The latest series of stories began last weekend when Ansar Abbasi reported for The News that “Pakistan has lost…more than Rs8,500 billion…during the last four years”. Abbasi’s source, for once with a name, is none other than Transparency International Pakistan (TIP) Advisor Syed Adil Gilani giving the claim some credibility. But the numbers quoted, rather than giving a clear view of corruption, actually provide a confusing and convoluted picture of the so-called “corruption”.

After several paragraphs of condemning statements, Abbasi finally gets to some hard numbers. But what readers are presented with are not cases of government officials pocketing money or steering it to their cronies. Instead, we are told that “circular debt is Rs190 million”, “state-owned enterprises like PSO, PIA, Pakistan Steel, Railways, SSGC, SNGC are eating away Rs150-300 billion per annum”, and “tax to GDP ratio in 2008 was 11%, which in 2011 has reduced to 9.1% instead of being increased”.

Economists can debate the proper level of circular debt and whether the government should own enterprises like airlines, railways, etc. But this is not corruption. Neither is the tax-to-GDP ratio. According to Abbasi, “this the drop of 1.9% in the tax GDP means annual loss of US$ 3.3 billion”. Even if his maths are correct, does he honestly expect us to believe that the PM has personally evaded US $3.3 billion in taxes? Again, this is a cultural problem – not official corruption.

Abbasi’s article takes a turn for the truly bizarre, however, when he attempts the following mathematical misdirection:

The TIP adviser added that India’s tax-GDP ratio is 18%, and at that rate, Pakistan’s tax evasion/corruption in FBR is 9% of $175 billion, which is US$15.5 billion per year, i.e. Rs1,400 billion per year.

Did you see what he did there? He’s not even comparing apples to oranges. Rather, he is suggesting that we pretend that the apples are oranges so that we can get an even higher number!

Believing he had discovered a magic formula for attacking the government, Ansar Abbasi continued his assault on mathematics a few days later when he claimed that he was mistaken on Sunday. The present government has not cost the nation Rs8.5 trillion – but Rs20 trillion!.

Where did Abbasi find an additional Rs9.5 trillion? After his article appeared on Sunday, he apparently received a phone call from his friend Dr Shahid Siddiqi who suggested some additional “corruption” that he could add to his equation. Now, in addition to counting spending for public enterprises like transport and steel, Ansar Abbasi is including national security spending as “corruption”.

Quoting the State Bank of Pakistan figures, Siddiqi said the cost of war on terror to country’s economy from April 1, 2008 till January 31, 2012 stands at Rs4400 billion ($50 billion).

And not only is he adding military spending, he is also adding in trade deficits and monetary devaluation!

The trade deficit of these years has been $47 billion where as the Pak rupee fell from Rs68.16 per dollar in June 2008 to Rs90.50 in February 2012. The rupee fell by Rs22.3 per dollar during these years. A total of $30 billion has been transferred out of Pakistan during the first three financial years of the Gilani regime.

At this point the question must be asked if there is anything Ansar Abbasi and his sources believe is not corruption?

It should be noted that Dr Shahid Siddiqi appears to be a ‘go-to’ economist for Ansar Abbasi’s economic hit pieces. In October 2011, Ansar Abbasi quoted Dr Siddiqi extensively terming the government as “lying” about economics and bleeding the country through corruption. Ansar Abbasi quoted Dr Siddiqi again in December 2011 as saying “the overall economic situation of Pakistan under the present regime is the worst in the 64-year history of Pakistan”.

Mr Adil Gilani, too, may have a grudge to bear against the present government as he has found himself summoned before Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) Lahore over questions about his relationship with National insurance Company Ltd board member Qasim Amin Dada. Previously, it was reported, Mr Adil Gilani’s son resigned from his position as board member of Pakistan National Shipping Corporation (PNSC) after questions were raised about his appointment.

We do not question that corruption is a legitimate and serious problem in society. But stirring up a cloud of dust and calling it smoke does not make a fire. Hit pieces based on formulas that inflate numbers do not help expose and eliminate corruption, it only serves to distract from those who are legitimately trying to shine a light on serious issues of corruption and governance. If we are going to reduce and eliminate corruption, we need serious journalists to do the honest work of reviewing data and separating what is and is not legitimate use of taxpayer funds.

