Scooped

You know what the difference is between a scoop and just another story? Sometimes as little as a few seconds. In my case, it's about one hour.

Finance Minister Shaukat Tarin (Source: Dawn / Reuters)

So the story is, I actually had the scoop about Finance Minister Shaukat Tarin's resignation having been accepted - ostensibly because he's needed back at Silk Bank, which he owns -  at about 9pm tonight. Problem was, I couldn't completely confirm it. Bigger problem was I was away from the net. And by the time, I finally got to a computer, Kamran Khan had led with the story in his 10 o' clock show on Geo. Pretty pathetic I must admit. And no, I don't expect you to believe it. If someone else told me the same story, I would probably say, well, too bad, but who cares you had the story earlier. Point is, Kamran Khan broke the story.

But it did make me think a bit about scoops. In the olden days, scoops operated on a day-basis: which newspaper got the story a day before the others. Wire agencies - those who supply news to newspapers - of course operated on a much more stringent timeframe, since agencies competed with each other to be the first to break the news to other news organizations. But generally, the average person (i.e. those not working in newspaper offices) hardly ever discovered which agency got the scoop first.

Since the advent of 24-hour television and the web, that whole languid manner of working has gone out the window (pardon the pun). And everyone with access to television and the net has access to breaking news, even from wire agencies. Of course, the race to achieve first-status is why all manner of mayhem is unleashed on the unsuspecting public, with half-baked and even sometimes completely untrue stories making it out there. But despite what DawnNews may think, you really cannot have a news channel that ignores the breaking news (as an aside, while Kamran Khan was breaking the news about Shaukat Tarin, DawnNews' new Urdu programme hosted by Wusatullah Khan was running a fascinating discussion about the place of 'regional' languages in the national psyche). It's the nature of the beast. The best you can do is to try and tame the excesses of news organizations, through laying greater audience store in the checking of facts. It's a long-term process, however, where audiences force channels through their viewership / ratings to provide them correct information. If there is any other viable (i.e. non-draconian) alternative, I don't know it.

I also thought about whether scoops really matter to anyone other than media people. I mean, I can think of some stories that might save lives (e.g. you hear about firing going on in an area you are about to go to before you get there) but, generally, most scoops can hold for a few hours or even a day. For example, would it really make a difference to a common viewer / reader if they found out that the Supreme Court struck down the NRO the day before? Would finding out about Shaukat Tarin's resignation tomorrow really negatively affect anyone other than perhaps people who might want to lobby for his post and find themselves out-lobbied? Isn't the act of scooping closely tied in with egos and entertainment?

Just some things I was thinking about...(And I'm not being a sore loser; I have already accepted that I lost the "race.")

In any case, coming back to the Shaukat Tarin story, Kamran Khan named three possible successors to his post: Arif Habib CEO Nasir Baig, former State Bank governor Dr Ishrat Hussain and former PPP finance minister Makhdoom Shahabuddin. From my sources, apparently, the President's camp and the Prime Minister's camp have their own favourites. Baig, who is incidentally the brother-in-law of Anwar Majeed, Zardari's so-called right hand man (who is also related to Shaukat Tarin through the marriage of their offspring), and Shahabuddin are apparently in the President Zardari's list, as is PPP MNA Naveed Qamar. PM Yousuf Raza Gilani's list, on the other hand, has, in addition to Hussain, current state minister Hina Rabbani Khar and economist Dr Hafeez Pasha. Who eventually gets picked may indicate which way the wind is blowing. In fact, having one of Zardari's nominees get the post would be no big deal. One of them not getting it, on the other hand, might be.

Fashion Statements

Oh shoot. Here we go again with fashion weeks and Pakistan. Can we do anything in Pakistan without it being linked in some way to either appeasing the Taliban or kicking sand in their faces?

Assaulting the Taliban, yet again

I refer of course to the latest "I-spit-on-the-runway-the-Taliban-sashay-down" type of pieces in the American Christian Science Monitor (titled predictably "Lahore Fashion Week Takes on Talibanization in Pakistan") and in Britain's The Times about the just concluded Lahore Fashion Week. The latter may be headlined a bit more soberly ("Pakistan Fashion Week Pushes Back Boundaries") but the prose is nothing less than a deep shade of purple.

For example, here are the opening lines:

"A call to prayer echoed over the red carpet. The celebrity guests and socialites of Lahore lifted their diamante stilettos through the scarlet pile, careful not to trip as they showed lipsticked smiles – and bare shoulders – to the flashing camera bulbs."

Just in case you forgot what The Times was aiming to get at, you understand. Gasp! Muslims. Fashion. Shock. Bare shoulders. Horror. But far be it from The Times to simply imply something when they can get their facts utterly wrong in black and white:

"Pakistan’s first Government-endorsed fashion week finished yesterday. There is hope that with it will disappear decades of the government repression that had previously forced the scene underground."

