The Pakistanian Defence And Its Alternatives

Pakistan Today's cover May 3, 2011

It can be argued that the world’s most powerful countries are those that understand the difference between perception and reality, and attach equal importance to controlling both. Pakistan’s reality is a harsh, challenging one, but unless we move proactively and immediately to counter the further degradation of our already distorted image, it is about to get a lot worse.


Consider this, from Al Jazeera English:

“The Arab Spring has eroded many of the conventional assumptions about the relationship between dictators, Islamists and the West. In Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen and Syria, we heard dictators playing the Islamist card for three decades – "support us unless you want the terrorists to win".

The reality has been quite different...Today, the US continues to lavishly fund the Pakistani military, while using drones and secret soldiers such as Raymond Davis to attack the extremist forces that the same regime supports. It is up to the US to stop feeding the beast.”

Or this, from The New York Times:

“... Bin Laden’s death near Islamabad has rekindled suspicions in Afghanistan…“Pakistan is the problem, and the West has to pay attention,” said Amrullah Saleh, the former intelligence director of Afghanistan, who resigned last summer. Though jubilant at the death of Bin Laden, he said it was time for the United States to “wake up to the fact that Pakistan is a hostile state exporting terror.”

Or this, from Salman Rushdie for The Daily Beast:

“ There is not very much evidence that the Pakistani power elite is likely to come to its senses any time soon. Osama bin Laden’s compound provides further proof of Pakistan’s dangerous folly.

As the world braces for the terrorists’ response to the death of their leader, it should also demand that Pakistan give satisfactory answers to the very tough questions it must now be asked. If it does not provide those answers, perhaps the time has come to declare it a terrorist state and expel it from the comity of nations .”

Despite American and British efforts to diffuse the situation, this hard-line ‘enough is enough’ stance is being echoed across the globe. It is neither surprising nor unexpected, and in the long run questions of whether it is justified will remain, as they are now, relevant only to Pakistan’s internal dialogue, but more on that later. The world, like the mob, is ultimately uninterested in the nuances of things. Can it, like the beast, be lulled into stillness with the right tune?


I cannot comment with any authority on the PR plan our politicians, military, past/future leaders and broadcast journalists are currently following. I know that most of the politicos are sticking with the ostrich routine, most of our leaders are rechecking their visa-to-safer-climes status, most of our broadcast journalists are continuing to miss the forest for the trees, and that the ISPR is shooting a feature film, written possibly by the official behind the 'We're good, but we're not God' line featured in this BBC report. The two sole Pakistani voices who have spoken for us internationally today, then, are the rather Laurel and Hardyesque pairing of novelist Mohsin Hamid and President Asif Ali Zardari; Hamid in an opinion piece for The Guardian and Zardari in a comment for The Washington Post.


Both have chosen to follow what I would like to dub ‘The Pakistanian Defense’ (a nod to George Bush, which is also interestingly often a feature of the PD, as is the kind of ironic self referencing you see here). The Pakistanian Defense has a few standard features, some of which are listed below, which can be tweaked to accommodate word length, timing and audience.


1) More of my countrymen have died than all of yours combined.


Zardari, or his resident ghost writer, does it with: 

“Let us be frank. Pakistan has paid an enormous price for its stand against terrorism. More of our soldiers have died than all of NATO’s casualties combined. Two thousand police officers, as many as 30,000 innocent civilians and a generation of social progress for our people have been lost.”

Hamid does it with: 

“Less well known is the statistic that since the subsequent US invasion of Afghanistan, terrorists have killed nearly five times that number of people in Pakistan. The annual number of Pakistani fatalities from terrorism has surged from fewer than than 200 in 2003 to almost 1,000 in 2006, to more than 3,000 in 2009. In all, since 2001 more than 30,000 have died here in terror and counterterror violence; slain by bombs, bullets, cannons and drones. America's 9/11 has given way to Pakistan's 24-7-365.”

Zardari’s piece is simple in structure and word choice, much like a lot of the hostility currently emanating from the pens of opinion makers in other countries. It, like Clinton’s ‘you cannot wait us out, you cannot defeat us’, outlines the outer limits of the diplomatic dance. Hamid, on the other hand, co-opts the linguistic weapons of choice of the other side (surged, counterterror, America’s 9/11 has given way to Pakistan’s 24-7- 365) and in doing so creates a space where nuance may one day live.


2) Pakistanis want peace, not war.


Zardari raises the facts that: 

“Radical religious parties have never received more than 11 percent of the vote. Recent polls showed that 85 percent of our people are strongly opposed to al-Qaeda. In 2009, when the Taliban briefly took over the Swat Valley, it demonstrated to the people of Pakistan what our future would look like under its rule — repressive politics, religious fanaticism, bigotry and discrimination against girls and women, closing of schools and burning of books. Those few months did more to unite the people of Pakistan around our moderate vision of the future than anything else possibly could.”

Hamid reinforces that with: 

“If Osama Bin Laden's death means that the war in south and central Asia can now begin to end, that America can begin to withdraw its forces from the region, and that Pakistan and Afghanistan can somehow rediscover peace, then one day there may be celebrations here as well.”

3) They will be gunning for us even more viciously now.


Zardari points this out with: 

“Only hours after bin Laden’s death, the Taliban reacted by blaming the government of Pakistan and calling for retribution against its leaders, and specifically against me as the nation’s president.”

Hamid says it with: 

“As news of terrorist leader Osama bin Laden's death reverberates in Pakistan, embassies here are shutting down, hotels are ramping up security, restaurants are reporting cancelled reservations and public gatherings like plays, concerts and lectures, are being postponed. The feeling in Lahore is familiar: it is like the dread that lingers over the city in the days after it has suffered a massive terrorist attack. This time, though, the attack has not yet happened, and the dread spans the entire country. Pakistanis know they may pay a blood price for Bin Laden's killing. A purported mirror has been broken. Bad luck is to be expected.”

Zardari makes the mistake of sticking with the royal ‘we’, demanding an acknowledgement of worth nobody currently wants to give us. Hamid comes in from the other end and makes us ordinary, human, sketching life for Pakistanis in details The Other can understand, even if they are details actual ordinary, human Pakistanis would scratch their heads at (hotels, restaurants, plays, concerts, lectures…er…what?). A universal symbol of bad luck, the broken mirror, is weaved in too, to reinforce the pathos and significance of ‘dread’ and ‘blood price’. Zardari invites you to stick a sock on your hand and pillory his pomposity. Hamid invites you to sit down, listen and sympathize.


4) Why on earth would we want to make the most trigger-happy nation in the world angry with us?


Zardari feels the best way to make this point is:

“The war on terrorism is as much Pakistan’s war as it is America’s…My government endorses the words of President Obama and appreciates the credit he gave us Sunday night for the successful operation in Khyber Pakhtunkhawa. We also applaud and endorse the words of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that we must “press forward, bolstering our partnerships, strengthening our networks, investing in a positive vision of peace and progress, and relentlessly pursuing the murderers who target innocent people.”

