A Matter of Principle
Beena Sarwar February 5, 1999
#33 Posted by maliani on February 22, 1999 5:57:13 pm
I agree with Zakk that there exists a very strong ethnic bias in The Jang group. We all know how Jang played a (provocating) role in the language riots of 1972. Rais Amrohvi`s ``Urdu Ka Janaza Hay Barri Dhoom say nikely`` on the first page of daily Jang and black borders around the first page of most Urdu newspapers were delibrately designed to flare up emotions of Mohajirs.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#32 Posted by ferozk on February 15, 1999 4:16:11 pm
Re: Amin Saleh post # 33
I see where you were going with your last thread...!
As to the dealing with cause of what ails Pakistan and not the symptoms, again I am in agreement with what you say. You have brought up a fine discrepency in discussing the problem of actions versus intentions.
To push this proverbial cart a step further, where do we draw the line between past and future deeds? Who is going to draw that line in the sand and say, ``it ends here!``
You are right to say that unless some form of remedy is applied, this cycle will continue replicating itself. To break, or not to break, this circle is a secondary question to who will break it! There is no denying this fact, but to actually do so that is another debate.
There is no need to expose Pakistan to anarchy; it already exists in a state of anarchy. The scope of guilt in Pakistani politics, and the perpetual retro-accusations which go with it, are not as important as agreeing on the mistakes. Everyone in Pakistan and their alter-egos are guility!
I will regress even a step further, how do we force these people to share the blame before anything else?
I see where you were going with your last thread...!
As to the dealing with cause of what ails Pakistan and not the symptoms, again I am in agreement with what you say. You have brought up a fine discrepency in discussing the problem of actions versus intentions.
To push this proverbial cart a step further, where do we draw the line between past and future deeds? Who is going to draw that line in the sand and say, ``it ends here!``
You are right to say that unless some form of remedy is applied, this cycle will continue replicating itself. To break, or not to break, this circle is a secondary question to who will break it! There is no denying this fact, but to actually do so that is another debate.
There is no need to expose Pakistan to anarchy; it already exists in a state of anarchy. The scope of guilt in Pakistani politics, and the perpetual retro-accusations which go with it, are not as important as agreeing on the mistakes. Everyone in Pakistan and their alter-egos are guility!
I will regress even a step further, how do we force these people to share the blame before anything else?
#31 Posted by Amin Saleh on February 15, 1999 9:20:41 am
Ferozk,
1) I believe you are misconstruing what I said. I am in agreement that Jang group should have complete control of its editorial content of Jang, whether this might be criticism of the government or analyzing the government`s actions or policies or influence public opinion towards certain policies. But all this is tainted if Jang is also involved in wrong doings or it is economically dependent on the government (through advertisement billings).
2) So in order to save Pakistan`s democracy we should expose it to anarchy. This is what will happen if instead of attacking the cause instead of attacking the effect. I recently got an email for a petition that says that the government should withdraw all false cases against Jang. This was really humorous. It`s humorous because again we are hitting the effect rather than the cause. I believe we should have a law legislated that would impose significant penalties on the government officials that lose a case (assuming that if the case is false, it should fail barring the problem of false witnesses).
In my previous letter what I said was that even if Nawaz eradicates ills of the country selectively (catch tax crimes committed by its opponents) he will tacitly be encouraging them to do the same when the opposition comes into power. And as such Nawaz will have to ensure that he keeps his nose squeaky clean so that his opponents do not catch him in the same position.
3) Expressing ones opinion is key in democracy. But if one thinks that muzzling the newspaper will achieve that one is deluding oneself. First of all because there is more than one way of expressing ones disdain for the governments policies. Members of parliament are hardly used in Pakistan (that is if he is even known by his electoral body). Second, Those that read newspapers are increasingly moving towards internet, satellite (as Jang realizes its importance), etc., thereby eroding newspapers monopoly on being the voice for the people.
I believe democracy one should constantly monitor the government`s actions and provide continued comments to the government via the MNA. For the newspaper may just be the ramblings of one person but the direct contact truly reflects the power of the people.
1) I believe you are misconstruing what I said. I am in agreement that Jang group should have complete control of its editorial content of Jang, whether this might be criticism of the government or analyzing the government`s actions or policies or influence public opinion towards certain policies. But all this is tainted if Jang is also involved in wrong doings or it is economically dependent on the government (through advertisement billings).
2) So in order to save Pakistan`s democracy we should expose it to anarchy. This is what will happen if instead of attacking the cause instead of attacking the effect. I recently got an email for a petition that says that the government should withdraw all false cases against Jang. This was really humorous. It`s humorous because again we are hitting the effect rather than the cause. I believe we should have a law legislated that would impose significant penalties on the government officials that lose a case (assuming that if the case is false, it should fail barring the problem of false witnesses).
In my previous letter what I said was that even if Nawaz eradicates ills of the country selectively (catch tax crimes committed by its opponents) he will tacitly be encouraging them to do the same when the opposition comes into power. And as such Nawaz will have to ensure that he keeps his nose squeaky clean so that his opponents do not catch him in the same position.