Underground scene? Hellooooo! We just had another fashion week in Karachi, not three months ago! Kind of missed the bus on the "underground scene", by like, two decades, don't you think? I think The Times has kind of got Generals Ziaul Haq and Musharraf confused... which would be fair enough in some respects but certainly not this. Just to put the record straight, do recall that fashion shows (which existed before and even during Zia's regime) were being sponsored by Benazir's government in the early '90s and even taken abroad as part of her foreign delegations. And what was the Mush reign, if not about state-sponsored fashion?

General Musharraf walks the ramp in his Amir Adnan sherwani

Here's some more editorial pronouncements by writer Mary Bowers:

"A triumph for young liberals, the event was also a red rag to those who protect conservative Islamic values with an iron fist. Inter Services Intelligence and the bomb squad were standing by to keep out haute couture’s uninvited guests."

Eh? Ever been to a party in Pakistan, Ms. Bowers? Or Nargis' dance-theatre? Or to see a Pushto film? Ever picked up a copy of GT? Mostly, if the ISI is there, it's to enjoy itself.

ISI Chic?

Ms. Bowers also, incredibly, inserts the following bit in her tribute to the changing Pakistan:

"...even Pakistani TV crews happily meet gleaming and unveiled faces."

Whoa! Since when did TV crews (TV crews, for God's sake!) EVER refuse to meet "gleaming and unveiled faces"? I mean, have you even seen Pakistani channels, Ms. Bowers? And no, Haq TV does not count. We don't even know if it's a Pakistani channel, since we can't see their faces.


But how can one blame just Mary Bowers and The Times, when she has such a treasure-trove of our own people to apparently provide whacked out quotes. (I add the word 'apparently' here only because with a reporter with such a penchant for checking her facts, who can trust her memory or jotting skills?) For instance, here's "freelance fashion writer" Aamna Isani leading her up the garden path:

“We have seen the fashion world in Pakistan evolve in recent years,” said Aamna Isani, a freelance fashion writer. “Ten years ago we weren’t allowed to say the word 'fashion’. We had to go for a ‘cultural event’ with clothes.”

Ten years ago was the year 2000. You weren't allowed to use the word 'fashion' Ms Isani??? Which paper were you freelancing for exactly? Takbeer?

For Roundups on "Cultural Events With Clothes"

Here's Ms. Isani again talking about the elitism of Pakistan's fashion shows:

“I think we’ll really evolve when we have women on the catwalk with purdah too,” she says. “It’s an irony that we’re OK with navels and arms now, but not with the veil. 80 per cent of women in Pakistan wear the veil and many want to. They’d want to even if they had the option. They are pushing us away and we are pushing them away.”

Leave aside the fact that Ms Isani seems to be confused about the whole concept of the purdah / veil - yeah, women who do purdah are just itching to parade themselves on ramps, aren't they? - but where exactly has she got the "80 percent" figure from??? One can sympathise with Ms Isani's idea of inclusive liberalism, but I am more and more inclined to believe that she has spent most of her life inside the Takbeer offices.


Then you have Instep's editor making one of her usual cryptic comments:

“Now that women work like men they must dress like men,” said Muniba Kamal, fashion editor at the national daily The News. “I wouldn’t go burning our bras though. We need those.”

Don't burn that bra, baby

Burning bras? Didn't that kind of go out of fashion in the '70s? "We need those": What does this even mean? That Pakistani women are all well-endowed?


Of course, nothing would have come together for Ms. Bowers without this bit of sensationalism:

  

"“Half an hour before the show we were getting death threats and phone calls and all kind of blackmail,” says a model, Meesha Shafi, 28. “They had our names. It’s very scary." 

Er, yes, Meesha, who could possibly know your name or that of the other models? I mean, it's not like you guys are on the pages of Sunday every week, or on the cover of fashion magazines and billboards, in newspapers or acting in tv dramas and giving interviews on television, right? Or in a sleeveless tank-top on your band's website, right? But what I want to know is, what kind of blackmail was this really about? I have visions of someone threatening you, "if you don't walk the ramp for Umar Sayeed, we'll make sure you are forced to walk for Hourain!" Now that would be scary.

Loudest is not always smartest

Remember folks, at the end of the day, it's just clothes. The Taliban wear clothes too. And more of them. Let's keep things in perspective.

DawnNews' Urdu Avatar

DawnNews' new look.

It seems we were slightly off in terms of our time slot predictions for the Urdu bulletins. The date for their launch has also been put back by a week. The one major addition here, as you may notice, is that of BBC Urdu man Wusatullah Khan (on the extreme right). Could he be the silver bullet that can save the channel?

Wake Up, Stand Up, Stand Up For Your Fights

A hilarious post on "Sexy Islamism" by ex-DawnNews journalist Khawer Khan pointed me in the direction of this clip of designer Maria B. being interviewed on Samaa TV's Nai Rahain programme with host Nadia Jamil. You must watch too for a good time.





