Wali Khan Baber has been killed according to news reports. The Geo TV reporter was covering operation against drug-traffickers in Pehalwan Goth.
Baber’s death comes only a few weeks after International NGO Committee to Protect Journalists terms Pakistan ‘deadliest nation‘.
The media response to the assassination of Governor Punjab Salmaan Taseer today has been deplorable. Just when I think that things can not reach a lower level, I turn on my TV to be yet again disappointed. From the comments of Ansar Abbasi and Irfan Siddiqui to Geo’s animated depiction of the vicious murder, the media has found itself stooping below where even I thought it could possibly fall.
Blogger Ahsan Butt comments today on how it is precisely this sort of media playing to the fundo gallery that results in such acts of violence.
Plenty of media personnel and right-wing politicians in this country contributed to this with their constant “wajib-ul-qatl” refrain, not to mention equating support for blasphemy laws to support for Islam. All of them could technically be dealt with as inciters to violence (illegal in our country, and basically every other one out there) but they won’t. You get to say and do whatever you want, act with as much impunity as you want — as long as you have God on your side.
This was an opinion shared by late Governor Taseer himself – one that he was not afraid to speak.
The sad irony here is that Governor Taseer was murdered for speaking his mind openly and freely. The same right that so many media talking heads hide behind when they act so irresponsibly. Apparently it is a right for them to call anyone corrupt or kafir, but it is not a right for anyone to criticise them and point out their own hypocrisy.
Enough. I cannot watch anymore today.
Ahmed Quraishi has weighed in on the media debate. In his typical style, Quraishi ignores the more thoughtful discussion of his more intellectual colleagues in journalism and jumps straight to accusations of some American conspiracy against Geo for being “critical of Mr. Zardari”. But upon careful reading, Quraishi’s critique quickly falls apart.
Quraishi’s entire claim of conspiracy is based on two newspaper articles published by The Washington Post: One titled, “Pakistan’s press piles on president” and the other titled, “Pakistan’s Emboldened Judiciary Threatens Government Stability“. Quraishi does not deny that the press is “piling on” the president as, presumably, he knows that such a claim is too much even for his own readers.
Rather, Quraishi says that “such one-sided and biased reporting can appear in Washington Post shows there are power centers in Washington that take any attack against the incumbent Pakistani government very personally”. Of course, using Ahmed Quraishi’s same logic, one-sided and biased reporting in The News shows that are power centers in Islamabad that take any attack against the incumbent Pakistani government very personally. And that, let me tell you, is simply silliness.
Quraishi’s logical problems don’t stop there. He claims that this is not simply one article, but “underscores a trend in the US media over the past one year”. His evidence? One other article published by the same newspaper one week earlier. Again, using Ahmed Quraishi’s same logic, if it rains in Sialkot for two days in one week, therefore there is a one year trend of constant rain for the whole country. It simply makes no sense.
Most interesting, though, is what this new column reveals about how Ahmed Quraishi changes his conspiracy theories to fit his political objectives. In his latest article, Quraishi defends Geo as a voice of Pakistan. But in 2007, Quraishi himself accused Geo of being a tool of American interests!
This is why most Pakistanis have never seen American diplomats in Pakistan active like this before. And it’s not just the current U.S. ambassador, who has added one more address to her other most-frequently-visited address in Karachi, Mrs. Bhutto’s house. The new address is the office of GEO, one of two news channels shut down by Islamabad for not signing the mandatory code-of-conduct. Thirty-eight other channels are operating and no one has censored the newspapers. But never mind this. The Americans have developed a ‘thing’ for GEO.
Of course, in 2007 Ahmed Quraishi’s worries were somewhat similar. At that time he was worried that the Americans were supporting democratic reforms in Pakistan by not propping up Musharraf. In 2010, he is worried that the Americans are supporting democracy by not standing aside for another coup. Ahmed Quraishi perhaps gives away his ideology a bit later in his 2007 article, though, when he writes:
Musharraf has also told Washington publicly that “Pakistan is more important than democracy or the constitution.” This is a bold position. This kind of boldness would have served Musharraf a lot had it come a little earlier. But even now, his media management team is unable to make the most out of it.
