Posts Tagged ‘double-standard’

Babar Sattar vs. Babar Sattar on transparency

Monday, March 12th, 2012

Babar SattarIslamabad based lawyer Babar Sattar is a regular columnist on legal issue for The News (Jang Group). As a respected legal mind writing for the nation’s largest media group, he has a special ability to influence public opinion on important issues. Mr Sattar is entitled to his opinons, of course, but we believe it is fair to note when inconsistencies in his pieces suggest that the positions he is projecting may be influenced by something other than facts.

Writing about Asma Jahangir’s critique of the Supreme Court’s interim order in the ‘memogate’ fiasco, Babar Sattar called the Court’s actions “a welcome development” for expanding the scope of fundamental rights.

Why should a matter be consigned to the dustbin merely because it involves national security, the holiest of all cows? Does it not bode well that national security has finally stepped outside the exclusive domain of the khakis? When was the last time that the army chief and the DG ISI (or any serving general for that matter) submitted himself before a court of law in Pakistan? Why should the court be expected to look away when asked to determine whether or not Pakistan’s envoy to a foreign state made an offer that compromises Article 9 and 10 rights of Pakistanis under the constitution? Would it strengthen rule of law in Pakistan if instead of being adjudicated before courts of law in full public view, the ‘troikas’ and such illegitimate centres of power in our polity continue to brawl over and resolve differences related to national security behind closed doors?

In questioning the Court’s actions on the ‘memogate’ case, Babar Sattar suggested, the Supreme Court was being treated unfairly by assumptions that the Court would treat civilians and military officials differently.

The misgivings against the Supreme Court are a product of the premature (and uncharitable) conclusion that the apex court is incapable of doing justice in a matter wherein the army chief and the DG ISI have exhibited personal interest. And these fears have not singularly been nurtured by the court’s actions or orders in the memo case, but by its omissions and indifference vis-à-vis other cases wherein the allegations of abuse of fundamental rights are much more blatant. For example, what would it take to get the Supreme Court to fix for hearing the Asghar Khan case and adjudicate the alleged involvement of the ISI in distributing funds and cobbling together the IJI?

Though he could not have predicted it, Mr Sattar got his wish and the Supreme Court took up the Asghar Khan case earlier this year. So what does Babar Sattar have to say about the importance of transparent investigations and fundamental rights now?

It is thus important that the Asghar Khan case leads to a wider disclosure of facts. Such disclosure need not be public.

Perhaps the Supreme Court is not treating civilians and military officials differently under the law, but it certainly looks like someone is.

Jang Group’s Double Standard on Security

Tuesday, January 24th, 2012

The News (Jang Group)When The News (Jang Group) published an editorial on 6th January questioning Husain Haqqani for claiming that he was concerned about his security without providing some concrete proof of threats, we noted that creating this arbitrary standard of proof of threats was insulting to the courageous men and women of the press who every day put their lives at risk to investigate and report news that is uncomfortable for certain powerful quarters, especially when their own newspapers had carried reports terming him as a traitor.

Imagine our disappointment, then, when we opened today’s edition of The News only to find another editorial, this time giving utmost sympathy to the claims of Mansoor Ijaz about his own security concerns in what appears to be a blatant double-standard.

This is what The News said about Husain Haqqani:

There has been no fulminating cleric calling for Haqqani’s demise, nor protests or rallies against his alleged treachery. Today Haqqani remains in the PM house, and one might reasonably wonder why there and not some other place – his own home for instance, suitably guarded against intrusion or attack. But that is another unknown, alongside all the other unknowns of this curious affair. We wish no ill to Mr Haqqani, but might attach greater credence to his claims of insecurity were he able to support them with something a little less ephemeral than euphemistic references to ‘powerful quarters’. In short, facts please. Or is that just too much to ask?

This is what The News said about Mansoor Ijaz:

Can anyone be blamed, then, for accusing the government of trying to intimidate Ijaz into staying away from Pakistan and standing in the way of the memo investigation reaching its logical end? It boggles the mind why the government would want to lose its already tenuous moral ground by shirking from its primary responsibility of witness protection. If the judicial commission fails to complete its work, the assumption of Husain Haqqani’s guilt and the complicity of top government leaders will be recorded in historical memory. An easier way out has already been suggested by Haqqani’s lawyers when they asked the commission to arrange testimony of their witnesses through video conferences. If this can be done for one side, why not for the other? The government must exhibit that it is committed to protecting Ijaz for the sake of the truth, and make every effort to get him to come to Pakistan or get his testimony for both the judicial and parliamentary commissions. On his part, Ijaz also needs to exhibit more faith in the judicial process to which he says he is ready to surrender the truth.

