Bhutto Haters must learn some lessons from Maldives... Respect deomcracy...Asadullah Ghalib

Read more...

Well done, Imran Khan, Hamid Gul, Kashif Abbasi and Hamid Mir. Your friends Taliban have destroyed another girls school in Swat.

Well done, Imran Khan, Hamid Gul, Kashif Abbasi and Hamid Mir. Your friends Taliban have destroyed another girls school in Swat. Imran Khan? Why don't you admit your children to a Taliban jihadi madrassah? Is that your insaaf?

Read full story at the following link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/story/2008/10/081028_swat_school_as.shtml
Read more...

Hussian Haqqani gives Kashif Abbassi some good spanking.

Kashif Abbasi is a media juooni: The TV face/ mouth pieces of Taliban in Pakistan.


Regime of ‘hostile’ TV anchors
Daily Times - Saturday, June 21, 2008

Two particular encounters on two TV channels Thursday night revealed the mind of the “misplaced or hostile anchor” in Pakistan. The first was a discussion among a group of TV journalists on the accusation levelled against them that they are no longer impartial in their conduct of talk shows and tend to favour a political stance. The “consensus” was that encroachments on institutions of representative democracy by military rulers could not be viewed with impartiality, and that a show of partiality was dictated by the anchors’ loyalty to the Constitution. One opinion was that this obligatory partiality must be accompanied by “objectivity”; but it was not clear how the state of being “objective” could be reconciled with the state of being “partial”.

The other discussion was an interview with Pakistan’s ambassador Mr Hussain Haqqani by a TV journalist noted for his acerbity of approach and bias. The topic was the attack made by NATO-ISAF forces inside Mohmand Agency which resulted in the death of 13 Pakistani troops, souring Pakistan’s relations between Washington. The ambassador, while acknowledging his duty to bring the umbrage of Pakistan to the notice of the Washington Administration in the most forceful of terms, also charged the TV person with the obligation of looking objectively at the situation in which Pakistan found itself. He asked him if he took account of the ground realities in the Tribal Areas where the war against terrorism was clearly in the national interest of Pakistan. The ambassador argued for “realism” in the handling of such crises as the one resulting from the attack in the Mohmand area. But the TV anchor demanded that Pakistan approach the United Nations for a solution to the problem of the growing breach of Pakistan’s “sovereignty” and “territorial integrity”. The ambassador pointed out that the Security Council was an arena of power play, not a kind of Supreme Court where all plaintiffs were equal. The TV anchor then fell back on the argument of “national pride” and claimed to represent the people of Pakistan, arguing in favour of Pakistan opting out of the international war on terrorism. He had no answer, however, to the question about what Pakistan would do after that, after its various trouble spots are bombed by a combination of forces united inside the US Security Council.

The patriotically “partial” TV anchors began by opposing a military ruler and are now caught in a situation of political bias under democracy because of the dictates of their partiality. The 2008 elections have delivered a political battlefield where elected parties are trying to move together despite their different recipes and solutions. What should the TV anchors do now? Normally, they should have moved back and become neutral, letting the discussions be fairly judged by the viewers, but they continue to pose as arbiters and decide on their own such matters as the “mandate” of the 2008 elections, the “immorality” of the NRO, and the rough dismissal of President Musharraf from his job. But when matters are in dispute between elected parties and in parliament, it is the duty of the media to remain impartial in order to allow the people to make their own judgements.

While highlighting the “complaints” against the TV channels, one must be clear, however, about the over-all role played by our electronic journalism. Despite their early “philosophical” gropings, the TV channels are a sine qua non of our lives and their foibles of “partiality” are dwarfed by their achievement of creating awareness among the people on all other economic and social matters. For example, in Punjab, Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif is taking action, correctly, after watching TV reports on the malfunction of government institutions.

A sense of pride and sovereignty may take nations into war and humiliate them without making them understand what went wrong. This happened to Germany in the Second World War and in recent times to Serbia whose people, proud and sovereign, hate the world today for not understanding why they were killing Bosnians and Kosovars. But states don’t only feel aroused emotionally. They can also be cold-blooded. They can be motivated only by their self-interest whose pursuit might negate the state’s pride and sovereignty. When Iran and America confront each other, both tend to fly off the handle. In contrast, in Europe, where many nationalist wars were fought in the past, few feel as aroused.

