Ansar Abbasi

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
1

Is he the worst culprit of yellow journalism in Pakistan? Taking pot shots at Dawn/Daily Times? :no:

**Isn’t it time for retrospection?
**Comment

By Ansar Abbasi

ISLAMABAD: With due apology to the community one belongs to. Isn’t it time for serious retrospection for us, the journalists, who have a major share in the Lal-Masjid bloodshed?

If we always have ample ammunitions in store to fire on others for what we see as their follies, we should have a serious look on our role as to what we have done in the past six-month on the Lal Masjid-Jamia Hafsa crisis. There isn’t much to cheer about. Rather, we would feel ashamed as to how did we really push the government to go for a final showdown.

These were generally some of the English dailies, which have been repeatedly advising the government particularly President General Pervez Musharraf through their hard-hitting editorials that the government must not show any leniency in proceeding against the Lal Majid-Jamia Hafsa students and the Maulana brothers. They have been demanding that this lot must be scrapped from the face of the earth.

The despicable terms likes “radicals”, “clerics”, “fanatics”, “talibanisation”, “fundamentalists”, “narrow minded”, and “extremists” were extensively used as if we are dealing with enemies, not our own brothers. The government was repeatedly taunted that while it was propagating the enlightened moderation policy but was dismally showing unprecedented leniency in dealing with the Jamia Hafsa issue.

It was because of the onslaught of the media that President General Pervez Musharraf had once said that the media was pressing him for the action against Lal-Masjid. He, however, said that when he would proceed against the Lal-Masjid Maulanas, it would then show the dead bodies.

Encouraged by the so-called “liberals” of our community, Musharraf decided to take on the “extremists” but it all ended up in an unprecedented bloodbath. The “extremists” were given the name of “terrorists” and killed without giving a chance to defence.

Like the embedded western journalists, who had reported the Iraq War precisely as they were fed by the US-led invading forces, many of us in Islamabad served as a worst propaganda tool of government agencies. Denied any direct access to the live show “Silence”, the journalists simply reported what they were told by the security agencies and government authorities. This was perhaps the most poorly reported episode. Shouldn’t we ponder over what we did during all the 10 days of the crisis?

One serious charge levelled by the government and propagated religiously by the media was the holding of women and children as hostage by the late Maulana Abdur Rashid Ghazi. Ghazi and his “militants”, including “foreign militants”, were also accused of using women and children as “human shield”. However, this all turned out to be a mere misinformation. There were no hostages; there was no human shield. But the alleged “terrorists” and “extremists” were killed for the crime they never committed. And now the government is dragging its feet from its initial claim of the presence of any foreigner in the compound.

The basic question is, had the Lal-Masjid Maulanas and the Jamia Hafsa students committed such a serious crime for which they needed the kind of punishment they were given? Certainly not, and this is the very reason that the media is now taking on the government but conveniently ignoring its own blundering role.

It is important for the media persons to understand the sensitivity of their “power” and must ensure that it is not being used to divide the society and create enemies from within. It should instead promote the culture of tolerance and start respecting others’ views instead of trying to remould the society in a manner that the world or the west wants to see us.

By the way, why should we be bothered about the so-called world that has conferred knighthood on blasphemer Suleman Rushdi that has repeatedly published sacrilegious caricature of the Prophet (SAW) and defended the same, that has supported the killing of hundreds of thousands of Muslims in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere and that sees the Muslims as “terrorists” and “fundamentalists”.

Kindly ignore the grammatical errors :halo:

2

Re: Ansar Abbasi

I am pretty sure its editorials like this that have him ticked off:

Give terrorists no quarter](http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/17/ed.htm#1)

A WEEK after the crackdown on the Lal Masjid and three days after Ayman al-Zawahiri asked his followers to hit Pakistan, his suicide bombers have struck. Even though the blasts occurred in Fata and the NWFP, everyone in the country has been shaken to the core. With over 100 dead in the Lal Masjid shootout, the death toll from two days of suicide attacks is too high to bear for this traumatised nation. Deeply troubled, people are appalled that some fiends should resort to barbarism in the name of Islam. Taking exception to the government’s handling of the Lal Masjid stand-off is one thing, massacring innocent people quite another. The way the security forces had a go at the well-armed militants holed up in the sacred precincts of a mosque has been widely criticised in the country. This paper has been strongly critical of the government’s policies on many vital issues. But it has never believed that killing innocent men, women and children can make the rulers change their policies.