Here are some gems from Maria B.'s mouth:


On Why She Supports the lunatic Zaid Hamid (at 1:05):

"Because he doesn't stop you from anything!"

On Deciding Why She Won't Do Revealing Clothes Anymore (at 1:29):

"It's part of what my evolution is becoming [sic]."

On "Hate-Mongering" Critics of Zaid Hamid (at 2:19)

"He is a fakir, who teaches love"

(You can see some of that love on a previous post here btw)


On What 'Wake Up Pakistan' supremo Zaid Hamid's Ranting Is All About (at 2:52):

"This is a movement about tolerance, it's about love, about protectioning [sic] the minority."

Here's the sufi in his own words (do see the whole clip):





On How She Thinks Muslims Should Behave Towards Non-Muslims (at 6:32):

"Some people think that being religious and Islamic means ke you just going to... [treat non-Muslims with derision].. No! Those.. that Hindu can be a better person than you and higher in the scale of Allah [sic] than any one of those Muslims going around beating people up. So ye bilkul bhi mujhe koi na kahe (don't anyone say this to me).. just because you are Muslims you think you are superior, nobody is."

Aah, noble thoughts indeed. But then what do we make of this bit of humility from your mentor, wherein he claims 50 crore Indian Hindus are just itching to convert to Islam and that the next time Pakistan goes to war with India, Indian Hindus should be prepared to be massacred ("This time we will take no prisoners")?:





On How 'Wake Up Pakistan' Movement Is All About Diversity and Tolerance (at 7:45):

"Hum jab meeting kar rahe hotay hain, aik larki baithi hoti hai hijab mein, aik niqab mein, aik main baithi hoti hoon, aik Feeha Jamshed baithi hoti hai.. (When we have our meetings, there is one girl sitting in hijab, one in a niqab, I am sitting there and [TeeJays' designer] Feeha Jamshed is sitting there)... and we respect each other."

Like duh. So it is all about fashion statements, isn't it? By the way, what, no Ali Azmat at the meetings?



I don't know about you but I want to set up the "Wake Up Maria" movement.

How To Make The News And Other Mistakes

First things first. If ever there had been any doubt about the cretinism of President Asif Ali Zardari's legal and political advisers, surely such doubts must have been laid to rest with what happened yesterday. I mean, you would think that if you knew the military, the judiciary, the opposition and an influential part of public opinion hated your guts, and the Americans were distracted enough by their upcoming surge in Afghanistan not to care too much about covering your ass, you would be a bit more circumspect in your actions, wouldn't you? No such luck with geniuses of the likes of Farooq Naek, Latif Khosa and Babar Awan.

Triumvirate of Legal and Political Genius: (clockwise from top left) Naek, Khosa, Awan

But I guess, advisers can only reflect the level of competence of the person selecting them.

The tangential repercussion of this fiasco on the media has been that two media houses have had wildly different feelings about it. The Jang Group, which had been trying its darnedest to instigate some sort of crisis involving Zardari for quite some time now - and one had only to have followed Geo anchors such as Kamran Khan, Dr S&M and The News' Group Editor Shaheen Sehbai to understand their desperation - must be licking its lips. Only the day before, the Jang Group had filed a suit in the Sindh High Court claiming that the government was trying to victimize it for exposing the president's alleged corruption by cutting off its government advertisements and pressurizing National Bank to call in an allegedly rescheduled loan. Geo had once again begun to run Mr Jeem's whine (last seen during Musharraf's "emergency") about struggling to survive (this despite the fact that Geo continues to be far at the top of all news channel ratings and revenue streams). Zardari and his bunch of geniuses could not have handed the Jang Group a better opportunity to go after him, an opportunity that has obviously been grabbed by both hands.

At the other end of the spectrum is the Daily Times, which after the departure of its founding editor Najam Sethi, has resembled nothing much more than the in-house newsletter of the house of Salman Taseer, the publisher (and of course, the governor of Punjab). Today's paper could have hardly done better to indicate its owner's mood, with a banner heading that said it all. Even the paper's weekend glossy, Sunday, seemed to indicate a sort of depression. It had only 6 pages of photographs dedicated to the wedding of Taseer's son. Compare that to the 11 pages the week before, and the 8 pages the week before that. (But there's still the valima pics to look forward to!)

But in the middle of all this ecstasy and misery, what I really wanted to touch upon was the Filmfare Awards-worthy performance of Jang Group's mediocrity-in-residence (gosh, there are a number of them vying for that title aren't there?) Saleh Zaafir. A reporter never ever accused of being terribly reliable (though he has been accused of being many other things), Mr Zaafir outdid all others by breaking news on Geo that a state of emergency ala November 3, 2007 was about to be declared in the country. He actually began it all by this bit of breathless ranting (he comes in around 12:50 in the first clip and continues up until 00:55 in the second):







Never ones to shy away from milking any sensation to its limits, Geo then proceeded to run "Breaking News" flashes across its screens for the next 30-45 minutes (the news flashes can be seen beginning around 09:30 in the second clip), announcing that "information indicated a state of emergency was about to be declared." No other channel had this information, obviously, because they don't employ Mr Zaafir. But even Information Minister Qamaruzzaman Kaira's rubbishing of the flash (which Samaa TV carried) was not deemed worthy of running on Geo. Geo kept insisting that the presidency was "refusing to confirm or deny" the story, which of course is journalistic shorthand for claiming 'we're actually right and they're hiding something.' It was only when Zardari's spokesman Farhatullah Babar came out to specifically deny the claims, that Geo stopped flashing its 'exclusive' breaking news.

