Monday, February 8, 2010

Aamir Liaquat: Further Adventures in Irritating TwitDom

Can no one rid us of this idiotic twerp?

The pseudo-doctor Aamir Liaquat Hussain (sorry, Hardilazeez [Beloved] Aamir Liaquat Hussain, since that now seems to be part of his name) is back. Not that he ever really left. But back as in back after making a hefty packet out of a Haj packaged tour sold with his name, where he sort of accompanied the faithful (who shelled out a premium to get a guided tour of the pilgrimage with him... Why, God only knows) by staying at a 5-star hotel and turning up to read a dua-e-maghfirat (prayer for forgiveness) for the camped out pilgrims.

And what a return it has been. So far, he has given his two-cents that the real cause for the losses suffered by the Pakistan cricket team in recent weeks has been the green soles of the team's shoes (apparently a direct rebuff to Islam since green is the colour associated with it) and opined that the assassination of an Iranian nuclear scientist a few weeks ago had to do with Iran kowtowing to Zionists by constructing synagogues for its Jewish citizens.

I had actually caught some other twerp on his programme on January 31 (right after the 5th ODI between Pakistan and Australia and devoted to cricket, including an appearance by Maulana Inzamamul Haq) holding forth on the green soles issues and had been looking around for a clip of the programme to make its way to the net. But apparently, Mr. Jahil Online (JO) actually said the same thing himself in his first programme back, on January 29, which has been blogged about by a number of other people including Teeth Maestro and Nadeem Farooq Paracha in Dawn.

Here's the clip from that programme (the bit about the green soles is between 3:30 and 4:15):

As JO points out: "Yeh belief ki baatein hain, yaqeen ki baatein hain, aql ki hujaton ko poojnay waalon ko kabhi yeh baatein samajh nahin aayein gi." ('These are matters of belief, of faith, those who worship at the altar of reason will never understand them.') Damn right about that, you silly superstitious little twit.

But if propounding silly superstitions were the only thing this moron did, it would be easy to ignore him (though not of course Geo and Jang which provide him with the platform to take his twitdom to the public at large). No, he uses his platform to far greater effect. Remember, this is the same man who had called on air for Salman Rushdie to be killed (which led to his expulsion from the MQM) and for Ahmadis to also be targeted. He has now spent two full programmes about the Dr. Aafia Siddiqui episode, interviewing her mother and sister in a manner that can only be termed calculated to provoke religious zealots.

I don't want to get into the content of the programmes at this time but even the ad for the programmes, splashed on the front page of The News and Jang, can provide a fair inkling of it.

The ad reads: "Amreeki adalat mein Pakistani beti mujrim qaraar... Mutaasib jajon ke janibdaraana faislay par aik pur-istaqaamat maan aur pur-azeemat behen ki istaqlal aur azm se bharpoor guftagoo." ('Pakistani daughter convicted in an American court... A discussion full of commitment and resolve with a steadfast mother and determined sister about the biased decision by prejudiced judges.')

Now, that's what you call objectivity, innit. To be frank, I don't know the real truth about Aafia Siddiqui's case, there are issues that need to be resolved (was she actually arrested in 2008 as claimed by the Americans or had she been detained illegally - as the notorious "Grey Lady of Bagram" - since 2003? Did she actually try to kill her American interrogators or is this a purely fabricated case? What was her actual link with Al Qaeda? What's become of her two children not yet recovered? etc etc etc) and she may indeed be a victim of human rights violations perpetrated in the name of the "war on terrorism." But does that give JO and the largest media group in Pakistan the right to pass judgement all by themselves? Forget that, ostensibly, what does a 'religious' programme have to do with a legal case... On what basis is this judgement being made? The opinions of an obviously traumatised mother and an irritatingly self-righteous sister who seems to be hiding a lot more than she is divulging?