For Quraishi, the nation is not democracy – which is the will of the people – it is only the will of Ahmed Quraishi, a “media manager” or propagandist, and his patrons.
It’s a bit cheeky of Ahmed Quraishi to criticise an American newspaper for commenting on Pakistani politics and media when Ahmed Quraishi himself has made a career out of creating conspiracy theories about American politics and media.
At least the American newspaper had the professionalism and decency to seek out comments from Rana Jawad, Fekhar Rehman, and Cyril Almeida. Of course, the article that so offended Ahmed Quraishi was written by real journalists, not “media managers”. Perhaps instead of criticising the Washington Post, Quraishi could take a moment to learn a thing or two about real reporting.
The following editorial appeared in today’s Daily Times and echoes our analysis of yesterday on the issue of media’s role in the executive-judiciary tensions. Of particular interest is the statement by the Daily Times editorial staff:
Even the prime minister’s statement that this was a conspiracy to pitch the two institutions against each other was not considered enough.
It is worth taking a moment to consider what it means to our country if unsubstantiated rumours are considered more authoritative than the word of the Prime Minister. Let me tell you, that is not a good situation.
EDITORIAL: Media’s rumour mongering
The Supreme Court’s “restraining order” to stop government functionaries from any moves to undermine the judiciary have brought to the fore the unsavoury role being played by a section of the electronic media in the political arena. On Thursday, the chief justice of Pakistan felt compelled to call an extraordinary session of the Supreme Court past midnight, acting on rumours spread by a TV anchor in his programme that the government plans to de-notify the restored judges who had been sent home after General Musharraf’s imposition of emergency on November 3, 2007. During yesterday’s hearing, the attorney general tried his best to convince the apex court that no such move was being contemplated by the government. Even the prime minister’s statement that this was a conspiracy to pitch the two institutions against each other was not considered enough. The surprising factor was that the honourable court took the rumours, not backed by any evidence, seriously and acted promptly.
Unfortunately, the media group from where these rumours originated, through its opinion pieces presented as news items and highly partisan anchors, has time and again attempted to provoke the judiciary to declare the president illegal and dismiss the government. One might recall the September 27 hearing of the NRO verdict implementation, when this channel stopped its routine transmission and this same anchor started painting a doomsday scenario only to eat his words later when the Supreme Court partially accepted the government’s plea and postponed the NRO verdict implementation hearing for two weeks. The media generally, and this media group in particular, has crossed all limits and ridden roughshod on any and every thing we knew as ‘media ethics’.
There has been tension between the government and the judiciary since the judges’ restoration. If this kind of yellow journalism and rumour mongering is allowed to provoke the august court and create confusion and chaos in society, how can we expect sanity to prevail? Intellectuals and saner elements of society, who care for the future of the country, consider a clash of institutions to be extremely destabilising. Seeing a section of the media working on an agenda to somehow incite this clash in order to throw out an elected government is disturbing. When already there is so much strain between the government and the judiciary owing to several cases before the court involving the government, this kind of scare mongering is intolerable. Disseminating unsubstantiated claims and calling opinions upon them on the powerful medium of television and manipulating public opinion to accept a certain view is a coup of sorts via the media. If state institutions start reacting to each ‘breaking news’, it might lead to more confusion and chaos than there already is. It is neither in the interests of such media groups, nor in the interests of the institution of journalism nor the country. Whether one likes a particular party or regime or not, weakening the system by inciting a clash of institutions is not in the country’s interest. We are engaged in a belated effort after many years, under a democratic dispensation, to strengthen the institutions of the state and get them to work within the parameters prescribed for them in the constitution. To establish their limits and define their relationships is a work-in-progress. This kind of journalism is definitely not helping that cause.
Imagine how much could be done towards actually rooting out corruption, overhauling the tax system, and all the other issues supposedly important to the media intelligentsia if they would quite wasting time on rumours and conspiracy theories. Just last night there was another emergency that turned out to be a non-emergency only because of some media personalities reporting rumours and gossips and everyone’s complete unwillingness to think sensibly. I am talking, of course, about the rumour that the government was planning to withdraw the notification to restore the Supreme Court justices.