That Ansar Abbasi’s article is speculation and not evidence-based is admitted by Abbasi’s own words:

Talking to media persons on his return from Davos after attending the World Economic Forum Conference, the prime minister is reported to have said, “Any decision about the extension of DG ISI would be taken at an appropriate time.”

There is no explanation as to why did the prime minister say this but given the track record of the rulers and their style of soiled politicking, Gillani may use the extension card as a lever to get Pasha softened on memo issue.

In other words, “There is no explanation as to why did the prime minister say this but” I am going to invent an explanation anyway.

Ansar Abbasi is, of course, entitled to his own speculation and whatever conspiracy theories are born in his head. And if Jang Group believes Ansar Abbasi’s fantasies and conspiracy theories are worth publishing, they have every right to do so. But such inventions are not reporting, they are opinions and should be properly published on the pages clearly marked as containing opinions so that readers are not intentionally or unintentionally misled into thinking that Ansar Abbasi’s speculation is something other than what it is.

With last week’s piece, we asked if it was possibly “intended as blackmail to prevent a politician from participating in elections”. The latest article makes the situation even more curious. According to Abbasi, his anonymous source “received a copy of the communication sent by Musharraf’s confidante to the ex-US Congressmen”.

So now there is an alleged secret memo written by the envoy of Musharraf and delivered to a retired American official asking for US support in Pakistan. And even though it was a secret carried out only by trusted emissaries, somehow it wound up at the office of Jang Group.

Why does this plot sound familiar…? Of course! The first ‘Memogate’ saga was obviously such a box office success that it was only a matter of time before a sequel appeared. Only it seems that in their rush, the memogate’s producers have forgotten that the first episode of ‘Memogate’ has not even finished before they already rolled out the next episode in the series.

As we wrote last week, Ansar Abbasi does not need to reveal the name of his ‘influential diplomatic source’, but it is becoming increasingly strange that the supposed ‘secrets’ of every unpopular politician are suddenly ending up in the pages of Daily Jang. Has Ansar Abbasi suddenly learned the art of investigative reporting? Or is someone feeding him this information? What is the motivation of these ‘sources’? Who will be the next politician to have a ‘secret memo’ to US officials magically appear in Daily Jang? I guess we’ll have to wait for the next sequel to find out.

In a detailed front page story of The News on Sunday, Ansar Abbasi asks, ‘How did Musharraf become a billionaire?’ While questions about the source of Gen Musharraf’s personal fortune are legitimate, they typically focus on public information – how was he able to afford his London home? What is his current source of income? But Ansar Abbasi points to new information about Musharraf’s personal wealth, and it is not only the information, but how Ansar Abbasi was able to access it that raises troubling questions.

In his article, Ansar Abbasi spends no less than nine paragraphs listing details of Gen Musharraf’s personal accounts with banks and trading accounts in UAE. Not only does Ansar Abbasi list the amounts each account contains, but the account numbers themselves. All of this information is attributed, as usual, to “a source”.

Musharraf has announced that he will return to Pakistan this month to participate in the next parliamentary elections. The question must be asked who would have access to such private financial information as overseas bank accounts, including their account numbers and amounts? And why would those with access to this information be interested in revealing it to Ansar Abbasi? Is it merely a coincidence that Ansar Abbasi’s “source” has revealed this information at this time? Or is Abbasi’s article intended as blackmail to prevent a politician from participating in elections?

This blog has no way of knowing whether the information provided by Ansar Abbasi is true or false. If it is true, we also have no way of knowing where the money came from – whether from looting the national treasury as seems to be implied by the article, or from legitimate sources such as book sales and speaking fees. It is in the public interest to know that politicians are not building personal wealth through corruption, but it is also in the public interest to know how such private information becomes public. Ansar Abbasi does not need to reveal the name of his anonymous source, but it may be in the public interest to know whether his source is an employee of the bank – which is the bank’s concern, or an employee of some other organization – which may be a concern to democracy.