Why shouldn’t a state feel emotional? Because being emotional may be contrary to its national interests. These interests are almost always economic. This is perfectly understandable because as long as a nation is prosperous and not dependent on outside creditors, its pride and sovereignty remain intact. But if a state is neglectful of its economy and pursues other emotional goals either unrelated or hostile to its economy it is bound to impose suffering on its people through the growth of poverty. And nothing removes pride and sovereignty from a nation more cruelly and quickly than poverty. Let us not forget that the organisation which kidnapped and beheaded the American journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002 called itself National Movement for the Restoration of Pakistani Sovereignty.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtOYSEhdWMQ&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5GxmWsWmtA&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_3fanwU4Blo&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YSyY2ZWXsH4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh5vOhew0aE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WIaagFjVFA&feature=related

Some Comments:

H Khan
I have kept Hussian Haqqani in disdain for quite sometime but here he gave Kashif Abbassi some good spanking.

FarazA
LOL... kashif took some serious beating... this little patheritc chaos creater wasn't able to answer a single question asked by Haqanni. Amazing journalist


H Khan:

This Kashif Abbassi represents the height of pathetic journalism in Pakistan. As one could see he has no training in journalism and how journalist should present themselves in front of dignitaries. Journalistic protocol has not even touched these types of idiots.

Kashif was interviewing Pakistani Ambassador to the USA in his office (which is the Embassy of Pakistan in Washington D C) while he was wearing some faded jeans.

My no means this was an interview but a solid ruthless bashing by Hussian Haqqani and he made Kashif Abbassi an example out of.

abaig:

True, this Kashif Abbasi (I've stopped watching his arrogant programs) interviewed Foreign Minister of PML-Q govt Khurshid Kasuri, some one year back. He was his usual arrogant and was in no mood to listen to the 4 point agenda Khurshid Kasuri gave on Kashmir. After some time, Khurshid Kasuri asked Kashif some questions back asking for solutuions to Kashmir problems .... leaving kashif answer-less and shame-less!

In this interview also, he rightly pointed out that we are emotional nation and we do not understand that we must expect equal footing ONLY if we are equal in heights and standing to USA. Eyes to eyes can be seen with someone equal to us!

The basic thing that these guys lack is "TEHZEEB" to talk to any dignitary. They think they're over-smart. Governor Salman Taseer rightly says, "They'll come to their senses, if their salaries are reduced from 10,00,000 to 10,000"

SSAAD:
Clue less idiots like Mr. Abbasi should at least google things before they start their stupid, populist rants. The way he shamelessly got his ass handed to him by HH should be an eye opener for him. Essentially HH told him to keep his trap shut!

I see Hamid Mir, Kamran and this idiot as all in the same league of BS, populist, wanna-be hard talking journalists without having the fundamentals of journalism or even common knowledge under their belts!

dara Says:
November 19th, 2008


I don’t understand what that Kashif Abassi the brave warrior thing is?
I agree up to the fact that we need to criticize and question government people, but when answer has received then there is no need to argue and being judgemental.
Kashif Abbasi sounds like immature and partisan. Every one has opinion and Kashif has aright to have one but as anchor you put a question but never react to answer the way kKashif does.

I hope you take my critical analysis in good faith.
Read more...

A postmortem of anti-democracy journalists; A mirror to Ansar Abbasi, Kashif Abbasi, Hamid Mir, Mushtaq Minhas and other supporters of Taliban.

Freedom of press? My foot.

Abbas Ather





Read more...

Confronting militancy: The Urban Taliban, The Dehshat Nigar, The Media Junoonis, The Public Face of Talibans, The Imran Khans, The Hamid Guls etc

Confronting militancy
Monday, October 20, 2008
by Raza Rumi

It is time that the vocabulary introduced by the global imperial projects is changed in Pakistan. The infamous and rotten coinage – war on terror – needs to be trashed. It was constructed by an imbecile global leader, whose vision defies basic standards of human intelligence.