Sohail Khan reports today for The News that:
The issue became serious when a late night press release issued by the Supreme Court informed the nation that the SC had taken notice of the reports on TV channels and had registered a case which will be heard by a full 17-member bench of the SC on Friday. A notice had been issued to the Attorney General to appear before the bench.
There were strong speculations in the media in the evening that the government was considering the move to remove the SC judges by cancelling the notification which had been issued after the Long March of March 16 to restore the judges.
As a result of this “strong speculation”, Supreme Court judges and their staff rushed to the court to issue a press release and make emergency preparations for a hearing, summoning the Attorney General to appear and give some explanations. Explanations of what? The government never did anything. Nobody did anything except some media personalities who once again spread some rumours or “specualtions” with no basis in any evidence.
No matter that the Prime Minister himself issues a statement at 8:30 pm assuring that there was no such conspiracy and that such speculation was all non sense.
“These kind of reports are incorrect and baseless and there is no such thing, and through these kind of statements efforts were made to create misunderstanding between the institutions,” said the PM House spokesman while quoting Prime Minister Gilani.
The spokesman said the prime minister had stated that the government respected the judiciary as the PPP had struggled and given the sacrifices for the independence of the judiciary. “Those who spread such kind of reports do not want strengthening of institutions,” the spokesman said, quoting the prime minister. Gilani said all the conspiracies will be foiled regarding the confrontation between the government and judiciary.
Even Supreme Court Bar Association President Ali Ahmad Kurd has stated that the Supreme Court judges acted hastily and would have been better to wait until the light of day to determine the facts.
But the issue is not the actions of the judges, which may be understandable as they heard about this on the news. It raises the more serious question of the role of media in the affair.
According to a report on the Geo website today:
The Supreme Court in its short order in the case regarding withdrawal of judges’ restoration notification reports stated that the government has failed to satisfy the Court and any attempt to remove the judges would be tantamount to treason, Geo News reported Friday.
The apex court ruled that judges restoration notification cannot be withdrawn. The court said that the executive order of 16th March 2009, restoring the sacked judges has lost its effectiveness after the 31st July 2009, verdict and heads of all constitutional organs must abide by the judgement.
The order also restrained all the heads of constitutional organs of the country including the president from restoring it.
What the Geo article fails to report, however, is that the government immediately and explicitly stated that it had no plans to withdraw judges restoration and has made no move to do so.
With the group of nations known as ‘Friends of Democratic Pakistan’ meeting with Foreign Minister Qureshi in Brussels today and the PM and President meeting to discuss preparations for Pakistan-USA strategic dialogues, the timing of this media report must be considered.
As the government has issued a strong denial of this rumour and, in fact, no such withdrawal has taken place, perhaps the Court should inquire as to who is behind the “strong speculation” that was reported on TV and whether the media that reported the rumours took the time to check with government representatives before they reported such.
With the ongoing tensions between the judiciary and the executive, it is common to evaluate the intentions of the justices and the government officials. Perhaps it is finally time for an official evaluation of the intentions of media also.
Nadeem Paracha, writing for Dawn Blog today, analyses the media reaction to the ‘shoe incident’ and the resulting protests by political activists against the media. One can’t help but come away thinking of an old song lyric.
There’s battle lines being drawn
Nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong
The attacks were a highly undemocratic act and supposedly coming from members and supporters of the country’s largest political party made it even worse. However, if everything about this condemnable act was undemocratic, one must also ask exactly how democratic and wise were the following acts that the same media group has been embroiled in?
How wise and democratic was the role of one of its religious talk-show hosts who blatantly instigated violence against a minority sect in Lahore in 2008?
How wise and democratic is the fact that one of its many anchors was accused by the son of a slain former ISI man who was kidnapped by a group of extremists and allegedly killed on the suggestion of the anchor? The anchor has pleaded that he was not involved and the voice on a taped conversation between an extremist and him was not his. How far has the channel gone to fully investigate the issue – even though personally, I am a fan of his and would be most happy if he proves his innocence once and for all.
