Posts Tagged ‘Pervez Musharraf’

The News (Jang) Publishes Defamatory Headline Against Musharraf

Friday, October 1st, 2010

The News (Jang) today published a ‘top story’ carrying a headline that refers to Pervez Musharraf as ‘Crazy’. This is a wholly irresponsible and potentially defamatory action by the Jang Group newspaper.

The News publishes headline referring to Pervez Musharraf as CrazyGen. Musharraf is, of course, entitled to his opinions about the proper role of the military. If he believes in military dictatorship, for example, he has the right to say so. If the editorial staff of The News disagrees with Musharraf’s contentions, this is their right also and the proper place to publish their opinion is in an Editorial if it is the official position of the newspaper.

But to call someone ‘crazy’ is an attack on the character of the person and not the substance of his ideas. Furthermore, editorial comments do not belong on the front page of the newspaper in a news article. This changes the article in The News from a legitimate news source to a political attack. The News has already been corrected once by the Supreme Court for publishing inappropriate headlines. This practise needs to stop.

Disaster Relief, Then and Now

Monday, August 30th, 2010

Ahmad Noorani, journalist or political operative?Ahmad Noorani writes for The News today a curious article about flood donations received from the international community. The thesis of Mr Noorani’s column appears to be that the present government is not as effective as the Musharraf regime in 2005. Despite the author’s intentions, though, his presentation of facts to back his claim are questionable at best. Often they are simply incorrect.

According to Noorani, “the total present pledges so far stand at only $777 million and the actual money received so far is only $82 million”. This is false.

According to data compiled by The Guardian, committed funding (funds that have been received) stood at $687,228,789 on 26 August. And additional $324,309,146 in uncommitted pledges (funds that have been promised, but not yet delivered) is outstanding. That means that the total present pledges can be no less than $1 Billion.

The largest donor is the United States, which has given $155,930,000 and pledged an additional $50,000,000. The next two largest donors are Saudi Arabia ($74,448,904) and United Kingdom ($64,765,001). In addition to monetary donations, many countries have provided “in kind” donations of foods and transportation, such as over 30 helicopters that are being provided by the US.

According to Noorani,

“A spokesman for the Economic Affairs Division confirmed to The News that by the weekend the total aid received in cash stood at $82 million while relief goods worth $60 million had also arrived, making the total foreign aid received at $142 million.”

It is not clear from Mr Noorani’s column what account the representative from EAD confirmed, but the claim that “the total foreign aid received” was not more than $142 million is not possibly correct.

It is also of concern that Mr Noorani compares international response to the 2005 earthquake to the response to the 2010 floods without considering the very different contexts of these two disasters. In fact, there are several important differences between the two events that analysts believe to be responsible for the difference in international aid.

The death toll in the 2005 earthquake was over 73,000. The latest reports put the number of deaths from flooding at around 1,600. While the number of deaths attributed to the floods is expected to grow, it is a slower killer than the earthquake, potentially making it seem less urgent to many international donors. According to one NGO, disasters that are more quickly destructive raise more relief money.

World Vision typically raises 10 to 15 times more from donors responding to a hurricane or earthquake as opposed to a flood, said Randy Strash, World Vision’s strategy director for emergency response.

There are other obvious reasons as well: The economy in 2005 was much stronger than the economy in 2007, making many donors feel that they can give more of their personal funds to help others. And, while the worst crisis in recent history, the flooding comes only a few months after the earthquakes in Haiti resulting in what many are calling “donor fatigue”.

None of these points are addressed in Mr Noorani’s column.

It is also curious that, when describing donations, Mr Noorani switches between currencies without providing any constant by which to compare. After some basic conversions using the website XE.com, it appears that some of Mr Noorani’s data points may be misleading.

For example, according to Mr Noorani, the total demands of provincial governments amount to over Rs.1 Trillion, or $11.8 Billions in US dollars. While no one suggests that the amounts currently raised for relief and reconstruction are anywhere near adequate, none of the recent crises saw such a large amount of donations.

The most recent crisis before the floods, the earthquake in Haiti, has received a pledge from the international community for $5.3 Billions over the next two years. This is less than the $7.5 Billion pledged by the USA alone last fall even before the floods devastated the country. Furthermore, the pledge did not come until April, four months after the disaster. While everyone will hopefully do more to help the flood victims, saying that fundraising is a failure if it does not achieve such levels as Mr Noorani suggests does not provide a realistic metric for evaluation.