The gravity of the situation is however not shared by many. The rugged militants are artfully backed by the “urban Taliban.” There are political parties and their leaders who downplay the threat to Pakistan, and a few journalists and TV anchors brazenly eulogise the Taliban bravery and “sound” governance. Even some on the residual Left term this extremism as an anti-imperial struggle. We are being reminded that the destruction of private property and daylight murders of innocent civilians are nothing but a “reaction” to our policies and Western diktat.

The urban Taliban is now hell-bent on holding events outside Pakistan responsible for local insurgency. His natural supporter is the jingoistic strategic- depth-seeker analyst who blames the entire world for what ails Pakistan. The big brother neighbour, who has been given a clean chit by the head of the state as the least of the threats, is alluded to as the motivator of the suicide bombers. The argument that a Muslim cannot kill other Muslims is fallacious and not supported by history or the way the so-called Islamic societies have functioned.

The liberal prescription is equally messed up by throwing its weight behind army action and surgical strikes. This menace is not going to go away, let alone be successfully tackled through war. In the short term, reclaiming territory may be an imperative but even this effort has been stymied by conflictual signals and un-sequenced actions. This is why the Awami National Party’s leadership is now a hostage of a complex set of actors and processes.

To make matters worse, the identification of this government’s anti-terror mantra with Musharraf has amplified the perception that it is another stooge of the dwindling imperial power. To be fair to the PPP, its stance has always been clear: it is opposed to extremism and the hijacking of Islam by self-styled jihad-warriors. But the urban Taliban have strengthened this perception of the capitulation of the PPP at the hands of Amreeka. However, the incumbent government, notwithstanding a burdensome legacy, has been unable to demonstrate that it has the will or the capacity to handle the situation. The ordinary people, a bulk of whom viewed the PPP as “their” party, are distraught by galloping inflation and insecurity. The overwhelming sense of dejection and hopelessness arises from the way local investigation has progressed on the late Benazir Bhutto’s case.

Questions have also been raised as to how a truck loaded with a phenomenal amount of explosives freely roams on barricaded Islamabad streets; is allegedly prepared for action in Islamabad; and remains unnoticed until it explodes. And, reckless media theories [concocted by Ansar Abbasi, Mushtaq Minhas, Kashif Abbasi, Hamid Mir, Irfan Siddis and other spokespersons of terrorists] suggesting that this was a slick James Bond-type operation against the US intelligence operatives merely dilute the colossal tragedy for the poor security personnel, the drivers and the passers-by. There is not a single country where freedom of media allows for trashing the country’s national security issues the way it is done here.

Not a single soul questioned the Marriott hotel magnate about inadequate fire-fighting measures in the top-notch hotel? Instead, many media reports were extolling the kind-hearted individual acts of charity of the hotel owners, overlooking the sheer negligence that often accompanies profit-greed.

The bomb blasts in Lahore and elsewhere have also demonstrated that there are virtually no civil defence mechanisms in place. The government managed civil defence departments are historically under-funded, untrained and miles away from being minimally functional. Despite the escalation of violence and creeping of a war within the cities and towns, there has been little effort on this front. This is time when the public has to be prepared, motivated and taken along the efforts to counter the forces of violence.

However, nothing can be more urgent than the reclaiming of policy-making from the unelected power-elites to the civilian-elected decision makers. This is why the Parliament’s in-camera session has been such an important milestone. Pakistan’s troubled history teaches us this single lesson: there is no alternative to civilian ascendancy over national security. This will not be achieved overnight but has to be earned overtime.

Five issues therefore become paramount: first, the articulation of a refined policy and a homegrown agenda with bipartisan consensus (the troublemakers can compose their cacophonous tunes but the PML-N is vital to this agreement); second, a clear demonstration of the government’s writ by expediting and completing a local inquiry into Benazir’s assassination; third, developing a strategy to confront the few media zealots and urban Taliban who are splitting the public opinion through a discounted ideological framework. Fourth, bolstering the civil defence systems, to ensure that the public is a proactive partner; and, last, an immediate attention to issues of social protection, so that the citizens are shielded from the vagaries of economic exploitation. (The News)

The writer blogs at www.razarumi.com and edits cyberzines Pak Tea House and Lahore Nama. Email: razarumi@gmail.com
Read more...

