Gen.(retd) Shahid Aziz - the new 'darling' of the media

[waraich66]

Now two core cammanders are against Musharaf policies???

 

[fatman17]

Now two core cammanders are against Musharaf policies???

its clear they have a 'axe' to grind!

 

[waraich66]

The reign of a compulsive gambler

Save a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.comSave a link to this article and return to it at SAVE THIS Homepage Email a link to this articleEmail a link to this article Printer-friendly version of this articlePrinter-friendly version of this article View a list of the most popular articles on our siteView a list of the most popular articles on our site

by Abid Ullah Jan

General Musharraf is a classic case for understanding gambler’s attitude of almost all dictators. Like gamblers, they go through the phases of winning, losing, and finally desperation. In the final phase, they do not hesitate to put anything under their control at stake for the next bet. Unlike relapse in alcoholism, where the alcoholic can only see the hangover and devastation of the next drunk, gambling and dictating do, in fact, hold out the elusive hope that "I can win!!" on that next bet.



Scanning views of some keen observers in the last 44 months show that Musharraf has gambled more than steering the country as a statesman. Up to September 11, 2001, Musharraf had little opportunity to gamble. Despite EU, Commonwealth and Washington’s rejection, he was winning at home. The public fully supported his sincere and impersonal — at least apparently — moves. His reason was to win; his attitude was to plan carefully and the driving force was his consuming desire to recreate the high. The winning phase, however, ended with the big win — the ensured US backing.



After September 11, the world witnessed a different Musharraf, a gambler who just started his losing phase. Far from the edgy, almost apologetic figure he cut in the televised announcement of his "full support" for the US, he seemed almost bouncy, as if the crisis were something he had been waiting for all his life.



Note that in losing phase of gambling, his focus remained on chasing to get even with other legitimate leaders and recouping loss that incurred to him due to his illegitimate power grab. The driving force in this phase was to recapture the glow of winning — this time abroad, which forced him to bet impulsively and rashly.



To identify his gambling attitude, first came out John Zubrzycki of The Australian to declare that General Musharraf's “gamble will be welcomed in the US.”[1] For winning some concessions, the first rash bet was Musharrf’s trashing out his close coup partners: Lieutenant-General Mahmud Ahmed, chief of ISI — the man who went to Musharraf's aid in the 1999 coup by seizing control of Pakistan's television — and Lieutenant-General Usmani, corps commander of Karachi, who took control of the city's airport when Nawaz Sharif tried to prevent Musharraf's plane from landing just before the coup. This was the period when analysts such as Hannah Bloch, Syed Talat Hussain, Massimo Calabresi, Jeff Chu and Meenakshi Ganguly collectively declared “Western goodwill … at the core of the Pakistani President's great gamble.”[2]



BBC’s Stephen Cviic then titled his January 12, 2002 analysis of Musharraf speech as “Musharraf’s gamble.”[3] This was the moment when Musharraf decided to stake his entire future on a gamble that Islam is less important to his fellow countrymen than peace, prosperity and stability. With reference to Palestine he said, “We are not contractors of Islam.” The same tone continues till date. Now he says, “Why should Pakistan be more Palestinian than the Palestinians” ignoring the fact that he sounds more Jewish than the Jews such as Rabbi Yisroel P. Feldman of Neturei Karta International, who came to Boston on June 15 to protest in his words, “the celebration of the founding of the blasphemous and heretical Zionist state… and the heinous crimes committed in the name of its illegitimate “State of Israel.”[4]



Mark Baker of the Age called referendum for appointing himself as president, “Musharraf’s boldest gamble” on May 4, 2002. [5] Baker summed up that the gamble will “be remembered as the moment when another ambitious general began to put personal aggrandisement ahead of a professed commitment to defending democracy.” Zaffar Abbas believed “Musharraf's latest gamble” was “anything but a routine flutter.”[6]



Elections in Pakistan and the period since then mark the desperate phase of General Musharraf’s gambling carrier. In this phase, the gambler simply cannot stop. His attitude becomes unreasonable. His mood swings to blaming and the force that drives him to gamble is his juggling dwindling resources ­— the limited option for betting. A compulsive gambler would get funds from wherever possible, often through criminal means. Psychologists believe that at this time, a gambler’s actions become extremely out of character, unreasonable and desperate.