3) Expressing ones opinion is key in democracy. But if one thinks that muzzling the newspaper will achieve that one is deluding oneself. First of all because there is more than one way of expressing ones disdain for the governments policies. Members of parliament are hardly used in Pakistan (that is if he is even known by his electoral body). Second, Those that read newspapers are increasingly moving towards internet, satellite (as Jang realizes its importance), etc., thereby eroding newspapers monopoly on being the voice for the people.
I believe democracy one should constantly monitor the government`s actions and provide continued comments to the government via the MNA. For the newspaper may just be the ramblings of one person but the direct contact truly reflects the power of the people.
#30 Posted by Zakk on February 15, 1999 7:08:56 am
I have wanted to jump into this discussion for awhile now but was a bit busy ..anyways just want to throw my few cents into the ongoing debate .Their was a recent seminar about this Jang-GOP showdown arranged by Jang in here in Peshawar .Attending were numerous well known people from Peshawar ...including the Chief editor of the regional English newspaper The Frontier Post .Many people at the seminar offered their support to the Jang but complained of a very strong ethnic bias in The Jang group ..the way it`s Urdu newspapers turned on supporters of the Provinces renaming ..the lack of reprsentation of Frontier writers in the newspapers ..this and numerous other stuff had left a bitter taste in many peoples mouths .
And let us not forget that the Jang was a relatively big supporter of our much loved PM ( I`m being sarcastic here :) ) in his first stint as PM ..after he was elected in the `` free fair and transparent `` election of `90 ..we shouldn`t be surprised at NS biting the hand that fed him ..after all this is Pakistan ..we should`ve been expecting it :)
P.S Ed`s of Chowk there should be a follow on option in INTERACT as well as a line for people to put in their e mail or web site addresses if they want ..
And let us not forget that the Jang was a relatively big supporter of our much loved PM ( I`m being sarcastic here :) ) in his first stint as PM ..after he was elected in the `` free fair and transparent `` election of `90 ..we shouldn`t be surprised at NS biting the hand that fed him ..after all this is Pakistan ..we should`ve been expecting it :)
P.S Ed`s of Chowk there should be a follow on option in INTERACT as well as a line for people to put in their e mail or web site addresses if they want ..
#29 Posted by ferozk on February 11, 1999 9:04:47 pm
Re: Amin Saleh post # 31
No major disagreement over all, but some slight deviations.
One; who defines editorial intergrity and if I understood you correctly, why should Jang limit itself to editorial policies? Why should the government, through its actions in this regard, be allowed to encourage influence editorial policies of the Jang news group? If the Jang group can not dictate government policies, why should the goverment dictate the editorial content of Jang?
Secondly; Given your suggestion that ulterior motives might have beneficial results, are you implying, or suggesting a Machivellian ploy of ``end justifies the means``. Are you? To draw the proper inferences from your implication, it would similar to saying that Nawaz Sharif is justified to destroy democracy in Pakistan in order to save it!
Lastly; concerning that the people have a choice to remove Nawaz Sharif, via the ballot box, if they disagree with him, I would agree with that statement.
However, my question to you in this regard is, that does mean that there should be no criticism of such a government during its tenure, because it is democratically elected? Does this mean and are you suggesting, that after electing a democratic government, the people have no right to question its policies and in effect, they should bite their politically expressive lips and wait till the next elections?
Amin Saleh sahib, we have been through this way before. If I understand your concept of democracy, from your posts to this article of Beena Sarwar, I would say that your notions of democratic rights exists only in the context of the voting booth.
Consequently, according to your rationizations, there should be no further criticism of the goverment, because the people have made their choice and hence, they should live with the consequences of their choice. In other simpler words, there should be no dissent against the elected government after the elections!
That is not how democracy works. Democracy thrives on dissent and democracy is a market place where different ideas can be shouted about, argued, rejected or ridiculed, but they are all allowed their fifteen minutes of fame to express themselves. Democracy is the ability to allow an opinion that would only anger you; democracy is allowing a choice to others which you resent bitterly yourself; and democracy is the willingness to love and protect something which only infuriates and maddens you to no end!
No major disagreement over all, but some slight deviations.
One; who defines editorial intergrity and if I understood you correctly, why should Jang limit itself to editorial policies? Why should the government, through its actions in this regard, be allowed to encourage influence editorial policies of the Jang news group? If the Jang group can not dictate government policies, why should the goverment dictate the editorial content of Jang?
Secondly; Given your suggestion that ulterior motives might have beneficial results, are you implying, or suggesting a Machivellian ploy of ``end justifies the means``. Are you? To draw the proper inferences from your implication, it would similar to saying that Nawaz Sharif is justified to destroy democracy in Pakistan in order to save it!
Lastly; concerning that the people have a choice to remove Nawaz Sharif, via the ballot box, if they disagree with him, I would agree with that statement.
However, my question to you in this regard is, that does mean that there should be no criticism of such a government during its tenure, because it is democratically elected? Does this mean and are you suggesting, that after electing a democratic government, the people have no right to question its policies and in effect, they should bite their politically expressive lips and wait till the next elections?
Amin Saleh sahib, we have been through this way before. If I understand your concept of democracy, from your posts to this article of Beena Sarwar, I would say that your notions of democratic rights exists only in the context of the voting booth.
Consequently, according to your rationizations, there should be no further criticism of the goverment, because the people have made their choice and hence, they should live with the consequences of their choice. In other simpler words, there should be no dissent against the elected government after the elections!