Of course, Mr Zaafir has never taken being proved wrong lying down and he wasn't going to this time either. He then proceeded to write a price on the front page of Jang today, trying to explain how he was not really flying kites. An excerpt from his piece:

"Aiwan-e-sadr ki jaanib se saabiq sadr Pervez Musharraf ki 3 November, 2007 ki tarha emergency nafiz karnay ka faisla kiya ja chuka tha lekin awaam aur media ki jaanib se aanay walay rad-e-amal ne ussay  chaunka diya aur woh musheeraan jo idaaron se takraanay ka mashwara de rahe thhe aur un ke senior jo khatray ka sabab ban saktay thhe woh apnay "aqalmandana mashwaron" se peechhay hat-tay gaye...Zaraaye ka kehna thha ke awaami rad-e-amal ke sabab mulk aik aur 3 November se bach gaya."

('The decision to impose emergency on the lines of former president Pervez Musharraf's November 3, 2007 actions had already been taken in the presidency. But the reaction of the people and the media [emphasis added] to it stunned the presidency, and those advisers who had been advocating a collision with institutions, and their seniors who could have become a source of danger, began to backtrack from their "sagacious advice."... Sources say that the popular reaction [emphasis added] saved the country from another 3 November.')

Keep in mind that nobody else carried the story and aside from causing a lot of confusion and panic, nobody actually reacted to it in any public way. But then, nobody has ever accused Mr Saleh Zaafir of any sort of humility either.

Verbal Dasti - 2

This man is a one-man wrecking machine. I speak of course of PPP MNA from Muzaffargarh, Jamshed Dasti. The last time I wrote about him, I forgot to mention that he also has the dubious distinction of being the first MNA since the early 1970s to be removed from the National Assembly for disruptive behaviour.

I'm waiting for the exact quotes, but in the meantime, this is what Geo TV reported.

Parliamentarians Just Wanna Have Fun

A couple of stories I missed this past couple of weeks that really should be highlighted. If you haven't seen these yourself, you really should.

Making Hay

The first of these actually appeared in The Nation on January 25 and details the scam being perpetrated in (at least) the Punjab's Layyah district in the name of the Benazir Tractor Scheme. Here the PMLQ's MNA Sardar Bahadur Ahmad Khan Sehar and his relatives - who own thousands of acres of land - bagged 48 out of the 63 tractors supposedly to be given to small farmers. And that too in a supposedly random computerised ballot!

The News in an editorial on this blatant rigging had this to say about it:

Free tractors

Monday, February 08, 2010

A tractor is an essential piece of agricultural equipment in these days of mechanised farming, but most of our small farmers cannot afford what for them is a luxury item. Thus, there were many who hoped that the ‘Benazir Tractor Scheme’ — which made available by computerised ballot 5,000 tractors for Punjab, 2,000 for Sindh, 1,200 for NWFP and 850 for Balochistan – might bring a change in their fortunes. The scheme was open to farmers who own 25 acres or less of land and on September 12, 2009, about 340,000 applications were received, of which 277,106 were finalised for balloting. So far so good, except that when the results of the ballot were declared in Punjab, there were – to put it mildly — some statistical anomalies. In a pioneering move, those who organised the balloting managed to take out the ‘random’ element and rig the result, benefiting a range of delighted new tractor owners who were not eligible for the scheme in the first place on account of being the owners of thousands of acres of land rather than a meagre 25.

 

A quite remarkable 48 members of a single family in District Layyah out of a total draw for the area of 63 bagged themselves new tractors worth about Rs29 million – not a bad trick if you can pull it off. And to which family do these lucky people belong? Why none other than MNA Bahadar Ahmad Khan Sehar… what an extraordinary coincidence. Forty-eight poor farmers doubtless looked at one another, shrugged their shoulders and muttered the national mantra – ‘this is Pakistan’. Indeed it is, and this being Pakistan, a number of powerful individuals in a range of institutions including a bank and at least two political parties conspired together to rob poor people of an opportunity to better themselves. This being Pakistan, nobody is going to be taken to task for this blatant manipulation of a scheme that, if properly administered, would have lifted thousands out of poverty. Instead, the feudal landowners have once again ensured that the poor and downtrodden remain just that. The politicians have served themselves and the patronage system well and, this being Pakistan, the status quo has been preserved. A by-product of the scam is that somebody learned how to manipulate a computerised random ballot – which must be excellent news for those contemplating any future computerised general election.