Hamid goes with: 

“But there are other, truly frightening theories, such as that even in a town with as dense a military presence as Abbottabad, Bin Laden managed to elude Pakistani security forces, suggesting a remarkable degree of incompetence. More terrifying still would be if there were official complicity in harbouring him, putting Pakistan on a collision course with the US. Pakistanis must hope that neither of these is true.”

The royal megaphone of royalty sticks with the moving speechwriting software writs and having writ moves on. Hamid establishes the difference between the sheep and the shepherds with one fluid reference to the ‘incompetence’ of the state within a state that consistently fails to protect its charges. 


To be fair to President Zardari, this is where the difference between a novelist and a head of state is, governed by realpolitik as much as it is by style. The privilege of implying, publicly, that their nation's army is either incompetent or duplicitous rests only with one. This is evident also in the contrast between Sir Salman Rushdie's Down With Pakistan and David Cameron's more measured public stance.


5) Forget the past, it is not in our power to change it. Lets talk about what happens next.


According to our president: 

“We can become everything that al-Qaeda and the Taliban most fear — a vision of a modern Islamic future. Our people, our government, our military, our intelligence agencies are very much united. Some abroad insist that this is not the case, but they are wrong. Pakistanis are united.”

According to one of our brightest literary lights: 

“In the meantime American, Pakistani, Afghan, and terrorist commanders will go on conducting their operations, the slaughter will continue, and human beings – all equal, all equal – will keep dying, their deaths mostly invisible to the outside world but at a rate evoking a line of aircraft stretching off into the distance, bearing down upon tower after tower after tower. Bin Laden is dead. But many Pakistanis sense the impending arrival of yet another murderous plane, headed their way.”

Zardari takes the opportunity to tell people Pakistanis are united against ‘terrorism’. Hamid points out that Pakistanis are united only in being the direct target of everybody else’s cross hairs.


The defining characteristic of The Pakistanian Defense, finally, is that…


6) People are no longer buying it.


And that, really, is the point of the deconstruction. It doesn’t matter how well or how badly written our responses to this situation are, what notes we hit or don’t hit in our explanations, the rest of the world no longer gives a shit.

Consider this, from an Economics Times report on our President’s article:

“Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari defended his country on Monday against accusations it did not do enough to track down Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, but made no direct comment on alleged intelligence failures…Zardari provided no detailed explanation on how bin Laden managed to live for years undetected in Abbottabad, a hillside retreat popular with retired Pakistani generals just a few hours drive from Islamabad. “

Or consider this, from one of the responses posted to Hamid’s article in The Guardian:

“I once referred to Pakistan as the classic informant, who tells the thief about the whereabout of the owner of the property and then informed the owner of the property the thief is coming…Pakistan as I have also posted before is a country the world should fence off and throw away the key. It is a country that its only contribution to the world is misery and danger to lives and limbs. In fact it is terrorist country. The most dangerous terrorist country on the planet.

Every western gov't including ours should not only cease aid to Pakistan, immigration from Pakistan should also be stopped. The world should let Pakistan sleep in the bed it made.”

Back now, to the question of whether the bile and revulsion this ‘rogue state’ and ‘terrorist sanctuary’ is currently provoking is justified. You can choose to find your answer amongst the six points of The Classic Pakistanian Defense outlined above. You can find it while channel surfing, watching someone like Ansar Abbasi holding forth on how Osama Bin Laden was a Muslim Hero. You can find it in the pages of an Urdu paper as a columnist obsesses over the burial ritual of one murderer and not the mass graves of the multitudes of innocents he, and those he was a figurehead for, killed. You can find it in the online edition of an English one detailing how the banned Laskhkar-e-Taiba held funeral prayers for Bin Laden in Karachi today.


People of that ilk make Pakistan’s image crisis worse by openly exposing their – and by extension our - tolerance for intolerable positions. If what the foreign commentators I have quoted above said offends you, and you think they are refusing to distinguish between Pakistanis and those elements within Pakistan that gave Bin Laden shelter, acknowledge the role those elements play in shaping the outside world’s refusal to make that distinction. This, from outside the bubble, is a country where a sentence is blasphemy but a murder is not, rape victims are vilified for attempting to challenge patriarchy, terrorists are sheltered after slaughtering innocent civilians, and the challenge to sovereignty by a western force is always more important than the steady, decades long erosion of sovereignty by some imported, medieval hogwash.


Once, there might have been room in the world for an ideology that thinks it is special, God gifted, exempt from the rules and norms of the comity of nations of which one commentator speaks, but that place has already been taken. Certain Pakistanis need to accept that we are not Israel. By this I mean we cannot defend an indefensible position by virtue of association with unshakeable allies because really, at the end of the day, we have none. Even Saudi Arabia had the sense to let its most notorious son slip quietly into the sea, we on the other hand built him a home in a hill resort.


Today, we have a twofold crisis. One, the incompetence, exposed, of a bloated institution that has never lost an opportunity to enrich itself and steadfastly refused to fix itself. Two, a perception that Pakistan is populated by illiterate Muslims who will come out on the street to protest Danish cartoon strips but not to protest an almost comical, internationally inflammatory misstep. How do we fix the first? The rogue state within a state needs to be broken, examined forensically, and rebuilt in the shelter of a democratically elected civilian government, never to take a step without a popular mandate again, and then only to protect our citizens not endanger them further. 


How do you fix the second? For a start, apologize. Apologize Mr. President, Mr. Prime Minister, to the world for not keeping your side of the bargain, to your country for letting us be shamed on your watch. Apologize even if it kills you. Because your subsequent loss of face might embolden you enough to hold others accountable. And because somebody or the other is always trying to kill you anyway and you might as well die on the right side of the line.

The Day After

I had hoped to put up this image which one of our Twitter friends (don't remember which one) had pointed us to, after a Pakistan win in yesterday's semi-final. But I think it's more appropriate than ever now. (Incidentally, I do not know who made it but if the designer is reading this and would like credit, let us know and we will credit you.)

Afridi: The Renaissance Man (Design: Komail Naqvi)

So, yes, India played far better than us on the day and deserved to win the match. But as, thankfully, most people in Pakistan have recalled, nobody, including myself, gave the Pakistan team much chance of even getting this far before the World Cup began. And for this, Shahid Afridi, the captain, and the team deserves our respect. Generally, despite the one major blip against New Zealand (for which we'll forever be grateful to Kamran Akmal), Pakistan played far beyond expectations and seemed, after a long, long, time, to be a united team.

