Ansar Abbasi and Hamid Mir are one camp and Kamran Khan is another camp. Do it depends on the person is.
Ilyas Kashmiri - still alive
- Thread starter sonicboom
- Start date
Hamid Mir's clarification on counterclaims
Journalistic behaviour
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Hamid Mir's journey from a reporter to a media anchor, asking self-serving questions, to a journalist of repute is a struggle based on the philosophy of ends justifying the means. When he has to write skilfully to give a balance to his image, his writings against non-state actors appear in the English papers (like the story of the Swat lady teacher and now the one on Ilyas Kashmiri published in your newspaper on Sept 20). All those stories that glorify militants are unfortunately in the Urdu press. The latter bring him public support and the former show him as intellectually honest. He is one of the many journalists whom everyone knows thrive on bending the facts to their journalistic advantage and, given their capacity of unrestricted access to the national and international media, securing the interests of those who have no feelings for the people of this poor country.
Pakistan's bad luck revisits every time Mr Mir and his ilk (of which there are many) with full access to the public media repeatedly make insinuations on the country's image at a critical juncture when we are about to make a genuine attempt of acceptability in the world community. I, understandably, relate Mr Mir's journalistic behaviour to deep frustration following his erstwhile associates coming under scrutiny in the successful military action in Swat and FATA but consider the contents of the article need correcting for the record. Ilyas Kasmiri was never an SSG 'commando' and not even closely associated with the elite military outfit. He may have been merely a petty criminal surviving on the fringes of state by associating with larger gangs through a supporting media clothed as misaligned jihadis-cum-sectarian terrorists. Mr Mir should also clearly admit his association with non-state actors in remembering Mr Kashmiri on the front page of a national newspaper. Based on what has been written in the press, Mr Kashmiri was a member of a banned outfit who ruthlessly tore the very fabric which was barely sufficient to cover our national integrity. The events Mr Mir is referring to during 1998-2000 could have only happened when he was the editor of a local Urdu daily well-known for its support to the so-called jihadi and Central Asian nationals in the capital who ultimately turned out to be a nightmare for the poor people of this country their presence eventually leading to the Lal Masjid episode. Whenever the local police placed a hand on these elements at their 15 rented locations in the posh areas of Islamabad, it was turned into a human rights issue. The people of Islamabad have the right to know when they ask how the elements reached Lal Masjid under the nose of the law-enforcing agencies. Even then, his paper used the same readership to save the ideology to which he is committed as it aims now in the Ilyas Kashmiri article.
No doubt Pakistan has the right to support the Kashmiri indigenous struggle but it also has the right to sell this to the people the right way. Pakistan never supports the type of actions Mr Mir's article refers to. Raising the level of an incident involving support of corps commanders and the president where ostensibly no strategic or even a near tactical gain was achieved, is misleading. Mr Mir has enough potential and grooming through state institutions. I can only advise him to change his pace of thinking.
Adnan Jehanzeb
Islamabad
*********************
Adnan Jehanzeb has not written the above letter with reference to my report (Sept 20) on Ilyas Kashmiri with his real name. This hypocrisy is the biggest problem of all those who think that they are serving Pakistan through their petty double games. Mr Jehanzeb has not said anything new about me. He has tried to prove that I am a dishonest and anti-state journalist playing in the hands of Pakistan's enemies. The same allegations were levelled by General (r) Pervez Musharraf against me many times and he banned me for many months from TV. However, now he is not in Pakistan and I am still here. After his departure, some security agencies used their mouthpieces in the media (people like Zaid Hamid) for my character assassination but all this has come to naught. And the reason for that is lack of proof.
Mr Jehanzeb has alleged that my writings against non-state actors appear only in English papers (like the story of the Swat lady teacher and now the one on Ilyas Kashmiri) and that stories which glorify militants come in the Urdu press. I can only laugh at this. The fact is that my column about the killing of the said lady teacher -- by the Taliban of Swat -- was first published in Jang on Jan 8, 2009. Some readers were moved by this so much that someone translated that column from Urdu into English on his own and sent it to this newspaper. I added just one paragraph and the modified article was published in this newspaper on Jan 13. Secondly my story about Ilyas Kashmiri was published simultaneously on the front pages of Jang and The News. Mr Jehanzeb or his bosses cannot produce any evidence that I tried to glorify any terrorist in the Urdu press and criticised him in English press.
Mr Jehanzeb has tried to give an impression that I am frustrated after the defeat of the militants in Swat. If I was their supporter then why would I write against their brutal behaviour in Jan 2009 at a time when the military was trying to make a 'peace deal' with the militants of Swat? I am the one who visited Swat in those days -- when the writ of the state was confined only to a few buildings of Mingora. I investigated a gang rape in which militants killed four women in Kanju and this was reported not only in this newspaper but also on Geo TV. I wrote many articles in Jang and The News in support of the military action. An article of mine titled "Taliban will be defeated this time" was published on May 8, long before the operation was a success. Why was I sure that the Taliban would be defeated? Because the media, civil society and many political parties had by then realised that the Taliban have become a threat to the constitution of Pakistan and to its democracy. Yes I criticised the killing of innocent civilians in that operation a few times but it seems that my criticism has been taken wrongly. I believe in the rule of law and I will always speak and write against all those who will violate the law. I have never done or said anything to undermine the sacrifices made by our security forces and police during the operation.