How wise and democratic was the way one of its former talk-show hosts – with an obsessive habit of making outlandish predictions about the downfall of the current government – ridiculed the Sindhi folk culture on the occasion of the Sindh government’s ‘Sindhi cap day’ early last year?
The list can go on. I am part of the media myself, but refuse to toe the line many of my contemporaries at the protest rally were toeing. But what was this line?
Briefly put it goes something like this: Sensationalising (on air) an event that sees a man throwing a shoe at the president is freedom of expression; but getting the same treatment from those incensed by the nature of reporting that the event got on your channel is an attack on this freedom?
Same way, suggesting that the president’s tour of Britain amounted to him ignoring the floods but forgetting about the floods yourself at the wake of the shoe-throwing incident was OK? The channel did begin to obsess about the ‘issue’ like an excited group of high school pranksters. ‘What floods, where? Get me that shoe story, now!’
The above are just questions that I aired during my meeting with some contemporaries of mine at the rally.
I fully appreciate that some of them are taking their status of being the society’s watchdogs very seriously. But many of them know as much as I do, that within our community of crusading, pen-pushing do-gooders can be found a number of characters who are as lecherous, fraudulent and arrogant as those individuals each one of us loves to bring down for being corrupt and deceiving.
What’s more, recently the local electronic media has grown another edgy tentacle. That of constant self glorification, self-righteousness and peachiness, all queerly entangled with a huge persecution complex.
Exactly when or who gave us (the media), the mandate (and the audacity) to become judge, jury and executioners?
Shoe throwing gained global prominence as a protest tactic in 2008 when Iraqi journalist Muntadar al-Zeidi threw his shoes at the then-President of the US, George Bush. Since then, it has been a popular form of protest for many different nations. The same tactic has been used against Chinese premier Wen Jiabao in 2009, and throwing shoes at politicians has become practically a sport in India.
The strange part of this latest shoe throwing story is that the public rally was filmed and broadcast on television – and nobody saw any show throwing.
Anti-government commentators promise that video evidence will appear soon, but still no one has seen it. In the meantime, news media has been reporting the incident and airing interviews with the alleged shoe-thrower, substituting rumour and conjecture for actual evidence of the act.
Even the alleged-shoe thrower’s story is a curious claim. According to The News report,
Sardar Mohammed Shamim Khan, 57, said Asif Ali Zardari’s speech had incensed him so much that he spontaneously decided to unlace his size 10 leather shoes and hurl them at the bewildered Pakistani leader.
There are several problems with this man’s story that any junior reporter should be able to pick up on. First is the shoe size. Perhaps it is mere coincidence that Mr Shamim Khan reports that he threw a “size 10 leather shoe”, which is the exact same description of what was thrown at Mr Bush two years ago.
But Mr Shamim Khan’s claim that his action was “spontaneous” is even less reliable when it is learned, as reported by The News, that Mr Shamim Khan “managed to sneak into the invite-only political rally”. Was this really a spontaneous act? Or a carefully planned bit of political theatre?
There are several signs that perhaps it was the latter.
The day after the alleged incident, The Nation reported, an Internet game appeared encouraging people to throw the shoe at the president. What The Nation failed to ask, though, is how this game was created and distributed so quickly after the incident unless it was prepared before the incident even happened? And if the game was already in the works, how could Mr Shamim Khan’s act really have been spontaneous?
That’s not the only troubling aspect of this entire episode. Writing for the popular blog All Things Pakistan, Adil Najam reports that almost immediately after the alleged incident, someone began circulating fake photographs of the incident on media email lists.
And now there is the fiasco about the shoe hurling. It is still not clear what really happened. But the fuss created around it is huge. As is the embarrassment: not just for Mr. Zardari, but for Pakistan itself. If ever there was need for proof that we are all purveyors of tamashbeen politics, this is it. Within hours of the news a clearly fake ‘picture’ was being touted by a supposed ‘journalist’ on a media email list. Indeed, the supposed photo of Mr. Zardari being hit by a shoe was so clearly and nauseatingly a fake that one had to wonder about the deprivation of the mind which would even offer it in this age of the magic of Photoshop.
Adil goes on to offer a scathing criticism of Pakistan’s media which has been all too quick to report rumours and unsubstantiated claims around the alleged shoe throwing without doing the slightest bit of actual research.