And what about this news, published in the Jang Group's own English paper? According to it, the Taliban have threatened to execute an American soldier if Dr. Aafia Siddiqui is not set free, their demand coming after  Dr. Siddiqui's family approached them to put pressure on the US. The Taliban commander had this to say to explain the call for her release:

"“We tried our best to make the family understand that our role may create more troubles for the hapless woman, who was already in trouble. On their persistent requests, we have now decided to include Dr Aafia Siddiqui’s name in the list of our prisoners in US custody that we delivered to Americans in Afghanistan for swap of their soldier in our custody,” explained the militant commander.
He claimed family members of Dr Aafia told the Taliban leadership that they had lost all hopes in the Pakistan government and now Allah Almighty and the Taliban were their only hope. Later, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid also called The News from somewhere in Afghanistan and owned a statement given by the Taliban commander."

There is far more to this case than meets the eye. But will Dr Aafia's sister continue to hold that the family has no connections with militants in Afghanistan? You can bet that JO will never be asking her this question.


digger said...

Dead right. Aafia Siddiqui's case has become more about politics than law or fact. The media over here has ducked just about every significant question - those raised in this post, and many more. The key is the period between 2003 and 2008, which forms the basis for Aafia's martyrdom when she was supposedly incarcerated and tortured at Bagram. But what is the basis of this assertion, except Aafia's hysterical sister and Yvonne Ridley, who has produced one witness, Binyam Mohammad, who says he saw Aafia at Bagram (and even then, the woman he saw was much 'heavier', he says). Ridley has a track record of telling porkies. She claims Aafia was raped in custody but when asked to provide proof, she has none: it must have happened, she says, because sexual abuse was prevalent in Abu Ghraib.

This cast-iron logic is never challenged, however, on Pakistani TV channels, where it's simpler to get whipped up into a pseudo-nationalist frenzy of indignation, and duck asking a couple of decent questions. So many other 'daughters of the nation' have been treated terribly (Dr Shazia Khalid springs to mind) but nobody seems to get too exercised about their plight.

Of course the Americans have behaved badly - there are no angels in this case - and its understandable why public anger about so many dreadful disappearances/torture cases is being channeled into this one. But problem, though, is that's unclear what exactly this case IS. Allowing anti-Americanism to fog the truth serves nobody. Put the wrong people on a pedestal and when they fall - as inevitably this one will - they will whack you on the head.

Anyone seriously looking for answers might start with Aafia's 13-year-old son, Ahmed, currently residing with Fowzia in Karachi. He disappeared with her in 2003, and reappeared with her in Afghanistan in 2008, giving investigators a cock and bull story about being an earthquake orphan from Balakot. The Americans proved he was her son with a DNA test. But Fowzia refuses to allow anyone to speak with him.

Which raises the bigger question: where are Aafia's two other children? And if, as they claim, they have been abducted and/or killed, then why isn't THAT the focus of their outrage. Seems like a bigger deal to me.

Anonymous said...

Interesting post & I agree with all the points you raise except one - Jang group is clearly biased, but just for the record it was The News that first broke the story of Aafia's links with a terrorist group as alleged by her husband in this story published a year ago.

temporal said...

there is only way to effectively gag this guy...send him to soodirabia...permanently...infinitely better than sending him to heaven;)

Anonymous said...

Just can't understand the audacity of Geo actually getting away by gathering the biggest hate-filled nut jobs (Liaqat, Shahid Masood and, of course, the psychotic trio of Zaid Hamid, Ali Azmat and Ahmad Qureshi).

vanguard said...

GEO is turning out to be FOX NEWS of Pakistan

Enam Hasan said...

It is beyond doubt that Afia had some connection with Al-Qaeda operatives. But that's not the case in point. Thing is, even war prisoners are not given the kind of treatment Afia has received at the hands of intelligence agencies. Humane treatment is what differentiates the modern world from Taliban, so the former cannot afford to act like the latter.
On another note: it is an irony that Dr. Afia's misery is now being told by sick right-wingers, including Hazrat Aamir (A.S.). Whatever the truth, the blame clearly goes to our not-truly-modern liberals, who lack courage to speak up for Afia. No wonder our so-called liberals suddenly outcry when a girl in Swat is targeted by Taliban, but they don't have the guts to speak against what happened with Afia.