According to The News, Husain Haqqani is crying crocodile tears while he is placed on the ECL and sitting behind armed guards at PM’s house, but Mansoor Ijaz has an understandable complaint while he enjoys the comfort of his home in South France and is able to travel freely. We are not questioning whether Mansoor Ijaz has received any threats, but why are his claims more believable to The News than Husain Haqqani? Is it because The News wants to create different impressions about the two people? Or is The News simply unaware of their obvious double-standard?

This is the worst sort of double-standard because it so obviously takes sides in a case that is presently sub judice. Rather than acting like the media team for one side or the other, Jang Group would be appreciated to inform readers without bias. In short, facts please. Or is that just too much to ask?

Fashion Journalism

Tuesday, August 2nd, 2011

We have avoided until now addressing the treatment of FM Khar by some in media because it was our sincere hope that this would be a momentary lapse of reason that would fade away once the newly appointed minister was giving meetings with her international counterparts as representative of the national interest. But upon seeing the following cartoon published by The News (Jang Group), we decided that we have had enough.

Cartoon_TheNews

Whether or not Hina Rabbani Khar dresses fashionably has nothing do with her abilities as Foreign Minster. Despite his dapper appearance, when did media groups devote such time and energy to the fashion of SMQ during his tenure?

SMQ

And fashionable dress is not something limited to the Foreign Ministry or PPP. Check out these countless MPAs from PML-N bragging about their expensive branded clothes and their 7-Series cars.

What about these other political leaders? Are they dressed in latha kurta and simple sandal shoes?

Musharraf with Bush

The question must be asked why only Hina Rabbani Khar’s clothes are considered news worthy while her male counterparts are given free pass on their choice of wardrobe and expensive accessories?

Meanwhile, while media groups are gossiping about the Foreign Minister’s clothes, she is busy building closer relations with her foreign counterparts and making progress on confidence building and normalizing relations over issues like Kashmir that eluded her male predecessors for years. Certainly this is more news worthy than the maker of her bag.

Libya, Conspiracies, and Double Standards

Monday, March 28th, 2011

Libyan Muslims Demand No Fly ZoneLast week, director at the South Asia Free Media Association, Khaled Ahmed, held a mirror to the nation’s commentariat and observed the uncomfortable truth that it’s only when non-Muslims kill Muslims that we complain. He was writing about how so many turn a blind eye to daily atrocities committed by Taliban jihadis, choosing instead to express all anger against a random event like the Raymond Davis case. But the point continues, and is perhaps best illustrated by media coverage of the international enforcement of a ‘no-fly zone’ in Libya.

Daily Times calls the Libya no-fly zone a ‘disastrous military intervention by the western forces’ and claims that the no-fly zone is part of a plan for American global domination.

Ever since the Cold War ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world has seen a horizontal expansion of capitalism into the formerly socialist countries and under the rubric of globalisation into the rest of the world. The world’s dominant countries, who like to call themselves the ‘international community’, have set out to re-conquer the world through military means. It started with the Balkans, and via Afghanistan and Iraq, is now being witnessed in Libya. The goal is Pax Americana (global empire).

Sadly, this Daily Times editorial follows the position of the anti-American far right wing as expressed by Gen (R) Mirza Aslam Beg.

…another Muslim country has been invaded with such arrogance of power, which is seen as continuation of the last thirty years of state-sponsored terrorism against the World of Islam

If the enforcement of UN resolution 1973 is part of a conspiracy by the US to conquer the world, why did the US hand over control of the operation to NATO? And if this is a western conspiracy, why are fighter jets from Qatar and United Arab Emirates participating?

According to Daily Times, “Libya is a relatively weak country when it comes to the global powers but this provides no justification for attacking it”. But this claim ignores the reasoning behind the UN resolution which was was passed because the dictator Col. Gaddafi vowed “no mercy” against pro-democracy demonstrators and had actually been using air strikes against his own people which prompted the Arab League to request the UN resolution, a resolution that was celebrated in the streets of Libya after it passed.

The Nation accuses the US of a hidden agenda because it is participating in the no-fly zone against Libya but not intervening in Bahrain.