Of course, it hurts to lose, especially to arch-rivals India, and especially after seemingly having the game within our grasp, but there is no shame. Okay, there should be shame about dropping a batsman like Tendulkar four bloody times, but you know what I mean. Afridi made good on his pre-World Cup promise of reaching at least the semis and for this we should celebrate and give the team its due. It's actually very heartening to see that most people, including the media, have taken the defeat in the spirit in which it should be taken. There should be introspection within the team (particularly about Kamran Akmal's future) but for once, hopefully, we will be able to use this a springboard for improvements for the future rather than nihilistic destruction.

I don't want to get into the details of the cricketing issues that surfaced in this match (others have already done so in fair detail) but I did have a couple of other thoughts about non-cricketing issues after the match which I would like to share.

1. Can we, like, get a list of all those astrologers, psychics, numerologists and "astropalmists" who predicted a Pakistan victory? You know, just so we know who to avoid? And at the very least, can the media stop referring to them before any big event? (Geo, to its credit, did take the lead on this, running a mocking package about them, including its own resident astrologist known as 'Mamoon', this morning.)

2. I don't wish to sound cruel (and animal-lovers please note, this is merely in jest) but as far as that unproven story about the Shiv Sena / predictions-vendor allegedly killing the parrot who predicted a Pakistan victory in Bombay, wouldn't you say they were sort of right in retiring the parrot? I mean I would never support the killing of any poor animal for such indiscretions but the parrot had obviously lost it. Moreover, the parrot in Karachi who also predicted a Pakistan victory, can you blame him/her after s/he'd heard about what supposedly happened in Bombay?

3. I hope it puts to rest all those tawdry (and frankly done one too many times) jokes about the jawaan Sheila, the badnaam Munni and the Pathan Afridi. Really. Please stop now.

4. If any credible story comes out about someone actually having bet on Tendulkar being dropped more than three times, I will personally ask Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry to take suo moto notice. Beyond that, let's please not bring in claims of match-fixing this time. One team had to lose.

5. The one definite and huge down-side to the loss is of course seeing the idiotic brigade - Ansar Abbasi et al - back in business. (Even in supposed empathy with Afridi, he must bring up Raymond Davis.) It was good while it lasted but as they say on Twitter, FML!

6. Finally, to all those 'cricket-liberals' scaring us about the potential for doom and gloom because of the fervour around the match, I hope you realize the world did not end, no nuclear missiles were launched, and amazingly there was even no bad blood on the field. You know why? Because most people do take it as a game even if they are jumping up and down, putting war-paint on their faces and mocking their sporting rivals.

Good luck to both India and Sri Lanka for the final!


: : : UPDATE : : :

Actually there was one more thing I thought about which I forgot to put down: Where is Poonam Panday?

The War Within Geo

If you thought Pakistani society was polarized, take a look at the open warfare going on under the same media house roof.

The issue being discussed was, of course, the sudden release of the man known as Raymond Davis from jail after the payment of diyat or 'blood money' to the relatives of the deceased. What better time than that, thought Geo's analysts with wildly divergent points of view, to attack each other in the most personalized manner possible?

First up, Geo's Capital Talk programme, where host Hamid Mir assembled a long list of panelists and commentators he knew (or hoped) would raise a hue and cry about the release, among them the odious Irfan Siddiqui, the slippery Mohammad Mallick, the dissenting lawyer for the victims' families and former foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi. But star attraction was of course the once journalist-now-self-righteous turd known as Ansar Abbasi. Abbasi had made his contempt for the result of the case known earlier during Geo's news bulletins but had basically tied himself up in knots over the fact that 'Davis'' release had come about through the application of the Islamic Qissas and Diyat Laws - which have been often criticised for allowing the rich to get away with murder - laws that Abbasi can't bring himself to critique. That and the fact that ostensibly all of his former idols and regular sources, the ISI, the Sharif brothers and the judiciary were complicit in allowing 'Davis' to get away, seemed to have truly left him bewildered, though unfortunately not at a loss for words.

In today's programme, which went on air at 8pm PST, Abbasi made a number of remarkable claims, such as his opinion (presented as the gospel truth) that the case was one of 'fisaad fil arz' [spreading division in the land] rather than a double murder and therefore making diyat inapplicable. He further added that all terrorism should now solely be blamed on the military establishment, the federal government of the PPP and the Punjab government of the PMLN for letting 'Davis' go. Not for nothing is Abbasi known as an apologist for the religious extremists who might actually be carrying out the acts of terror.

But Abbasi decided this was also the time to vent his considerable frustration at fellow Geo analysts who had presented an analysis entirely opposite to his. So, without naming names but making it abundantly clear who he meant, he called Najam Sethi (who had also presented his analysis on earlier Geo bulletins) "an American agent." As proof he cited Sethi claiming to know what discussions were being held between the Pakistan government and the Americans. You can see what he said in the following clip, between 10:00 and 10:35...




It has to be mentioned that Hamid Mir had, in fact, begun his programme with a soliloquy also directed very much at Najam Sethi, criticising those who were gloating over their predictions having come true and blaming the media for misleading the public while supposedly not mentioning how the Americans had been proved wrong.

All it took was another two hours for the reply, in Aapas Ki Baat, Geo's 11pm PST programme featuring Najam Sethi. The opening intro by host Munib Farooq immediately set the tone for the programme as seemingly a reply to Mir and Abbasi. But by the end of the programme, Sethi had managed, also without naming names but making it abundantly clear who he meant, to call Ansar Abbasi and Mir brainless twits and journalists "jo apnay aap ko phannay khan samajhtay hain lekin ander se bilkul phuss hain" [who think the world of themselves but who are as empty as deflated balloons]. You can see and hear what he said between 0:00 and about 4:45 in the following clip:




Don't you just love Geo's tolerance of diversity? Or should one say glasnost?

Knowing the vindictive natures of both Abbasi and Mir, however, expect more sparks to fly in the pages of the Jang Group's publications. This is going to get very ugly unless the Jang Group clamps down now.

List Please

Ansar Abbasi triumphantly points out on the front page of The News today that what is "generally ignored in the ongoing discussions in the media" is that the mandatory death punishment for blasphemy "applies to all the prophets" as per the 1991 ruling of the Federal Shariat Court (FSC). He writes:

"The selected portions of the FSC judgment are: "It is also to be noted that Allah Almighty creates no distinction or inequality in the status of the Prophets though. He did bestow on some of them more gifts than others." While quoting different verses of the Holy Quran, the judgment said, "Practically, all the jurisconsults and scholars agreed that in view of the above verses and the equal status of all the Prophets as such, the penalty of death as determined above shall apply, in case any one utters contemptuous remarks or offers insult, in any way, to any one of them.""

