Connecting the Dots

So, after quite a while, I was once again checking out the website of The Dawn because somebody asked me about it. And no, I don't mean Dawn as in the newspaper; in fact, I think the Dawn Media Group once even threatened, or at least contemplated threatening, them with legal action (I have no idea what became of it). And suddenly, something caught my eye that made bells go off in my mind. It was quite a Eureka! moment.

"The prophetic Sunrise in the East"?

But before I tell you what my Eureka! moment was, let's all just take a moment to understand what The Dawn really is.

Its flowery tagline proclaims it as a "News digest of the prophetic Sunrise in the East." If that's not enough to impress you, in its 'Why The Dawn News?' section, it clearly implies that the Quaid-e-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah was somehow involved in its founding (even though it exists only as a web-paper and the web didn't actually come into being until about 46 years after the founder of Pakistan passed away). It talks about Jinnah founding Dawn and The Pakistan Times prior to Partition before cleverly (and grammatically incorrectly) sidestepping the issue and adding "This Newspaper is inspired the founding father of Pakistan [sic] and revelation of the Shair e Mashriq Alama Iqbal." It even uses the following famous photograph of Jinnah to bolster its credentials:

Jinnah reading some other paper with a "similar sounding name"

It then goes on a tangential rant about the warped world view of communists, socialists and secularists before concluding, right at the end, with:

"This site has nothing to do dawn.com"

Prepositions, it seems, are not its strong point. But you may already have surmised that this is not the most widely circulated English paper in Pakistan from the vitriol it spews against alleged "5th columnists" (many of whom write for Dawn) such as Asma Jahangir, Ayaz Amir, Irfan Husain, Ayesha Siddiqa, Imtiaz Alam, Pervez Hoodbhoy, Hasan Nisar, Ardeshir Cowasjee, Najam Sethi, Dr. A.H. Nayyar, Nadeem Farooq Paracha and Huma Yusuf (see Wall of Shame on right of the site's page). Far more hilariously, however, it adds the following disclaimer in its 'About Dawn News' section:

"The Dawn News makes no representations as to accuracy, completeness, currentness [sic], suitability [sic], or validity of any information on this site & [sic] will not be liable for any errors, omissions, or delays in this information or any losses, injuries, or damages arising from its display or use.All information is provided on an as-is basis. The Dawn News does not accept any responsibility for sites with similar sounding names."

Right then. Aren't you glad you have that sorted out?

Anyway, now that you all understand what I am talking about and I have (hopefully) set up the context, here's what provoked my Eureka! moment. The website says this about itself:

"The Dawn News is owned and operated by Sapartese Management. There are several editors, Moin Ansari, Amardeep Singh, and Lisa Bernstein."

Now why did this catch my eye and set off chimes in my head? Well, mainly because the juxtaposition of these important sounding but unknown names seemed vaguely familiar. The combination of one alleged gora/ gori, one alleged Indian and one alleged Pakistani name reminded me of something I once read.

Remember this post about a (well-funded) rag called The Daily Mail? Remember what I had written about the story featured in that post, authored allegedly by "Cherry Ferguson in London, Kapil Verma in Mumbai and Ambreen Nadeem Janjua in Islamabad"?:

"One word to the wise: don't believe any of the bylines. I doubt any of these people actually exist."

Incidentally, our persistent friend Marvi Sirmed had actually called up the Mumbai Press Club after that post, only to discover that no journalist by the name of Kapil Verma is known to anyone there. Big surprise. Not. Another of The Daily Mail's regular ace reporters named Christina Palmer, a foreigner based ostensibly in Delhi, apparently does not exist either according to the Indian government (which did try looking for her). The Daily Mail's editor Makhdoom Babar even admitted as much, claiming it was a pseudonym "to protect her identity." (Since she stopped writing soon after the Indians arrested one of their Islamabad-based diplomats, Madhuri Gupta, for spying, there was even speculation that Ms Palmer was actually Ms Gupta... which, if true - Babar denies of course - might give you a little more insight into The Daily Mail.)