Is the government threatening the security of the country by cutting development of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme? Or is the government improving the security of the country by investing in a modern nuclear weapons programme? According to The News (Jang Group) the answer is yes to both.

In Monday’s copy of The News, Ansar Abbasi warns that Pakistan’s nuclear programme is not a top priority of the present regime, and that because nuclear development has not been funded properly, it “has been stopped”. According to Abbasi, an “informed source, who has been one of the top nuclear managers of Pakistan’s nuclear programme” (his initials wouldn’t happen to be AQK, would they?) explained that because of the policies of the present government, our nuclear programme is experiencing “technical roll back”.

This is a particularly interesting situation to be in since in May of this year, The News reported that Pakistan under the present government is on path to become the 4th largest nuclear state and is quickly outpacing other nations in both number of warheads and technology.

Former UN weapons inspector David Albright, reported that Pakistan appears to be building a fourth plutonium reactor at the Khushab complex, and is expanding plutonium separation capabilities at another site.

Another report, from a US think tank, says Pakistan now has 70 to 90 nuclear warheads, more than its rival India. This puts Pakistan on track to command the world’s fourth-largest nuclear weapons arsenal by the end of the decade.

The evidence suggests that Pakistan is trying to develop a second-strike nuclear capability. Pakistan has tested cruise and other missiles that can carry strategic warheads from land or even from submarines.

That hardly sounds like the defence policy of a government that is turning a blind eye to security. In fact, The News reported advancements in Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme in April also when the military successfully tested the Nasr, a ballistic missile of Hatf series, capable of carrying a nuclear warhead can hit targets up to 60 km.

Strategic planners term the test a ‘new and very significant development’ since the missile falls in the category of tactical nuclear weapons. “This is a low-yield battlefield deterrent, capable of deterring and inflicting punishment on mechanised forces like armed brigades and divisions,” said an expert in the field of missile technology. “This takes care of the Indian Army’s obsession with finding space for limited war under the nuclear umbrella.”

Addressing the gathering at the undisclosed location, DG SPD Kidwai said the test was a very important milestone in consolidating Pakistan’s strategic deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum. He said in the hierarchy of military operations, the Nasr Weapon System now provided Pakistan with short-range missile capability in addition to the already available medium- and long-range ballistic missiles and cruise missiles in its inventory.

The president and prime minister have congratulated the scientists and engineers for their outstanding success and warmly appreciated the successful test.

In November of this year, Ansar Abbasi himself reported that ‘Pakistan’s nuclear programme has made some extraordinary progress by developing one of the world’s smartest nuclear tactical devices’.

The defence budget increased 15.3 per cent in 2009, in 2010 saw a 17 per cent additional increase, and in 2011 ballooned by an additional 12 per cent. Since taking power, the PPP-led coalition government has increased defence spending by at least 44 per cent over the budgets under the previous regime.

Is Pakistan’s nuclear weapons programme threatened by budget cuts made by the present regime? Years’ worth of reporting by Jang/Geo provide ample evidence that successive governments including the present one have dedicated a vast amount of resources to the nuclear weapons programme that have yielded great advancement in both the number of warheads as well as advanced tactical technologies. In trying to accuse the PPP of weakening Pakistan’s nuclear programme, Ansar Abbasi only exposes his own lack of credibility.

Abbasi’s would-be political advice is especially humorous given Imran’s recent successes drawing crowds exceeding 100,000 to his jalsa in Lahore and showing legitimate growth in his party’s support since disappointing showings in past elections. Nevermind the facts, Ansar Abbasi is angry that “PTI leaders are more interested in the alleged corruption cases of Nawaz Sharif”. Abbasi is further enraged that “Imran Khan and his party did not issue any statement in support of the Supreme Court” despite the fact that later in the column he even admits that “The PTI’s spokesman Umar Cheema instead said that it was the PTI that had demanded in the very beginning to establish a commission under the Supreme Court to probe the matter”.