That is not how democracy works. Democracy thrives on dissent and democracy is a market place where different ideas can be shouted about, argued, rejected or ridiculed, but they are all allowed their fifteen minutes of fame to express themselves. Democracy is the ability to allow an opinion that would only anger you; democracy is allowing a choice to others which you resent bitterly yourself; and democracy is the willingness to love and protect something which only infuriates and maddens you to no end!
#28 Posted by Amin Saleh on February 11, 1999 10:15:47 am
Ferozk
quote
Still, I would be interested to know what you think of OMAR1974`s contention that Nawaz Sharif does not take kindly to critism of his policies. Yes, the Jang group is guilty of selling its excess newsprint on the market, but does that condone the government`s actions to bridle the freedom of the press? No one is innocent in Pakistan and who is to judge who is more innocent than others? The government? The press? Who?
Amin Saleh sahib, I admire and respect your convications in defending the nascent democracy in Pakistan. Let me just ask you this
question sir, do you honestly feel that Nawaz Sharif has any interests of Pakistan in mind in persecuting the Jang group and why is Nawaz
Sharif so thined skined to critism of his policies? If he claims to be a democratic leader, shouldn`t he, and in that token, his policies be
open to a free and constructive form of critism?
unquote
1) Democratic government have to live with criticism and while Nawaz might not like it he should be learn to live with it. Obviously since Nawaz did not fire the errant Senator for his remarks clearly taints him with those views. This aspect would be rectified by people not voting for Sharif government in the next election but by no means would mean that newspapers should be given a free hand in aspects involving activities other than Editorial integrity.
2) It is not necessary that somebody has to have selfless reasons to have a positive impact on the country. While Nawaz may have ulterior motives to pursue Jang`s illegal activities, may result in the positive affect of detering business to undertake illegal activity that might compromise their position (if in the first place Editorial integrity was Jang`s concern).
Jang may well be using Editorial integrity position to deflect other accusations.
quote
Still, I would be interested to know what you think of OMAR1974`s contention that Nawaz Sharif does not take kindly to critism of his policies. Yes, the Jang group is guilty of selling its excess newsprint on the market, but does that condone the government`s actions to bridle the freedom of the press? No one is innocent in Pakistan and who is to judge who is more innocent than others? The government? The press? Who?
Amin Saleh sahib, I admire and respect your convications in defending the nascent democracy in Pakistan. Let me just ask you this
question sir, do you honestly feel that Nawaz Sharif has any interests of Pakistan in mind in persecuting the Jang group and why is Nawaz
Sharif so thined skined to critism of his policies? If he claims to be a democratic leader, shouldn`t he, and in that token, his policies be
open to a free and constructive form of critism?
unquote
1) Democratic government have to live with criticism and while Nawaz might not like it he should be learn to live with it. Obviously since Nawaz did not fire the errant Senator for his remarks clearly taints him with those views. This aspect would be rectified by people not voting for Sharif government in the next election but by no means would mean that newspapers should be given a free hand in aspects involving activities other than Editorial integrity.
2) It is not necessary that somebody has to have selfless reasons to have a positive impact on the country. While Nawaz may have ulterior motives to pursue Jang`s illegal activities, may result in the positive affect of detering business to undertake illegal activity that might compromise their position (if in the first place Editorial integrity was Jang`s concern).
Jang may well be using Editorial integrity position to deflect other accusations.
#27 Posted by Chowk Staff on February 11, 1999 5:07:25 am
Forwarded by Beena Sarawar:
MEDIA-PAKISTAN: Journalists Challenge Gov`t Controls
By Beena Sarwar
ISLAMABAD, Feb 10 (IPS):- The Pakistani government appears to be pulling back from a confrontation with the Jang Group, publishers of the country`s largest selling newspaper, but a journalist union has said it will pursue its legal case for press freedom.
Ongoing negotiations between top government officials and Mir Shakilur Rahman, the owner of the Jang Group here in Islamabad seem to be heading towards returning to the newspaper group the right to access its newsprint stores and bank accounts.
The government has had to backtrack because of unprecedented public condemnation and the stiff resistance from working journalists and human rights crusaders.
On Monday, all Pakistan`s political parties excluding the prime minister`s Muslim League participated in a mammoth Press Freedom March held simultaneously in the capital city Islamabad and Karachi, Pakistan`s biggest city.
Benazir Bhutto, the previous prime minister and Sharif`s arch rival addressed the participants in Karachi, her home town. ``This is not the issue of a particular group of newspapers but a matter of press freedom and the integrity of the country,`` she said.
Earlier some 4,000 journalists, lawyers, non-governmental organisations, trade unionists and artists participated in an anti-government march called by the `Committee for a Free Press` in Lahore, set up last week.
``The show of strength was unprecedented,`` commented its convenor, veteran journalist Aziz Mazhar. ``We last saw similar protests 27 years ago, when the martial law government of Gen. Ayub Khan took over Progressive Papers Limited in Lahore, including daily `Pakistan Times` and `Imroze`.``
Political parties, as well as columnists in various newspapers, including traditional rivals of the Jang Group, have slammed the Nawaz Sharif government and called its attacks on the Jang Group an abuse of authority.