In any case, I was intrigued enough by the names to Google them. And guess what I discovered? These are some busy journalists! The exact same combination of names (with some minor additions here and there) appears on at least six other separate sites as editors. Here's something called Daily Mail Post:

Here's the Pakistan Ledger:

Here's Rupee News:

Here's Pakistan Patriot:

Here's Today's Views:

And here's Pakistan Independent, which actually ends up getting confused (can you blame them?) and talking about Rupee News in it's own 'About' section:

In addition, I found another 4 sites where at least one of the above illustrious personalities were listed as editors. These included The Pakistan Times (or New Pakistan Times), the Khalistan Times, the Times of Kabul and the Hindustan Globe. All these sites have the exact same description about their 'team' of contributing authors which always includes the following list in exactly the same order, typos and all:

"Moin Ansari is a 50-something US-raised Pakistani American living somewhere in the US. His political background is well to the left of centre,  and is very interested in investigative history, international relations, immigration, cultural integration and language policy issues. He is presently working on a long term doctorate in history

Jason Miller is a tenacious anti-capitalist and vegan animal liberationist. He is also the founder and editor of Thomas Paine’s Corner, associate editor for Cyrano’s Journal Online, blog director for The Transformative Studies Institute and associate editor for the Journal for Critical Animal Studies.

Isha Khan

A Bangladeshi activits who regualrly posts on Rupee News

Dr. Fawzia Khan

A professor based in New Jersey who writes for various magazines including Counterpunch.

Dr. Abdul Ruff

Prolific writer from Delhi who regularly contributes to Rupee News

Dr. Koncha

A Dalit activits from Hydrabad India who highlights Dalit issues in Dalit Freedom Network

Jim Mondavi: 27 year old  economist and journalist, center-left.

Riaz Khan

An American freelance journalist who lives in the US

Munir Khan

An Indian activist who writes on politics

Ahmed Quraishi

A Pakistani nationalist who has his own site www.ahmadquraishi.com

Andaleeb etc. etc."

Do note the second last name and the "etc. etc." at the end (that's how it reads on all the sites). Actually finding Ahmed Quraishi listed on ALL these sites probably was not altogether unpredictable since even The Dawn, in its description about itself, throws in a reference to the infamous obsession of his mentor Zaid Hamid, i.e. Ghazwa-e-Hind.

I also noticed that all these sites were "owned" by the company called Sapartese Management (sometimes misspelled as Sapertese). Digging further, I discovered at least another 8 sites / papers that were owned by this little-known-but-apparently-massive player in the media market (Rupert Murdoch, watch out!). The 'editorial boards' (always multiple editors) were slightly different than the ones in the first 11, but all still counted the same writers as their contributing authors. Their names? Times of Bombay, The Delhi Times, Dacca Times, The Daily Mail Times, Bharat Globe, Pakistan Akhbar, Musalman Times and Views Times. Interesting collection, isn't it? And I'm not even listing a number of other blogs also managed by the same company. Unsurprisingly, all sites seem to have the exact same political world view, i.e. hawkishly pro-Pakistan, virulently anti-India and suitably ambivalent about the Afghan Taliban.

Have a look at what all these different sites - which, incidentally cross-reference and promote each other constantly - look like:

 Notice anything?

But perhaps you're saying, so what? All this proves is that the same bunch of high-energy people are very enthusiastic about writing for different blogs and papers. And that the company that runs all these sites, even if it's going over the top with so many titles, is well within its rights to standardize the look of its various publications.

Well, then let's take a look at the 'company' that allegedly owns all these sites: Sapartese Management. There's one thing quite curious about it. The only place it seems to exist is on these websites; Google it: there is no separate website with any listed office. For a company running at least 19 'prestigious' publications all over the globe, wouldn't you think it would have a bustling office somewhere?

So I began to pay attention to the contact details for these various publications and the addresses listed for them as well as for, sometimes, Sapartese Management. It proved remarkably difficult to pin down where the company's offices actually were, mainly because they seemed to be moving around quite a bit. For example, according to The Dawn, Sapartese was located at "1013 Gates Court, Morris Plains, NJ 07950" but according to Pakistan Ledger its parent company was located at "3333 5th Avenue, New York, NY." Other publications listed a number of other addresses, often also in New York.

But there was something funny about these addresses too, as some might have already gathered. As anyone who has walked around or looked for directions in New York can tell you, there's critical information such as ZIP codes and Suite numbers missing. In fact, there is no building number 3333 on 5th Avenue in Manhattan, the boulevard numbers actually end in the mid-2000s. Look it up on Google maps, I am not kidding. There is another 5th Avenue in Queens but the houses there are numbered in the single digits. Neither is there, it seems, a 1013 Gates Court in Morris Plains, NJ.