Jane’s foreign report titled its March 23, 2003 report as, “Musharraf’s High Risk Gamble.” The report rightly describes that in utter desperation Musharraf is pitting himself against Islam. According to the report: “The source of Musharraf's power comes from his control of the army, with the only other source of power coming from religion.” The report rightly identifies Musharraf’s dwindling resources: 1) by “surreptitiously encouraging, mass public demonstrations, [Musharraf] is able to show the international community what he is up against.” 2) Musharraf stirred up “mass panic and anti-US feeling by publicly proclaiming that he believes that Pakistan could be the next target of pre-emptive action.” 3) since “US troops were already operating out of Pakistan and Afghanistan,” Musharraf had “little extra to offer the Bush administration.” Thus, he “had hoped that a large vote for an extremist religious party would trigger increased US support for his government.” That is what he is cashing at the moment.



Outsiders picked up Musharraf’s signs of desperation well within his losing phase. The Hindu called his plans for a praetorian National Security Council and LFO a reflection of his “sense of political desperation that was totally out of sync with his exudation of confidence as the arbiter of Pakistan's destiny.”[7] The whole world watched carefully when Musharraf accentuated his sense of anxiety to safeguard his political flanks for years to come in the misty future.



The self-deluded potentate is in the final desperate moments of his gamble. He looks around, thinks and then gambles on almost anything that he considers remotely fit to please his masters. In his promotional, “What I can do for you!” trip to US and UK, he started talking about diplomatic relations with Israel. He pleaded that he needs “more room to manoeuvre in Pakistan to develop a national consensus on the [Israel’s] recognition question.”[8] More room to manoeuvre means a never-ending dictatorship like Hosnie Mubarak and a continued US sponsorship.



Instead of demanding implementation of the UN resolutions, he proposed an American designed “Road map” for Kashmir. Whereas Orient on Line reports (June 29) that India has “got recognised Line of Control as a formal dividing line between India and Pakistan.” Furthermore, the US “wants Pakistan to seal its border with Iran”[9] a dream the US has been dreaming since early 90s. Musharraf has already run out of options. The only card left in his hands is Islam. He declared the other day, “I am very clear that we cannot allow this thing [the establishment of a vice and virtue department] to happen in our country.”[10] To him occupations and oppressions are not the issues, poverty and progress is.[11] Therefore, he is ready to assist US in consolidating its grip on Iraq and he alone considered himself sufficient to agree in principle for allocating Pakistani troops for this dirty job.



In order to keep gambling, Musharraf has to come up with new services to offer to the masters of his destiny. Having nothing else to offer, he has opted to put Islam on the chopping block. In the days ahead, just keep an eye on how Musharraf uses this option. When begging, borrowing, and stealing cross the limits, gamblers need a "bailout." When bailouts fail, many desperate gamblers have had to say, "My house is your house." It is difficult for people to understand how a person loses control of his gambling behaviour. It just seems like any normal person would know better. After all, no one is making him do it; there is not a chemical addiction; he can see what is happening around him; he must know there is a problem. Musharraf like gamblers has lost control in spite of everything he knows or anyone else can tell him. Whatever he does is just not rational.

 

[waraich66]

the first rash bet was Musharrf’s trashing out his close coup partners: Lieutenant-General Mahmud Ahmed, chief of ISI — the man who went to Musharraf's aid in the 1999 coup by seizing control of Pakistan's television — and Lieutenant-General Usmani, corps commander of Karachi, who took control of the city's airport when Nawaz Sharif tried to prevent Musharraf's plane from landing just before the coup.

two more core cammanders ????