But at some point one also starts getting tired of the relentless badgering by some in the mainstream media. Government actions, such as the reported closure of GEO and ARY in certain areas, are to be condemned and condemned unequivocally. But those in the mainstream media need to realize that even as they create public opinion, the media is itself being judged by public opinion. The line between news and entertainment has long been erased as has been the line between fact and opinion. Now we find ourselves trespassing into the realm of slander.
As one of the institutional that many Pakistanis – including this Pakistani – has been proud of in recent years, this slide is disturbing to watch. Vigilance and transparency for those in power – as for example on the fake degrees issue – is the media’s duty. But ultimately the media will be judged – within Pakistan and abroad – for its sense of balance and fairplay. A sense of media integrity is a precious commodity for any society. A society as precarious as Pakistan’s can ill-afford the embarrassment of that integrity being questioned.
As for shoe-hurling as a means of political commentary, there are still too many things that we do not know about the incident (including the government insisting that it never even happened).
If there are still so many unanswered questions, another question must be asked – Who is behind this, and what are their motives? In fact, certain media companies have been quick to re-frame the story from one of political protest to one of tension between “the media” and the government, with “the media” being the victim.
The News, which has been severely criticised for anti-government political bias, wrote 25 percent of its “Top Stories” accusing the government of targeting Jang Group and Geo (The News is part of this same Jang media empire) – the same as about the floods which have affected millions of citizens.
In effect, Jang Group appears to be using the claim of alleged “shoe throwing” as a means to create the perception of a more general “media vs. government” tension. This has resulted in the Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting, Syed Sumsam Ali Bukhari, issuing a statement assuring everyone that the government will not impose curbs on the media.
The reaction from certain sections of the media is both disappointing and deeply troubling. Whether or not someone threw a shoe at the president should be easily confirmed or denied. If the media cannot provide actual evidence beyond the claims of political operatives, it should not report the incident as having actually happened. What is more disturbing, though, is that these same news organizations continue to fail to provide answers to obvious questions about Mr Shamim Khan’s claims and the timing of things like an Internet game and doctored photos that appear to be pre-planned before the supposed “spontaneous” incident occurred, and instead have begun attempting to create the perception of government crackdown on media freedoms, despite lack of evidence for such a claim.
Whatever happened – if anything – should be investigated and reported by the news media. But journalists and media organizations should not be involved in creating or advancing political theatre.
The Hamid Mir conspiracy saga continues with more news organizations speaking up about the charges.
Today, Dawn adds their voice to the debate in the following editorial:
If the person on the line is indeed Mr Mir, an explanation is in order about his possible ties with militant organisations. He must also answer allegations that the information he ostensibly provided may have contributed to the killing of Khalid Khawaja, a former ISI official belonging to the air force who had been abducted by the Taliban. Mr Khawaja, believed by many to be a Taliban sympathiser, is repeatedly described as a CIA agent by the man who sounds uncannily like Hamid Mir.
Mr Khawaja and his wife are also held responsible in part for the bloodbath at Islamabad’s Lal Masjid. The person on the phone also spews venom of the vilest kind on the Ahmadi community. Slain Taliban leaders are referred to as martyrs.
Mr Mir denies most of the conversation and has served legal notice on the paper that broke the story. He claims that he and the organisation that employs him are being victimised for their consistent criticism of the PPP government and President Zardari in particular. Hamid Mir, who is not short of detractors even within the media, also maintains that the audio ‘recording’ is the work of the Intelligence Bureau which took a voice sample and then produced an entire conversation with the help of a “special gadget.”
Mr Mir has every right to proclaim his innocence but that alone will not suffice. In this digital age it is child’s play for independent experts to confirm whether or not the voice on the tape is Mr Mir’s. It is just as simple to distinguish a doctored recording from an unedited conversation. The credibility of the media is at stake here. What is needed is an investigation that is carried out with an open mind and whose outcome is accepted and acted upon by all parties. This is imperative if allegations of unethical conduct by the media and charges of dirty tricks by the government are to be laid to rest.