 The far end of 5th Avenue: not that difficult to see where it ends, is it? (Source: Google Maps)

Some of the other office addresses are equally absurdly manufactured. For example, the offices of the Times of Bombay are listed as "76543 34th Street, New York, NY" and The Delhi Times as "5555, 15th Street, New York, NY." Neither exist. If you actually Google these addresses (obviously someone forgot about the extensive mapping of addresses in the US), some land you up in parking lots, others in the middle of the highway. Even the address Mr. 'Moin Ansari' - who owns at least 21 domain names - provides while registering domain names is seemingly fictitious.

Incidentally, who really is this mysterious Moin Ansari who lives "somewhere in the US"? I have no idea if he is either this man or this man or someone entirely different altogether. It must be said, however, that the interview in the second link refers to him as "an executive in the Information Technology industry" and the person under whose name Rupee News is registered also lists a company by the name of Crestech in his registration details. A software company owned by the Crescent Group is also called Crestech but I have no idea if it's the same one being used here. Perhaps I'll leave that for another time or for others to probe.

Do I really need to spell out who I think has the resources and the motivation to spin this elaborate web of fake publications and yet be so incompetent about it? And what does that tell you about Ahmed Quraishi and the people associated with papers like The Daily Mail?

Eureka?

Money Talks

Guess who was spotted on November 9 in Washington D.C. at a reception for American and Pakistani media personnel thrown by US AfPak ambassador Richard Holbrooke's media assistant Ashley Bommer? Mir Ibrahim Rehman, scion of the house of Jang and CEO of the Geo TV Network. He walked in with The Friday Times editor and Dunya TV's Najam Sethi but stayed long after Sethi left the party.

Mir Ibrahim Rehman (c) at his master's convocation earlier this year

Mir Ibrahim (MIR) apparently jetted in for a mysterious three-day visit to the US, during which, our sources say, the main objective was to convince the US administration that Geo was neither anti-US nor anti-democracy, the line being peddled by the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) government. MIR also wished to gather official American support for the Jang Group against the PPP boycott of the group as an instance of an assault on freedom of the media.

Our sources claim that MIR did not find too much traction among US officials against the idea of a media boycott, perhaps because the Obama administration itself has a similar boycott against Fox News (albeit without the shoe-throwing rent-a-demos and vile grafitti scrawls against Fox News owners). However, what is particularly interesting about the Jang Group's attempts to woo the American establishment is the fact that there has been apparently a lot of discussion within the US government about whether it should support and even subsidize a media group that has no qualms about running shrill propaganda against the US, and sometimes even promoting a pro-Taliban line. In particular, Hamid Mir's contribution to whipping up Blackwater hysteria in Pakistan, Ansar Abbasi's rants about Western puppets, and the space given to nutjobs such as Zaid Hamid (Aag TV) and Ahmad Quraishi (Aag TV and The News) have apparently raised quite a few eyebrows in the US administration.

The Americans have reason to be upset with the Jang Group, and MIR has reasons to find their upset unsettling. The running of the banal American propaganda Voice of America (VoA) programme Khabron Se Aagay [Beyond the Headlines] as an 'advertorial' on Geo since 2005 has netted the Jang Group and its owners, by some accounts, millions of US taxpayer dollars. Although the exact 'compensation package' doled out to Geo by the US government is still secret, it should be noted that the deal between Geo and VoA was mediated during the Bush-Musharraf era by the then Information Secretary Anwar Mahmood and advertising whiz-kid Asif Salahuddin, the latter of whom is reputed not to touch 'small' deals. Apparently, part of MIR's discussions with the US administration included those on the future of the Geo-VoA deal.

Incidentally, while Najam Sethi was ostensibly in the US for medical check-ups and may have been present at the Bommer reception only coincidentally, as we have reported in the past, he too has been trying to persuade American-backed NGOs to fund a new 'liberal' channel to be headed by him.