If the US purpose in Libya is democracy, it does not seem interested in democracy for Bahrain, which is not just up in arms, but also a US fleet HQ.

While it is valid to examine why intervention is carried out in some countries and not in others, it is ironic to question America’s dedication to democracy considering that we are presently sending thousands of our own people to Bahrain to serve as pro-regime mercenaries willing to fight against pro-democracy demonstrators. It is also ironic considering that just last month The Nation published promoted the position that America was employing a double standard by not supporting Arab democracy movement.

They only know the stark hypocrisy and double standards: Western societies enjoy democracy and prosperity, while American influence is preventing our people from having their freedom by the force of weapons and oppression. They are forcing poverty on our people by squandering their wealth and laundering the money of their friends, the corrupt dictators.

Now that America is supporting the pro-democracy movement against a corrupt dictator, The Nation has changed its position. Of course, The Nation is not the only media group to make this sudden change of position. In fact, it seems that many of the same people who only a few weeks ago were asking why America was not using its military might to support pro-democracy movements against corrupt Arab dictators are now defending those same corrupt Arab dictators and condemning the Americans support for the pro-democracy rebels.

The UN resolution authorizing enforcement of a no-fly zone in Libya and the way such enforcement is carried out is a valid topic of discussion. But any discussion should be honest and based on the facts, not twisting positions to fit an anti-American ideology. At present, what we are seeing from much of the media on the Libya story is not an honest and objective analysis of the issues, but a repetition of conspiracy theories and double standards that undermine the credibility of our media and make us look like the only principle we stand by is that “if America is for it, we are against it”.

Media Double Game Against Bilawal?

Friday, August 6th, 2010

Last night Bilawal Bhutto Zardari released a statement about his immediate future. In short, he says, “I am currently looking into the possibility of studying law” and will not be jumping into politics as widely reported. According to his statement, Bilawal felt compelled to act out, “to counter some inaccurate information that has recently been reported”. While there was certainly much media attention to the alleged speech planned for Saturday, what is more telling is the way Bilawal’s future and his more immediate decision to open a donation center for flood victims has been treated in the news media.

On Thursday, Dawn reported that “Speech by Bilawal fuels talk of political career”.

But now he has finished his history degree at Christ Church, seen as one of the most aristocratic of Oxford’s colleges, speculation is growing about what steps he will now take towards his political destiny.

Bhutto, who is already chairman of the PPP, is expected to speak before several thousand of its supporters at an event in Birmingham, central England, alongside his father who is visiting Britain.

It was not so far fetched for media to report that Bilawal would be at the rally scheduled for Saturday since Waheed Rasab, the PPP’s coordinator in Britain, told reporters as much. But the truth is, this was mostly speculation.

As a result, Dawn reported today about Bilawal’s statment.

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari on Thursday spoke for the first time in many months, only to categorically deny the prevalent impression created by a section of the media that he was to launch his political career over the weekend by attending a public meeting in Birmingham.

One has to wonder, with all the speculation about whether Bilawal will make a speech and enter politics, all the party coordinators and “anonymous sources” who were telling what was going to happen – why did no journalist actually bother to ask Bilawal what he thinks?

More disturbing, though, is that even Bilawal’s statement has not stopped certain media companies from continuing political attacks in their reporting.

The Nation‘s report on the statement includes the following conclusion:

The sources said that PPP took decision not to launch political career of Bilawal Bhutto Zaradri due to severe criticism launched by the media and politicians that in tough circumstance, President Zardari has left for UK to launch political career of his son.

Nowhere in the article does it reveal who these “sources” are, or what their evidence is for this claim, of course. This seems like a pretty transparent attempt for the media to take the credit for something that Bilawal is doing. So, when Bilawal does something they don’t like, it is his fault. When he does something they do like, The Nation claims credit.

The News, however, is even worse. On 1 August, the newspaper wrote that Bilawal “would do well by stepping in to cancel the ceremony and instead setting about to prove himself a worthy leader through more solid action rather than flamboyant gestures.”

Upon the release of Bilawal’s statement, however, The News quickly changed its tune. This morning’s newspaper is actually critical of Bilawal’s move.

Chairman of the PPP Bilawal Bhutto Zardari dramatically declared last night that he would not address the Birmingham rally on Saturday, August 07, putting cold water on the plans that he would be launched as the party chief and adding a new sense of drama to the countrywide campaign against President Zardari.