Mr Jehanzeb has said that Ilyas Kashmiri was not a former army commando. How does he know that? I would in fact like to meet him and show him evidence to prove my assertion. And even if, for the sake of argument, Ilyas Kashmiri was a petty criminal why was he allowed to hold a press conference in Islamabad in support of the Kargil operation in 1999? Yes I admit that I was also supporting the Kargil operation at that time and that was why I was declared a jihadi by the Indian media in those days. However, I was supporting Kargil because it was General Musharraf who had assured me that the Pakistan army would liberate Kashmir in just a few days through the operation and that the Pakistani media must support it. I never trusted him again. When he struck peace deals with the Taliban in South Waziristan in 2005 I opposed those deals and this is on record. As far as Lal Masjid is concerned, I told Gen Musharraf on his face at Army House in Rawalpindi in June 2007 that some of his colleagues were supporting the militants hiding inside the mosque and that it meant he was merely playing to the international galleries. I think after this interaction he made me a personal enemy.
I should add that immediately after the Mumbai attack, a briefing for some selected media people was held and we were told that Baitullah Mehsud and Maulvi Fazlullah were "patriotic Pakistanis" and that misunderstanding between them and the state should be removed through talks. Many journalists, including myself, were stunned to hear this. My colleagues, however, said that we should not blackmail our enemy by declaring that Baitullah Mehsud and Fazallulah are patriotic Pakistanis. I reported that statement in this newspaper on Dec 1, 2008, and after that I became a 'criminal' for Mr Jehanzeb and his bosses. These days the same people are claiming victory against "terrorists Baitullah Mehsud and Fazlullah" and I can only smile at their claims. I am happy that they are now saying what we were saying long ago. It is now time to say goodbye to the lies and hypocrisy of the Musharraf era. No more double games. Next time Adnan Jehanzeb must write against me with his real name. I challenge him to come out with his real face and prove his allegations at the Islamabad Press Club in the presence of my senior colleagues and his bosses.
Hamid Mir
Islamabad
Journalistic behaviour
Thursday, October 01, 2009
Hamid Mir's journey from a reporter to a media anchor, asking self-serving questions, to a journalist of repute is a struggle based on the philosophy of ends justifying the means. When he has to write skilfully to give a balance to his image, his writings against non-state actors appear in the English papers (like the story of the Swat lady teacher and now the one on Ilyas Kashmiri published in your newspaper on Sept 20). All those stories that glorify militants are unfortunately in the Urdu press. The latter bring him public support and the former show him as intellectually honest. He is one of the many journalists whom everyone knows thrive on bending the facts to their journalistic advantage and, given their capacity of unrestricted access to the national and international media, securing the interests of those who have no feelings for the people of this poor country.
Pakistan's bad luck revisits every time Mr Mir and his ilk (of which there are many) with full access to the public media repeatedly make insinuations on the country's image at a critical juncture when we are about to make a genuine attempt of acceptability in the world community. I, understandably, relate Mr Mir's journalistic behaviour to deep frustration following his erstwhile associates coming under scrutiny in the successful military action in Swat and FATA but consider the contents of the article need correcting for the record. Ilyas Kasmiri was never an SSG 'commando' and not even closely associated with the elite military outfit. He may have been merely a petty criminal surviving on the fringes of state by associating with larger gangs through a supporting media clothed as misaligned jihadis-cum-sectarian terrorists. Mr Mir should also clearly admit his association with non-state actors in remembering Mr Kashmiri on the front page of a national newspaper. Based on what has been written in the press, Mr Kashmiri was a member of a banned outfit who ruthlessly tore the very fabric which was barely sufficient to cover our national integrity. The events Mr Mir is referring to during 1998-2000 could have only happened when he was the editor of a local Urdu daily well-known for its support to the so-called jihadi and Central Asian nationals in the capital who ultimately turned out to be a nightmare for the poor people of this country their presence eventually leading to the Lal Masjid episode. Whenever the local police placed a hand on these elements at their 15 rented locations in the posh areas of Islamabad, it was turned into a human rights issue. The people of Islamabad have the right to know when they ask how the elements reached Lal Masjid under the nose of the law-enforcing agencies. Even then, his paper used the same readership to save the ideology to which he is committed as it aims now in the Ilyas Kashmiri article.
No doubt Pakistan has the right to support the Kashmiri indigenous struggle but it also has the right to sell this to the people the right way. Pakistan never supports the type of actions Mr Mir's article refers to. Raising the level of an incident involving support of corps commanders and the president where ostensibly no strategic or even a near tactical gain was achieved, is misleading. Mr Mir has enough potential and grooming through state institutions. I can only advise him to change his pace of thinking.