The abuse of freedom of press, Lal Masjid, terrorism, and the hypocricy of Qazi, Imran Khan, Nawaz Sharif, Fazlur Rehman and Chaudhary Sujaat Hussain

By Abbas Ather
The last two paragraphs are the essence of this op-ed.



Read more...

Intellectual terrorists (Dehshat Nigar) - This column criticises the supporters of Taliban & Sipah-e-Sahaba e.g. Ansar Abbasi, Mushtaq Minhas etc

Dehshat Gard and Dehshat Nigar

By Asadullah Ghalib (Express) Perhaps, this column is also a criticism on Aftab Iqbal for his unwarranted anti-India statements. Aftab Iqbal wants all Pakistani to suffer from India-phobia exactly as per the wishes of his masters in ISI.



Read more...

How can Pakistan win the war on terror? Some suggestions

1. The Government must keep a close eye on the extremists of Jaish-e-Muhammad, Sipah-e-Sahaba and the extremist Deobandi Madrassahs which have been actively involved in jihadi activities in Afghanistan and Kashmir.

2. The Government must 'practically' abolish all kinds and forms of jihadi training camps (sponsored by ISI) set up in Muridke, tribal areas and other parts of the country. The Government must set up summary military courts where those involved in acts of terror must be summarily trialled and executed within less than 30 days.

3. The Government must impose a strict media policy. Those journalist who are currently acting as the mouthpieces of Taliban (e.g. Mushtaq Minhas, Ansar Abbasi, Hamid Mir, Irfan Siddiqi) must be arrested and trialled in summary military courts.
Read more...

Son of the soil, great Pakistani leader Asfandyar Wali Khan, and the supporters of terrorists in Pakistani media e.g. Mushtaq Minhas

While the terrorists of Taliban/Al-Qaeda/Sipah-e-Sahaba are actively involved in acts of terror in various areas in Pakistan, their supporters in politics and media are busy in dirty disinformation campaign against those great sons and daughters of Pakistan who are bravely challenging terrorists. The mouth-pieces of Taliban include Rauf Klasra, Mushtaq Minhas, Ansar Abbasi etc who are really sad because of the failure of the suicide bomber in killing Asfandyar Wali Khan. Here is how Abbas Ather analyzes this situation:



Comment:

ResidentEvil:

Mushtaq Minhas, Lahore is a religious city? Really? Then why the biggest red light district in the country? And since when being Open Minded and Liberal is a BAD thing? Since when being a fan of Bulley Shah and Shah Hussain is a BAD thing? Maybe to Saudi Wahaabhis, but not to an average, progressive, open minded muslim.

Come on Mushtaq Minhas, don’t spread this venom of wahabiism through your program. Live and let Live! Nobody has the right to force their morality on others.


dara:

We were the followers of Bhulley Shah, Shah Hussain, Baba Farid, shah Latif Bhitai and Rehman Baba.
We said no to mullah, Mulayet ( extremism). We used to respect every one’s point of view. We use to respect our Maulvi Sahab but now
those who are killing innocent, who are be head human like animals, who does not has respect for others at all, who do not tolerate the existence of people who have different point of view. They are the one who were against Bhulley Shah at his times, or were against Rehman Baba at his times.
a link for peace lovers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0cFkOUixoU&feature=related
Read more...

Ansar Abbasi, the notorious Taliban supporter, how many American soldiers were killed in Bhakkar bombing?

Ansar Abbasi, the notorious Taliban supporter, tried to justify the terrorist attacks on Islamabad Marriott by writing a pack of lies that there were many American marines in the hotel who were busy in some secret operations, and that's why the hotel was attacked. The bloody Abbasi (and his supporter Kashif Abbasi) must be asked how many US soldiers were killed in the Bhakkar bombing, or in the attack on a hospital in D.I.Khan, or in the attack on Asfandyar Wali Khan, and so on and so forth.

Enough is enough. It is time that these shameless supporters of Taliban must be arrested according to Pakistan's National Security Act, and they must be trialled in an open court.

Read Nazir Naji's column today:



Read more...