Bolshevik said...


1) There was outrage over the Swat flogging because there was proof that it happened. Aafia's stories, on the other hand, have not been proved -- she herself hasn't helped either with her tirades against Jews, etc;

2) The girl in Swat was a citizen of Mamlikat Khudadad Pakistan. Aafia is a US citizen. And yet, those who are backing Aafia up so vocally actually tried to prove that no flogging had occurred in Swat -- why this discrimination?

3) If Aafia was indeed in illegal custody prior to surfacing in Kabul, her illegal custody is as condemnable as all other violations of basic human rights;

4) By extrapolating point # 3, why restrict yourself to condemning Aafia's illegal detention? Why not condemn Zarina Marri's detention, torture, rape, etc by the ISI? Why are all the fundos silent about the treatment meted out to Dr Shazia Khalid? Are they not "qaum ki betiaN" too?

5) The only people who're going cuckoo over Aafia's verdict are those who need any and every excuse to blame Ambreeka for everything. Note, that those people (I'm looking at the Jamaat-e-Islami, Imran Khan, etc) are not against Umbreeka Bahadur's imperialist tendencies; they are merely against "progress" and whatever little "freedom" exists for people in the US -- they are against what they refer to as "Westernisation". They are against the freedom of women; the rights of labourers and peasants (I'm looking at the Federal Shariat Court's verdict against land reforms); against freedom of speech and association.

All of them -- and their rabid, obviously-brainless supporters -- deserve a swift kick in the nuts, to say the least. Morons.

Enam Hasan said...


First of all: Afia's story is not told by Afia. It was told by a British journalist. The news of her disappearance and emergence, after years, was reported by newspapers. So, it is silly to assume that she might have concocted a story in her defense.

Of your points 4, 5: Thing is, you make it sound like "if you don't speak for Shazia/ Zarina, we won't speak for Afia." To me, this is not the case and not fair at all.

Yes, Afia's custody is condemnable, but who's condemning it? Who? That's the question. Liberals are not condemning. They are merely apologetic to the court judgement.

What happened in Swat was condemnable, but liberals cried out loud, as if it has never happened before here. Trust me, I would have expected Taliban to be more cruel, because they are the savages, right?

And if that incident was reportedly denied by rightwingers, does this mean that now so-called liberals deny (read, ignore) what's happening with Afia, even if she seems to have connections with Al-Qaeda. I believe she deserves a better treatment, because you are I and the rest of so-called liberals, left liberals, are the torch-bearers of modern human values. Don't expect it from Taliban. I don't like to expect the same respect for modern values from them. I am honoured to be a modern man!

On Afia making her case worse: well, imagine a situation where you are being tried for your Bolshivek views. Now you tell me if a Jamati is on the jury which has been deployed to make a judgment on you, wouldn't you rather demand to remove the Jamatis/ rightwingers from the jury? Wouldn't you make the same demands, as Afia did in the case of Jews? And wouldn't you say what Afia said after the judgement?

I would. And I know, you will. Because people are biased. We all believe in one thing or the other, fear/ hate one ideology or the other. Why? You know it better than me.

Bolshevik said...


I'd appreciate it if you didn't resort to Jamaati tactics and try to pin stuff on me which I haven't said. I wrote my comment in the form of numbered points so it would be easy to understand. Please go back and read point # 3 in my previous response.

Secondly, Aafia said what she said not after the judgments, but throughout the case. Her remarks would actually be considered racist, but we obviously have different standards for that in Mamlikat Khudadad Pakistan.

She took the witness stand -- despite repeated requests to the contrary by her lawyers -- and provided conflicting testimony and cock-and-bull stories. Convicting someone sans evidence such as fingerprints etc is not unprecedented in the history of the US justice system.

For more details:

Have fun reading and for once, getting your facts right. I shall now go back to doing what my sarmayadar masters pay me to do: edit shitty copy and make my life miserable. Bbye. :-)

Bolshevik said...