Explaining how the FSC judgement becomes the law de facto, he says:

"Ismail Qureshi, senior advocate of the Supreme Court, religious scholar and the man who fought a long legal battle to get death sentence for blasphemers in the Pakistani statute, told The News that the Federal Shariat Court's decision got finality after the then government had withdrawn its appeal from the Supreme Court. In talk shows and discussions even some prominent lawyers were heard saying that the Section 295-C is flawed as it does not cover all the prophets. Qureshi explained that after the FSC's judgment, the Section 295-C would be read in the light of the Shariat Court's decision. Former Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice (retd) Saeeduzzaman Siddiqi, when approached, endorsed Qureshi's viewpoint and said that after a superior court's ruling gets finality, it becomes law no matter whether the concerned law is amended by the government or not."

Forget for a moment that this is Mr Abbasi's version of justice: in effect, his argument - like that of many other  blinkered defenders of the warped laws - is that those campaigning against them, which includes scholars of Islam, are mistaken because they are allegedly non-discriminatory. (Incidentally, typically, Abbasi picks on the argument of one marginal group of people who do not even represent the view of most of those who hold these man-made laws problematic. Nevertheless, if there were ever a decree to put to death all those with beards, I assume Abbasi would also defend it as non-discriminatory and commit hara-kiri.)

But I want to go on a different tangent.

Now, the Holy Quran actually names only 25 prophets. But it also says in Surah-e-Nahl that Divine Messengers were sent to every community (through history) and Allah also points out in Surah-e-Nisa:

“We have told you the story of some Messengers and of others We have not …”

So the Quran never tells us the exact numbers. However, according to Hadith No. 21257 from Musnad Ibn-e-Hanbal, the number of prophets is 124,000. Some scholars contest the veracity of this particular saying of the Prophet. Ibn-e-Saad claims the number is actually 1,000 while others say the number of prophets is as high as 224,000.

What I would like Abbasi and others of his ilk (including the mullahs of the FSC) to do is to provide us a verified list of ALL the prophets covered by this 'law', preferably all possible 224,000, but even 1,000 will do. Because, you know, we don't want to even inadvertently blaspheme against any of them by throwing someone's business card into the waste-paper basket.

The Real Blasphemers

"Mera azm itna buland hai ke paraye shaulon ka dar nahin

Mujhe khauf aatish-e-gul se hai, ye kaheen chaman ko jala ne de"

[My resolve is so strong that I do not fear the flames from without

I fear only the radiance of the flowers, that it might burn my garden down] 

— Shakeel Badayuni couplet referenced by Salmaan Taseer on Twitter, 8 hours before his assassination 

I had been hoping that I could post something light-hearted, more entertaining at the start to the new year, but today's Pakistan it seems is not the place for these sort of things any more. Four days into January and we already have yet another tragedy that has evoked not only pain and sadness but also immense amounts of disgust at the depths to which we, the unfortunate inhabitants of this blighted country, have sunk.

Assassinated Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer: last man standing (Photo: APP/Dawn)

Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer's brutal and senseless murder in Islamabad today (Tuesday) is not only an intensely heavy blow for his family and friends - to whom our thoughts go out to - but also to the hopes for a saner public discourse about issues that certain people endeavour to keep out of the conversation altogether. He often said things that many think but are unwilling to say in public out of fear or aversion to stoking argument. Whatever anyone may have thought about Taseer's personal life (not that it's any of anyone's concern) or his business practices, there is absolutely no doubt that he was a brave and outspoken man who did not compromise his personal beliefs for the sake of cowardly politics. Along with barely a couple of other politicians on the national level (Sherry Rehman being one), his was a rare voice that was willing to take on the rightist mullah mindset in the public domain.

And contrary to what his detractors claimed, he did so with full awareness of the moral responsibilities of a public figure. In a recent interview, he was asked why he chose to raise the issue of the unjust blasphemy laws when he knew that he would receive brickbats from the rightist parties and become the target of the extremists. He replied: "Because if even I don't, how will others get over their fears?" On December 31, he tweeted:

"I was under huge pressure sure 2 cow down b4 rightest pressure on blasphemy.Refused. Even if I'm the last man standing"

In Salmaan Taseer's untimely death we have all lost a truly courageous individual. Those within his party who opposed his just stand on the abhorrent misuse of blasphemy laws, moral pygmies such as Babar Awan, should hang their heads in shame.

The face of fanaticism: Malik Mumtaz Qadri (Photo: Reuters)

At the same time, one must also feel disgust at those who have either valourized Taseer's self-confessed lunatic murderer Malik Mumtaz Hussain Qadri, or used their weasely arguments to somehow try and justify the outrage. So-called-intellectuals like Irfan Siddiqui and bigots like Jamaat-e-Islami's oily Fareed Paracha and the ever-slimy Ansar Abbasi tried their best to claim (on Geo) that Taseer was somehow himself responsible for his fate because he had raised a "sensitive" issue. I am not of the opinion that one should not speak ill of the dead only because he or she is dead, curse Zia ul Haq with every breath as far as I am concerned. But these gentlemen's basic argument was this: even expressing your opinion about a warped law made by a warped dictator and endorsed by his warped proteges is enough to condemn you to death, so everyone should keep quiet about the misuse of religion and leave it all up to the mullah brigade. It's time to tell them to shut the fuck up themselves.

But the disgust does not end with a couple of morons trying to silence all discussion about religion to and other fanatics praising a criminal. The bigger issue, as we have been saying all along, is the refusal of society to see the inter-linkages of such acts of terrorism with the mindset that has been cultivated through the military establishment's promotion of jihadi outfits, the propping up of so-called religious parties whose only agenda is bigotry, the pusillanimous and opportunistic silence over the treatment of minorities such as Ahmadis, Shias, Hindus and Christians and indeed all dissenters (religious scholar Javed Ghamdi being one), the valourization of criminals such as the illiterate Ilm Deen (dubbed shaheed [martyr] because he was hanged in 1929 for murdering a publisher), the rejection of rationality and logic, the marginalization of the arts and cultural traditions as something alien to our society, and the tolerance for hate-speech and incitements to violence such as that of this monkey. It is this mindset, which has been cultivated by the state looking the other way at - if not directly promoting - acts of radicalization, that allows an entire police squad to see nothing wrong in one of their own planning to commit the murder of someone they are assigned to protect. (We now hear via Geo that Qadri had in fact confided to his colleagues in the Punjab 'Elite Force' about his plans and had even requested them not to shoot at him, a request they honoured.)

Our real disgust should be directed at all those parts of society that cannot put two and two together despite the evidence staring them in the face. We will inevitably hear a lot in the media about security lapses and administrative efficiency lapses that led to a criminal being part of a protective force (incidentally, Geo is also reporting through its sources that Qadri had been sacked from the Punjab Police's Special Branch a few months ago because he was dubbed a 'security risk'). But the only void that I think we really need to focus on is the one in our society's collective brain.

So how do we deal with all this? I have heard a lot of dismay and hopelessness today and I can completely understand the feeling. For many people, this is another nail in the coffin of the idea of a viable future for Pakistan. The only option to counter this feeling of despondency, in my opinion, is to become more assertive and louder and to shame those who would stifle dissent. The problem of course is that wishy-washy liberalism cannot fight fanaticism. Sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. Simply put, we can either shut up, resign ourselves to our fate and disconnect from this country and society or we can fight back and refuse to cede the space that the bastards want us to. Nobody ever said it would be easy.