Terrorists and their propaganda network in Pakistan

In his column in today's Express, Anwaar Ahsan Siddiqi notes that the supporters of Taliban and terrorists (e.g. Irfan Siddiqi, Ansaar Abbasi, Hamid Mir, Kashif Abbasi etc) have a very organized propaganda network to justify acts of terrorism in Pakistan. On the political level, this network is protected and supported by leaders such as Imran Khan and Qazi Hussain Ahmed while Nawaz Sharif and his PML(N) is criminally silent on this issue to score political points.


Read more...

A request to Hamid Mir and Kashif Abbasi: Stop playing the role of 'phaphay kutni' - fasadi evil mongerer

Read more...

Rauf Klasra exposes the Taliban loving journalists in Pakistan...

Ansar Abbasi, Kashif Abbasi, Hamid Mir, and other Taliban lovers will be the first ones to migrate to the USA and the UK if Taliban takeover Islamabad

By Rauf Klasra




The pro-terrorist journalists and scholars such as Ansar Abbasi, Kashif Abbasi, Hamid Mir, Hamid Gul, Roedad Khan, and other Taliban lovers will be the first ones to migrate to the USA and the UK if Taliban takeover Islamabad.
Read more...

Mullah's Islam is in danger because Zardari calls Sarah Palin 'gorgeous"

The narrow minded Mullahs and their supporters in media (e.g. Ansar Abbasi, Kashif Abbasi) think that Islam is in danger because Asif Zardari in her meeting with Sarah Palin called her gorgeous. These Bhutto-haters (now reincarnated as Zardari-haters) have formed a disinformation cell to malign anything and everything associated with the Pakistan Peoples Party. These Taliban supporters are the curse of Allah on Pakistan.
Read more...

Zardari's misspelled remarks proved fabricated - Disinformation cell in action by yellow journalists/Zaradari haters

By SHAFI BALOCH (Daily The Nation)


KARACHI - The ongoing campaign against President Asif Ali Zardari regarding his poor knowledge of English during his recent visit to Mazar-e-Quaid has proved a malicious and wicked electronic campaign that has tarnished his image in the eyes of the general public and analysts who did not bother to verify the facts.
Some hidden hands have sent an email to different journalists, newspapers and electronic organisations claiming that the President had misspelled the words God and strength.
However, a verification of this matter by TheNation revealed that the campaign was a venomous propaganda against President Zardari that was aimed at tarnishing his image in the eyes of the masses.
The upshot of President’s comments in the visitors’ book during his visit to Mazar-e-Quaid made it clear that Asif Zardari had impeccably written “May God give us strength to save Pakistan” instead of “May Gaad give us strut to save Pakistan” that was being propagated by the hidden hands through the email.
President Asif Ali Zardari wrote his views in the visitors’ book on September 11, 2008, when he visited Mazar-e-Quaid on the 60th death anniversary of the Father of the Nation.
It was distressing to note that senior Eglish-language columnist did not bother to verify the facts and added fuel to fire in his column while referring to this fabricated story.
The propaganda was launched at a time when the President had gone to the United States on an official visit and during his absence nobody bothered to counter the venomous campaign and tried to present the truth before the media and the people.
When contacted Muhammad Arif, Resident Engineer, Mazar-e-Quaid, produced the book containing the views of the President.
Arif said that he was accompanying President Asif Ali Zardari during his visit of the mausoleum and witnessed him express his views by writing in the visitors’ book: “God may give us strength to save Pakistan”.
After the visit of President Zardari, several high-ranking officials of Sindh government including Governor Dr Ishrat-ul-Ebad Khan, Chief Minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah, chiefs of the armed forces and Naib Nazima Karachi Nasreen Jalil also visited Mazar-e-Quaid and expressed their views in the visitors’ book.

All of them had written their views in English except Naib Nazima Nasreen Jaleel, who wrote her comments in Urdu language, Arif concluded.

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/26-Sep-2008/Zardaris-misspelled-remarks-proved-fabricated/1
Read more...

So, let us pull out of the war on terror. What is the alternative?

Digesting the Marriott blast

Some facts about the Marriott Hotel blast are coming out gradually as the scene of destruction is carefully examined and videos from the security cameras are scrutinised. More and more people are put off by the concept of suicide-bombing and are criticising it. The fifty-odd clerics who had issued the fatwa against it in 2005 — but were made to cower later by more aggressive clerics — are making their voice heard again. The Tehreek-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) of Baitullah Mehsud in South Waziristan is reluctant to own it because of this change in public opinion.