Meanwhile, Ansar Abbasi is also angry at Nawaz Sharif and his PML-N for focusing on allegations that “Khan’s siblings and other relatives are drawing heavy salaries from donations” to Shaukat Khanum and questions about “a residential plot allotted to the PTI chief by the then chief minister and incumbent PML-N chief on the former’s request”.

It seems that Ansar Abbasi is proposing his own NRO in which all allegations against political leaders should be set aside so long as they agree to attack the government. To begin, Ansar Abbasi would have Imran Khan and Nawaz Sharif stop questioning each other and instead take the strategy of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”, even though both political leaders appear to know better what they are doing than Ansar Abbasi. More to the point, it appears that Ansar Abbasi is not actually interested in the success of either PTI or PML-N, but simply takes the position of “the enemy of the government is my friend”. Obviously, this raises serious concerns both about Ansar Abbasi’s ability to provide objective, fact-based reporting and analysis and also whether Jang Group is pursuing a political agenda in giving someone like Ansar Abbasi front page coverage to air his personal opinions.

In researching his story, Ansar Abbasi spoke to officials at ISPR and Foreign Office, none of whom gave the Jang Group yellow journalist the dirt that he desired.

While the ISPR did not respond to The News questions about the return of the US officials or regarding the president’s statement as quoted by the US congressmen, the Foreign Office when approached said that it has no information about the return of many of those US officials who had left the country early this year.

Ansar Abbasi was undeterred by his inability to get any damning evidence about a new invasion of American agents from legitimate sources, and turned to his old reliable friends, unnamed “informed sources”. Could it be these are the same unnamed sources that the judiciary has termed ‘incorrigible liars’? It is certainly telling that he did not even bother to name these as ‘official sources’.

After desperately writing paragraph after paragraph containing “no information”, Ansar Abbasi concludes his piece with an attack on the government completely unrelated to the rest of his article.

However, the Gilani regime that is known worldwide for corruption and bad governance has yet to show any sign of improvement. Instead the state institutions are fast collapsing amid unconfirmed reports that the organisations like PIA are being deliberately pushed to death to pave the way for the launching of a new airlines to be owned by some top rulers and possibly named as Indus Airlines.

Even this unrelated conspiracy is based on “unconfirmed reports”. It seems that Ansar Abbasi cannot get anyone to provide any evidence for any of his conspiracy theories. Of course, none of this would be a problem if Ansar Abbasi would conduct objective research and report facts rather than inventing conspiracies and reporting anonymous rumours.

Despite having no information to report, The News published Abbasi’s piece at the top of page 2 as ‘National News’.

پاکستان میڈیا واچ اگرچہ انصار عباسی کا کالم انگریزی زبان میں چھاپ چکا ھے لیکن پھر بھی ھماری ٹیم نے اردو میں پوسٹ کرنا اور بھی مناسب سمجھا تاکہ اردو قارین بھی اچھی طرح سچائی سے واقف ھو سکیں۔

انصار عباسی اپنے جنگ کے کالم میں سلمان تاثیر کے قاتل ممتاز قادری کی انسداد دھشت گردی عدالت کی سزا کو عدالت کی ایک کوتاھی بیان کرتے ھیں۔ جج کے فیصلے کو غیر تسلی بخش قرار دیتے ھوئے وہ فرماتے ھیں کہ عدالت نے سب سے ضروری چیز کو نظر انداز کر دیا۔ وہ ضروری چیز یا فیکٹر بقول انصار عباسی حکومت کی بے نیازی ھے۔ انصار عباسی کا زیر بحث کالم نیچے ملاحضہ کیجیے۔

انصار عباسی اپنے کالم میں اس کیس کو کچھ یوں ظاھر کرتے ھیں کے جیسے اگر حکومت اس قدر بے نیاز نا ھوتی اور سلمان تاثیر کا نوٹس لیا ھوتا جب انھوں نے توھین رسالت کے قانون کو کالا قانون کہ کر اس کی بے حرمتی کی اور آسیہ بی بی سے یہ کہا کہ انھوں نے توھین رسالت نھیں کی ھے تو ممتاز قادری جیسے مایوس شھری کو سلمان تاثیر کا قتل نا کرنا پڑتا۔