The total worth of the tractors? A mere 29 million.



The Sweat and Toil of Legislating

The second story comes to us from the good folks at FAFEN or the Free And Fair Election Network, "a network of 30 civil society organizations working to foster democratic accountabilities in Pakistan" and who have been monitoring the performance (or in this case, lack of performance) of our elected assemblies. Their monitors who observe the goings on in parliament then report their findings regularly at the end of each session. Here are some of their observations on the last National Assembly session that concluded on January 29:

The participation of MNAs i.e. 46 percent in the eighteenth session was relatively higher than earlier sessions during the ongoing parliamentary year. 

So, basically, 54 percent of legislators (183 out of 338!) could not be bothered to show up for their job at all. And this was an improvement over previous sessions?! Will they show up to collect their salaries and TA / DA? You can bet they will.

The 15 daily sittings of the Eighteenth Session of the National Assembly included a total of 50 hours and 01 minute of parliamentary business. The average length of a sitting was 3 hours and 20 minutes. The shortest sitting lasted 1 hours and 34 minutes. Each sitting started late by an average of 28 minutes.

Will someone please give us all a job where, if you bother to show up at all, your workday consists of about 3 hours?

As many as 646 questions were raised by MNAs during the course of the session, of which 420 were responded to by the relevant ministers. However, relevant ministers were absent at 9 out of the 15 sittings during the question hour.

Now that's an even better job. And I like that figure of 420.

42 bills were listed on the Orders of the Day for consideration by the House. One of these bills was rejected. Out of the remaining 41, 10 bills were passed. 23 resolutions were on the agenda of the Eighteenth Session, but only six were taken up by the House. 42 % of items on the Orders of the Day (less then half of the business agenda of the House) were not addressed during the session.

10 bills passed, 6 resolutions "taken up", 58 percent of agenda items addressed. In 15 days. Now that's what you call efficiency.

175 Points of Order were raised. However, none of them required Speaker’s Ruling, indicating their inappropriateness vis-à-vis procedural definition. 

Great. Efficient and relevant. Incidentally, the most activity the National Assembly saw.

The only people to come out well from this analysis were Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, who attended every sitting in full and, to an extent, women parliamentarians who managed to move 12 out of the total 18 private members' bills, whatever became of them eventually. Activists often wonder why people badmouth democratic dispensations so much. It's not that they like the alternatives any more. They just express their disgust with what becomes of their aspirations.

Is A Modicum of Sanity Too Much Too Ask from Geo?

Is this absurd or what?

Hamid Mir in Geo's Capital Talk today (11 Feb) takes expert advice on water issues between Pakistan and India from Syed Salahuddin, Supreme Commander of the Hizbul Mujahideen and head of the Muttaheda (United) Jihad Council...



What's next? Lashkar-e-Taiba's Hafiz Saeed giving his expert opinion on tourism opportunities in Mumbai? Jaish-e-Mohammad's Azhar Masood reviewing Air India's inflight entertainment? Dawood Ibrahim analysing trends on the Bombay Stock Exchange?

Yousuf in the Confessional

If you haven't already, you must read this report about an extremely frank interview with Mohammad Yousuf (that apparently aired yesterday on some television channel) and in which he lays directly into Umar Akmal, Shoaib Malik and an unnamed player. I don't know which channel this was, if anyone knows please let us know, particularly if there's a weblink to the interview.

Some choice excerpts of what Yousuf said:

On PCB Chairman Ejaz Butt announcing midway through tour that he would be replaced as skipper:

“I don't know when the statement was made, but when it was, suddenly everyone in the team changed. Six or seven players started to see themselves as captains all of a sudden. At the start of the tour in New Zealand, the players were cooperating with me, but as the tour went on I felt they weren't because they knew I wouldn't be captain in the next series.”

On Umar Akmal's mysterious "stiff back":

“Umar was fine as far as I knew. What happened in his room and how he got a stiff back all of a sudden was a surprise to me. He miraculously recovered as soon as we told him that he would be going home.”

On Shoaib Malik as a possible captain:

“We all know what he’s good at, certainly not captaincy.”

On the most problematic player in the team:

“There is one player in the team who is disturbing team unity and other players. I spoke to coach Intikhab Alam and other management about it and they agreed with me," Yousuf said. “I will only disclose his name to the chairman of the board, Ijaz Butt.”

“Intikhab Alam (coach), Abdur Raqeeb (manager) and [Shahid] Afridi know who the player is and we discussed it as well several times,” Yousuf added.

“During the New Zealand tour and onwards Intikhab was telling me to be wary of him, but I wanted to see for myself. I saw in Australia how his body language was and we dropped him from the Tests. We decided in Australia during a meeting that we had to do something about him.”

Hmmmm. An intriguer who Yousuf does not like and who did not play in the Tests. One guess who this one is.