Hamid Mir has responded to the original story by sending legal notices claiming defamation and demanding a written apology and Rs 250 Million.
GEO News Islamabad Executive Editor Hamid Mir has sent legal notices to the publisher, editor and staff reporter of Daily Times, as well as the chief executive of TV channel Business Plus for publishing and telecasting “defamatory material against him”.
Mir claimed that the story carried and telecast by the newspaper and the channel, respectively, was “based on malafide intentions and had lowered him in the estimation of general public as the enemy of the state”.
Mir has demanded a written apology within 14 days and its publication in the newspaper and has asked the respondents to pay damages worth Rs 250 million in compensation, else legal action would be taken.
But Hamid Mir is not the only person sending legal notices, it seems. Reports today indicate that Khalid Khwaja’s son Osama Khalid has told reporters at Dawn that his family will be registering a case against Hamid Mir for being instrumental in his father’s murder.
On Wednesday, the family of Khalid Khwaja, the ISI official who was kidnapped by a militant group in the Tribal Areas in late March and subsequently killed, declared their intentions of getting a case registered against the television anchor, Hamid Mir.
“We will be first going to the police and also to the Supreme Court in a few days’ time to get a case registered against Mir for being instrumental in the murder of my father by Punjabi Taliban,” Osama Khalid, son of Khalid Khwaja, told Dawn by telephone on Wednesday.
Geo TV's Hamid Mir Accused of Conspiracy
I have been holding off on this story for a while just because I wanted to see if it actually developed into anything. Sometimes these things pop up, but then quickly disappear if there’s nothing to them. Actually, I will not take any opinion about the validity of the charges, but I think that since the issue involves a major media organization and the story has begun to be reported in the international press, it is worthwhile to examine the facts.
The story involves Hamid Mir who works for Geo TV. He is accused of instigating the murder of Khalid Khawaja, and ex-ISI official, by Taliban kidnappers.
What is the story?
In order to get beyond the suspicions and rumours that seem to be surrounding much of this story, let’s look at how this incident was reported by the UK newspaper Guardian. I have removed paragraphs about reactions to the incident to put together a basic storyline. We will look at Hamid Mir and other reactions to the story directly also.
The tape purports to be a recording of a phone conversation between the journalist, Hamid Mir, and a Taliban spokesman about the fate of Khalid Khawaja, a former intelligence agent being held by the Taliban.
In the tape Mir describes Khawaja as a CIA collaborator, questions his Islamic credentials, and accuses him of playing a treacherous role in the 2007 Red Mosque siege in which more than 100 people, including the chief cleric, were killed. When the abductor asks the journalist whether Khawaja should be released, he urges him to further interrogate him.
Last month Khawaja’s bullet-pocked body was found on a roadside in Waziristan with a warning note to other “American spies”.
…
The Taliban added to the controversy by issuing a statement that denied the tape was real but, confusingly, threatened the state telephone company for having taped the conversation.
…
On 24 April the Taliban issued a video showing a strained-looking Khawaja admitting to having worked for the CIA and betrayed the Red Mosque clerics.
A week later, after his execution, Mir wrote a detailed account of Khawaja’s life. He recycled the allegations against the former ISI agent, attributing them to militant sources.
Hamid Mir Responds
Hamid Mir publicly responded to the charges against him in a column for The News, the newspaper owned by Jang Group which also owns Geo TV on which his show appears. Calling the story a “grand plot against media.”
On his Facebook page, Hamid Mir threatened legal action against Daily Times and some blogs for publishing the story.
‘We are taking legal action against Daily Times(owned by Salman Taseer) and some US based blogs supervised by Mr.Hussain Haqqani for hatching a conspiracy against Hamid Mir by using a fabricated tape.’
The blog Let Us Build Pakistan, an independent blog of PPP supporters, has been tracking the story closely, since May 14 when they published the recording of Hamid Mir.