As a start, let us declare Qadri, all those who support Qadri and murderers like him, the Khatm-e-Nabuwat movement and its ilk as outside the pale of Islam. Let's see how they like being referred to as blasphemers and murtids. Nobody said the fight would not be dirty.

Was Ansar Abbasi Spotted at Kinnaird College?

A notice posted on a door in the all-women Kinnaird College Lahore (via @BushraS on Twitpic):

Um...I don't think I will actually translate this.

Fashioning Moral Outrage

Oh wow. We've all become so used to the hyperbole of the Western and local language English press around Pakistan Fashion Weeks, that it is sometimes easy to forget how a significant section of society in Pakistan views them. And who better to represent that view than our intrepid Khalifa-ul-Waqt, Ansar Abbasi, who can and will hold forth on anything.

The guardian of Pakistan's values: Ansar Abbasi

Below is a translation of his Urdu op-ed piece published in today's Jang (thanks to @tazeen for drawing my attention to it). It is worth a read, not only because it provides a window to the mindset of Abbasi and possibly many, many others. But also because it draws attention, once again, to the linguistic divide that separates the English reading public and non-English reading public, a divide that is not only tolerated but pandered to. (It is extremely unlikely you would ever read anything like this article in the Jang group's English paper The News or any other English-language paper for that matter.) This article serves to remind you, if anything, that all those post-modernist assumptions about progress in how the role of women in society is discussed, are merely hollow assumptions. Or at least that all those debates have passed Abbasi by without disturbing even a hair in his beard.

I have also yet to understand the mindset of the Jang Group, which launches Amn Ki Asha with great fanfare on the one hand, and has no qualms on the other in making petty-minded jabs about Gandhi and India on Geo on the other (see their coverage of US President Obama's visit to Gandhi's samadi). It will willingly tone down the anti-West moral brigade in The News or on Geo, but allow them free rein in Jang. It will make Geo a media partner of the Fashion Week and provide it wide publicity and, at the same time, run such incendiary pieces about it in its publications (and make no mistake, this article is a call to disruptive action)... Do they really think this is what is meant by 'letting a thousand flowers bloom'?

In any case, here's the article in translation (and here I thought I'd leave the Fashion Week alone):

If Modesty Does Not Remain…

By Ansar Abbasi

"The racket of spreading obscenity and immodesty through fashion shows and catwalks that is fast gaining strength in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in the name of “enlightened thought”, if immediate action is not taken to stop it, this fire of obscenity will soon engulf civilized households as well. We too will soon cross the extremes of uncivilized behavior and ignorance which have led to the destruction of moral values in Western societies, and where animalistic values have reached such heights that children often do not know their father’s name. Men and women prefer to live together without marriage, whereas the trend of men marrying men and women marrying women is gaining ground. Obscenity and vulgarity have lost their meaning altogether in these societies and have become part of their rituals and tradition which now have legal and moral sanction. For such uncivilized behaviour and ignorance to exist in an un-Islamic and heathen society is not surprising. But for such sort of trends to be nurtured in an Islamic society and in a country founded in the name of Islam is indeed worthy of giving pause for thought.

 

Hazrat Mohammad (PBUH) decreed that each religion has its own defining value and Islam’s defining value is modesty. In Surah-e-Nur and Surah-e-Ahzab, Allah instructs believers to guard their gaze and their reputations, while women believers have been told in clear terms what their dress code should be and in what state of dress they should leave their homes. In Surah-e-Ahzab, the lack of purdah has been likened to the time of Jahiliyya [ignorance] when women used to dress up and make up to go outside their homes. But it is the height of sadness, that despite Allah’s and his Prophet (PBUH)’s clear directions regarding modesty and the lack of purdah, in Karachi, the largest city of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, the first ten days of the sacred month of Zilhaj were chosen to celebrate a fashion week.

 

Much like the month of Ramzan is known as springtime for good deeds, so are the first ten days of Zilhaj also very important, compared to normal days, in accruing the blessings of piety. But we chose these days to spread obscenity and vulgarity in the name of fashion. This transformation of a time specially designated for the worship of Allah and doing good deeds, into a Fashion Week in the Islamic homeland of Pakistan, invited action neither from any government organization nor from any other responsible person. And that too, a Fashion Week that seemed like a competition about shedding clothes.

 

Seeing the highlights of this contest of immodesty and vulgarity on the television screen, I began to doubt my own Muslim-ness and the reason for the creation of Pakistan became blurred in my mind. The women that God had ordered to be in purdah while leaving their houses, could be seen participating half-nude in the fashion show. And those men who had been ordered to lower their gazes, were playing the role of spectators in these displays of immodesty. This show of immodesty was considered very successful and those participating in it expressed the hope that this vulgarity would continue and also that Pakistan can earn a lot of money from the success of the fashion industry. May God protect us from such success and such wealth. Amen.

 

The grief is not over how a small Westernized minority is out to destroy our religious and social values in this way. But the real sadness is over how, despite the clear instructions of Allah and His Prophet (PBUH), and despite the promise of the Constitution of Pakistan that an environment based on religious values and Islamic teachings will be created in Pakistan so that Muslims can live their lives according to the Quran and Sunnah, there is no one to stop those making fun of Islamic values. I don’t know who allowed such a fashion show to be held. This trend of fashion shows and catwalks began in Pakistan a few years ago and because of a lack of any controls, has gone, as in the West and India, towards obscenity.

 

Despite seeing this vulgarity on television screens, nobody condemned it and neither was there any protest. No ruler spoke about it and neither did any opposition leader. The Islamic [sic] parties and their leaders also remained silent, and parliament remained as insensate as the administration. If President Zardari and Prime Minister Gilani are unable to see all this, what reasons have compelled Mian Nawaz Sharif, Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, Imran Khan, Syed Munawwar Hassan and Maulana Fazlur Rehman to keep silent? Why is the higher judiciary not taking suo moto notice of this vulgarity? Why is Pakistan’s media unable to fathom this evil as evil? At least I don’t have the answers to these questions.

 

What I am really amazed at is that in a city such as Karachi, where most of the population is educated and politically aware, not even one person came on to the streets in peaceful protest against this vulgarity. If our politicians, parliament, government, judiciary, media and masses are so insensate, we will definitely touch the extremes of moral degeneration like the West. In any case, we don’t have anything left other than shame and modesty and moral and social values. These are the values that raise us above the West. If today we do not guard them and give ourselves to the wind to take us wherever it chooses, we will be completely destroyed.