Coming back to MIR, it seems that more than American upset, a potential threat of withdrawal of lucrative financial support may be the trigger for a panic at the Jang Group. As they say, bullshit may walk but it's money that talks. I have a strong feeling that you may well see the (media) house line shifting very soon. If you suddenly begin to miss the casual anti-US vitriol in the group's publications and on Geo, you'll know why.

Braaallelujah! Brallelujah!

I did not particularly wish to do this story. As far as I’m concerned, as long as they’re not hurting/ maiming/ killing/ reading any column from GT aloud to anyone, what people wish to do in their own time is their own business. But there are aspects to this post at the ambiguously named Pak Alert Press blog that are worth pondering.

'CIA trying to make inroads into Pakistani media'?

1) Who leaked these pictures, and why? If the cunning plan was to subtly imply the journalists featured collaborate with the evil Americans (see heading "CIA Hosts Drinks and Dance Party for Pakistani Journalists at US Embassy Islamabad" and subheading "CIA Public Relations at Work?" for examples of aforementioned subtlety), that’s a fail.

Secret agents apparently don't need secret rendezvous any more

Nobody of reasonably sound mind would be convinced that Pinky, Tinky, Dinky, Minky etc are the spawn of Satan, lovers of Lucifer or buttmonkeys of Beelzebub after looking at a couple of relatively innocuous shots of them with an American or two at an officially sanctioned gathering. Especially when other guests include Asma Shirazi of the ARY Network who, if memory serves correctly, told Hilary Clinton during her last visit to Pakistan that America needed to bugger off home pronto, that the war on terror was not our war, and that using 9/11 as a justification for anything didn’t cut it in a nation where 9/11s happened every day.

If the point was to make the two female anchors featured prominently in most pics – Samaa TV's Meher Bokhari and DawnNews' Saima Mohsin- look stupid, that’s an even bigger fail. Anyone of reasonably sound mind who has seen their shows already knows that they are well capable of achieving that look by themselves. See the episode of Newseye in which the dominatrix of rhetorical obfuscation Ms. Shireen Mazari teaches Saima a little something about humiliation, and the interview in which PM Gillani stuns Meher into silence by asking her to identify anybody who opposes the Kerry Lugar bill (good thing he didn’t ask her to name the four provinces), for examples of why I think so.

If the point of the story, however, was to give the clearly already crazed inhabitants of the Zaid Hamid / Ahmed Quraishi blogosphere - whence these pictures originated and continue to be distributed - a little somethin’ somethin’ to look at, I completely understand. Haters have rights too. Especially Master Bators. Sorry. I meant Master Haters. (Interestingly, all the pics initially proudly bore the 'PKKH' - short for the Pakistan Ka Khuda Hafiz blog run by acolytes of the aformentioned gentlemen and quite possibly themselves - logo and stamp, which was subsequently removed on second thought!)

Saima Mohsin's Freemason handshake?

2) What are the current rules of engagement for local journalists when it comes to networking with people or entities they might not particularly wish to hang out with but have to anyway because if they don’t have access they don’t have anything? If they are uber-nationalistic, should they accept invites to receptions in honor of the ambassadors of countries they secretly wish would explode? If they are Muslim, should they attend Christmas parties at foreign missions? If they do, should they refuse to shake hands with female dignitaries if male and avoid physical contact with male dignitaries if female? Should they wash their hands (and so on and so forth) if such contact occurs? Should they walk out if alcohol is being served? Or should they make sure they drink or dance (if indeed dancing and not the incredibly convoluted Freemason handshake is what Ms. Mohsin was doing) where cameras cannot capture them like so many other ‘good Muslims’ do?

Meher Bokhari aroused great, er, ire from the commentariat...

3) Why are we so darn racist? Incredible ire was provoked in the comments on the post by the fact that two of the anchors were posing with "blacks" or "kalas", with most deciding to completely ignore the CIA/ anti-Islamic bait and advocate the shaming/ stoning/ killing of the women for their proximity to "negros."  One monsieur ‘Khan’ expressed it best perhaps when he wrote of Meher Bokhari:

"…appears to be drunk and drowned in love of the blackman hugging (or attempting to do so) her in every picture. BTW she is real hotty. Why no Pakistani makes her to feel cool? Afterall what’s bad in her? But that ugly blacky, I curse her choice. May be, she know far better and far deep or have a specific taste."