Given the introduction and conclusion so the column, the author’s intent seems to be to suggest that the present government is not as effective as the Musharraf regime. What the author actually does, however, is make false comparisons and ignore important qualitative and quantitative data that explain differences in the response to the 2005 and 2010 disasters. While we hope that Mr Musharraf is able to raise some funds to help the country, it is important that media reports of donations be accurate and impartial so as to encourage everyone to give generously. Misleading reports such as the one filed by Mr Noorani do not help.

Who is Shaheen Sehbai working for?

Monday, May 10th, 2010

Shaheen SehbaiGen. Musharraf

Shaheen Sehbai is back with more of his psychic magic in The News. Today he uses his psychic powers to read the mind of, as usual, President Zardari who he says is ‘on a warpath‘ against, well, everyone. But today’s column takes a new, and troubling direction. While the silliness and contradictions that we have come to expect from Shaheen Sehbai are ever present, there is a dark lining to this new column that suggests something very sinister in the works.

Sehbai begins his column by claiming that President Zardari ‘and his closest minions’ are planning an offensive against the military the same way they are waging a war on “the Supreme Court, parliament, its own coalition partners, the opposition, the media and its own government, even the party and its prime minister.”

Allow me to explain just how devious Zardari is. He has masterminded a war on the Supreme Court by reinstating Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudry; on the parliament by signing 18th Amendment to return more power to it; on coalition partners by asking for open discussions and negotiations about difficult issues. He has gone to war with the opposition by consulting them on important issues – how else was the 18th Amendment passed unanimously? As for attacking the PM, handing over powers to him is a strange method of attack.

Actually, it was only a few weeks ago that this same author Shaheen Sehbai wrote that Zardari was all but finished, and that he was struggling to stay in office.

His presidential powers are gone, despite the best delaying tactics that he could deploy. His strategies have failed miserably, examples being not restoring the judges, toppling the Sharif brothers in the Punjab, resisting the nullification of the NRO, getting money from the so-called Friends of Pakistan, appointing his own judges, taking over the ISI, dictating the India and Afghan policy, running the day-to-day government, buying over the media and finally keeping the PPP under his thumb.

So, which is it Mr. Sehbai? Has Zardari gone on a warpath against everyone, or is he a failed President who has given away his powers?

Of course, the truth does not matter to Shaheen Sehbai. This is all a set up, of course, to allow him to publish a new set of rumours. This time, he starts by saying that the President is going to try to cut the powers of Gen. Kayani. Sehbai’s evidence is that “There have been whispers in power corridors for several weeks…” That’s right. Sehbai claims that there is a rumour. He names no sources, of course; presents no evidence, but only claims that he has heard a rumour. Then Shaheen Sehbai does something truly surprising.

Sehbai admits that he is making it up.

Surprisingly, all efforts of this writer, and my team in Islamabad, to get to know the factual position about these structural changes in the armed forces have come to a naught so far.

What?!? Let’s read that one more time…

Surprisingly, all efforts of this writer, and my team in Islamabad, to get to know the factual position about these structural changes in the armed forces have come to a naught so far.

That’s right. Sehbai says himself that he has no factual evidence for anything he is writing. It has been already shown that Sehbai does not have connections in the armed forces, so why should we be surprised that he has no facts? But I must admit that I am a bit surprised that Sehbai has decided to admit that he is just making the whole thing up.

Of course, this does not stop him from continuing with this web of conspiracies and rumours.

Actually, when Shaheen Sehbai does reveal some of the sources of these rumours, they are quite troubling. “Circles close to General Musharraf in London and Washington are already telling everyone…” Wait just one minute. Is Shaheen Sehbai truly writing that his sources for inside information are “Circles close to General Musharraf in London and Washington”?

These are the “whispers in power corridors” that Shaheen Sehbai has been listening to? Not only are these not people in power, these are people who have a very clear agenda against Pakistan. Musharraf is being investigated in connection with the murder of Benazir Bhutto – and Shaheen Sehbai thinks that his advisors in Washington and London are a good source of inside information about the government? This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.

In fact, Shaheen Sehbai’s entire column appears to be simply repeating rumours started by Musharraf’s advisors overseas. Shaheen Sehbai writes:

This is quoted by the Musharraf people as one more reason for the growing belligerence of PPP against Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, who it is said, may be turned into a Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, if he tried to press too hard on the Swiss cases.

We are supposed to believe Musharraf’s foreign advisors about any issues related to Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry? Rubbish.

Shaheen Sehbai really becomes quite cheeky though when he says that officials in the Law Ministry “have opted to go home as they know that these political gamblers will be the first to fly away leaving them in the lurch.”