He dont even spare his mohsin ?????

 

[All-Green]

Whatever Musharraf did was with the blessings of these corps commanders...very convenient to develop a conscience now and to spice everything up.

Chemical weapons in lal Masjid...utterly pathetic and shallow comment...what the hell was our SSG doing in there and losing their own lives?
So many casualties of SSG just to spare as much innocent life as possible...
There would have been no need to send them in if lethal chemical weapons were being used....

Such men make themselves bigger fools this way but i guess honour and integrity are lost on them.

 

[TalibanSwatter]

Whatever Musharraf did was with the blessings of these corps commanders...very convenient to develop a conscience now and to spice everything up.

Chemical weapons in lal Masjid...utterly pathetic and shallow comment...what the hell was our SSG doing in there and losing their own lives?
So many casualties of SSG just to spare as much innocent life as possible...
There would have been no need to send them in if lethal chemical weapons were being used....

Such men make themselves bigger fools this way but i guess honour and integrity are lost on them.

Both Shahid Aziz and Jamshed Gulzar Kiyani seem to forget their support role as part of Musharraf's original team - hypocritical to say the least.

Moreover, they seem to be clearly supportive of the local TTP thugs with the former justifying the TTP terrorist attacks in a recent interview as 'an understandable response' to policies of the government, and the latter condemning the goverment's tyrannical attitude towards the Lal Masjid 'innocents'.

 

[fatman17]

the first rash bet was Musharrf’s trashing out his close coup partners: Lieutenant-General Mahmud Ahmed, chief of ISI — the man who went to Musharraf's aid in the 1999 coup by seizing control of Pakistan's television — and Lieutenant-General Usmani, corps commander of Karachi, who took control of the city's airport when Nawaz Sharif tried to prevent Musharraf's plane from landing just before the coup.

two more core cammanders ????

He dont even spare his mohsin ?????

they were 'fundos'!!!

 

[fatman17]

The reign of a compulsive gambler

Save a link to this article and return to it at www.savethis.comSave a link to this article and return to it at SAVE THIS Homepage Email a link to this articleEmail a link to this article Printer-friendly version of this articlePrinter-friendly version of this article View a list of the most popular articles on our siteView a list of the most popular articles on our site

by Abid Ullah Jan

General Musharraf is a classic case for understanding gambler’s attitude of almost all dictators. Like gamblers, they go through the phases of winning, losing, and finally desperation. In the final phase, they do not hesitate to put anything under their control at stake for the next bet. Unlike relapse in alcoholism, where the alcoholic can only see the hangover and devastation of the next drunk, gambling and dictating do, in fact, hold out the elusive hope that "I can win!!" on that next bet.



Scanning views of some keen observers in the last 44 months show that Musharraf has gambled more than steering the country as a statesman. Up to September 11, 2001, Musharraf had little opportunity to gamble. Despite EU, Commonwealth and Washington’s rejection, he was winning at home. The public fully supported his sincere and impersonal — at least apparently — moves. His reason was to win; his attitude was to plan carefully and the driving force was his consuming desire to recreate the high. The winning phase, however, ended with the big win — the ensured US backing.



After September 11, the world witnessed a different Musharraf, a gambler who just started his losing phase. Far from the edgy, almost apologetic figure he cut in the televised announcement of his "full support" for the US, he seemed almost bouncy, as if the crisis were something he had been waiting for all his life.



Note that in losing phase of gambling, his focus remained on chasing to get even with other legitimate leaders and recouping loss that incurred to him due to his illegitimate power grab. The driving force in this phase was to recapture the glow of winning — this time abroad, which forced him to bet impulsively and rashly.



