R Wing
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 23, 2016
- Messages
- 3,516
- Reaction score
- 10
- Country
- Location
There are a few tools one can use to ascertain whether a journalist really cares about universal human rights or is simply out to malign the Army.
1.) Does he/she proportionately criticize non-PA human rights violators (e.g. Baloch sardars who enslaved and looted their own people, using barbaric and draconian punishments; feudal lords in underdeveloped parts of the country, etc.)?
2.) Does he/she mention Western/Indian hypocrisy when they accuse Pakistan of supporting terrorist groups (that's like the pot calling the kettle black, since both the West and India have illustrious histories of supporting violent militants in other countries)? Also US political support/arms sales to some of the worst human rights violators on the planet.
3.) Does he/she qualify statements made by Western media/govts by reminding readers that this is the same country (the US) that invaded Vietnam based on a fabricated incident (Gulf of Tonkin) and Iraq based on essentially no evidence of WMDs? So naturally their version of events via official statements doesn't hold any value.
4.) Does he/she mention US double standards on "enforced disappearances" and other such accusations given America's own extraordinary rendition program? Not to mention extra-judicial killings (without a free and fair trial and often with civilian casualties) via drones and CIA hit teams, etc.
5.) When discussing CPEC, does he/she highlight that it is a natural target for covert Indian aggression? Is NSA Ajit Doval's ridiculously and openly hostile stance mentioned?
If all/most of this is present and the journalist still criticizes the army, which he/she has the right to, then at least there is some credibility --- and I will gladly hear their arguments because the Army, like any institution, has flaws that should be highlighted and discussed. The problem is that most of these journos who've made their name in liberal elite / pseudo-intellectual circles by Army-bashing lack the above mentioned neutrality and balance to be given any respect.
1.) Does he/she proportionately criticize non-PA human rights violators (e.g. Baloch sardars who enslaved and looted their own people, using barbaric and draconian punishments; feudal lords in underdeveloped parts of the country, etc.)?
2.) Does he/she mention Western/Indian hypocrisy when they accuse Pakistan of supporting terrorist groups (that's like the pot calling the kettle black, since both the West and India have illustrious histories of supporting violent militants in other countries)? Also US political support/arms sales to some of the worst human rights violators on the planet.
3.) Does he/she qualify statements made by Western media/govts by reminding readers that this is the same country (the US) that invaded Vietnam based on a fabricated incident (Gulf of Tonkin) and Iraq based on essentially no evidence of WMDs? So naturally their version of events via official statements doesn't hold any value.
4.) Does he/she mention US double standards on "enforced disappearances" and other such accusations given America's own extraordinary rendition program? Not to mention extra-judicial killings (without a free and fair trial and often with civilian casualties) via drones and CIA hit teams, etc.
5.) When discussing CPEC, does he/she highlight that it is a natural target for covert Indian aggression? Is NSA Ajit Doval's ridiculously and openly hostile stance mentioned?
If all/most of this is present and the journalist still criticizes the army, which he/she has the right to, then at least there is some credibility --- and I will gladly hear their arguments because the Army, like any institution, has flaws that should be highlighted and discussed. The problem is that most of these journos who've made their name in liberal elite / pseudo-intellectual circles by Army-bashing lack the above mentioned neutrality and balance to be given any respect.