``If democracy is the body, freedom of expression is its soul,`` said Neelam Shah of the Awami National Party, addressing the crowded courtyard of Lahore Press Club, before the rally on Wednesday.
The `Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists` President Abdul Hameed Chapra said a petition on press freedom filed in the Supreme Court would not be withdrawn, even if the government submitted to pressure and stopped harassing the Jang Group.
The Sharif government has been after the Jang Group for alleged tax evasion, withholding newsprint supplies and demanding that it sack 16 journalists who have been open in their criticism of government policies.
The Committee for a Free Press has demanded the withdrawal of various controls over press freedom, including government control over newsprint imports, the abolition of the Ministry of Information, the removal of state control over the electronic media, and the setting up of a committee to ensure equitable distribution of government advertisements.
Journalists in several Pakistani cities - including Multan, Hyderabad, Islamabad and Peshawar - have joined their Lahore colleagues in observing ongoing token hunger strikes at their Press Clubs in solidarity.
The campaign snowballed when the government dragged its feet on the release of newsprint, despite the Supreme Court`s Feb. 1 order that 200 reels should be immediately released in order to allow minimal publications of Jang Group papers.
Trucks carrying newsprint were prevented from reaching Jang presses by government officials, and journalists protesting this defiance of Supreme Court orders were beaten up and roughed up by police at least twice over the last week in Islamabad. It was only on Feb. 4 that the Supreme Court orders were finally implemented.
A resolution passed at the the end of Monday`s `Press Freedom March` has called on the government to withdraw sedition cases against the editors of the Jang Group, and dailies `Aman` and `Parcham` for printing an advertisement of the Karachi-based political group MQM, considered anti-national by the government.
The advertisement, calling on supporters to donate money for a fund for the families of victims of police excesses, was considered by the Sharif government to be inciting the people against the state. The MQM is blamed for the sectarian violence in Karachi, and the police have for years been trying to crush the group.
The resolution also called for the removal of Mushahid Hussain as minister of information and the abolition of the Information Ministry - a promise made in the election manifesto of the ruling
party in 1997.
The Karachi rally also called for the lifting of government controls on the electronic media which at present is the ``government`s mouthpiece``. Speaking in Islamabad, cricketer-
turned-politician Imran Khan said his political party has been blacked out on radio and TV.
``This rally marks the start of our struggle for press freedom,`` thundered Federal Union of Journalists president Abdul Hameed Chapra. ``We will continue our efforts as we did in the
past when we fought against military dictators.
And Pakistan`s leading rights lawyer Asma Jahangir who is representing the Union in its case for press freedom in the Supreme Court, said the petition was ``historic``. ``Nawaz Sharif
may come and go,`` she said. ``The people are desperate to keep and strengthen democratic institutions``. (END/IPS/bs/an/99)
Inter Press Service
49 (FF), Defence Colony Market,
New Delhi - 110024
India.
Phone 91-11-4634154
Fax 91-11-4624725
Email ipsindia@vsnl.com
Web http://www.ips.org
MEDIA-PAKISTAN: Journalists Challenge Gov`t Controls
By Beena Sarwar
ISLAMABAD, Feb 10 (IPS):- The Pakistani government appears to be pulling back from a confrontation with the Jang Group, publishers of the country`s largest selling newspaper, but a journalist union has said it will pursue its legal case for press freedom.
Ongoing negotiations between top government officials and Mir Shakilur Rahman, the owner of the Jang Group here in Islamabad seem to be heading towards returning to the newspaper group the right to access its newsprint stores and bank accounts.
The government has had to backtrack because of unprecedented public condemnation and the stiff resistance from working journalists and human rights crusaders.
On Monday, all Pakistan`s political parties excluding the prime minister`s Muslim League participated in a mammoth Press Freedom March held simultaneously in the capital city Islamabad and Karachi, Pakistan`s biggest city.
Benazir Bhutto, the previous prime minister and Sharif`s arch rival addressed the participants in Karachi, her home town. ``This is not the issue of a particular group of newspapers but a matter of press freedom and the integrity of the country,`` she said.
Earlier some 4,000 journalists, lawyers, non-governmental organisations, trade unionists and artists participated in an anti-government march called by the `Committee for a Free Press` in Lahore, set up last week.
``The show of strength was unprecedented,`` commented its convenor, veteran journalist Aziz Mazhar. ``We last saw similar protests 27 years ago, when the martial law government of Gen. Ayub Khan took over Progressive Papers Limited in Lahore, including daily `Pakistan Times` and `Imroze`.``
Political parties, as well as columnists in various newspapers, including traditional rivals of the Jang Group, have slammed the Nawaz Sharif government and called its attacks on the Jang Group an abuse of authority.
``If democracy is the body, freedom of expression is its soul,`` said Neelam Shah of the Awami National Party, addressing the crowded courtyard of Lahore Press Club, before the rally on Wednesday.
The `Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists` President Abdul Hameed Chapra said a petition on press freedom filed in the Supreme Court would not be withdrawn, even if the government submitted to pressure and stopped harassing the Jang Group.
The Sharif government has been after the Jang Group for alleged tax evasion, withholding newsprint supplies and demanding that it sack 16 journalists who have been open in their criticism of government policies.