To identify his gambling attitude, first came out John Zubrzycki of The Australian to declare that General Musharraf's “gamble will be welcomed in the US.”[1] For winning some concessions, the first rash bet was Musharrf’s trashing out his close coup partners: Lieutenant-General Mahmud Ahmed, chief of ISI — the man who went to Musharraf's aid in the 1999 coup by seizing control of Pakistan's television — and Lieutenant-General Usmani, corps commander of Karachi, who took control of the city's airport when Nawaz Sharif tried to prevent Musharraf's plane from landing just before the coup. This was the period when analysts such as Hannah Bloch, Syed Talat Hussain, Massimo Calabresi, Jeff Chu and Meenakshi Ganguly collectively declared “Western goodwill … at the core of the Pakistani President's great gamble.”[2]



BBC’s Stephen Cviic then titled his January 12, 2002 analysis of Musharraf speech as “Musharraf’s gamble.”[3] This was the moment when Musharraf decided to stake his entire future on a gamble that Islam is less important to his fellow countrymen than peace, prosperity and stability. With reference to Palestine he said, “We are not contractors of Islam.” The same tone continues till date. Now he says, “Why should Pakistan be more Palestinian than the Palestinians” ignoring the fact that he sounds more Jewish than the Jews such as Rabbi Yisroel P. Feldman of Neturei Karta International, who came to Boston on June 15 to protest in his words, “the celebration of the founding of the blasphemous and heretical Zionist state… and the heinous crimes committed in the name of its illegitimate “State of Israel.”[4]



Mark Baker of the Age called referendum for appointing himself as president, “Musharraf’s boldest gamble” on May 4, 2002. [5] Baker summed up that the gamble will “be remembered as the moment when another ambitious general began to put personal aggrandisement ahead of a professed commitment to defending democracy.” Zaffar Abbas believed “Musharraf's latest gamble” was “anything but a routine flutter.”[6]



Elections in Pakistan and the period since then mark the desperate phase of General Musharraf’s gambling carrier. In this phase, the gambler simply cannot stop. His attitude becomes unreasonable. His mood swings to blaming and the force that drives him to gamble is his juggling dwindling resources *— the limited option for betting. A compulsive gambler would get funds from wherever possible, often through criminal means. Psychologists believe that at this time, a gambler’s actions become extremely out of character, unreasonable and desperate.



Jane’s foreign report titled its March 23, 2003 report as, “Musharraf’s High Risk Gamble.” The report rightly describes that in utter desperation Musharraf is pitting himself against Islam. According to the report: “The source of Musharraf's power comes from his control of the army, with the only other source of power coming from religion.” The report rightly identifies Musharraf’s dwindling resources: 1) by “surreptitiously encouraging, mass public demonstrations, [Musharraf] is able to show the international community what he is up against.” 2) Musharraf stirred up “mass panic and anti-US feeling by publicly proclaiming that he believes that Pakistan could be the next target of pre-emptive action.” 3) since “US troops were already operating out of Pakistan and Afghanistan,” Musharraf had “little extra to offer the Bush administration.” Thus, he “had hoped that a large vote for an extremist religious party would trigger increased US support for his government.” That is what he is cashing at the moment.



Outsiders picked up Musharraf’s signs of desperation well within his losing phase. The Hindu called his plans for a praetorian National Security Council and LFO a reflection of his “sense of political desperation that was totally out of sync with his exudation of confidence as the arbiter of Pakistan's destiny.”[7] The whole world watched carefully when Musharraf accentuated his sense of anxiety to safeguard his political flanks for years to come in the misty future.



The self-deluded potentate is in the final desperate moments of his gamble. He looks around, thinks and then gambles on almost anything that he considers remotely fit to please his masters. In his promotional, “What I can do for you!” trip to US and UK, he started talking about diplomatic relations with Israel. He pleaded that he needs “more room to manoeuvre in Pakistan to develop a national consensus on the [Israel’s] recognition question.”[8] More room to manoeuvre means a never-ending dictatorship like Hosnie Mubarak and a continued US sponsorship.