...but for some reason this guy did not

That makes it twice in one day that rapidly circulating items (see Imran Khan in Ilford clip below) illustrate how deeply embedded prejudice is in our national psyche. Is it a reflection of some deep rooted insecurity on the part of our mard hazraat, or are some of us just taking ‘beware of Blackwater!’ too literally?

Lapdog Smackdown

Guess what? Ahmed Quraishi's source on the Hussain Haqqani story - you know the one which caused HH to sue The Nation for ONE BILLION smackeroos - has just turned hostile. They've (I say 'they' because it's a publication but actually it's only a single source) accused Shireen Mazari's lapdog of misrepresenting their report in addition to decrying The Nation's "gross irresponsibility."

 Quraishi contemplating the lap

Here's what The Cable, a part of the American Foreign Policy publication, has to say:

Pakistan's ambassador sues newspaper over misrepresented Cable article

Mon, 11/30/2009 - 1:32pm

The Pakistani press is becoming increasingly independent and free-wheeling, representing new opportunities for government criticism. This newfound press freedom, however, has also resulted in numerous mishaps, if not incidents of gross irresponsibility, in the Pakistani media, one example of which surrounds an article written at The Cable.

Pakistan's The Nation bills itself as Pakistan's "most respected publication in English," and "internationally the most quoted Pakistani newspaper," but it often levels controversial and thinly supported accusations at elements of the government led by Pakistani President Asif Ali Zadari and has published unsupported allegations about U.S. journalists working in Pakistan.

In one such case, a Pakistani official is now pushing back. Islamabad's man in Washington, Amb. Husain Haqqani, has sued The Nation for libel after the newspaper published an article Oct. 14 accusing the ambassador of threatening to reveal state secrets if he were sacked due to the botched rollout of the Kerry-Lugar Pakistani aid bill.

The article in The Nation appears to be based entirely on an Oct. 12 Cable item quoting Haqqani as saying he was not being fired and also citing Pakistani sources as saying that "Haqqani has reams of documents that could embarrass the forces aligned against him and sacking him could open up a Pandora's box of controversy."

In the Nation article, however, writer Ahmed Quraishi, shown at right, states without evidence that the Pakistani source was "close to Ambassador Haqqani," and states without evidence that Haqqani is "contemplating going public with embarrassing Pakistani official documents." Neither allegation was part of the article in The Cable.

The title of Quraishi's article goes even further in misrepresenting the reporting in The Cable, and reads, "If fired, Haqqani threatens to unveil 'reams' of Pakistan's secrets."

(Quraishi also mislabeled the author of The Cable as "Bill" Rogin; not sure where he got that one.)

Haqqani is suing The Nation and its editor in chief, Majeed Nizami, for one billion Pakistani rupees, which is equivalent to about $12 million U.S. dollars. He remains at his post and there are no signs he is on the way out.

Nizami and The Nation also stand accused this month of endangering the life of Wall Street Journal South Asia correspondent Matthew Rosenberg, after publishing a front-page article Nov. 5 accusing him of being an agent for the CIA, Blackwater, and as having ties to the Mossad, the famous Israeli intelligence agency.

Sourced to one anonymous "official of a law enforcement agency," the article sought to portray Rosenberg's meetings with various officials and travel around the region as evidence he was something other than a regular journalist doing his job.

The Rosenberg article prompted the leaders of 21 top international journalism organizations to write to the government of Pakistan asking for protection for foreign journalists placed in danger by such unsupported accusations. The Journal's Daniel Pearl was killed in Pakistan in 2002.

"We strongly support press freedoms across the world. But this irresponsible article endangered the life of one journalist and could imperil others," the letter stated. "It is particularly upsetting that this threat has come from among our own colleagues."

Wall Street Journal managing editor Robert Thompson also sent a separate letter to Nizami and The Nation's Shireen Mazari defending Rosenberg's status as a well-respected, objective reporter and demanding a retraction.

"Our profession has been done a great disservice by the utterly baseless article," Thompson wrote. "At present, your paper is guilty of spreading falsehoods, but it could ultimately be complicit in a far greater tragedy unless this wrong is corrected."

Pakistan Media Watch, a blog covering the missteps of Pakistani media outlets, has ongoing coverage of the Rosenberg scandal and other abuses by The Nation.