The Committee for a Free Press has demanded the withdrawal of various controls over press freedom, including government control over newsprint imports, the abolition of the Ministry of Information, the removal of state control over the electronic media, and the setting up of a committee to ensure equitable distribution of government advertisements.
Journalists in several Pakistani cities - including Multan, Hyderabad, Islamabad and Peshawar - have joined their Lahore colleagues in observing ongoing token hunger strikes at their Press Clubs in solidarity.
The campaign snowballed when the government dragged its feet on the release of newsprint, despite the Supreme Court`s Feb. 1 order that 200 reels should be immediately released in order to allow minimal publications of Jang Group papers.
Trucks carrying newsprint were prevented from reaching Jang presses by government officials, and journalists protesting this defiance of Supreme Court orders were beaten up and roughed up by police at least twice over the last week in Islamabad. It was only on Feb. 4 that the Supreme Court orders were finally implemented.
A resolution passed at the the end of Monday`s `Press Freedom March` has called on the government to withdraw sedition cases against the editors of the Jang Group, and dailies `Aman` and `Parcham` for printing an advertisement of the Karachi-based political group MQM, considered anti-national by the government.
The advertisement, calling on supporters to donate money for a fund for the families of victims of police excesses, was considered by the Sharif government to be inciting the people against the state. The MQM is blamed for the sectarian violence in Karachi, and the police have for years been trying to crush the group.
The resolution also called for the removal of Mushahid Hussain as minister of information and the abolition of the Information Ministry - a promise made in the election manifesto of the ruling
party in 1997.
The Karachi rally also called for the lifting of government controls on the electronic media which at present is the ``government`s mouthpiece``. Speaking in Islamabad, cricketer-
turned-politician Imran Khan said his political party has been blacked out on radio and TV.
``This rally marks the start of our struggle for press freedom,`` thundered Federal Union of Journalists president Abdul Hameed Chapra. ``We will continue our efforts as we did in the
past when we fought against military dictators.
And Pakistan`s leading rights lawyer Asma Jahangir who is representing the Union in its case for press freedom in the Supreme Court, said the petition was ``historic``. ``Nawaz Sharif
may come and go,`` she said. ``The people are desperate to keep and strengthen democratic institutions``. (END/IPS/bs/an/99)
Inter Press Service
49 (FF), Defence Colony Market,
New Delhi - 110024
India.
Phone 91-11-4634154
Fax 91-11-4624725
Email ipsindia@vsnl.com
Web http://www.ips.org
#26 Posted by ferozk on February 10, 1999 10:09:52 pm
Re: Temporal # 28
I am going split hairs for a second. There is a huge difference between being prepared and actually implementing a scheme. I know you are ready and I am trying to resist, kicking and screeming, you pulling me into this madness, but it is not working!!!!
It is like parachuting. Parachuting is not a natural act, because you are jumping out of a perfectly sound aircraft and there is no telling that your `chute will open at all! On the other hand, when a mad dog attacks you, you do not try to reason with it, but you shot it down before it can bite you! In this case, I am leaning towards the mad dog theory....
FYI, I am two hours behind Toronto time and you can e-mail me at frkhan@chowk.com. I am told this address is operational....Be a good mensch yaar!
I am going split hairs for a second. There is a huge difference between being prepared and actually implementing a scheme. I know you are ready and I am trying to resist, kicking and screeming, you pulling me into this madness, but it is not working!!!!
It is like parachuting. Parachuting is not a natural act, because you are jumping out of a perfectly sound aircraft and there is no telling that your `chute will open at all! On the other hand, when a mad dog attacks you, you do not try to reason with it, but you shot it down before it can bite you! In this case, I am leaning towards the mad dog theory....
FYI, I am two hours behind Toronto time and you can e-mail me at frkhan@chowk.com. I am told this address is operational....Be a good mensch yaar!
#25 Posted by temporal on February 10, 1999 7:33:51 pm
Omar:
Inside scoop: Hamid Gul`s second biggest disapointment was when his protege let go of him prior to last elections. Ask Hamid Gul about any problem and his encompassing intelligence and knowledge shines through. But he is not a doer!
That`s my impression of him--- a visionary but not an activist.
GlenFeroz:
What! You were kidding? And here I was all serious. You said one must be prepared. You said the patient is on its death bed. Malpractice suit? Hmmm.... that`s another angle (sorry Bina, these interacts have a life of their own!)--- but if blood flows and the patient is brain dead what does the hippocratic oath says?
regards,
ps: Ask the editors to pass on my email address.
You maybe in for a pleasant surprise.
Inside scoop: Hamid Gul`s second biggest disapointment was when his protege let go of him prior to last elections. Ask Hamid Gul about any problem and his encompassing intelligence and knowledge shines through. But he is not a doer!
That`s my impression of him--- a visionary but not an activist.
GlenFeroz:
What! You were kidding? And here I was all serious. You said one must be prepared. You said the patient is on its death bed. Malpractice suit? Hmmm.... that`s another angle (sorry Bina, these interacts have a life of their own!)--- but if blood flows and the patient is brain dead what does the hippocratic oath says?
regards,
ps: Ask the editors to pass on my email address.
You maybe in for a pleasant surprise.