دراصل انصار عباسی صاحب کی بات سچائی سے کوسوں دور ھے۔
1.  توھین رسالت قانون قران شریف سے نھیں نکالا گیا بلکہ یہ جنرل زیا الحق نے آئین میں شمار کروایا تھا۔
2.سلمان تاثیر اس قانون کے استعمال سے ناخوش تھے اورانھوں نے اسی بات کو مدنظر رکھتے ھوئے آسیہ بی بی کے موضوع پر کہا تھا کہ ان کے خلاف جن لوگوں نے کیس درج کیا تھا ان کے پاس ثبوتوں کی کمی تھی۔

ایک رپورٹ کے مطابق سلمان تاثیر نے آسیہ بی بی کے کیس کے بارے میں کچھ یوں کہا تھا کہ یہ ایک متنازع کیس ھے اور الزام تراشی کرنے والوں کے پاس ثبوت کی کمی ھے۔رپورٹ میں یہ بھی بتایا گیا کہ سلمان تاثیر قانونی کاروائی میں دخل اندازی نھیں  دینگے اور جس حد تک مدد کر سکے کرینگے تاکہ آسیہ بی بی کو اس بات کی سزا نا ملے جو انھوں نے نا کی ھو۔

اب آئیے عباسی صاحب کی ایک اور غلط فھمی کی طرف۔ اپنے کالم میں وہ ایسے ظاھر کرتے ھیں جیسے  سلمان تاثیر نے ایک لیڈر ھونے کے ناطے آسیہ بی بی کی رھائی کی کوشش کر کے ایک غیر اسلامی حرکت کی جب کہ حضرت آئشہ رضی لله سے روایت ھے کہ نبی کریم نے فرمایا کہ ایک لیڈر  کے لیئے یہ بھتر ھے کہ وہ غلطی میں معاف کرے بجائے اس کے کہ وہ غلطی میں سزا دے۔ یہ ایک سچ حدیث ھے۔

اس کے علاوہ انصار عباسی جس توھین رسالت قانون کو مقدس کہتے ھیں اس قانون یں تبدیلیاں لانے کے حق میں کاؤنسل آف اسلامک آئڈیالوجی ھے۔ یہ کاونسل اسلامی اسکارز پر مشتمل ھے اور اس کاؤنسل نے توھین رسالت قانون میں تبدیلی لانے کی حمایت کی ھے۔

یہ تو بات ھوئی صرف انکے غلط فیکٹس کی۔ اب آئیے انکی بے بنیاد دلیل کی جانب۔ انصار عباسی صاحب فرماتے ھیں کہ چونکہ سیشن کورٹ نے آسیہ بی بی کو سزا موت سنا دی تھی سلمان تاثیر ایک ممجرم کی طرف داری کر رھے تھے جس کا نوٹس حکومت نے نھیں لیا اور اس بات کو انسداد دھشت گردی کورٹ یعنی اے ٹی سی کورٹ نے نظر انداز کر دیا۔مگر سوچنے کی بات ھے کے اسی لاجک اور دلیل کے بل بوتے پر کیا انصار عباسی صاحب جیل تشریف لے جانا چاھیں گے۔کیونکہ ممتاز قادری بھی ایک مجرم ھے جسے باقائیدہ عدالت نے سزا موت سنائی ھے۔اور انصار عباسی اس وقت خود ایک عدالت سے سزا یافتہ ملزم کی جوش و جزبے سے طرف داری کر رھے ھیں جسے جنگ گروپ نے اپنے صفحہ اول پر چھاپا ھے۔