First Aman Event Remains An Asha

Apparently the first big do for and by 'Am(a)n Ki Asha' - the Times of India / Jang Group collaboration - has bit the dust in the wake of the dual bomb blasts in Karachi.

The Jang Group was going to play host February 16-17 in Karachi to a massive gathering of business and industry leaders from Pakistan and India. The event was to have seen the likes of the Tatas, Birlas and Ambanis or their representatives from the Indian side and the Manshas, Saigols, Hashwanis et al from the Pakistani side. Almost all the top companies from both sides were represented and people like former Pakistan State Bank Governor Ishrat Hussain and Indian filmmaker Mahesh Bhatt were to have addressed the august gathering. Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani was scheduled to be the chief guest, the idea being that sitting down and sharing biryani and pulao would help break some ice and promote greater collaboration between the business sectors of the two countries. But it was not meant to be.

Fears about security and, possibly, nervousness from the Indian side after the carnage in Karachi on the 5th of February, have, sources claim, put paid to the plan for now. The meet has been postponed till further notice. No word on what the next step will be. Shireen Mazari must be ecstatic.

Can Pakistan and India ever move forward on anything without something or the other screwing it up?

Aamir Liaquat: Further Adventures in Irritating TwitDom

Can no one rid us of this idiotic twerp?

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

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

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

"“We tried our best to make the family understand that our role may create more troubles for the hapless woman, who was already in trouble. On their persistent requests, we have now decided to include Dr Aafia Siddiqui’s name in the list of our prisoners in US custody that we delivered to Americans in Afghanistan for swap of their soldier in our custody,” explained the militant commander.

He claimed family members of Dr Aafia told the Taliban leadership that they had lost all hopes in the Pakistan government and now Allah Almighty and the Taliban were their only hope. Later, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid also called The News from somewhere in Afghanistan and owned a statement given by the Taliban commander."

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

Afghanistan: Back To The Future?

One of the most thoughtful pieces about the recently held London Conference on Afghanistan has come from BBC Urdu's Wusatullah Khan, published on January 31.

Here is a translation of the piece, done by yours truly. Worth reading.

Create A New Problem!

Wusatullah Khan

BBCUrdu.com Islamabad

 

For the last few days, I have been remembering slain Afghan President Najeebullah intensely.

 

In 1989, when the last Soviet troops had crossed the River Amo, to save Afghanistan from further destruction, Najeebullah’s national reconciliation plan was on the table. Under it, the Mujahideen groups had been appealed to think only as Afghans, now that the Red Army that they had been fighting against was gone. Najeebullah’s government said ‘We will not take up arms, you too should lay down your guns. Let us call a Loya Jirga [Grand Meeting], sit across from each other and instead of indulging in a destructive blame game, let us make a government that represents all segments of Afghans. This government can then make a constitution and conduct elections as well.’

 

But Najeebullah’s plan was scornfully rejected by the United States, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the Mujahideen groups. Najeebullah was taunted, saying ‘you yourself are a remainder of the Soviet occupation, how can there be any reconciliation with you?’ The result was that the destruction that had occurred in Afghanistan during the Soviet occupation, much worse was visited upon the country after it, and has continued since.

 

The reconciliation strategy that 60 countries have endorsed as practical at the London Conference is almost a photocopy of Najeebullah’s national reconciliation plan. If there is any difference between the two, it is that 20 years ago the same plan was considered impractical because it was put forward by a Soviet puppet Afghan president. Now the same plan is considered kosher because the US and NATO are behind it. And because Hamid Karzai is touted as an elected leader rather than a Western puppet.

 

Najeebullah was accused of many things. But he was never accused of financial corruption, of encouraging warlordism or of overseeing drug trafficking. Hamid Karzai’s reputation is entirely different and these allegations against him have come – and continue to come – not from his enemies but, in fact, from circles within the US, NATO and the United Nations. According to Transparency International, Afghanistan is the second-most corrupt country in the world. And the level of misgiving is such that even the Afghan parliament itself has twice rejected most of the nominees put forward for the cabinet.

 

In such a scenario, to expect the Hamid Karzai administration to honestly oversee disbursement of the promised US$500 million fund set up to bring the Taliban into the mainstream of Afghan social life, is like putting a cat in charge of protecting milk.

 

Whatever else the London plan may have accomplished, it is certainly reinforcing the perception that within a year or year-and-a-half, Afghanistan will once again be left at its own mercy. But when the US and NATO take their leave, their place will once again be taken by militants backed by Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia and India.

 

They say one way of addressing a complicated and complex problem is to create a bigger problem. It looks like this is exactly what is in store for Afghanistan.

Some Thoughts On Karachi's Bomb Attacks

Some people have asked us why he have not "covered" the bomb attacks in Karachi yesterday.