In a dramatic climbdown, the 21-year-old son of Benazir said that he would continue with his studies and wanted to stay away from the media. The move comes as a humiliation to the party mandarins who were preparing for weeks for his grand entry into politics.

It is worth noting here that The News may have slipped in admitting that there is a “campaign against President Zardari”. Of course, this should not be a surprise to readers of The News, which has a sordid history recently of publishing unsubstantiated political attacks.

But it is especially important to note that the political bias of The News is clearly evident in their inability to give proper recognition to Bilawal even when he does something that the very newspaper says it hopes for! Rather than praising Bilawal for canceling his appearance and setting up a donation point for flood victims, The News calls the move “a humiliation”. This is a double game against Bilawal – damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

To their credit, Dawn, Daily Times and Express Tribune reported the development without infusing an opinion into their reporting. This shows that there are some journalists content to simply report the facts, and this should be encouraged.

Still, we must look at this episode as a part of the ongoing problem with media speculation, wishful journalism, substituting opinions for facts, and playing political double games. Bilawal aside, we all deserve better.

Media Bosses Double Standard on Travel

Tuesday, August 3rd, 2010

In a follow up to our report yesterday about The News and Ansar Abbasi exploiting the national sensibilities for victims of KP floods, reader Sana from Chai Chutney Politics blog emailed to tell that media bosses are to be found traveling in Europe and USA while complaining about others doing the same.

Showing just how political they can be, Pakistani media elites are treating themselves to trips all over Europe and the US – while condemning President Zardari for traveling on official business.

The Jang & Geo leaders can currently be found out and about in London. The Dawn Group leaders find themselves in New York City. This socializing goes on whilst newspapers call for the President to cancel his diplomatic trips. If the papers call for the President to stop his duties as head of state so that he may travel to the flooded areas, why are these media elites not held to the same standard?

President Zardari is the man elected by the people of Pakistan to represent them to the world. Unfortunately, the Pakistani media is either ignorant of this or they simply wish to keep him from doing his job properly – which is not surprising as the media is now a tool to manipulate the minds of people against their elected leaders rather than to inform them of what is going on in with their country. The sad fact is that instead of meeting their own responsibilities of reporting on the issues, the media has devolved into a manipulative, obstructionist machine.

Khud bhi nahin kaam karte aur doosro ko bhi nahin karnay detey.

A post by the fact-checking website, Pakistan Media Watch exposed how some in the media are heartlessly exploiting the flood victims. By using the tragic circumstances to score cheap political points against the federal government, these individuals have proven that nothing is sacred. What Pakistan needs is a media that serves the people in its own capacity, and does not try to become another political party.

In this time of national grief, the journalists in Pakistan should be at the front lines of the disaster. Shouldn’t the media serve as the medium that shows the rest of the country and the world what the flood victims are suffering through? Isn’t there a political pundit brave enough to leave his or her comfortably dry studio and record their show from Pakistan’s impoverished & flood-ravaged regions? President Zardari’s administration has granted Pakistanis a free press. But when can we have a media that does its job?

We have more than enough political parties. We need pundits and journalists whose main goal is to serve the people, not play politics.

Ansar Abbasi: Double Standards and Smears

Thursday, July 8th, 2010

Ansar AbbasiAnsar Abbasi today is continuing with his sad display of poor journalism and unsupported political attacks. His column in The News is titled “NAB used to target CJ on Presidency’s wishes“, but nowhere in the column does he present any evidence that such a claim is true. Rather Ansar Abbasi uses double standards and bald faced smear tactics to try to create some resentment against the government and promote his own political goals.

It’s ironic that Ansar Abbasi claims that the government is trying to “scandalise and ridicule the superior judiciary”, all the while his same newspaper publishes articles that uses phrases like “the government’s ugly effort” and “desparate”. Abbasi in his column says that “the government has launched this frontal attack against the Chief Justice”, but in another article in the same paper is titled, “Govt attacked, judiciary backed”. Which is it?

But that is not the only double-standard that is obvious. Ansar Abbasi says that in questioning the validity of President Zardari’s decision to reinstate the Chief Justice, NAB “ignored the basic fact that the issues regarding the judges restoration or those reappointed under the Naek formula have already settled and could not be questioned anymore.”