 

The current silence and insensitivity is very painful. I wish that we would realize that if today we remain silent about this obscenity and vulgarity because the girls and women performing in fashion shows and abhorrent TV commercials are not our own daughters, then remember that tomorrow, the place of these girls and women could be taken by the daughter, sister, wife or mother of one of today’s spectators or other members of an insensate society and its responsible people. And they will be doing the catwalk half-naked in front of thousands of people."

Don't forget to send Jang and Abbasi some words of appreciation for safeguarding our values.

The Continuously Intriguing Media

It's getting so that even reporting on people changing jobs in the media has become risky business. As in, risky for one's credibility. Even though we do rely on very good sources before putting the information out here.

The latest U-turn (and believe us, it is a U-turn) is morning show star Dr Shahista Wahidi's announcement today on ARY that the news of her departure from the channel is simply rumour and not based on fact. Yes, Dr Wahidi, tell that to Geo which had bade Nadia Khan farewell and was having your new show's set designed. Obviously, this can only mean that ARY has upped the ante even further than the 22 lakhs a month Geo had offered Wahidi to lure her. Some people have all the luck, particularly at channels where many complain of not being paid their far more meagre salaries on time.

It was precisely because of this pendulum style of job negotiations that we had held off on reporting about The News senior investigative journalist Rauf Klasra's potential move from the Jang Group to the Express Media Group, which he himself had threatened many times earlier and which we had actually known about for some time. But now that the daily Express itself has confirmed it, we can add to it the reasons for it beyond the lure of a better pay packet.

In fact, Klasra had been rather unhappy at the Jang Group for quite some time. The official reason that Klasra is apparently now giving is his unhappiness with the, in his opinion, 'agenda-driven anti-government line of the Jang Group.' (It must be remembered that Klasra is known to be quite friendly with Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, who is from his hometown, Multan, and who it is believed is sometimes himself the source for some of Klasra's stories.) The upset with the excesses of the Jang Group may well be true, but it is also true that Klasra has been at daggers drawn with some of his colleagues at the Islamabad bureau of The News, particularly with the Editor Investigations Ansar Abbasi and his junior Ahmad Noorani, whom he accuses of constantly maligning and undermining him.

The rivalry between the three truly came out into the open last year when the website pkpolitics.com ran a story about Klasra's alleged corruption in receiving favours from the government in the allocation of plots and government housing for his (government employee) wife and relatives, claims Klasra strenuously denied. Klasra believed the story was instigated by the Nawaz Sharif camp to discredit him in retaliation for stories he had done about the Sharifs' alleged corruption and maladministration and claimed in a Jang column in September 2009 to have served a legal notice for 100 million pounds on the website (we have no idea what became of it). But more than that he also saw the direct connivance of Abbasi and Noorani in what he termed a 'smear campaign' against him. (Noorani, who most believe says things and writes stories at Abbasi's behest, even weighed in publicly against Klasra.) Things became so bitter at the Islamabad bureau that Mir Shakilur Rahman did one of his trademark organizational fudges to calm things down: he removed Klasra from under Abbasi and gave him a made-up title of Editor Reporting, reporting directly to the Editor. (Incidentally, the current Editor of The News Rawalpindi, Mohammad Mallick, supported Klasra in his fight against pkpolitics, which makes eminent sense since pkpolitics had also run a story earlier about Mallick's alleged corruption.)

But things continued to simmer and came to a head last month when Klasra ran two stories on September 28 and September 30. The first of these claimed that "backdoor channels played a key role" in defusing a crisis between the government and the judiciary. Bizarrely, the newspaper carried another story side-by-side with this, from "our correspondent" (code for Abbasi / Noorani) quoting Supreme Court sources debunking Klasra's story. (The Jang Group must have the only newspapers in the world that carry two diametrically opposite 'investigative' stories on the same day.) In fact, the Supreme Court exerted so much pressure for a retraction that The News published an "unconditional and sincere apology" on September 30. However, since Klasra was adamant about his story (insider sources say he told management he was willing to go to jail for it if need be) the apology was published from the editor, printer and publisher. No journalist appreciates a management that refuses to stand by its reporter and apparently Klasra was incensed that the apology was published despite his standing by his story. In fact, he blamed Abbasi for goading the management into publishing the apology and even hit out publicly at Abbasi on a Dunya TV programme later.

The second story Klasra published on September 30, claimed that President Zardari had admitted in an internal Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) meeting that he had been "misled" into not defending in court the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) by some unnamed "players of the game." Klasra further cited "one insider source" to claim that Zardari may have been referring to a well-respected but unnamed former judge from Karachi. Once again, two days later Ahmad Noorani published a story claiming that Justice (retd) Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim denied the "president's defamatory allegations" and mocking Klasra for defaming him. This was another bizarre rebuttal since Klasra had never actually named anyone in his story. It is also obvious from the story that Ebrahim had been goaded into offering a rebuttal, as if he was the only respected retired judge in Karachi.

These two instances of direct undermining by colleagues were apparently the straw that broke the camel's back, leading Klasra to finally say enough is enough. For whatever it's worth, Klasra has often broken some interesting stories at The News / Jang and his departure will certainly leave the Jang Group poorer in the investigative department. The Jang Group will also miss his contacts within the government since Abbasi and Noorani have already been accused by the PPP of running one-sided stories. Klasra, whose recently published book Ek Siyaasat, Kayee Kahaniyaan [One Politics, Many Stories] has already become a best-seller, may be on a high at the moment, but it remains to be seen how well he adjusts to a new organizational culture at the Express Media Group.

Meanwhile, Aaj TV continues its blood-letting of staff after the departure of Syed Talat Hussain for Dawn and DawnNews. More staff have been fired from the Islamabad bureau, leading others to wonder just exactly what Aaj's management has in mind for the channel.

Who Was Behind Umar Cheema's Torture?

There is a lot to be said for journalistic instinct.

The moment one heard the shameful story of the abduction, humiliation and beating of The News' Islamabad-based investigative reporter Umar Cheema, something sounded too pat.

The News reporter Umar Cheema

For those who may not have followed it, this is the story as it broke earlier this evening: Cheema was waylaid on his way home early yesterday morning in Islamabad (around 3.30am) by people wearing police uniforms, bundled into a car, blindfolded and driven around for about 30 to 45 minutes, finally landing up in an unknown place where he was stripped naked, hung upside down and beaten severely before his hair and moustache were shaved off. After about six hours of this torture, he was taken and dumped on the Islamabad Motorway with warnings not to make the incident public. According to Cheema himself, the men beating him kept berating him for writing against the government and allegedly wanting to invite martial law, abused the chief justice of the Supreme Court and Cheema's parent organization, the Jang Group, and threatened his children as well as his immediate boss, Ansar Abbasi, with dire consequences if he and Abbasi continued to attack the government.