This is meant simply to be a brief explanation of why we did not blog about the carnage that engulfed Karachi yesterday or have not blogged about earlier such incidents. It's not that terrorist strikes do not affect us or that we live in some sort of cocoon far removed from the reality of present-day Pakistan. They certainly affect us very personally - emotionally if not physically - and, in fact, we know many people who have lost friends and relatives in the bloodshed or seen them injured. Many of our colleagues in the media have also suffered.

No. The reason for not blogging about it has more to do with seeing no need to replicate the wall to wall coverage that is already present in the media, and with a reluctance to speculate on something about which the facts are often still murky, at least to us. Yes, we know that there have been terrorist strikes in Karachi on Ashura and Chehlum, for example, but can we really say with 100% surety who was behind them? Can we add anything to the discussion that has not already been said? All too often people are willing to jump in with prescriptive opinions on the basis of silly assumptions, hearsay and wrong data.

Let's take the Ashura bombing and subsequent "rioting" that followed. The original claim of a suicide attack on the procession was eventually officially struck down (after a week!) and it was pretty apparent right at the beginning that the burning of Boulton Market et al was hardly an act of 'spontaneous rioting by enraged people in the targeted procession.' (Processionists at such religious congregations do not generally carry with them chain-cutters, gloves and inflammatory chemical material, all of which were used to break into shops and burn them, as we saw on the closed circuit camera footage.) Now, had there actually been a suicide bomber, the probability of jihadists being behind the bombing would have been quite high - if there's one thing paid mercenaries are unlikely to do, it is to sacrifice themselves for a 'cause'. But since there was apparently none, the possibilities of who could be behind the bombing multiply. This does not mean that jihadists (and I will come back to them later) could not be behind the attack (in fact, at least one spokesman for them claimed it). Just that the pool of possible perpetrators increase.

Depending on your point of view, it could be Al-Qaeda aligned jihadists (Pakistani Taliban or Lashkar-e-Jhangvi types), foreign agents (out to sow chaos in Pakistan and depending on your point of view, this could mean Indian, Afghani, American), local shadow government agents (out to derail the government), or even ruthless political players (out to score petty local gains). The only thing we know for certain, at this time, is that whoever it was, falls squarely into the definition of "terrorist", i.e. they want to achieve some political aim through an act of violence that is designed to create a scare among ordinary folk.

Let's look also at the allegations hurled about after the arson that followed the Ashura blast. The MQM immediately blamed the 'Taliban' (in their mind often a shorthand for Pashtuns from the north who have active support from the Pashtuns in Karachi), while others immediately blamed the MQM, ostensibly because the City Government (CDGK) it controls wanted to shift / demolish some shops in the area earlier and, sotto voce, because it allegedly wants to drive the Pashtuns out of the city by initiating a backlash. Neither side has been able to provide conclusive proof so far.

The problem with the MQM allegations is not that the jihadists could not be responsible, it is that its knee-jerk pinning the blame for every such act of violence on the Taliban / tribal Pashtuns reeks not a little bit of political opportunism and racism. Is it too much to ask to wait for an investigation to uncover some facts?

On the other hand, the Jamaat-e-Islami led allegations against the MQM, in this case at least, have not yet been backed up by real proof. Not only has the supposed CDGK plan to evict shopkeepers whose shops were actually burnt not been backed up by any concrete proof, it boggles the mind that, with such a dastardly plan in place, the MQM would go out of its way to capture footage of the arsonists and provide it to the police and the media.

What we do know is this: since the calculated act of arson could not have been carried out without the cover of the blast, it would be reasonable to connect the two. So, those who planned the arson would, in all probability, have had to know at least that there would be a situation created wherein their activity was possible. There is no point in speculating beyond that.

However, a final word about jihadists, a term I am using simply as a shorthand for a certain mindset. There is a section of opinion that has got so carried away with its anti-American and anti-establishment rhetoric that it paints the Taliban and its allies as some sort of romantic resistance movement against neocolonialism. And I don't mean just Imran Khan or our shadow warriors like Colonel Imam and Hameed Gul. I have heard even some otherwise reasonable leftists spout similar rhetoric. Let's get one thing straight: they may be anti-American (right now) but the Taliban are no resistance movement against neocolonialism. They and their allies are among the most ideologically regressive bunch of people to walk this earth who would be all too willing to be in bed with Unocal once again if they were in power.

But one of the other most irritating things to hear in the media is the claim that such acts of murder could never be committed by Muslims. That of course not only blithely ignores the whole history of internecine Muslim violence over 1400 years, but also deliberately ignores the commonality between the Taliban and their jihadist allies: their Wahhabist aversion to Shia Islam. Al Qaeda, The Taliban, the Mehsud-led Tehrik-e-Taliban, the Sipahe Sahaba, the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, the Jaish-e-Mohammad, the Lashkar-e-Taiba et al, they are all part of a continuum that sees Shias as innovators in religion (and thus worthy of condemnation) or outright heretics (and thus worthy of being killed). And this mindset has been tolerated at one point or another (or continues to be tolerated in the case of some) by not only their military handlers but also by the majority of Pakistanis sold on the idea of romantic resistance.