Adnan Jehanzeb
Islamabad
*********************
Adnan Jehanzeb has not written the above letter with reference to my report (Sept 20) on Ilyas Kashmiri with his real name. This hypocrisy is the biggest problem of all those who think that they are serving Pakistan through their petty double games. Mr Jehanzeb has not said anything new about me. He has tried to prove that I am a dishonest and anti-state journalist playing in the hands of Pakistan's enemies. The same allegations were levelled by General (r) Pervez Musharraf against me many times and he banned me for many months from TV. However, now he is not in Pakistan and I am still here. After his departure, some security agencies used their mouthpieces in the media (people like Zaid Hamid) for my character assassination but all this has come to naught. And the reason for that is lack of proof.
Mr Jehanzeb has alleged that my writings against non-state actors appear only in English papers (like the story of the Swat lady teacher and now the one on Ilyas Kashmiri) and that stories which glorify militants come in the Urdu press. I can only laugh at this. The fact is that my column about the killing of the said lady teacher -- by the Taliban of Swat -- was first published in Jang on Jan 8, 2009. Some readers were moved by this so much that someone translated that column from Urdu into English on his own and sent it to this newspaper. I added just one paragraph and the modified article was published in this newspaper on Jan 13. Secondly my story about Ilyas Kashmiri was published simultaneously on the front pages of Jang and The News. Mr Jehanzeb or his bosses cannot produce any evidence that I tried to glorify any terrorist in the Urdu press and criticised him in English press.
Mr Jehanzeb has tried to give an impression that I am frustrated after the defeat of the militants in Swat. If I was their supporter then why would I write against their brutal behaviour in Jan 2009 at a time when the military was trying to make a 'peace deal' with the militants of Swat? I am the one who visited Swat in those days -- when the writ of the state was confined only to a few buildings of Mingora. I investigated a gang rape in which militants killed four women in Kanju and this was reported not only in this newspaper but also on Geo TV. I wrote many articles in Jang and The News in support of the military action. An article of mine titled "Taliban will be defeated this time" was published on May 8, long before the operation was a success. Why was I sure that the Taliban would be defeated? Because the media, civil society and many political parties had by then realised that the Taliban have become a threat to the constitution of Pakistan and to its democracy. Yes I criticised the killing of innocent civilians in that operation a few times but it seems that my criticism has been taken wrongly. I believe in the rule of law and I will always speak and write against all those who will violate the law. I have never done or said anything to undermine the sacrifices made by our security forces and police during the operation.
Mr Jehanzeb has said that Ilyas Kashmiri was not a former army commando. How does he know that? I would in fact like to meet him and show him evidence to prove my assertion. And even if, for the sake of argument, Ilyas Kashmiri was a petty criminal why was he allowed to hold a press conference in Islamabad in support of the Kargil operation in 1999? Yes I admit that I was also supporting the Kargil operation at that time and that was why I was declared a jihadi by the Indian media in those days. However, I was supporting Kargil because it was General Musharraf who had assured me that the Pakistan army would liberate Kashmir in just a few days through the operation and that the Pakistani media must support it. I never trusted him again. When he struck peace deals with the Taliban in South Waziristan in 2005 I opposed those deals and this is on record. As far as Lal Masjid is concerned, I told Gen Musharraf on his face at Army House in Rawalpindi in June 2007 that some of his colleagues were supporting the militants hiding inside the mosque and that it meant he was merely playing to the international galleries. I think after this interaction he made me a personal enemy.
I should add that immediately after the Mumbai attack, a briefing for some selected media people was held and we were told that Baitullah Mehsud and Maulvi Fazlullah were "patriotic Pakistanis" and that misunderstanding between them and the state should be removed through talks. Many journalists, including myself, were stunned to hear this. My colleagues, however, said that we should not blackmail our enemy by declaring that Baitullah Mehsud and Fazallulah are patriotic Pakistanis. I reported that statement in this newspaper on Dec 1, 2008, and after that I became a 'criminal' for Mr Jehanzeb and his bosses. These days the same people are claiming victory against "terrorists Baitullah Mehsud and Fazlullah" and I can only smile at their claims. I am happy that they are now saying what we were saying long ago. It is now time to say goodbye to the lies and hypocrisy of the Musharraf era. No more double games. Next time Adnan Jehanzeb must write against me with his real name. I challenge him to come out with his real face and prove his allegations at the Islamabad Press Club in the presence of my senior colleagues and his bosses.
Hamid Mir
Islamabad
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Volcanoes, Not Meteorite, Killed Dinosaurs, Scientist Argues
- Latest: Novus ordu seclorum
-
Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts
-
-
-
Bajwa calls Bushra's allegations against Saudi Arabia 'baseless'
- Latest: Novus ordu seclorum
-
-