Instead of demanding implementation of the UN resolutions, he proposed an American designed “Road map” for Kashmir. Whereas Orient on Line reports (June 29) that India has “got recognised Line of Control as a formal dividing line between India and Pakistan.” Furthermore, the US “wants Pakistan to seal its border with Iran”[9] a dream the US has been dreaming since early 90s. Musharraf has already run out of options. The only card left in his hands is Islam. He declared the other day, “I am very clear that we cannot allow this thing [the establishment of a vice and virtue department] to happen in our country.”[10] To him occupations and oppressions are not the issues, poverty and progress is.[11] Therefore, he is ready to assist US in consolidating its grip on Iraq and he alone considered himself sufficient to agree in principle for allocating Pakistani troops for this dirty job.



In order to keep gambling, Musharraf has to come up with new services to offer to the masters of his destiny. Having nothing else to offer, he has opted to put Islam on the chopping block. In the days ahead, just keep an eye on how Musharraf uses this option. When begging, borrowing, and stealing cross the limits, gamblers need a "bailout." When bailouts fail, many desperate gamblers have had to say, "My house is your house." It is difficult for people to understand how a person loses control of his gambling behaviour. It just seems like any normal person would know better. After all, no one is making him do it; there is not a chemical addiction; he can see what is happening around him; he must know there is a problem. Musharraf like gamblers has lost control in spite of everything he knows or anyone else can tell him. Whatever he does is just not rational.

all written in hindsight!!!

 

[SSGPA1]

In an unterview with Kamran Khan, Retd. Core Commander & CGS Gen. Shahid Aziz on army’s support and unshakeable confidence in President Musharraf.

A wonderful account from Retd Core Commander & CGS Shahid Aziz about army’s support to Musharraf in every decision.

http://www.pervezmusharraf.net/?p=608

Video is not there because Geo TV's claim to the copy right.

Here is the link where Lt. Gen. Shahaid Aziz said that all decisions by President Musharraf are backed and supported by the Army:

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Again' when one clicks this link, a message comes:

This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by geotv.

Obviously Geo and Jang Group can't show two faces of Lt. Gen. Shahid Aziz

Gen Aziz monitored the local bodies’ elections of 2001, so if someone claims that 01 eletions were rigged etc then Gen. Aziz is responsible for it too.

Answering a question, the former EC secretary said the General Headquarters (GHQ) played an important role in the local bodies’ elections of 2001. He said Gen Shahid Aziz, who was then the Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) was head of the army team which monitored the polls.

DAWN.COM | Pakistan | ?EC refused to move against Benazir, Zardari despite pressure?

This interview is not only the doing of Gen Shahid but also another attempt by Jang Group to malign Pakistan Army. Don't they have any track of who said what a couple years back and how they used that interview?

PA is getting kudos from the masses these days which is not acceptable to the Jang Group and its masters.

 

[qsaark]

Usual anti-media rant; instead of blaming media, blame the person who is willing to show his and his mates dirty laundry in the public. Even he should not be blamed, at least he realizes that mistakes were made and they can not be fixed if they are not discussed. What is the purpose of the talk shows? Of course what is done is done, you can not change what has happened in the past, by discussing the previously made bad moves and wrong decisions, and you can learn something and can avoid making the similar mistakes in the future.

Unfortunately we are not the nation who is willing to fix our mistakes or even admit them; instead we even try to destroy the record so it will never be discussed as mentioned by General KM Arif in his book ‘Khakis’. He mentioned that after the ceasefire of 1965 war, the GHQ ordered all the field commanders and above to destroy their war diaries!!!!!! Destroy war diaries? Any officer who attends the military academy and later institutions like the war college, school of infantry etc. knows the important of such records. Why on earth would you destroy war diaries? So what happened after that, the Pakistani history of 1965 war is nothing more than an oral tradition passed on from one to another without credible proof. On the other hand, the Indian field commanders and higher-up were not issued any such orders hence their narration(s) of the 1965 war are more accurate as they have the actual war diaries to support their claims. This is only one example of how we avoid from talking about our mistakes and go to every length to avoid such discussion.