ان باتوں سے یہ ظاھر ھوتا ھے کہ انصار عباسی کے تمام سچ اور انکے دلائیل سخت کمزوری کا شکار ھیں۔ لیکن اس سب میں جنگ گروپ کی بے نیازیوں کو نظر انداز نھیں کیا جا سکتا۔انصار عباسی کی دھشت گردی کی طرف نرم دلی سے تو کافی لوگ آگاہ ھیں ھی لیکن کیا جنگ گروپ کا اس اشو یعنی موضوع کی جانب غور کرنے اور اسے صحیح کرنے کا ارادہ ھے بھی کہ نھیں۔کیا وہ اب بھی اردو قارین کو ایسے شدت پسند مضامین پڑھنے کا موقع دیتے رھیں گے۔ اس بات کا جواب حاصل ھونا صرف ضروری ھی نھیں بلکہ لازم ھو چکا ھے۔

What speaks more to both Ansar Abbasi’s mentality and Jang Group‘s editorial judgment, however, is what appeared on the same day on the front page of Daily Jang – Mumtaz Qadri ko saza, Adalat nay riasat kee nakami nazarandaz kardi (Mumtaz Qadri Sentenced: Court Ignores Failure of the State).

In this piece, Ansar Abbasi writes not about French submarines, but Mumtaz Qadri. According to Abbasi, Salmaan Taseer was murdered because the PPP government refused to punish him when he, “told a woman who had been sentenced to death by a court for blasphemy that she had not committed blasphemy, calling the blasphemy law as ‘black’ law, and asking for forgiveness for a woman who is proven guilty of blasphemy”.

Ansar Abbasi is wrong on the facts. Asia Bibi was accused of blasphemy by some people who she had an ongoing feud with. On that fateful day, a fight erupted over a glass of water.

The argument started on a hot summer’s day in June 2009 as Aasia Bibi picked falsa berries – a purple fruit used to make squash – with her Muslim neighbours. She brought them water to drink; they refused to touch her glass because she was a Christian. A vicious row ensued, although what was exactly said remains a matter of contention.

Bibi’s accusers say she flung vile insults at Islam and the prophet Muhammad. “She got very annoyed,” recalls Maafia. “But it was normal. We could not drink from that glass. She is Christian, we are Muslim, and there is a vast difference between the two. We are a superior religion.”

According to the Asia Bibi, though, she did not make any insults to Islam or the prophet. Not only did Asia Bibi deny that she had made any insults to Islam, she even swore on the Bible that she had not committed blasphemy which as a Christian would be the highest oath. Rather than accept her oath, the crowd threatened her if she refused to convert to Islam.

It should be noted that Surat Al-Baqarah (2:256) says, “la ikrah fi’d-din” (There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion).

Salmaan Taseer did not tell Asia Bibi that she had not committed blasphemy. What he said was that the case was controversial and that her accusers were lacking evidence. According to a news report at the time:

Taseer said that he did not want to interfere in the judicial proceeding, but he would do as much as he could in his capacity to make sure that she does not get punished for a crime she said she had not committed.

It should be noted also that according to al-Tirmidhi (1011), Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said, “it is better for a leader to make a mistake in forgiving than to make a mistake in punishing.”

Additionally, what Ansar Abbasi terms as ‘one of the most holy (muqadas) laws’ is actually not without controversy. The Council of Islamic Ideology recommended several amendments to the law, saying that as it was written it was open to misuse.

“It should be made obligatory for the complainant to produce concrete evidence to substantiate the charges while lodging a First Information Report with the police.

The accused persons must be given the right of defence through a legal adviser and a First Class magistrate should supervise the police investigations prior to the registration of the case,” according to the proposal.

Blasphemy cases should be tried by the High Courts, members of the CII have observed in the document.

Asia Bibi’s case was not handled in a manner that complied with these recommendations. No concrete evidence was lodged against Asia Bibi, the police handled her case as if she was assumed guilty from the beginning, and her sentence was given by a district court, not a High Court.

But Ansar Abbasi not only distorts the facts, he distorts logic also.

According to Abbasi, Salmaan Taseer was out of line to question Asia Bibi’s guilt or innocence once the court handed down its decision. Ansar Abbasi says that “because the State was silent on the governors extremely controversial speeches” it “forced a sad/upset (mayoos) citizens to kill Salman Taseer and take the law in his own hands”.