#24 Posted by ferozk on February 10, 1999 5:00:20 pm
Re: Amin Saleh post # 25
I agree with you, though I am kidding with Temporal in ushering a genocide in Pakistan, that we need to work things out in a legal sense and improve our respect for the rule of law.
Still, I would be interested to know what you think of OMAR1974`s contention that Nawaz Sharif does not take kindly to critism of his policies. Yes, the Jang group is guilty of selling its excess newsprint on the market, but does that condone the government`s actions to bridle the freedom of the press? No one is innocent in Pakistan and who is to judge who is more innocent than others? The government? The press? Who?
Amin Saleh sahib, I admire and respect your convications in defending the nascent democracy in Pakistan. Let me just ask you this question sir, do you honestly feel that Nawaz Sharif has any interests of Pakistan in mind in persecuting the Jang group and why is Nawaz Sharif so thined skined to critism of his policies? If he claims to be a democratic leader, shouldn`t he, and in that token, his policies be open to a free and constructive form of critism?
I await your replies!
I agree with you, though I am kidding with Temporal in ushering a genocide in Pakistan, that we need to work things out in a legal sense and improve our respect for the rule of law.
Still, I would be interested to know what you think of OMAR1974`s contention that Nawaz Sharif does not take kindly to critism of his policies. Yes, the Jang group is guilty of selling its excess newsprint on the market, but does that condone the government`s actions to bridle the freedom of the press? No one is innocent in Pakistan and who is to judge who is more innocent than others? The government? The press? Who?
Amin Saleh sahib, I admire and respect your convications in defending the nascent democracy in Pakistan. Let me just ask you this question sir, do you honestly feel that Nawaz Sharif has any interests of Pakistan in mind in persecuting the Jang group and why is Nawaz Sharif so thined skined to critism of his policies? If he claims to be a democratic leader, shouldn`t he, and in that token, his policies be open to a free and constructive form of critism?
I await your replies!
#23 Posted by OMAR1974 on February 10, 1999 2:49:23 pm
Dear Amin Saleh,
If you`d just have read a bit more carefully, i think you`d see that i in no way endorsed Imran Khan`s potential bid for power in the next elections. In fact since he is now a known fundo who cavorts openly with fmr ISI chiefs, Hamid Gul et al, who are known for their fundo-type positions, i do not think he is the right man for Pakistan either.
I agree that the Jung group cannot be exonerated of wrong doing on the basis of their own statements, but why only investigate them? Why not ALL of the print media that is guilty of this practice?
regards,
OMAR1974
If you`d just have read a bit more carefully, i think you`d see that i in no way endorsed Imran Khan`s potential bid for power in the next elections. In fact since he is now a known fundo who cavorts openly with fmr ISI chiefs, Hamid Gul et al, who are known for their fundo-type positions, i do not think he is the right man for Pakistan either.
I agree that the Jung group cannot be exonerated of wrong doing on the basis of their own statements, but why only investigate them? Why not ALL of the print media that is guilty of this practice?
regards,
OMAR1974
#22 Posted by Amin Saleh on February 10, 1999 9:52:20 am
OMAR1974
quote
So why target Jung group if they had already stopped it?
unquote
And how do we know that if there is no authority to check that (given that everybody seems to be in favor of leaving Jung alone to do what it please beyond editorial freedom). Selective or not, continuous monitoring would be the only way to deter institutions from transgressing the law.
Finally, we cannot assume our constitution never happened and start over. We have to improve the law and if simplifying helps then that should be a priority.
More importantly, people should be treated according to the rule of law and there should be no sacred cows. And no I am not being naïve when I suggest that we should not be emotional in defending Jung. Instead if they are innocent as they claim to be then let it be proven in the court of law (despite Senator`s remarks to the contrary). And let me warn you that do not blindly follow what Imran Khan promises. This world is full of good and bad and there is no way to eliminate one or the other. So if you think Imran Khan will be able to deliver Utopia you might be in for a rude shock. If Imran Khan has not been able to work at the root levels outside government to promote corruption free society (running one hospital does not count) I would not count on him being able to deliver that when he is in the government.
quote
Individual liberties need to be zealously guarded, else we end up with a despotism which usurps all.
Unquote
I hope you do realize that while the US constitution is very old, this freedom that you cherish did not come to everyone even in this century. Blacks had to fight for their rights to vote, Students had to fight for their right to burn flags, and yet they end up with a law that prohibits persons from denying the holocaust. Not that I have any problems with anything except that we should realize that there are limits to everything and more important is to struggle to protect the rights of those whose rights have been trampled by improving the process of the law.
quote
So why target Jung group if they had already stopped it?
unquote
And how do we know that if there is no authority to check that (given that everybody seems to be in favor of leaving Jung alone to do what it please beyond editorial freedom). Selective or not, continuous monitoring would be the only way to deter institutions from transgressing the law.
Finally, we cannot assume our constitution never happened and start over. We have to improve the law and if simplifying helps then that should be a priority.
More importantly, people should be treated according to the rule of law and there should be no sacred cows. And no I am not being naïve when I suggest that we should not be emotional in defending Jung. Instead if they are innocent as they claim to be then let it be proven in the court of law (despite Senator`s remarks to the contrary). And let me warn you that do not blindly follow what Imran Khan promises. This world is full of good and bad and there is no way to eliminate one or the other. So if you think Imran Khan will be able to deliver Utopia you might be in for a rude shock. If Imran Khan has not been able to work at the root levels outside government to promote corruption free society (running one hospital does not count) I would not count on him being able to deliver that when he is in the government.
quote
Individual liberties need to be zealously guarded, else we end up with a despotism which usurps all.