Author Ahmed Rashid explained in a recent article on the BBC Web site that elements of the Pakistani press are dedicated to toppling the Zadari government or stirring controversy by airing conspiracy theories while ignoring serious news events.

"Pakistan is going through a multi-dimensional series of crises and a collapse of public confidence in the state. Suicide bombers strike almost daily and the economic meltdown just seems to get worse. But this is rarely apparent in the media," Rashid wrote.

"The campaign waged by some politicians and parts of the media -- with underlying pressure from the army -- is all about trying to build public opinion to make Mr Zardari's tenure untenable."

And here we thought we knew who Ahmed Quraishi's 'sources' were. The truth can, sometimes, be utterly prosaic.

The Nation Vs The World

How's this for moving fast? In her short stint as the Editor of The Nation, Dr. Shireen Mazari has managed to turn virtually all her colleagues in journalism against her.

Take a gander at this letter, sent today by 21 of the world's top media organizations, to the government protesting at the "irresponsible" and "unsubstantiated" attack by The Nation on a journalist from the Wall Street Journal "tarring him" as a spy and thereby, according to the letter, endangering his safety. (And no, they were NOT talking about that other Wall Street Journal reporter tarred as a spy and later beheaded.)



For those who don't want to click through, here is the text of the letter:

"TO: Qamar Zaman Kaira,

Minister for Information and Broadcasting, Government of Pakistan

4th Floor, Cabinet Block, Pakistan Secretariat, Islamabad

RE: Nation article about Wall Street Journal reporter

16 November 2009

Respected Minister Kaira,

We are writing to register our strong concern at a recent development that has caused alarm among international media organizations working in Pakistan.

On November 5, The Nation newspaper published a front page article accusing Matthew Rosenberg, a correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, of working for the C.I.A., Israeli intelligence and the U.S. military contractor Blackwater.

Mr. Rosenberg is a respected journalist of high standing. Not only was the article unsubstantiated, it critically compromised his security and raised questions about whether he can return to Pakistan to work safely in the future. 

The article also has broader implications. These are difficult times for all journalists in Pakistan. Our employees already face an array of threats, including violence and kidnapping, as they strive to provide timely and accurate coverage. Now those risks have been needlessly increased.

We strongly support press freedoms across the world. But this irresponsible article endangered the life of one journalist and could imperil others. It is particularly upsetting that this threat has come from among our own colleagues.

We recognize that courageous Pakistani journalists routinely face greater dangers than their international counterparts. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, five Pakistani journalists have been killed in the past 12 months alone. And we are heartened that several Pakistani media organizations have denounced The Nation’s story.

But we are also concerned that an incident of this kind – tarring a foreign reporter as a spy – could occur again. We ask the government of Pakistan to take note of this story and to take all necessary steps to ensure the safety of all media personnel in future."

The letter is signed by the heads, the editors, the editors-in-chiefs, and vice presidents of virtually most major news organizations in the world. Count them, they are almost all there: ABC News, AFP, AP, Reuters, McClatchy, FranceInfo, The Guardian, The Independent, The Times, Financial Times, The Economist, BBC, CNN, Radio France Internationale, Los Angeles Times, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, NPR, Time, Newsweek, and even Al-Jazeera. Rather incredible isn't it? You have to have a certain je ne sais quoi (is 'touch' the word I am looking for?) to garner such collective denunciation, don't you think?

Just in case you were wondering, here is the original article, carried on the front page of The Nation on November 5, that sparked off this whole furore. I think it bears being reproduced here for people to judge for themselves how journalistically sound it is:

Journalists as spies in FATA?

By: Kaswar Klasra | Published: November 05, 2009

"ISLAMABAD – Agents of notorious spy agencies are using journalistic cover to engage themselves in intelligence activities in NWFP and FATA, sources informed TheNation on Wednesday.

To the surprise and shock of many, top bosses of Federally Administrated Tribal Area (FATA) Secretariat are allegedly feeding these journalists with secret reports and information regarding Pak Army and militant groups operating there.

Matthew Rosenberg, South Asian correspondent of Wall Street Journal, has been spotted travelling frequently between Washington, Islamabad, Peshawar and New Delhi during the last couple of months. His frequent and secret meetings with Secretary Law and Order FATA Secretariat, Capt (Retd) Tariq Hayat Khan, and Additional Chief Secretary FATA, Habib Khan, have raised several questions.