Abbasi complains that “even after all the demonstrations, protests and rallies, the federal government did not take any steps”. But this is supposed to be a country that respects the rule of law, not the rule of mobs.

But has Mumtaz Qadri not been tried, convicted, and sentenced also? By Ansar Abbasi’s own logic, should he himself not be shot down in the street by some mayoos shehri who disagrees with him? Obviously not. Mumtaz Qadri was tried, convicted, and sentenced, but he still has a right of appeal. And even after his appeal, he has the right to petition for a presidential pardon. Ansar Abbasi tries to justify the difference by arguing that “though the ATC court judge knew that Mumtaz Qadri did not have anything personal with Salman Taseer, he still wrapped up this case like a normal murder case”. In other words, the social context of the case should be taken into consideration when judging whether someone deserves a sentence of death. But isn’t this exactly what Salmaan Taseer was saying about Asia Bibi’s case?

What it seems to come down to is that Ansar Abbasi supports Mumtaz Qadri and believes he was justified in murdering Salmaan Taseer because of extenuating circumstances, namely that the government would not punish Taseer for him. It also seems that Ansar Abbasi is too cowardly to say this directly, so instead he begins his piece by stating that “any one person cannot be given such authority over such a person because this will spread lawlessness, anarchy, unease and panic in the society” and then proceeds to justify exactly the “lawlessness, anarchy, unease and panic” that he warns.

So Ansar Abbasi is wrong on the facts, and he is wrong on the theory also. But what about Jang Group? For their English-medium audience, Ansar Abbasi and Jang Group serve up corruption accusations against PPP based on the self-serving statement (whether true or not) of an accused man. For the awam, Ansar Abbasi and Jang Group have saved the real masala – a front page article telling that Mumtaz Qadri was forced to murder Salmaan Taseer because the PPP government refused to punish him for defending a blasphemer.

Ansar Abbasi’s extremist sympathies are well documented. Does Jang Group continue projecting these views out of ideological sympathy, or are they using Ansar Abbasi as their Media Taliban in a proxy war against the PPP government? These are the facts. You decide.

[CORRECTION:] An English version of Ansar Abbasi’s piece about Mumtaz Qadri did appear in The News (Jang Group) on Wednesday also. We missed this in our original post because the piece was published on page 12, with a second Ansar Abbasi piece about French submarine scandal on page 1. While we regret the mistake, we do not believe that it affects the substantive analysis in the post. We thank our dear reader for bringing this to our attention.

English Translation:

Islamabad (Ansar Abbasi) ATC delivered the death sentence to Mumtaz Qadri and reinforced the law that punishing someone is the responsibility of the State not an individual, but very simply overlooked failure and the laziness of the State which were the reasons for the death of the former governor. In a 12 page verdict delivered by the ATC, it was mentioned that a proved blasphemer is ‘duty to kill’ (wajib-ul-qatl) and no one can forgive him except for the prophet himself and raised these two fundamental questions: First, can a person who lives a sinful life be called as an apostate (murtad) and second, if that is the case, who is responsible for punishing him? The verdict answered these questions itself. The answer is that no one person can be given the firm authority to decide upon any particular person is he/she is an apostate or a non-Muslim. Furthermore any one person cannot be given such authority over such a person because this will spread lawlessness, anarchy, unease and panic in the society. Nevertheless, the verdict does not mention anything about the laziness and failure of the state in handling the situation created after controversial steps taken and speeches made by Salman Taseer. And this was the actual reason for death of former governor Punjab at the hands of Mumtaz Qadri. Although ATC judge said rightly that no one person can take the law in his own hands, he completely ignored what Salman Taseer did. Judge did not talk about the controversy created by Salman Taseer with reference to the disconnect showed by the federal government, the President and the Prime Minister. Based on these reasons why was the role of government not brought up and also neither was this basic fundamental question answered which asked if State was the true responsible entity for death of Salman Taseer. Former governor of Punjab visited the Lahore jail and did a press conference with Aasia Bibi who had already been sentenced to death by the Session Court under blasphemy law. Being the leader of the province Salman Taseer told a woman who had been sentenced to death by a court for blasphemy that she had not committed blasphemy, calling the blasphemy law as ‘black’ law, and asking for forgiveness for a woman who is proven guilty of blasphemy, Salman Taseer had to face the reaction from entire Pakistan. Salman Taseer had said that he would take the case up to the president who has the power of the law to grant her pardon. He also said that he had studied the case of Aasia bibi in detail and found out that she is not deserving of the blasphemy law verdict handed to her. According to this and his press conference, he himself had not accepted the decision of the court even though he was the legal leader of the province, called one of the most holy (muqadas) laws as a black law, and tried to get forgiveness for a death sentenced woman under blasphemy law which according t the ATC court is not even possible. Just like the president, the governor also cannot be tried that is the reason why Salman Taseer couldn’t be caught. Even though there were protest rallies all over the country and he was asked for resignation. Anyways, even after all the demonstrations, protests and rallies, the federal government did not take any steps. Salman Taseer was not condemned on any of his speeches by any government department/institutions, President or the Prime Minister. The verdict delivered by ATC does not mention any of this disconnect from the state, which forced a sad/upset (mayoos) citizens to kill Salman Taseer and take the law in his own hands because the State was silent on the governors extremely controversial speeches. Even though the ATC court judge knew that Mumtaz Qadri did not have anything personal with Salman Taseer, he still wrapped up this case like a normal murder case