Anti-Mir Shakil grafitti on Zamzama (Photo: Huma Imtiaz)

Now recall that the Jang Group has been at loggerheads with the government recently (just a few weeks ago, parts of Karachi were plastered with abusive grafitti and banners against its chief executive Mir Shakilur Rehman obviously sponsored by the ruling Pakistan People's Party) and Ansar Abbasi in particular has been a sort of a thorn in the government's side with numerous investigative stories (and unfortunately, opinion pieces) detailing corruption and incompetence in the corridors of power. On the face of it, this seems a cut and dried case of governmental fascism.

So, why did the story seem too pat? Well, basically because of the obviousness of it. Which government could hope to pull off such a stunt against a high-profile media house and NOT see wall to wall coverage of it on its television channel and newspapers? And if I were a government out to commit such fascism, would I at least not ensure that it could not be easily traced back to me? That is, would I not at least send my thugs in civvies rather than police uniforms?

See from 0:30 onwards

I realize of course that these are merely assumptions of a certain amount of government intelligence and competence and are no proofs that the government was not itself involved. The counter argument would be that the government really is far dumber than even its worst critic believes. And certainly Imran Khan, interviewed on Geo for his reactions, is willing to believe that the two largest political parties, the PPP and the PML(N), have big enough 'dakus' in them to do something like this.

But it seems my gut instinct is shared by most journalists in Pakistan, including Ansar Abbasi and Umar Cheema himself. Both pointed out that the kind of operation it was, it was far too "professionally" handled for any "private" or "freelance" thugs, which basically leaves one of the three main intelligence agencies as the culprits. Umar Cheema went as far as saying that his own feeling about what his masked captors were saying to him was that it was meant as "deception", a smokescreen if you will, to make it seem that they were government agents.

There are some additional circumstances one must keep in mind. Umar Cheema claims that his abductors had told him that they were actually lying in wait for him in Gakhar Mandi, since he was due to travel to Gujranwala, but that when he had cancelled his travel plans, they had come to Islamabad to get him. Now, the only way they could have known about his plans was if they had the ability to eavesdrop on his mobile conversations. Who can do that in Pakistan but the intel outfits? Secondly, you might also recall a very similar incident in 2003 during General Musharraf's rule, when then Punjab deputy opposition leader (and current Punjab Law Minister) Rana Sanaullah had been similarly kidnapped, beaten and had his hair, moustache as well as his eyebrows shaved off. There is little doubt who was behind that incident.

Consider also why Umar Cheema would be targeted. What shocker has he written recently that would draw the ire of the government? Actually, having gone through Cheema's recent output, really not that much. His last piece, on August 20, was about how some big businessmen would not be attending a meeting called by President Zardari to raise funds for flood relief. On July 21, he reported about Zardari's rubbishing of claims by painter Laila Shahzada's daughter that he had helped her brother steal 93 of her mother's paintings. On July 8, he reported on the opposition parties' resolve to back the judiciary in any stand-off with the government. On July 2, he reported that some Turkish guides hired for Zardari's visit to Turkey had not been paid and had gone to court against the Pakistan embassy. On June 19, he reported about Law Minister Babar Awan chartering a PAF plane to go distribute monies to bar associations in southern Punjab. On May 16, he wrote a story claiming that General Musharraf's right-hand man Tariq Aziz had become Zardari's close adviser. And on May 12, he reported about how Rehman Malik's past was being whitewashed and the record of cases against him was disappearing.

On the other hand, many of Cheema's stories seem to be rubbing up the military the wrong way. Consider: On August 5, a sensitive story about how the army is using up to 400 personnel of the Pindi police to guard the army chief's house and the routes to it. On July 8, a story about the mishandling by intelligence agencies of high profile terror attacks such as that on Lt Gen Mushtaq Baig and ISI buses, which led to the acquittal of the accused. On July 7, a story detailing the Punjab government's condemnation of the army and its intelligence agencies for not cooperating in terror attacks investigations. On June 9, a story about how one of the commandos court-martialled for disobedience during the Lal Masjid episode was seeking Nawaz Sharif's help. On June 8, a story about how the two court-martialled commandos had not been provided the court-martial proceedings and had approached the Supreme Court for justice. On May 26, a report about the quiet arrests of an army major and his brother after the Faisal Shehzad incident in New York. On May 23, a story detailing a secret report that blamed the MQM for target killings. Etc, etc, etc. Of course it was Cheema who had filed stories against the army-managed National University of Modern Languages as well, which we had written about here as well.

In fact, remarkably, tonight's special edition of Capital Talk on Geo all but laid the blame for this incident at the feet of one of the military intel agencies - either the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) or the Military Intelligence (MI). It may not have been said in so many words or obvious reasons, but the participants, including Abbasi, Cheema and the Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists' President, seemed to be quite clear in their minds who was behind it, and it was not the government-controlled Intelligence Bureau. If you consider the fact that this was Geo, the channel the PPP government has had the most issues with, the host was Hamid Mir and the participants included Abbasi, both of whom have been accused of carrying an anti-PPP agenda, you really have to give pause when all more or less absolve the government.

If true, this of course then begs the immediate question: what was the motive?

While Cheema's stories touching on sensitive military issues could be one reason, I really do not feel they warrant the kind of reaction this incident indicates. Plus his last story on the military was almost one month ago. It just does not make sense. There is also a body of opinion that believes that Cheema himself was only an unfortunate pawn (none of his anti-government stories have been major shockers) and the real motive was to send a message to Abbasi who is far more prolific and opinionated. This again would make more sense if indeed it was a PPP-sponsored attack. What message would the military want to send to Abbasi? Why would they not want him to expose corruption in the government? But Abbasi himself does not believe this was directed by the government.

No, I'm afraid the only thing that makes sense then is that this was someone's idea of psy-ops. To create a further wedge between the government and the media, particularly the Jang Group. To create the perception that the government is going out of control, to build a case that can be later cited as among the reasons it should not stay in power.

Unfortunately, what this incident has shown is that whoever was involved in this shameful, shameful incident cares not a whit for the real grave issues Pakistan is grappling with at this time. All this incident is likely to do is to blacken Pakistan's name further. If it was indeed the government, it is far more stupid than anyone imagined. And if it was the military, it is at least as incompetent as the politicians it moans about.

After Paul the octopus, can we now have a Zardari-hating kangaroo?

So a German octopus has been more adept at predicting the outcome of matches in the football World Cup than a thousand highly paid human pundits. And now the eight-tentacled Paul has competition from Mani, a parakeet from Singapore, a female octopus, Pauline, from Holland, an Estonian chimpanzee (Pino) and an African Red River Hog.

Paul: just one of many oracles

Almost as exciting as speculation about the ultimate winner on Sunday is the parallel side match between these oracles from the animal kingdom: for example, Paul has wrapped Spain in his tight embrace, while his feathered rival has pecked Holland. Should a gambler now rush to be smothered by Paul, go for Mani in the hope of feathering his nest, or hog the limelight with the African beast?