Daily Times has also responded to the legal threats from Hamid Mir today in its editorial:
In DT’s editorial “Shocking revelations” (May 17, 2010), we argued: “There should be a thorough investigation into the matter by the security agencies. It should first be ascertained whether it was actually Hamid Mir or an impersonator on the audiotape.” We did not pass judgment on the genuineness or otherwise of the audiotape, but left room for the possibility that it was a forgery, as Mir has subsequently claimed amidst his loud protestations of innocence. In an inadvertent admission, however, he says the audiotape is an amalgam of bits and pieces of other conversations (innocent journalistic exchanges, according to him). Even if this is conceded, there is sufficient in the ‘bits and pieces’ to arouse alarm. Surely Mr Mir should welcome the opportunity to clear his name if the tape is indeed a forgery. On the other hand, if it turns out to be genuine, Mir has a lot to answer for and the law should take its course. The country is in the middle of a life-or-death struggle against the homegrown jihadis who have declared war on the state. Journalists, who are engaged in an increasingly precarious and dangerous profession in conflict areas, may be required for professional reasons to keep lines of communication open with the ‘enemy’. However, this does not give anyone, journalist or not, room to transcend the law of the land or the ethics of his profession. If the tape is genuine and Mir did say the things about Khalid Khwaja that are on the tape, a prima facie case is made out for his arraignment on charges that could include being an accessory before the fact to the murder that followed, as well as in possible violation of the Army Act (applicable to civilians in times of war). The statement released by the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan denying the contents of the tape and trying to clear our intrepid anchor’s name has done more to muddy Hamid Mir’s case than anyone else could have.
Other Journalists Weigh In
Ayesha Sidiqqa is a regular contributor to Dawn, and has a Ph.D. in War Studies from King’s College, University of London. She has written two books on Pakistan’s military. On her blog, Dr. Sidiqqa writes,
Is the man conversing with, whats alleged as a member of the Punjabi Taliban, Hamid Mir? The simple answer is yes. The man in the tape is Hamid Mir beyond doubt. The voice and style of conversation is his. I have had conversations with him on several occasions and he breaks stories in this very style. The conversation should not surprise people as Hamid Mir has old links with the Islamiscts and the intelligence agencies. In the world of the armed forces information is difficult to access. Relatively better access to information comes at a price which Hamid Mir and many other journalists in the world, particularly Pakistan pay happily. There is not a single journalist, especially on the electronic media who comments on national security and is not fed by the military. I remember one very popular journalist who even writes for foreign press. He is considered an authority on military affairs. The poor chap cannot tell the front of a submarine from its back. Planting people in the media and intelligentsia is an old trick. The only matter of concern really is that how and why is the audio recording made available on the net? The real story is the disclosure rather than the conversation.
UPDATE: Journalist and former BBC correspondent Shahid Malik writes in an email today:
Award winning journalist and documentary maker Asad Qureshi life is under severe danger of being cut short by his captives in Waziristan. Hamid Mir claiming that the famous tape recording is fake and fabricated is naked lie, for no ones voice can be faked perfectly, as it is like your finger print and the voice on the tape certainly does belong to Hamid Mir. TTP member has supposedly come forward in support of him claiming it to be fake also.As Hamid Mir is the only known clue to who have abducted Asad Qureshi as he is in touch with them, he should be questioned ASAP to recover Asad from his captors. The media trial and or taing sides can go on, but a stake is a innocent life and that also of the one of our best reporter/ director and documentary maker. Please to check the credentials of Asad Qureshi at www.imdb.com and also look at his award winning documentary on the 2005 earth quake and Wazirisan called ‘Wana Olives’ and many others.
From the comments:
An extract reportedly from an email has been attributed to journalist and former BBC correspondent, Shahid Malik. I write this to clarify that the credit for its authorship is not mine.
The paragraph in question caught my attention only today (November 10, 2010); hence a belated correction.
The following was posted by Mr. Yousuf Nazar at his own blog, State of Pakistan, on Saturday, 10 April 2010. Mr. Nazar makes excellent observations about the increasingly poor so-called ‘reporting’ being published by The News (Jang Group).
I am getting quite fed up with the planted, biased, illiterate, and highly unprofessional so-called reporting by the The News International. Its current owner Mir Shakil ur Rehman was not above cheating in the exams. More about this in a moment.