Media is like this everywhere, and it should be like this. Media’s job is not to hide things, but to bring them to light, and let the people make their minds up based on the information provided. Today it is electronic media, before that it was print media. Have guys know the names of people like Moulana Mohammad Ali Jouhar, Deewan Singh Maftoon, Khwaja Hasan Nizami? Allama Iqbal, Faiz Ahmed Faiz? I only wish if you could read the newspapers of that time and read the columns and articles written by the name I mentioned above and many others like them. Even in their time, there were people like you who would call them mad dog and what not because you can not tolerate the truth.

You guys are so polarized and you judge the honesty and integrity and the intention of media, or even of a person not based on what he is presenting but based on who is being discussed. If it was NS or honorable CJ who’s dirty laundry was being exposed, than this was the best media in the world, most honest and unbiased. But because media is talking about a former dictator and his supporters, and the corruption of the present governemnt largely, you being a hardcore supporter of dictatorships and vehement apposer of democracy and freedom of speech, are condemning media. Is this something unusual or uncommon? It is very natural that those who are in the power are always in the lime light than those who are sitting in the audience re not, until it is their turn to take up the stage. Read newspapers from any country and see for yourself who are in the news, those who are in the power or those who are in the apposition? Even a third grade can understand this difference but dictatorship supporters can and never will.

Media is nothing more than a mirror, it shows you exactly how you are. So blaming media is actually blaming yourself, nothing more nothing less. In one of my previous reply, I gave a long list of newspapers and magazines which are not published under the auspicious of the Jang group, and their columnists are as critical of disastrous policies of Musharraf, and corruption of the present government (that came with the full support and blessing of the former dictator) as are the columnist of the Jang group. Let me give you few of the names of these folks who are not on the payroll of the Jang group. Ofcourse this will not change the jahilana (un-educated) perception of yours anyway, but only to keep the record straight and let people know about your jahiliat and biasness towards media. These coloumnists include Athar Abbas, Javeid Choudhry, Oria Maqbool Jan, Altaf Hasan Qureshi, Ardeshir Cowasjee, Irfan hussain, Jawed Naqvi, Mahir Ali and many more.

 

[qsaark]

In an unterview with Kamran Khan, Retd. Core Commander & CGS Gen. Shahid Aziz on army’s support and unshakeable confidence in President Musharraf.

A wonderful account from Retd Core Commander & CGS Shahid Aziz about army’s support to Musharraf in every decision.

http://www.pervezmusharraf.net/?p=608

Video is not there because Geo TV's claim to the copy right.

Here is the link where Lt. Gen. Shahaid Aziz said that all decisions by President Musharraf are backed and supported by the Army:

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

Again' when one clicks this link, a message comes:

This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by geotv.

Obviously Geo and Jang Group can't show two faces of Lt. Gen. Shahid Aziz

Gen Aziz monitored the local bodies’ elections of 2001, so if someone claims that 01 eletions were rigged etc then Gen. Aziz is responsible for it too.

Answering a question, the former EC secretary said the General Headquarters (GHQ) played an important role in the local bodies’ elections of 2001. He said Gen Shahid Aziz, who was then the Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) was head of the army team which monitored the polls.

DAWN.COM | Pakistan | ?EC refused to move against Benazir, Zardari despite pressure?

This interview is not only the doing of Gen Shahid but also another attempt by Jang Group to malign Pakistan Army. Don't they have any track of who said what a couple years back and how they used that interview?

PA is getting kudos from the masses these days which is not acceptable to the Jang Group and its masters.

Only the title and that too on Musharraf’s propaganda or fan boy website is worthless; Give the proper link not the excuses so the members could listen and understand in which context Shahid has said what. The emphesis is on the word 'context'.

 

[qsaark]

Both Shahid Aziz and Jamshed Gulzar Kiyani seem to forget their support role as part of Musharraf's original team - hypocritical to say the least.

They were only saving their jobs and that is it. Not everyone has moral courage to go against the Dictators, only honorable people do this.

