How Geo News reporter was treated by Pakistan Army

Syed.Ali.Haider said:

By the law. Not illegally.

Click to expand...

They have the right to remove any person, they believe who is a threat to them or not in compliance with their policies, from the premises, same goes with the banning of a TV channel and the reporter -----so if Mr.Mir Shakilur Rehman, you or I have been declared persona non grata and are not invited on the premises on these organizations or institution, then there is little we can do about it ---- keep it in mind, I am taking about Internally -- with in the organization or Inter Agency setup -----
Please do let me know ifbyou have seen anyone's name who has been officially tagged threat to national security and he is not invited in Pakistan ---

Syed.Ali.Haider said:

That is your personal opinion, without anything substantive to support it. He is entitled to run his media business as he sees fit.

Click to expand...

His meetings with RAW people his Indian contacts the traitor Mir Shakeel ISI should take him out

balixd said:

Every organization has a right to carryout their risk and threat assessments and formulate their internal policies accordingly
Nobody forced anyone to not watch geo

Click to expand...

Hi,

You are not right---they have no rights when reporting against the country and inciting riot---they can also be executed and hanged----.

Example red mosque issue---the Kasaab reporting----. Even in the usa---cnn, foxnews, msnbc take on ivoluntary restrictions on what they may report.

balixd said:

They have the right to remove any person, they believe who is a threat to them or not in compliance with their policies

Click to expand...

Policies must follow the law. The law does not follow the policies. Please get that basic requirement correct first.

Syed.Ali.Haider said:

Policies must follow the law. The law does not follow the policies. Please get that basic requirement correct first.

Click to expand...

Where does my post above implicates that am not???
And you for not answer my my question above

MastanKhan said:

Hi,

You are not right---they have no rights when reporting against the country and inciting riot---they can also be executed and hanged----.

Example red mosque issue---the Kasaab reporting----. Even in the usa---cnn, foxnews, msnbc take on ivoluntary restrictions on what they may report.

Click to expand...

Sir, is this not what i have said above? Military is in its right to declare some onea threat to them- internally

WebMaster said:

Not all Geo workers hate Army.

Click to expand...

not all of them hate but imagin one drop of urine in glass of milk. made whole glass undrinkable
workers do what their boss ask them to do .. you dont knwo whos cameraman but you know whos infront of it.. you dont know who write news but you know who read it. you dont know their policies unless and untill they bash pak army .. and bring people in debates like hoodbhai asma hamid mir who have one point agenda to insult pak army..
if people like them are in thousands .. belive me to counter them there are million mohab e watan will stand in front of them.
Jaye Pak

balixd said:

Where does my post above implicates that am not???
And you for not answer my my question above


Sir, is this not what i have said above? Military is in its right to declare some onea threat to them- internally

Click to expand...

You are not getting it right to begin with. The military is not "in its rights to declare someone a threat" in violation of law. The military has absolutely no role in controlling media. Its duties are on the border dealing with threats there.

As SC has given the order, what reason do cable operators have for not showing Geo, asks SHC - thenews.com.pk

KARACHI: The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Tuesday observed that the Supreme Court had given an order to cable operators and the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) to ensure smooth transmission of TV channels, then what reason cable operators had for not telecasting Geo.

Syed.Ali.Haider said:

You are not getting it right to begin with. The military is not "in its rights to declare someone a threat" in violation of law. The military has absolutely no role in controlling media. Its duties are on the border dealing with threats there.

Click to expand...

Ah, and i think you did not get my point, i believe that you need to read my above post again --- if Geo as an entity,party or as an organization has veen deckared as a threat to the institution in question or to the interests of this country , and this threat assessment is for internal purposes only - i.e to formulate or review the internal policies than it is not in voilation of law --- they are not discriminating abyone on the basis of their race ,religion or ethnicity, its purely based on their actions ....
And inhave asked you above - if any of the members , employee, or Geo itself has been publicly, in the official capicity declared a threat by any of the institution, be it PEMrA or Military, please do let me know about that.....
But if military is stopping its employees from watching a particular channel within the premises of organization, then they have right, its same as barring the use of facebook and other social sites....
Geo has been deckared a threat, internally, not externally --- peroid....
Next time please refer to the law, military is in voilation of by declaring geo as a threat --- i know how policymaking is done, i work in a multi national organization too at a middle management ----and reviewing policies and procedures is what i do

Syed.Ali.Haider said:

You are not getting it right to begin with. The military is not "in its rights to declare someone a threat" in violation of law. The military has absolutely no role in controlling media. Its duties are on the border dealing with threats there.

Click to expand...

Yes military is reaching out to every damn cable operator in the country - thats how useless they are --- lol, ypur logic fails

balixd said:

if Geo as an entity,party or as an organization has veen deckared as a threat to the institution in question or to the interests of this country , and this threat assessment is for internal purposes only - i.e to formulate or review the internal policies than it is not in voilation of law

Click to expand...

The violation of law occurs when a media outlet is declared an a threat by an organization that has no legal basis to interfere or meddle in the internal affairs of the country. The rest of the logic cannot stand after that basic error.

balixd said:

Yes military is reaching out to every damn cable operator in the country - thats how useless they are --- lol, ypur logic fails

Click to expand...

It must be those damned "angels" again.

Horus said:

Ordinary workers are not guilty but Mir Shakeel is a threat to the national security.

Click to expand...

There is not a single country in the world where its channel openly speaks against army, & Front line of defense i.e ISI. In other countries they are called as traitor & SPY, and this is rule in the world "Death for traitor & spy"

Peaceful Civilian said:

There is not a single country in the world where its channel openly speaks against army, & Front line of defense i.e ISI. In other countries they are called as traitor & SPY, and this is rule in the world "Death for traitor & spy"

Click to expand...

Actually, in all civilized countries, the military is subject to close scrutiny and open criticism by a free media. Absolutely. Only in countries like North Korea or Burma or Pakistan does the military claim illegal privilege to be immune from criticism under the garb of national security.

Syed.Ali.Haider said:

Actually, in all civilized countries, the military is subject to close scrutiny and open criticism by a free media.

Click to expand...

Here this is not scrutiny, this is malicious campaign. Look the recent events even our Prime minister is speaking lie in front of army. Thanks for ISPR clarification & PAT & PTI leaders. One news channels represented ISI chief as terrorist. Which channel in other country allows this? They will never speak against interest of country.

Peaceful Civilian said:

Here this is not scrutiny, this is malicious campaign. Look the recent events even our Prime minister is speaking lie in front of army. Thanks for ISPR clarification & PAT & PTI leaders. One news channels represented ISI chief as terrorist. Which channel in other country allows this? They will never speak against interest of country.

Click to expand...

The fact remains that the military does claim illegal privilege to be immune from criticism under the garb of national security. The ISI is alleged to have done many illegal things that it must answer for in a proper court of law, and it is the duty of the media to cover these potential illegalities.

Syed.Ali.Haider said:

The violation of law occurs when a media outlet is declared an a threat by an organization that has no legal basis to interfere or meddle in the internal affairs of the country. The rest of the logic cannot stand after that basic error.



It must be those damned "angels" again.

Click to expand...

You do know that you have crossed the limit of being in a debate or a discussion and are actually trolling now ---
You have not shared a shred of an evidence that can implicate taht any instituion has banned or declare other insitution as a threat to the national security - publically ---
I ask again why a Military cannit declare someone a threat for their internal purposes --- are you telling me Military has no legal capacity to carryout their internal risk and threat assessmebts???