At one point of time, I was very negative about Asif Zardari, and still am, [read my article of Sep. 04, 2008] but whatever he is or his past, he is at least a known commodity. And to be honest, what the PPP government under President Zardari has achieved in political terms in just two years, Zia and Musharraf could not achieve in the twenty two years, these murderers and traitors ruled the country. Zia killed ZAB and Musharraf killed Akbar Bugti. Whatever ZAB and Bugti’s wrongs might have been, every one deserves a fair trial. Both Zia and Musharraf violated the constitution and the law of the land with impunity and contempt. So it is not out of line to accuse them of murder and treason.
Now about the Jang Group. On Saturday, April 10, 2010, the News published a report by Ahmad Noorani that claimed, “a highly controversial clause regarding the judges’ appointment in the 18 Amendment bill has changed the whole scenario of lawyers’ politics with the government trying to gain their loyalties. According to the Law Ministry sources, sensing the lawyers’ reaction on the passage of the controversial clause of judges’ appointment, the law ministry has decided to launch a full-fledged campaign against the country’s independent judiciary. Credible sources confided to The News that senior officials of the ministry had been deputed for this purpose and they had been assigned to give cases to certain lawyers so that they feel obliged and sympathise with the government at an appropriate time.”
What kind of nonsense, unprofessional, planted and inspired reporting is this or for that matter reporting at all. Law Ministry sources, credible sources, reliable sources.. and so on! Another one was “lawyers plan to challenge the 18th amendment” without naming a single lawyer. This is not reporting. Name the sources or have the guts to say that it is your opinion. But then put it on opinion pages and stop publishing one-sided and inspired material as front page news items.
First of all, to term the clause regarding the judges’ appointment in the 18 Amendment bill as highly controversial is ludicrous, dishonest, and factually incorrect. The Amendment won an overwhelming majority and this particular clause was passed without any opposition, whatsoever, by the National Assembly. Would any one who is a journalist worth his salt and has any professional caliber, term this as “highly controversial” unless he is either very biased or is working on some agenda.
Such journalists should join politics and then they would be free and entitled to say whatever they fancy but as long as they profess to be journalists, they should learn to observe some professional standards. Or is that too much to expect. Maybe it is.
Specially from the Jang Group. This Group has played a special role in Pakistan’s history in promoting dictatorships, jingoism, sectarianism, ethnic conflicts, and in general keeping its readership in a world that can be described as xenophobic. Its role in projecting Jamaat-e-Islami in the 1970s, turning the newspaper into a pamphlet and printing highly inflammatory slogans [as a border] that provoked the language riots in Sindh (1972), barely six months after the dismemberment of Pakistan, remains one of the darkest chapters in Pakistani journalism. Jamaat Islami Chief, Tufail Mohammed was an uncle of Zia ul Haq and an agent of the CIA as Mr. Bhutto documented in detail in his book, If I am Assassinated.
Jang Group’s TV channel has promoted people with dubious credentials like Aamir Liaqat Hussain who have fake degrees. GEO, on its website, prides itself as the CNN of Pakistan, totally oblivious of the reality that in most countries outside the United States, CNN is considered to be a biased mouth piece of American establishment and is not exactly known for objectivity or independent reporting. GEO TV colloborates with the Voice of America, which is an official news arm of the government of the United States. Yet, it claims to be indpendent and objective.
Observing this lowly and sleazy standard of journalism, I have been reflecting on an evening in the distant past. I was preparing for my final exams for the B.Com in 1976 in Karachi. One evening, when I was studying, my door bell rang. When I went out, it was my friend Zain Ghazali, son of Commander Ghazali, a former manager of Pakistan’s cricket team. He asked me to come and sit in the car parked outside my house. As I got into the volkswagen, I saw a nice looking boy on the wheels. It was Mir Shakil ur Rehman. He was very excited as he had managed to get the Accounting paper “OUT”. So I asked what then was the problem? “I don’t know how to solve it”, was the answer. I hope the readers get a picture.
I believe, Shakil has now moved to Dubai with his family and does not even live in Pakistan. I wonder if such people, who did not have the ability to even cheat in an exam and do not even live in Pakistan despite making so much money here, would have even bothered to provide some elementary training in journalism and its basic standards to the members of their staff. It seem not.