I have it on good authority that Geo has cottoned on to this exciting development and has decided to embark on a new cost-cutting. crowd-pleasing drama. Negotiations are currently under way between the leading media group and a bewildering array of animals, minerals and vegetables, to take over the slot vacated by Dr Shahid Masood. Geo is now apparently talent-hunting for a creature who goes hysterical and loses his marbles every time the name Zardari is mentioned. According to inside sources, a kangaroo who punches anyone who says the 'Z' word is tipped for the coveted slot. The only problem is that kangaroos don't particularly scream too much or have any particular ideological affinity to General Hamid Gul. The other main candidate is a big fat bee that not only drones on and on but unfailingly stings PPP sympathisers on prime time as a divine sign of imminent doom for their party.

Highly unreliable sources claim that a top channel has also hired Kaka, a Lyari mule, to spot a fake degree from a mile. The animal is known to kick wildly in the air when someone's degree is from a dodgy online university ('Dr' Babar Awan and 'Dr' Aamir Liaquat got the treatment in a pilot study) and expel a load of dung when the degree in question is a downright forgery. When confronted with the newly re-elected honourable PPP member from Muzzafargarh, Kaka is believed to have contracted severe diaorrhea. As they say on PIA, apna Dasti samaan saath le jaana na bhooleye.

Not to be left behind, other channels have also got in on the act, with Samaa torn between hiring a screeching parakeet or a hyena to replace Meher and Jasmine, and ARY negotiating with a chhipkali to take over from Dr Danish on his night off without too many people noticing the swap. Not only can these creatures screech or slither on cue, but they can tell you the exact date on which we will be rid of this fascist democracy and get a good, decent authoritarian regime in its place. 

Express TV was talking to a big bug-eyed right wing creature but discovered that he is already on their staff and is ostensibly human. He goes by the name of Javed Chaudhry. Aaj continues its search for a fish oracle that witnessed a brave Pakistani journalist's exploits aboard a Gaza-bound flotilla attacked by Israelis. The creature is meant to leap up in the air every time Talat Hussain is within a half-mile vicinity and scream " death to Israel".

Unfortunately, Geo got there first. The cuddly, extremist-spotting blind dolphin from Sukkur that was witness to that episode during its Mediterranean holidays, was about to bag a major slot on the Jang Group's channel, but has developed certain irreconciliable differences with Hamid Mir. The normally peaceful creature, blind fool that it is, even developed shark-like tendencies and attacked poor Ansar Abbasi the other day. Mr Mir would prefer to hire an ostrich who can't spot a Taliban horde even if it is hit on the head by one. Sadly, the big bird has opted instead for a senior position in the Punjab government.

Any ideas about novel animals our channels can hire to liven things up?

The Curious Case of the Allegedly Fake Flogging Video

So, in the last few days, I was confronted by people who claimed that the infamous flogging video from Swat - you know, the one in which a burqa clad woman is held down by some bearded men while being publicly flogged and which caused immense disgust across Pakistan and the world exactly one year ago - had now been proved to be fake. Since I was clueless about any such news, they proceeded to inform me that not only had The News conclusively reported that the video was faked by an NGO (ostensibly to defame Pakistan and the righteous Muslims of Swat as well as to make it easier for the army to gather public opinion on its side for an operation against the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan or TTP), but that even Kamran Khan had talked about the fakery on his programme on Geo.

I had to do a bit of searching to find the 'news item' referred to. There was a reason I had not seen it: it never appeared in the print edition of the Karachi paper (the one I get). I'm not sure if it actually appeared in the Islamabad and Lahore editions, but surprisingly, it was on the web - even though the web edition of The News is actually culled from the Karachi edition. Here is what the 'news item' was, in its entirety:

Video of girl’s flogging in Swat was ‘fake’

Monday, March 29, 2010

"PESHAWAR: A resident of Swat, who claims to have prepared the fake video of flogging of a girl in Swat, has termed it drama and revealed that he received Rs0.5 million for doing so before the launch of military operation ‘Rah-e-Rast’.

Before the operation ‘Rah-e-Rast’, an NGO financed preparation of fake video of flogging in which they portrayed the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) members flogging a woman. The provincial government and Malakand Commissioner Syed Muhammad Javed ordered investigations and sought report from the authorities concerned.

After the successful operation in Malakand division, the law-enforcement agencies had arrested the children who were present in the video while a resident of Swat was apprehended by Kohat administration. The children and the arrested man revealed that the video was fake and said that it was made on the demand of Islamabad-based NGO which provided him Rs0.5 million.

Sources revealed that woman who was flogged in the video was also arrested and she revealed that she had received Rs0.1 million while Rs50,000 were given to each child. Sources said that the NGO produced the video to defame the country’s integrity and respect.

Sources stated that the law-enforcement agencies dispatched the report about the arrests of the culprits and proposed action against the NGO. They also said that the security agencies also apprehended the TTP workers who flogged the people."

Now, there are a couple or three points to note in this report, which should be glaringly obvious to any half-decent reporter or editor.

1. There is no byline.

2. The 'sources' are all anonymous.

3. Even the 'resident of Swat' who makes these serious claims is not identified.

These, ladies and gentlemen, are all straightforward clues that the 'report' is what is known in Pakistani journalistic parlance, as a 'plant' or 'planted story.' Obviously, at least one news editor came to the same conclusion and decided NOT to carry the story (i.e. the Karachi edition), which should give us some indication of how seriously it was taken. Now, who planted the story, how it was managed and with what motives, is up to you to judge. But there is no iota of doubt in my mind that the story deserved to be killed, at least until some serious questions were asked about its sources and credibility.

Of course, that has not stopped the assorted nutjobs going ballistic on various net forums about conspiracy theories involving the West, RAW, the army, NGOs and Westernized liberals. You can see a sample of their frothing at the mouth on Teeth Maestro's blog here and the Pakistan Defence Forum blog here. You may recall that the Supreme Commander of the Nutjobs, Aamir Liaquat Hussain, had even at the time of the surfacing of the video attempted to discredit the video on his show and in his Jang columns, while weasels like Ansar Abbasi  had simultaneously attempted to justify the barbarism (God, I'd almost forgotten why the man makes my blood boil!).

Just to remind ourselves of the actual circumstances of the case at the the time (rather than the planted stories appearing now), you can read what Dawn had reported on 4 April 2009 via DawnNews, or take a look at TTP spokesman Muslim Khan accepting responsibility for the flogging here:





Small wonder, then, that human rights campaigner and filmmaker Samar Minallah, who helped to publicise the video in the media, has reacted with a blistering and eloquent rejoinder in the oped pages of The News and The Daily Times. After all, the planted story was squarely targeted at her. You really should read her piece fully. But what is really needed is for The News to issue a clarification about the unsourced report. If it stands by its story, it should tell us what its sources are. If not, it should issue an apology, not only to Samar Minallah but to all its readers. It's about time there was some accountability for the media too.