One more point: While Aafia had her day in court, people like Zarina Marri, etc, have been denied even that right. Dr Shazia Khalid was hounded out of the country by the "Pak fauj". Mukhtar Mai was put on the ECL by Herr General Musharraf. Why have the Jamaatis remained silent on all that? Again, are they not "Qaum ki maeiN / betiaN / nawasiaN / bhateejiaN / whatever" too?

Enam Hasan said...


You are hell bent on following "if/then" situation, though you explicitly deny that as well. So forget it, cuz I could never help people of extreme attitudes (don't read, views).

If Afia, why not Shazia? Why media is crazy about Afia? It sells. Shazia/ Zarina won't sell, probably.

Besides you should better have an idea of how somebody gets to stardom and some people don't. Get over it.

By the way, I didn't resort to any tactics in my previous post. I merely pointed out how and what you sounded like. I hope you know the difference between a statement quoted and one that "sounds like".

And, I checked the link. Missing forensic evidence, yet she's convicted? Just because of her contradictory statements and/ or testimonies. I am sure you don't want to bring psychological disorder into consideration here. Five years of "illegal" confinement does wonders to you, I bet. In fact, give Shazia a buzz and ask her how it feels.

Get your stories edited. Your city editor is fuming over your lack of concentration at work today.

By the way, your "study" lacks the contradiction in testimonies provided by the prosecutor. Get it updated.


P.S: It's a good collection of facts and perspectives. Make it better. (Now this is a compliment!)

Fiza said...

What I find problematic in this article is the (lack of) understanding by the author in understanding religious movements and their anti-Americanness. Had he known better, it is all about anti-imperialism - for further details, check out their official website, before resorting to typical "drawing room" and "over tea" discussions which have the assumption that they are against "progress" and whatnot. A highly opinionated article with little backing - so typical of our blogging elite.

XYZ said...

@Fiza: A little knowledge and too much extrapolation is a dangerous thing. Which "religious movements" are you actually referring to? Aamir Liaquat is a movement? If you're referring to the Taliban, let me assure you, I have far greater experience of them in real terms than you possibly could sitting in the ivory tower of Western universities.

Actually I don't even know what you are reacting to - my questions regarding Aafia Siddiqui and the lack of backing for assertions regarding her? Whose website should we check out? I hope you're clearer in your academic papers.

Anonymous said...

thumbs up for Fiza and Enam..
Bolshevik you suck like the bolshevik revolution..You happen to be one ignorant good for nothing scum..Keep your silly arguments to yourself.

well well..Mr /ms XYZ or whatever you are.If you are an expert on Talibans why not tell us about your bitter experiences,encounters and endeavors in detail.Would love to read about the pile of lies from you.:)

Its people like you who are a curse for Islam and its ardent followers.Taliban were no threat to American Imperialism.Yet the American media has left no stone unturned to demonize them. Now those who condone them also bear the brunt of hatred from people like you who think they are all knowing. People who leave no oppurtunity to trash anything even remotely linked to Islam.Ones who would gladly believe without a question everything that tarnishes the image of Islam. And when some sane soles reject it and provide solid evidences as well as logical explainations, they are branded as conspiracy theorists..tsk tsk.. The truth is you know nothing.You read and digest only what Fox news, Time magazine and newsweek tell you. Who needs Mossad and CIA to wreck havoc in Pakistan when we have Westeren ass licking traitors like you.You can be a very good candidate to do their dirty work and that too without a hefty paycheck:)
BTW if you ever have the time or oppurtunity to read a good read 'Afghanistan..The genesis of the Final Crusade'by Abid Ullah Jan. It definitely is one eye opening book. might as well help people who look at everything with one eye as their inner eye is totally blind.
There's another'None dare call it conspiracy' by Gary Allen.I am not trying to change your opinion neither i want to do that but perhaps you might come out of the myopia you suffer from and statrt looking at things in a wider percepective.
May Allah guide you

Bolshevik said...


MZR said...

@XYZ: You are too charitable in calling Aamir Liaquat Hussain, Mr Jahil Online. How about Mr Qatil Online instead?