Moreover, they seem to be clearly supportive of the local TTP thugs with the former justifying the TTP terrorist attacks in a recent interview as 'an understandable response' to policies of the government, and the latter condemning the goverment's tyrannical attitude towards the Lal Masjid 'innocents'.

You made it awfully more clear I think. You are assuming too much; not agreeing completely with Musharraf the god’s policies does not mean they become TTP sympathizers. Neither TTP nor Lal Masjid could have happened in the first place if these issues were not allowed to evolve into their monstrous form. It is like first you provide and encourage a person to eat tons of sugar, and when he gets diabetes, you start put all the blame on that person while at the same time you are as much or even more responsible for his diabetes. Lal Masjid was not in North or South Waziristan where there was not writ of the GoO but in Islamabad, the Capital city. What all the intelligence and security agencies were doing when the whole damn thing was incubating? And they way Lal Masjid problem was handled was not the only way, and that is what people are talking about. There is not disagreement on the nature and importance of problem, but on the ways and means it was handled; so calling that discussion a TTP-sympathizer attitude will not be just.

 

[Xeric]

i know the guy, he was Corps Commander lhr, met him a few times when i had to visit lhr. He was a through professional and a hard-task-master, now what i can see from his interview and the text printed in the newspaper is that there isnt exactly anything 'bad' that he has said, except that he went a way too upright and truthful at a point. What i think is that he was merely showing his training attributes, a trained soldier who dont lie, otherwise i dont think it's much of a issue, moreover, if you compare the interview and the printed stuff, the writers at The News has beautifully molded and minced the general's word while they put them to paper!

Though if seen critically, if he thought what Gen Musharraf had been doing was wrong he should have begged leave and been on the 'right' side. There is no fun in opening up confidential info after you have left the institution.

One thing i know is that when Gen Musharraf was to select the Vice Chief, Gen Shahid was also in the short-list, but unfortunately he couldnt make it, may this is making him speak now?!

 

[Xeric]

Usual anti-media rant; instead of blaming media, blame the person who is willing to show his and his mates dirty laundry in the public. Even he should not be blamed, at least he realizes that mistakes were made and they can not be fixed if they are not discussed. What is the purpose of the talk shows? Of course what is done is done, you can not change what has happened in the past, by discussing the previously made bad moves and wrong decisions, and you can learn something and can avoid making the similar mistakes in the future.

Our issue is not the media, our issue is the guy.

He was not a toddler who couldnt decide for himself when it comes to choose the right direction.

If he thinks that he had been following a wrong order, he could very easily quit (as he had done while being in NAB), but if didnt he is accomplice to whatever you call it.

This haji saab attitude is required once you are in the inside and can matter and not when you would shoot blanks!!

Unfortunately we are not the nation who is willing to fix our mistakes or even admit them; instead we even try to destroy the record so it will never be discussed as mentioned by General KM Arif in his book ‘Khakis’. He mentioned that after the ceasefire of 1965 war, the GHQ ordered all the field commanders and above to destroy their war diaries!!!!!! Destroy war diaries? Any officer who attends the military academy and later institutions like the war college, school of infantry etc. knows the important of such records. Why on earth would you destroy war diaries? So what happened after that, the Pakistani history of 1965 war is nothing more than an oral tradition passed on from one to another without credible proof. On the other hand, the Indian field commanders and higher-up were not issued any such orders hence their narration(s) of the 1965 war are more accurate as they have the actual war diaries to support their claims. This is only one example of how we avoid from talking about our mistakes and go to every length to avoid such discussion.

Media is like this everywhere, and it should be like this. Media’s job is not to hide things, but to bring them to light, and let the people make their minds up based on the information provided. Today it is electronic media, before that it was print media. Have guys know the names of people like Moulana Mohammad Ali Jouhar, Deewan Singh Maftoon, Khwaja Hasan Nizami? Allama Iqbal, Faiz Ahmed Faiz? I only wish if you could read the newspapers of that time and read the columns and articles written by the name I mentioned above and many others like them. Even in their time, there were people like you who would call them mad dog and what not because you can not tolerate the truth.