Unquote
I hope you do realize that while the US constitution is very old, this freedom that you cherish did not come to everyone even in this century. Blacks had to fight for their rights to vote, Students had to fight for their right to burn flags, and yet they end up with a law that prohibits persons from denying the holocaust. Not that I have any problems with anything except that we should realize that there are limits to everything and more important is to struggle to protect the rights of those whose rights have been trampled by improving the process of the law.
#21 Posted by OMAR1974 on February 10, 1999 2:56:25 am
Selective enforcement is inherently discriminatory and the motives of the government in view of Sen.Saif-Ur-Rehman`s taped directives are distinctly dubious. I think you (Amin Saleh)have to be pretty nieve to believe that this is all above board. Just tell me why it is that Mr.Nawaz Sharif`s govt can`t get along with anyone in the least inclined to criticise its policies. He is behaving like a bully in a playground. I`m concerned that when the lid blows, so will the future of any kind of stable democracy in Pakistan. Both the opposition & the governing party are corrupt. The people do not really have a clean alternative (despite Imran Khan`s fondest hopes), with the repeal of the 8th Ammendment, the (somewhat crude) system of checks and balances that had emerged has been destroyed.
It is not for nothing that the founding fathers of the U.S (Anybody who was Somebody at the time attended)spent 4 months meeting together in Philadelphia hammering out the details of the Constution before they emerged with a consensus, and the longest lasting constitutional govt in the history of the world. Their fear was always that the legislature would prove to be a 900lb gorilla in the system to they guarded against it. Changes and the legislative process was deliberately designed to make legislating difficult so that hare brained schemes enjoyed a marginal majority of support would not become law overnight w/o significant debate. Look at Pakistan`s Constitution. OVER 100 Pages long (preamble included), yet its not even worth the price of a similar quantity of TOILET PAPER. You wanna know why ? Its not because it doesn`t attempt to safeguard the people`s rights, its because the very structure of the government itself militates against it. And the objectives outlined can easily be ignored (ex.Right to Universal Ed, Social welfare State etc) on the basis of fiscal stringency. Constitutional Ammendments should be sent to the provincial legislatures for ratification like in the U.S, and in Pakistan 3 out of 4 provincial houses should have to approve the Changes before they are enacted into law, to check against the type of DEMOCRATIC DESPOTISM that Mian Nawaz Sharif is guilty of.
P.s I attended a lecture by Justice Antonin Scalia (U.S supreme Ct) recenty and he gave some interesting insights into the U.S Constitution & its history.
What is freedom of press if it can be modified in ?the interests of Islam? etc, the way most citizens rights are guaranteed in the Paki Constitution and easily subject to being suspended. What is the right to a fair trial worth when military courts can issue summary judgements in Peacetime ? Pakistan A DEMOCRACY ? Hah ! Trouble is that is precisely what its not.
Individual liberties need to be zealously guarded, else we end up with a despotism which usurps all.
First things first. The Paki Constitution should be scrapped, and a new Constitution drafted after freash elections, through consensus, after which it should be ratified by all 4 provincial legislatures before it can take effect.
Comments ?
It is not for nothing that the founding fathers of the U.S (Anybody who was Somebody at the time attended)spent 4 months meeting together in Philadelphia hammering out the details of the Constution before they emerged with a consensus, and the longest lasting constitutional govt in the history of the world. Their fear was always that the legislature would prove to be a 900lb gorilla in the system to they guarded against it. Changes and the legislative process was deliberately designed to make legislating difficult so that hare brained schemes enjoyed a marginal majority of support would not become law overnight w/o significant debate. Look at Pakistan`s Constitution. OVER 100 Pages long (preamble included), yet its not even worth the price of a similar quantity of TOILET PAPER. You wanna know why ? Its not because it doesn`t attempt to safeguard the people`s rights, its because the very structure of the government itself militates against it. And the objectives outlined can easily be ignored (ex.Right to Universal Ed, Social welfare State etc) on the basis of fiscal stringency. Constitutional Ammendments should be sent to the provincial legislatures for ratification like in the U.S, and in Pakistan 3 out of 4 provincial houses should have to approve the Changes before they are enacted into law, to check against the type of DEMOCRATIC DESPOTISM that Mian Nawaz Sharif is guilty of.
P.s I attended a lecture by Justice Antonin Scalia (U.S supreme Ct) recenty and he gave some interesting insights into the U.S Constitution & its history.
What is freedom of press if it can be modified in ?the interests of Islam? etc, the way most citizens rights are guaranteed in the Paki Constitution and easily subject to being suspended. What is the right to a fair trial worth when military courts can issue summary judgements in Peacetime ? Pakistan A DEMOCRACY ? Hah ! Trouble is that is precisely what its not.
Individual liberties need to be zealously guarded, else we end up with a despotism which usurps all.
First things first. The Paki Constitution should be scrapped, and a new Constitution drafted after freash elections, through consensus, after which it should be ratified by all 4 provincial legislatures before it can take effect.