The sources alleged that both Tariq Hayat Khan and Habib Khan were equally responsible in facilitating and feeding Matthew about secret documents regarding Pak Army and sensitive information regarding ongoing operation against militants.

Despite the fact that Foreign Office and Interior Ministry have warned foreign journalists and foreign workers of NGOs not to visit NWFP and FATA, Matthew in a clear violation of this warning recently held a detailed meeting with Habib Khan that lasted for two hours and 17 minutes.

When contacted, Matthew Rosenberg confirmed to this scribe from New Delhi on phone that he had been meeting with Tariq Hayat Khan and Habib Khan since long, as he enjoyed good terms with them.

“Yes I have been in Islamabad and Peshawar many times and Tariq Hayat Khan and Habib Khan are also close friends of mine. However, let me tell you that I am not working on any hidden agenda,” Matthew said.

According to an official of law enforcement agency, who requested anonymity, Matthew was working as chief operative of CIA and Blackwater in Peshawar. The law enforcement agencies, he said, had also traced Matthew’s links with Israel’s intelligence agency Mosad as well."

So, basically (in case you missed it), it is anonymous sources (I would wager anything that it's ONE intel guy) who not only "spot" Mr. Rosenberg travelling between "Washington, Islamabad, Peshawar and New Delhi" but also intimate our intrepid reporter about his position as "chief operative of CIA and Blackwater" and his "links" with Mossad! Not only that, the reporter's meetings with the Secretary Law and Order and the Additional Chief Secretary for FATA (two government officials for God's sake!) have been scandalized as something improper and surreptitious. Er, whatever happened to proof? Or basic journalism ethics? Or libel laws? Obviously Shireen Mazari cannot be bothered with such petty things while leading the supercalifragilisticexpialidocious jihad for "national interest."

This is how The News, to its credit, rightly editorialized on the issue on November 12 :

Shoddy journalism

"Journalists lead dangerous lives in Pakistan. They are targeted by the terrorists whose actions they report and by politicians and bureaucrats whose failings and indiscretions they expose. All this is to be expected. What a working journalist may not expect, however, is to be stabbed in the back by one of his own, as has recently happened to Matthew Rosenberg, a journalist working for the Wall Street Journal. Mr Rosenberg has been accused in a local newspaper of having links to the CIA and Mossad and of acting in some undefined way as an agent of Blackwater. As if this were not enough to blight his life and career, he is further accused of having 'secret' meetings with Secretary Law and Order FATA Secretariat, Tariq Hayat Khan, and Additional Chief Secretary FATA, Habib Khan. Both are said to have 'fed' documents to Mr Rosenberg, thereby implicating them in his alleged espionage activities. The story is based upon information from a nameless source and has no supporting evidence. Mr Rosenberg has had to leave the country and is unlikely to be working here in the foreseeable future.

The editor of the Wall Street Journal has rightly and robustly sprung to the defence of his journalist and written to the editor of the newspaper that printed the story. The opening paragraph of his letter reads … "As a fellow editor I am writing to convey in the strongest possible terms our dismay and disgust over the slanderous falsehoods published on the front page of your newspaper on November 5th regarding our reporter Matthew Rosenberg." We might add 'grossly irresponsible' and 'unprofessional' to the list of printable adjectives that may be applied to this dangerous travesty of journalism. Accusations such as this, based on information from a single unnamed source are life-threatening in their gravity. At the very least there should one other corroborating source and preferably more than one where accusations as grave as this are made. The electronic media has recently reached a voluntary agreement to 'clean up its act'; and perhaps some sections of the print media need to do the same."

But to expect Shireen Mazari or her band of yahoos posing as journalists to show even the slightest contrition or introspection would be really like asking for the moon. The very next day, Ms. Mazari's editorial lapdog Ahmed Quraishi - a former PTV host who incidentally is a fellow traveler of loonyman Zaid Hamid on the PakistanKaKhudaHafiz blog - responded to The News editorial by a further front-page diatribe, which bore little or no relation to the substance of the criticism but chose the usual defence of the Zaid Hamid variety. That is, accuse your critics of a lack of patriotism and everything else. Just don't talk about the subject at hand.

Truly, as Samuel Johnson put it in 1775, "patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."