You guys are so polarized and you judge the honesty and integrity and the intention of media, or even of a person not based on what he is presenting but based on who is being discussed. If it was NS or honorable CJ who’s dirty laundry was being exposed, than this was the best media in the world, most honest and unbiased. But because media is talking about a former dictator and his supporters, and the corruption of the present governemnt largely, you being a hardcore supporter of dictatorships and vehement apposer of democracy and freedom of speech, are condemning media. Is this something unusual or uncommon? It is very natural that those who are in the power are always in the lime light than those who are sitting in the audience re not, until it is their turn to take up the stage. Read newspapers from any country and see for yourself who are in the news, those who are in the power or those who are in the apposition? Even a third grade can understand this difference but dictatorship supporters can and never will.

Media is nothing more than a mirror, it shows you exactly how you are. So blaming media is actually blaming yourself, nothing more nothing less. In one of my previous reply, I gave a long list of newspapers and magazines which are not published under the auspicious of the Jang group, and their columnists are as critical of disastrous policies of Musharraf, and corruption of the present government (that came with the full support and blessing of the former dictator) as are the columnist of the Jang group. Let me give you few of the names of these folks who are not on the payroll of the Jang group. Ofcourse this will not change the jahilana (un-educated) perception of yours anyway, but only to keep the record straight and let people know about your jahiliat and biasness towards media. These coloumnists include Athar Abbas, Javeid Choudhry, Oria Maqbool Jan, Altaf Hasan Qureshi, Ardeshir Cowasjee, Irfan hussain, Jawed Naqvi, Mahir Ali and many more.

As for your above off topic 'repeatative-knowledge', i'll just say that you need to understand the difference between "Investigative Journalism" and "A publicity stunt".

 

[qsaark]

Our issue is not the media, our issue is the guy.

He was not a toddler who couldnt decide for himself when it comes to choose the right direction.

If he thinks that he had been following a wrong order, he could very easily quit (as he had done while being in NAB), but if didnt he is accomplice to whatever you call it.

This haji saab attitude is required once you are in the inside and can matter and not when you would shoot blanks!!

He was not following any wrong orders; he is only explaining that Musharraf the god made decision without taking his Corp Commanders into confidence. Obviously he was not asked to let the Americans take over Shamsi. He would have followed wrong decision if he was a base commander of Shamsi Base or if he was someone who had anything to do with the Shamsi base etc. He did resign and showed his character when Musharraf the god asked him not to follow up the cases against BB. So there is no issue with this guy, he seems like an upright and honest officer.

As for your above off topic 'repeatative-knowledge', i'll just say that you need to understand the difference between "Investigative Journalism" and "A publicity stunt".

Once there was a report about four SSG folks who were abducted and later killed by the TTP. There was news that those folks killed ten TTP guys before embracing shahdat, and I asked in that thread about the proof. None of you (who are thanking posts after posts on this media-bashing franzy) ever come forward and tried to demarcate between "Investigative Journalism" and "A publicity stunt" or did you? Who knows if they managed to kill even one of their captives or they lost their lives helplessly? What would you say about that hypothetical killing of the ten TTP folks in the hands of four SSGs? At that time media was all right and doing great job right?

Lets take the latest incidence of the TTPs alleged ‘Jannat’; the field commanders and Mr. Malik are claiming that the compound was the alleged ‘jannat’. Fine, have you guys seen the video posted in the related thread? From which angle that compound looks like a ‘jannat’? Painting few sceneries on the walls made it ‘Jannat’? Where are the streams of milk and honey that were reported in the media who simply reproduced what they were told by the field commanders and Mr. Malik? Only a mentally retard can believe that the compound was Jannat. Now where is your "Investigative Journalism" versus "A publicity stunt"? Everything is fine if it suits your purpose but if it does not, all of a sudden it becomes a case of publicity stunt?