So the judges restoration which occurred in 2009 cannot be questioned anymore, but the Swiss cases which were dismissed in 2008 should be re-opened? NRO which was promulgated in 2007 can be repealed? Is there a rule that only that which can be used as a weapon against Zardari is fair to be questioned, and anything else is “already settled”?

This same logic is applied to the NAB statements about the restoration of the judiciary. Ansar Abbasi says that, “the NAB…has tried to question the validity of the March 2009 restoration of the judges through an executive order issued by Prime Minister Gilani”. He says that this cannot be questioned because “the Supreme Court in its July 31, 2009 decision has already settled all such matters”.

But Ansar Abbasi uses a different standard for NAB. He says that “The NAB’s reply to the Supreme Court in a BoP corruption case is not only contemptuous but is also flawed and filed by a person, Irfan Qadir, who along with the minister in-charge of the NAB Babar Awan is required to be questioned by NAB in the same BoP fraud case.”

According to Ansar Abbasi’s logic, Irfan Qadir and Babar Awan should not be able to file a reply in a BoP case because they may be affected by the case. But it is perfectly acceptable for the Supreme Court to settle the matter of its own restoration!

In fact, Ansar Abbasi tries to smear the names of Irfan Qadir and Babar Awan by saying they are accused by Harris Steel owner Afzal Sheikh. This is a bald faced attempt to smear the names of these men without giving them the proper right to have any complaints or accusations cleared in a court. For someone who claims to care about justice, Ansar Abbasi continues to be selective in who he believes deserves the right of fair treatment and who is guilty by his own decree.

Ansar Abbasi: Challenging Shahid Massod to be Chief Justice of Media?

And after he continues to behave this way, Ansar Abbasi has the cheek to whine that nobody will talk to him! He complains in his column,

The government at different levels was even contacted last week by a staffer of The News Investigations Wing regarding what was cooking up in the corridors of power against the Chief Justice of Pakistan and the superior judiciary but it was again denied.

Can you imagine this phone call?

“Assalamu Alaikum”

“Walaikum assalam. I am a staffer of The News. Please let me speak to the crony in charge of cooking up contemptuous attacks against the Chief Justice?”

“I’m sorry, what are you talking about?”

“You know who I am talking about! He is in the Corridors of Power and works on the ‘Scandalise and Ridicule the superior judiciary’ portfolio!”

“Sir, I do not know what you are talking about. This is the government of Pakistan, are you sure you have dialed the right number?”

“How can you not know what I am talking about! It was reported in The News last month!!! So you are denying me to speak with the crony in charge of conspiracy to target the Chief Justice!”

“Sir, I am going to have to hang up the phone because we have important work to do in the government and do not have time to waste with prank phone calls.”

Ansar Abbasi calls the NAB’s reply “simply disgraceful, unprecedented and unheard of”. His entire column is a poison pen letter that makes accusations with double standards, innuendo, and no evidence. All of this he thinks is okay because his column has been labeled “News Analysis”. But this is not analysis. It is simply a political speech, and another embarrassment for Mir Rahman.

Shaheen Sehbai's Defamation Double-Standard

Tuesday, July 6th, 2010
MNA Azeem Daultana quotes Shaheen Sehbai's own words - is this defamation?

MNA Azeem Daultana quotes Shaheen Sehbai's own words - is this defamation?

One would think that after a 42-year career in the field of journalism, Shaheen Sehbai would have grown a slightly thicker skin. Instead, it appears that he’s grown quite a bit of cheek! Apparently the Group Editor of The News had his feeling hurt by an article penned by MNA Azeem Daultana and has responded with a Rs 100 Millions defamation notice. Reading The News report about the defamation notice, one wonders if Shaheen Sehbai is asking to be treated with a different standard than he himself observes.

Shaheen Sehbai’s complaint, filed against two province-based newspapers, claims that,

On May 30, 2010, the Editor-in-Chief of The News International received for publication from the Principal Information Officer of the Press Information Department an article entitled ‘Differentiating between journalism and ‘churnalism’: a case study of Shaheen Sehbai’s (‘Defamatory Article’ authored by Azeem Daultana, PPP Parliamentary Secretary for Information).

Besides making several aspersions on the professional integrity, credentials, character and intentions of Shaheen Sehbai, the article specifically stated that Mr Sehbai ‘sought an ambassadorial position from Asif Ali Zardari and the PPP government and when Mr Zardari and the government denied him the coveted position and office of profit, he embarked upon a revenge mission against Mr Zardari.’