So let's not kid ourselves. The jihadists may not have been behind the bomb attacks in Karachi on Ashura and Chehlum. But not because they could not intrinsically do this sort of thing.

Samaa Without the PR

We don't usually put comments from an earlier post into an entirely new post but there are a couple of reasons for doing it this time. For one, the comments are new additions to a post more than three months old and have probably been missed by most readers.

Secondly, they provide at least some current information that interests us and which we have partly been able to confirm. Specifically, that Director Current Affairs Amir Zia has either left Samaa TV or is about to leave. Here is how an anonymous poster alerted us to the news on January 29:

"ok... i'm usually the silent observer (reader) but this time its an exception.

1st of all let me tell u that the reason of sacking people was never "financial". Oh, wait a minute the latest news first .i.e. Mr. Amir Zia is told to leave by 11th of March, 2010. (explain this Mr. Jehangir)."

As we had written last October, Zia had been 'demoted' in a sense from Director News and Current Affairs and transferred to Islamabad during the last round of retrenchments at the channel. Obviously, he could not have been too happy about this, a fact that is borne out by recent sightings of him in Karachi, apparently job hunting.

You may recall that the COO of Samaa, Mr. Amir Jahangir had himself denied our claims (in the comments section) in the following words:

"Mr. Amir Zia is back in the field of journalism with SAMAA's flagship program "Qoum Kay Samnay". This is every journalist's dream."

So which one is it Mr. Jahangir? Is Mr. Zia with Samaa or not? Or is he sick of the dream?

In any case, if anyone has further information on this or other developments at Samaa, please feel free to share. We are interested in the facts. No innuendo or personal attacks please.

A Name, A Name, My Kingdom for A Name - Updated

So, thanks to diligent reader Hamza, we now learn that the following story may, in fact, be rubbish. We have left the original story in place only because it seems unethical to pretend we never posted it in the first place. However, as I pointed out originally, despite thinking that the original story was some sort of prank, we ran with it assuming that Foreign Policy with all the resources at its disposal, would not have without checking it. Of course, they have now retracted the original post on their blog and have added the following words of caution:

"Don't believe everything you read in print. Sometimes, the press gets hold of a story and, before checking all the facts, goes off half-cocked."

A bit rich coming from them, if you ask me. In any case, there you have it. I suppose apologies are due all round, especially to the hapless Mr. Zeb. Of course (and I'm not trying to have my cake and eat it too), if one follows FP's caution as outlined above, one should not take their retraction at face value either... But it did always sound like a wishful story.

_________________________________________
The Original Post:

I held off on posting this just in case this turned out to be some sort of spoof. But apparently not. My Arabic speaking sources confirm at least that the translation is correct. And as Foreign Policy's blog reports in considerable double entendre, the news has made it to Arab language newspapers.

Ambassador Miangul Akbar Zeb (Embassy Photo: Lee Berthiaume)

So, without further ado, here's how Salem-News of Oregon reported this delicate matter:

Saudi's Reject Pakistani Diplomat Whose Name Translates to 'Biggest Dick'

Tim King Salem-News.com

In Saudi Arabia, size does count.

(SALEM, Ore.) - A high level Pakistani diplomat has been rejected as Ambassador of Saudi Arabia because his name, Akbar Zib, equates to "Biggest Dick" in Arabic. Saudi officials, apparently overwhelmed by the idea of the name, put their foot down and gave the idea of his being posted there, the kibosh.

Akbar Zib is no newcomer to politics, in fact you could say he's a pretty big deal. This long-ranging high level diplomat has worked with some of the largest members of world governments, players charged with negotiating the outcome of the world's current events.

He most recently served as High Commissioner Designate of Pakistan to Canada, and prior to that he was the ambassador of Pakistan to South Africa,. He also served in that capacity in Washington from 1983-87, and New Delhi from 1994-2000.

He earlier worked at the Pakistan headquarters as section officer from 1982- 83, director from 1987-94 and director-general from 2000-2003.

Miangul Akbar Zib, also whose name news agencies sometimes refer to as Zib, was born on 15 February, 1954. He holds a Masters degree.

According to the Arab Times (as reported by FP) the poor Mr. Zeb's credentials have previously been rejected on the same basis by UAE and Bahrain (he is currently the Pakistan High Commissioner in Canada). Are foreign relations between the "brotherly Islamic countries" or any states really so dependent on misinterpretation of slang?

I wonder what would happen if Mr. Lund became the Swedish ambassador to Islamabad. Or had Laura Bush ever visited Pakistan. May be that's why Begum Abida Hussain never referred to herself as Mrs. Fakhr Zaman Imam when she was our ambassador to the US. I guess that would also rule out sending anyone named Foqia on any diplomatic assignment in the English-speaking West. Not to mention Rabia Butt.