Comments ?
#20 Posted by OMAR1974 on February 10, 1999 2:56:25 am
Re: Amin Saleh #17
``Given that Beena`s article clearly says that a senior person in Jung admits that Jung did follow policy of selling newsprint that it was allowed to purchase under lower duty structure. So if they are investigated (despite what was revealed on the audio tape) should be taken as the due process. If they are innocent let it be proven in the court.``
I Think Bina`s point was about selective enforcement, she said ALL newspapers are guilty of this practice. So why target Jung group if they had already stopped it ?
OMAR1974
``Given that Beena`s article clearly says that a senior person in Jung admits that Jung did follow policy of selling newsprint that it was allowed to purchase under lower duty structure. So if they are investigated (despite what was revealed on the audio tape) should be taken as the due process. If they are innocent let it be proven in the court.``
I Think Bina`s point was about selective enforcement, she said ALL newspapers are guilty of this practice. So why target Jung group if they had already stopped it ?
OMAR1974
#19 Posted by ferozk on February 9, 1999 8:54:28 pm
Re: Temporal post # 21
Yes, that sounds a like a plan to me. Lets keep the nuclear grenades locked, because we do not want status quo since that will only delay the final curtain drop on this tragi-comedy.
Though I have to admit, nuclear incineration sounds like a good idea. The only problem is that it destroys everything and ruins the environment. I would, on the other hand, suggest a few surgically placed fuel explosive devices which kill all humans, but will leave the buildings standing. The other option is to release biological toxins into the air, but then again, the wind patterns might be tricky to predict and I am not sure if we have the release mechanism. In fact, I think artillery shells filled with nerve gas toxins could do the job.
Yeah, I think you are right yaar, AK-47s will do just fine.
Personally, I would prefer a 5.56mm round to a 7.62mm full metal jacket round. A 7.62mm makes for a clean exit wound, but a 5.56mm round has a tendency to ``tumble`` inside the human body and cause massive internal trauma. With a 5.56mm, their chances of dying are pretty good, but with a 7.62mm, they might actually live and we can not allow that possibility!
What about the disposal of the bodies, any suggestions...dumb them into the Arabian Sea?
We can use Nawaz Sharif`s trucks for the trip.
Thanks buddy! What do you prefer Glenfiddich, Glenlivet...18 year old ok? I will drink a toast to you! Prost!
Yes, that sounds a like a plan to me. Lets keep the nuclear grenades locked, because we do not want status quo since that will only delay the final curtain drop on this tragi-comedy.
Though I have to admit, nuclear incineration sounds like a good idea. The only problem is that it destroys everything and ruins the environment. I would, on the other hand, suggest a few surgically placed fuel explosive devices which kill all humans, but will leave the buildings standing. The other option is to release biological toxins into the air, but then again, the wind patterns might be tricky to predict and I am not sure if we have the release mechanism. In fact, I think artillery shells filled with nerve gas toxins could do the job.
Yeah, I think you are right yaar, AK-47s will do just fine.
Personally, I would prefer a 5.56mm round to a 7.62mm full metal jacket round. A 7.62mm makes for a clean exit wound, but a 5.56mm round has a tendency to ``tumble`` inside the human body and cause massive internal trauma. With a 5.56mm, their chances of dying are pretty good, but with a 7.62mm, they might actually live and we can not allow that possibility!
What about the disposal of the bodies, any suggestions...dumb them into the Arabian Sea?
We can use Nawaz Sharif`s trucks for the trip.
Thanks buddy! What do you prefer Glenfiddich, Glenlivet...18 year old ok? I will drink a toast to you! Prost!
#18 Posted by temporal on February 9, 1999 7:32:55 pm
Feroze:
I wanted to add a postscript but it was too late! You didn`t catch it either--- is it late evening wherever you are? (reference is for the single malt absorption that you so cherish).
The nuclear grenades? Shall we mobilise the non-civilian remnants of the Army to Kahuta to safeguard the grenades for the west? If that angle is not covered, imminent intervention would lead to more of status quo.
And yes, (so difficult for me to say) our admiration is mutual.
regards
I wanted to add a postscript but it was too late! You didn`t catch it either--- is it late evening wherever you are? (reference is for the single malt absorption that you so cherish).
The nuclear grenades? Shall we mobilise the non-civilian remnants of the Army to Kahuta to safeguard the grenades for the west? If that angle is not covered, imminent intervention would lead to more of status quo.
And yes, (so difficult for me to say) our admiration is mutual.
regards
Interact Index
Also by Beena Sarwar
Similar Articles
- A Matter of Principle Beena Sarwar
- India Amitava Kumar
- Giving Way to Intolerance Mehdi Hasan
US Elections 2008 Primaries
Get Chowk RSS FeedLatest Interacts
- majumdar: Kaal bhai, Now or Never... Muhammad Aslam Khan Khattak:
- nkg: Re: # 133 Special provision... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- majumdar: Nkg moshai, What is wrong... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- nkg: Re: # 128 Dinaric... RSS is... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- nkg: Re: # 120 HP... The core... Terrorism Accused: Is Legal
- nkg: Re: # 98 hamidm2... " what... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- pinku: add to #133 Posted... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- pinku: #127 Posted by tahmed32... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