But there is a difference of media opinion, mostly mutually intolerant, over the direction of the war to which the blast points. Unfortunately, the side that refuses to face reality is the one which says “it is not our war”, and relies on the now quite old and unacceptable pan-Islamist position that whatever Muslim extremists do is not “action” but “reaction” to some perceived injustice. What these people want everyone to believe is that the real unjust “action” is undertaken by someone else. This approach is supposed to decide the moral question of what is or isn’t “wrong doing”. Their argument is: what Muslims undertake is “reaction” and therefore doesn’t come in the category of “doing” something wrong, therefore there can be no moral judgement made on it. In this line of thinking, under all moral and criminal codes there is either absolution or mitigation for “reaction”. The question of looking for “causes” comes next. Since the Muslims have not “acted”, the argument goes, they have not caused anything to happen, hence the West and the United States have to sit down and admit to the criminality of their actions, and once they have done so, and properly compensated the Muslims for their past actions, the problem of violence and terrorism will go away automatically. Thus all moral obligations on the part of Muslims are dispensed with nicely.

But the blast at the Marriott has jolted this catechism and caused a rift. This rift undermines the unity among those who say “it is not our war”. The message behind this slogan is not a simple one. It has many ramifications and each has to be studied separately. On the face of it, the slogan gained strength after the “land invasion” of the CIA in South Waziristan earlier this month which caused the Pakistan Army and the PPP government to react in severe protest. The first message is that innocent Pakistanis die because the government is involved in the wrong war. The message has been repeated so much that most Pakistanis now believe that if Pakistan were to pull out of the “American war on terror”, innocent Muslims will no longer be killed.

But let us ask what will happen if Pakistan pulls out of the “war on terror”. The presumption, which is not spelled out, is that once this happens there will be no contradiction between Al Qaeda and its foot soldiers in FATA on the one hand and the state of Pakistan on the other. But what about the well established fact that Al Qaeda has a programme of “Islamic reform” that is global and which will start by converting Pakistan into a state based on Al Qaeda’s radical caliphate which will be the base area of its declared war on the US and the West? If we accept the assumption that our military capacity is not equal to engaging Al Qaeda in a civil war-like conflict, the unspoken assumption is that the Muslims of Pakistan will and should accept the Al Qaeda philosophy as “true faith” and allow the transformation of the state to Al Qaeda’s liking and standards. Of course, the “liberals” will be eliminated in the new order and this “wish” is apparent from the term “liberal fascists” that is being used these days in some reactionary Urdu columns.

This “it-is-not-our-war” group is clueless about what the Americans and their European allies — and others stretching as far eastward as Japan — can and may do after they no longer have to regard us as an ally but face as an ally of their enemies. Why doesn’t this group make any reference to the alternative strategy — “eat grass honourably?” — in the presumed post-pullout phase? Who will face up to the trespasses made by the NATO-ISAF forces into Pakistan? How will trespasses by Al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban in safe havens in FATA violate our sovereignty any less? Are we ready to trust the security of the state to Al Qaeda who will, if all goes according to its plan, of course be in charge of the armed forces and will control our nuclear capability? In fact it is this thought about nuclear weapons that inclines the “it-is-not-our-war” club to pre-emptively allege that the Americans are in Afghanistan to “grab our nuclear weapons”. But surely the global consensus on taking out the nuclear weapons acquired by Al Qaeda will develop much more dangerously than it is developing now.

Abandoning the war against terrorism is no solution to the problem of Al Qaeda and its radical global agenda. Those who propose it are now faced with the growing objection to the killing of innocent citizens. And they cannot convincingly argue that, after we have pulled out, either the Americans will stop attacking Al Qaeda or Al Qaeda will stop attacking us if the state of Pakistan does not capitulate to it. (Daily Times)
Read more...

Disinformation cell part 2 - the paid agenst of ISI-Mullah alliance working against democracy in Pakistan

Asadullah Ghalib, Daily Express, 2 September 2008
Read more...