Ansar Abbasi rejoices that the US “is receiving dead bodies of its troops in Afghanistan more than before” and praises Taliban militants by saying “over a hundred thousands of US-led Nato troops, equipped with the modern weapons, have been reduced like rats by merely thousands of Islamic warriors within Afghanistan”. Again, passing over for a moment the shamefulness of rejoicing in death of anyone, we should consider just who are these “Islamic warriors” that receive Abbasi’s praise.

The Afghan Taliban has shocked independent human rights groups by using children as suicide bombers to attack NATO forces.

A tactic pioneered by al-Qaida but almost unheard of in Afghanistan until 2005, suicide bombing is becoming more popular with insurgents attempting to meet the massively intensified Nato campaign with their own surge of violence.

In one recent case a 12-year-old boy in Barmal district in Pakitika province, which borders Pakistan, killed four civilians and wounded many more when he detonated a vest full of explosives in a bazaar.

“They are relying more and more on children,” said Nader Nadery, from the country’s Independent Human Rights Commission, who thought the Taliban were struggling to recruit enough adults. “When somebody runs out of one tool they go to use the second one.”

Children are not the only ones killed and mutilated by Taliban. Women, too, are treated worse than farm animals. When 18-year-old Aisha tried to escape the abuse of her husband and his family, she was captured by Taliban and her face butchered to set an example to other women not to dare try to live with an ounce of dignity.

When Malim Abdul Habib became headmaster of Shaikh Mata Baba High School that educated girls, the Taliban took more than just his nose and ears.

“Four armed Taliban came to my uncle’s house at 1am,” said his nephew Abdullah Hakim, 25. “They told him he had to go with them. When he refused they stabbed him in the stomach in the yard and then cut off his head.”

Taliban militants forced Habib’s wife and children to stand and watch as they butchered him in front of their eyes.

These are the “Islamic Warriors” that Ansar Abbasi prays will defeat the US-led NATO forces. But what Islam is this that butchers women and children in cold blood? What Islam is this that forces a man’s wife and children to watch in horror as he is beheaded before their very eyes?

This question must not only be asked of Ansar Abbasi who is entitled to be a Taliban sympathiser if this is his belief, but it must also be asked of Jang Group which chooses to pay Ansar Abbasi to write columns that term the killers of women and children as “Islamic warriors” and then publishes them for the masses to read. Editors and publishers of The News may think that adding the disclaimer of “Viewpoint” is enough to absolve them of any responsibility, but their Ansar Abbasi is not merely an individual offering his ‘viewpoint’ rather he is paid by Jang Group to write these pieces. With freedom comes media responsibility and accountability. If Jang Group does not support this position, why are they paying for it?