The fanatic criminals who have murdered a minimum of 74 innocent persons and injured over 100 over the weekend consider this government to be their enemy because of its decision to join the US-led war on terror. Again, the opposition to the government’s foreign policy comes from many quarters, and even society’s liberal sections feel strongly about the way the generals have been extending cooperation to the US-led forces in Afghanistan and often behaving in a way that presents a tainted image of the country. But the best way to make the government realise its follies is to criticise it in and outside parliament and defeat it at the polls. However, to kill people — innocent people going about their day’s work or people who, in fact, may be sympathetic to the opposition’s point of view — is to behave like monsters. One must now ask Al-Zawahiri in what way he has furthered the cause of Islam by instigating these massacres. Besides, why does not he go back to his country and do whatever he likes there? Those who actually blow themselves up may perhaps be less guilty than the blood-sucking Draculas who convert innocent minds to their monstrous ways. The extent of the brainwashing to which the Al Qaeda and Taliban ideologues subject their acolytes was to be seen in the statement by a Hafsa girl over TV that she considered all those security men involved in the crackdown as kafirs.

Occasionally, Maulana Fazlur Rahman gives the impression that he is quite capable of rational thinking. Speaking at a joint meeting of the MMA and madressah leaders in Islamabad on Sunday, the deputy leader of the opposition disapproved of these massacres and said that Pakistan was not the place for suicide bombings. The JUI (F) chief also had the courage to call a spade a spade and said that Rashid Ghazi had not shown flexibility during the negotiations. Unfortunately, the majority of politicised ulema do not share the MMA leader’s view on suicide bombings. The madressahs were, by and large, opposed to the Aziz-Ghazi brothers’ criminal activities in the Lal Masjid, but after the stand-off was over, most of them criticised the government’s handling of it. But, on the whole, the ulema had on no occasion expressed their sympathy for the two brothers’ gangsterism. However, apart from ritualistic condemnations of suicide bombings, the politicians among the ulema have not denounced these attacks and have, in fact, behaved in a way that shows sympathy for the Al-Zawahiri-inspired suicide bombings. This is astonishing, and throws into doubt their sense of proportion which prevents them from condemning foreign-inspired terrorism that aims at destabilising Pakistan.

Regrettably, civil society and the opposition parties do not appear to be performing their duty on this question. This is no time for politicking, for what is at stake is not the fate of the Musharraf government but the fate and future of Pakistan. Will Pakistan be ruled by values given by Iqbal and Jinnah, the dreamer and the founder, or will it be ruled by the clergy with the thinking and outlook of medieval monks and Jesuits good at burning heretics at the stake? Irrespective of the acute political differences that exist between the government and the opposition, the nation must unite in its resolve to defeat religious militancy. The government must not waver in its resolve to rid the country of this monster. Those who are threatening to enforce Sharia at gunpoint are a small minority. They may kill without mercy and give the impression as if they can carry the nation along. But in reality the nation does not approve of such killings. No doubt, they are quite capable of perpetuating terror in isolated pockets, but even in Fata and the NWFP the vast majority of the people are sick of them. This should enable the government to draw up policies that combine force with an approach that seeks to enlist the people’s cooperation in isolating and defeating the murderous fanatics.

Rooting out terrorism is a national task. For that reason, the military-led government must try to develop a national consensus on its anti-terror policy. The best way to do this is to ensure transparency in the election due later this year. The nation and its well-wishers abroad want to see a democratic dispensation in Pakistan. The continuation of the status quo in which the elected civilian leadership has been subordinated to the military stands in the way of a successful prosecution of the war on terror.

3

Re: Ansar Abbasi

This is true to very extent. When Ghazi decided to surrender - the media people talked to him and cursed him online - questioning his bravery and claims of fighting till death. They indeed instigated him and made him stubborn.

4

Re: Ansar Abbasi

But Incidently the response from their supporters in NWFP justifies their killings.

5

Re: Ansar Abbasi

Why are the writings of Mr. Abbasi appear in the news section and not in opinion? He seems to write commentaries and opinions but is called a journalist? I think it is misleading. Clearly he is enjoying the freedom of media in Pakistan today and seem to write emotional articles based on rumors and innuendos.

6

Re: Ansar Abbasi

Perhaps paid by Lahore

Hum b daikhen
Hum b daikhen
7

Re: Ansar Abbasi

He has his own point of views and i respect that but no one give him right to use his stature to guide more respectable and reputable papers or as himself says English-daily's.

8

Re: Ansar Abbasi

[note]Pasha, what purpose does reviving this 1 and a half year old thread serve? Let me know how its related to current events via PM, otherwise this will be locked.[/note]