Remember, all of what he is telling is rumour coming from “Circles close to General Musharraf in London and Washington”. Tell me again who will be the first to fly away?

But knowing that Shaheen Sehbai is only repeating talking points from Musharraf’s Washington and London advisors helps make some sense out of his article. It has been well established by other commentators that Shaheen Sehbai has a history of trying to set different actors against each other. Actually, this is his modus operandi.

Let’s take a moment to go back and examine his present column knowing this:

First, he tries to set government against military.
Then, he tries to set government against judiciary.
Next, he tries to incite MQM against PPP.
Not content to be finished there, Sehbai writes some slander about PM Gilani and tries to create suspicion between the PM and FM Qureshi.

This is what causes me great concern. Shaheen Sehbai has resorted to publishing rumours he has been told by Musharraf’s foreign advisors, and slandering officials in the military, parliament, and the government. He is clearly trying to incite suspicion and doubt between government officials. Normally, I might think he is just trying to get headlines. But the fact that he admits all of his evidence comes from rumours told to him by Musharraf’s Washington and London advisors makes me fear there is something more sinister going on.

Could it be that Shaheen Sehbai is acting as a political operative, not a journalist? If so, what is his political objective? Is he actually trying to pave the path for Musharraf to return to power?

Given all this, a question arises: Why is The News allowing its pages to be used for political propaganda?

Shaheen Sehbai: Journalist or Man with an Agenda

Thursday, November 5th, 2009

It is interesting to note that in today’s The News, the OpEd written by Shaheen Sehbai, an Editor in the newspaper, has been relegated to the inner pages. It seems like even The News governing board has realized that Mr Sehbai is not a journalist, but a campaigner. And that his stories are not based on fact, they are based on conspiracy theories

Let us take a look at today’s story titled ‘Where did the minus-1 formula come from?’. In this story Mr Sehbai alleges that there was a one-to-one meeting between the President and the Prime Minister during which certain issues were discussed. Now, if there was no one else present in the meeting and I am sure President Zardari did not provide Mr Sehbai with information about the meeting, then who did? Did Mr Sehbbai receive information from the Prime Minister himself or from his office? Or did Mr Sehbai receive information from those who “listen” to conversations? Maybe that is what Sehbai means when he repeatedly refers to ‘fly on the wall’ informing him about what happened! But if this is the case then his story is totally unreliable and it is time someone exposed these dubious links.

Mr Sehbai’s piece is not a OpEd piece it is fiction. Here are some snippets. First, “…started taking shape in the power corridors of Islamabad and Rawalpindi when coupled with political failures, there was a torrent of reports of corruption, mainly by people associated and appointed by the presidency on key government and corporate positions, with a turnover of billions in shady deals.” Or “Secret meetings with uniformed star officers were held in the wee hours of cold nights.” And “Political amateurs, who had grabbed the high place coming from tiny bit jobs in hospitals, jails, and stud farms or from apartments in exile, could not keep the secret.” Better still, “A Presidency insider narrated the story of how the lifestyles of people around the president had transformed within weeks and months.” If I am not mistaken this is what we read in most mystery or romantic novels!

Mr Sehbai never mentions his sources, all he does is refers to meeting “politicians, retired and working civil and military bureaucrats, journalists and businessmen.”  If there are so many people he has met and so many who are willing to open up to him – as he supposedly argues – why does he have a problem in telling his viewers who these sources are? How is it that Mr Sehbai knows what is happening behind closed doors, in one-to-one meetings, has the confidence of everyone from the media to the civilian to the military establishment? Who gives him all this information? The public has a right to know especially when all he says about his sources is words to the effect, “A fly on the wall said a Maulana would appear regularly in the PM House to take what he needed and this was no secret.”

Or is it possible that Mr Sehbai has his own agenda. Ten years ago in an article in Dawn titled “The Patient and the Surgeon” (October 22, 1999), Mr. Sehbai described Pakistan as a “patient” and General Musharraf as the “surgeon.” Quoting unnamed sources Mr Sehbai advised General Musharraf on what he should do, namely, “General Musharraf cannot dawdle and straggle any more as he is losing the critical strike time that could give him the advantage of an early sweep against the mafias and layers and layers of corrupt elements all over the place. His administration has a very soft face so far and this has not caused enough fear and panic in the ranks of the corrupt. Publicity  of his image of a relaxed  man sitting with his dogs may have waited until he had shown some results.”