The PPP MNA was given an opportunity by Mr Sehbai to retract his baseless allegations through an e-mail dated June 12, 2010, within one week and tender an apology for the defamatory accusations. Instead of withdrawing the defamatory accusations and tendering an apology, the article by Mr Daultana was given wider dissemination and was published in two province-based newspapers, besides some suspicious blogs.

This defamation claim is particularly curious because the complainant, Shaheen Sehbai, is notorious himself for writing “baseless allegations” and “defamatory accusations”.

Just in the past few months Shaheen Sehbai has written numerous columns that include charges and allegations that he even admits have no factual support.

On 28 June, Shaheen Sehbai wrote:

The latest in the Zardari camp is to attack the judges, on the one hand, threatening to withdraw their Executive order and throw them on the street by Rehman Malik’s executive power, while on the other to secretly encourage General Musharraf to seriously come back and put together the remnants of the PML-Q under his wings and then cooperate with the PPP against Raiwind.

Where is Shaheen Sehbai’s evidence for such a claim? Or is this merely “baseless allegation” and “defamatory accusation” as well?

On 10 May Shaheen Sehbai wrote:

Brimming with self-delusional overconfidence, President Zardari and his closest minions are also quietly planning a similar offensive against the Establishment, which includes both the Pakistan Army and the country’s bureaucracy.

Against the GHQ, the presidency has plans to restructure the top hierarchy of the services chiefs and reports have been deliberately leaked from the top that the heads of the army, navy and the air force may be brought under a Chief of Defence Staff or CODS.

Of course this never happened. Isn’t this also “baseless allegation” and “defamatory accusation” as well?

On 23 April, Shaheen Sehbai wrote:

Inside the prison, the first objective for an influential, moneyed person is to develop a network of loyalists who can bypass the jail procedures, the manual, deceive the jailors, provide facilities to make life easy, bribe or negotiate with captors and judges and find conduits to communicate with the outside world. This is what Zardari did in his years of jail. He developed the hard core of his cronies – a jail doctor, a hospital owner, a business caretaker, a protocol provider, a media handler, a few political artists, a number of mafia-type jobbers, some trouble shooters, a couple of well-dressed attack dogs and a bunch of gun-wielders who he calls as his loyal security guards.

Where is Shaheen Sehbai’s evidence for such a claim? Or is this merely “baseless allegation” and “defamatory accusation” as well?

It seems that Shaheen Sehbai has a very long history of writing defamatory accusations about President Zardari. So why is he shocked when someone writes of him,

The extent of the writer’s venomous hatred for the President of Pakistan, Mr. Asif Ali Zardari, is well known to the readers of this newspaper. It can be judged by a recent piece written by Sehbai titled “Why is the President scared of political actors” published in The News of April 23, 2010, in which he sadly used words like “fiendish” and phrases like “attack dogs” to describe the person and the official staff who – whether we like it or not — represent the office of the President of Pakistan.

Shaheen Sehbai may not like what Azeem Daultana has to say, but at least he has provided some evidence in the form of Sehbai’s own words. That is more courtesy that Shaheen Sehbai ever extended to the president, is it not?

In fact, Azeem Daultana’s supposedly “defamatory” article is filled with quotes from Shaheen Sehbai’s own articles followed by corrections. Does Shaheen Sehbai allege that he has defamed himself?

Sadly, Shaheen Sehbai cannot even help but to make some defamatory statements in his own complaint about defamation. For example, why does he write, “…the article by Mr Daultana was given wider dissemination and was published in two province-based newspapers, besides some suspicious blogs.”

Mr Daultana’s article appears to have been published on the popular blogs Pak Tea House, which is editied by Raza Rumi, a regular columnist for The News, as well as Let Us Build Pakistan, which is edited by a group of Co-editors, all of whom are publicly listed on the website. So why these blogs are called “suspicious”? Is this not yet another example of merely “baseless allegation” and “defamatory accusation” as well?

Shaheen Sehabi has been writing column after column of rumour and innuendo against President Zardari and others. His allegations are regularly made without any evidence, and his predictions have repeatedly failed to come true. He hides behind the cloak of ‘professional journalist’ and uses this title as a talisman to ward off any criticism. Even though Shaheen Sehbai has no problem criticising others, when someone dares to criticise him, he makes a defamation claim. Does Shaheen Sehbai believe he should be held to a different standard than his own?