If we look at today’s piece Mr Sehbai seems to be doing exactly the same except this time round he is advising Prime Minister Gilani by asking him to come “out of the shadows of Zardari on the one hand and keep the loyalties of as many PPP MPs as possible so that his government’s majority in parliament is not threatened. The Opposition is helping him out, to a degree.” And further, “ The PM should, therefore, stop all such deals and decisions until he becomes a PM in his own right and the decisions are seen as collective decisions to be implemented in a transparent manner and not dictated to suit the deep pockets of presidential friends who have already made billions. The PM, when he gets out of the shadows of the Presidency, will have to catch these big fish to establish his credibility. Nothing short of a massive hunt for such wheeler dealers with a criminal mind will bring Gilani some credit. He has lived too long as a sheepish lame duck.”

So what we at PMW see is a pattern. Mr Sehbai runs campaigns and conspiracies against individuals and then uses his column to propagate these campaigns. This is not journalism, this is campaigning.

Pakistan’s Rush Limbaugh: Lies, Damned Lies and Shahid Masood

Monday, November 2nd, 2009

These days Shahid Masood is leading the charge in the camp which wants to destabilize the democratically elected civilian government of Pakistan. He is the man who initiated the Kerry-Lugar controversy and is again responsible for creating the current NRO problem.

So who is this man and what is his mission. In this piece PMW will take a look at the continuing strain of lies by so-called political commentator Shahid Masood which have taken a very high toll and need to be shown for what they are — lies!

Dr Masood’s habit of creating or constructing his own facts, of claiming to know everyone, of claiming to be wherever and whenever something important is about to happen are now no longer taken at face value. It is time people challenged his falsehoods.

In 2006 on one of his programs for ARY TV Dr Shahid Masood plagiarized material from some documentary films. In his show ‘Views on News’ Dr Masood cited material and dramatic footage belonging to a documentary ‘The End Times and the Mahdi’ produced by a Muslim Turkish scholar Dr Harun Yahya without acknowledging this fact. He and ARY TV are lucky that Dr Yahya did not sue them.

In early 2008 a veteran Pakistani journalist used the following words to refer to Masood:

“He’s a doctor by career but a journalist by profession. How convenient is that!” Further, “The surgeon-turned-media darling got chummy with Benazir Bhutto, Nawaz Sharif, and Pervez Musharraf; chatted up retired and serving generals for kiss-and-tell stories; interviewed anyone he so chose to grill and eventually landed as the czar of Pakistan Television, despite not wanting to take the job but took it at the insistence of Asif Ali Zardari!”

In November 2008 fellow host Kamran Khan (of Aaj Kamran Khan Ke Sath, GEO) decided to strike a body blow to the “fast sinking ship” of Dr. Shahid Masood. With reference to Dr. Shahid Masood’s appearance in Iftikhar Ahmed’s ‘Jawab Deh’ (November 23rd), Kamran Khan made the following observations:

“Dr. Shahid Masood claimed in ‘Jawab Deh’ that Dr. Ishrat-ul-Ibad had been his class-fellow. This is proven to be a lie. They didn’t even attend the same institution.

“Dr. Shahid Masood claimed in this column in Jang (a day after Musharraf’s resignation) that he was present in the same room that Musharraf gave his resignation speech in. This again, has been proved a lie by a serving member of the President’s House staff who called in. The official visitor’s list does not include Dr. Shahid Masood’s name as he had been stopped at the reception. Additionally, Hassan Kazmi who is a senior producer of Samaa TV and was actually part of Samaa TV’s broadcast team at the venue and an eye-witness to the entire event, also confirms that Dr. Shahid Masood’s article in Jang was a bundle of lies.

“Dr. Shahid Masood claimed in Iftikhar Ahmed’s ‘Jawab Deh’ on Geo, November 23rd, that all expenses for the ‘Dialogue’ (Dr. Shahid’s think-tank) conferences in Dubai and the US were paid for by those who attended. One of the members called in to expose this as yet another lie; all expenses, including airline tickets and hotel bookings were in fact paid for by Dr. Shahid Masood himself.

So who is Shahid Masood and what is his real agenda? Is he one of the shadowy figures in our politics-media world who make money and gain power and prestige from spreading false rumors, distorting facts and encouraging the various elements in society to fight with each other?

TV anchors and media personalities are supposed to present facts and give their opinions – they are not supposed to pronounce judgments based on twisted facts. People like Dr Shahid Masood twist facts, give their opinions as facts and then make pronouncements on leaders, countries and the future.