Portraying terrorist as heroes

[funtoosh]

TTP is not terrorits. they are the cousins of afghan taliabn and LeT. Pakistan loves LeT and Taliban. So they also think ttp as heroes and mard e momins

 

[FaujHistorian]

The TTP commander may have been glorified because he was killed by the Americans . If he was killed by the Pak army , it may not have happened.

Well said.

Islamists and communists have joined their evil forces.

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

Well said.

Islamists and communists have joined their evil forces.

Who are the communists in Pakistan ?

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

There is no clear definition of terrorist and freedom fighters/hero. If someone political interests or ideology match with your idealogy then he is your hero if not then he is terrorist. If people are working for political interest of your nation then they are hero/good guys ..if they are working against your national interests then they are terrorist/bad guys..

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

There is no clear definition of terrorist and freedom fighters/hero. If someone political interests or ideology match with your idealogy then he is your hero if not then he is terrorist. If people are working for political interest of your nation then they are hero/good guys ..if they are working against your national interests then they are terrorist/bad guys..

Anybody who kills unarmed innocent civilians deliberately , no matter what the political goals , he is a terrorist. this much the civilised world agrees upon.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Who are the communists in Pakistan ?

Pakistani communists are hypocrites. They will never accept it in the open.

However you can spot them by their anti-West drivel.

Anybody who kills unarmed innocent civilians deliberately , no matter what the political goals , he is a terrorist. this much the civilised world agrees upon.

That definition is flawed.

Islamists use the same to call Pakistani army or NATO as "terrorist army".

Terrorists are just non-state actors, who kill loot or injure civilians AND government officials/forces.


peace

 

[muse]

Any culprit killed by drone, next day it become hero...even that hero responsible for the death of hundreds of Pakistanis. As far as urdu print media concern , most columnist of urdu daily has some strong affiliations with religious groups or under threat and those element forced them to write something positive .

All of that is so but urdu press is not pulling these ideas from it's collective behind - Who created Talib, Let , Lej, SSP and the rest of the alphabet soup? Why were they created? who was master of that ideology?

Please be fair, Urdu press inculcated the ideas that the state presented, who came up with the idea of attacking terrorists with drones to be illegal, the Pakistani state did, so why blame the urdu press, who came up with good talib and bad talib, the pakistani state did

See, there is an ideology at work here, if you choose to blame the Urdu press or media, do ask yourself what has been the state's ideological response to terrorism? "Angry BROTHERS" They kill 50,000 of us and the COAS refers to them as BROTHERS!!

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

Anybody who kills unarmed innocent civilians deliberately , no matter what the political goals , he is a terrorist. this much the civilised world agrees upon.

Well then according to this definition many people qualify as terrorist including some armies/soldiers who drop bombs and kill civilians of opposite side to create fear in their minds and to force them to retreat after giving them loss of lives...

 

[HAIDER]

All of that is so but urdu press is not pulling these ideas from it's collective behind - Who created Talib, Let , Lej, SSP and the rest of the alphabet soup? Why were they created? who was master of that ideology?

Please be fair, Urdu press inculcated the ideas that the state presented, who came up with the idea of attacking terrorists with drones to be illegal, the Pakistani state did, so why blame the urdu press, who came up with good talib and bad talib, the pakistani state did

See, there is an ideology at work here, if you choose to blame the Urdu press or media, do ask yourself what has been the state's ideological response to terrorism? "Angry BROTHERS" They kill 50,000 of us and the COAS refers to them as BROTHERS!!

May be we fail to advocate mainstream policy as per demanded by Pakistani people. Another aspect , which never been discuss , present govt fail to give any straight policy against terrorism to law enforcement agencies as of yet.

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

Well then according to this definition many people qualify as terrorist including some armies/soldiers who drop bombs and kill civilians of opposite side to create fear in their minds and to force them to retreat after giving them loss of lives...

Yes armies that kill unarmed civilians deliberately are behaving like terrorists , no doubt about that. At least the individuals in those armies are.

I am not talking about collateral damage here.

 

[Bobby]

If we finish this India Pakistan war whether on threads on any thing then we both can stand against America. Pakistan do not need to attack India. Attacking a nation is of no use. Both cannot save their own resources. One is supported by Russia and the other is by America. Acting like thread dolls. Both should unite together. The main enemy is not Pakistan. British ruled the sub continent. Both nation people are killed in it. We have created our own fights and they take the use of it.

That can only happen when both side accept LOC as international border and forget other part of Kashmir...unless it will continue...

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

Yes armies that kill unarmed civilians deliberately are behaving like terrorists , no doubt about that. At least the individuals in those armies are.

I am not talking about collateral damage here.

Civilians are purposefully targeted in modern warfare. You need to look at the numbers of innocent people got killed in world wars 1/2 and recently in Afghanistan/Iraq and compare it with those who lost their lives in suicide blasts or other terrorist activities. Why more civilians lost their lives during wars? When you drop bombs on enemy nation then you know that its going to take lives of many innocent people but you don't care because you can easily get away with it because you are wearing Army uniform. They say war is terrorism of rich man while suicide blast is terrorism of poor/helpless man who cannot afford conventional war

Again If you kill a person intentionally or unintentionally don't matter because he get killed in both cases for no valid reason. I don't think a mother/father will feel less pain because her/his son got killed because drones or bombs of army instead of suicide blasts of a terrorist..they both bring same terror and suffering for a family who lost their innocent son

 

[Saleem]

For the last many years, the Pakistani media has followed a trend of glorifying militants’ death by presenting them as heroes. The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) deputy chief, Waliur Rehman, is the latest entry on the list. Rehman was killed last month in a drone strike in North Waziristan. The TTP commander was lionised by the media as someone who died a hero’s death after living a militant’s life. Some news cartographers sketched Rehman’s life as a teacher and preacher.

Others put together conspiracy theories to paint a softer image of him within the ranks of hardcore militants. The dreaded TTP commander was projected as a pro-Pakistan fighter, who picked confrontation within the TTP ranks for his focus on attacks across the border. This one-sided portrayal apart, Rehman’s death is the end of yet another militant commander. He remained a vital part of the terror enterprise that consumed thousands of innocent lives. In his dozens of video appearances, Rehman never backed off from his commitment to challenge the Pakistani state and society.

Why are different groups of networked gangsters treated as heroes? The political economy of mass communication can be held responsible for popularising this variant of gutter journalism. However, the buck does not stop here. This issue is ideologically structured in Pakistan, which makes it important that we understand it. We have to look further to trace the ideological factors responsible for creating conditions, which help militancy to grow materially. Such conditions provide reason for some to join militancy and allow others to go scot-free after committing violence.

The concept of the security state and its role in the formation of national identity are central to the issue of militancy in Pakistan. Throughout its formative phase, political manoeuvering of the civil-military leadership to evolve itself into a principally structured force has derailed the country. Any opposition from within was associated with the existential threat from outside — India. Its purpose was two-pronged. First, to pave way for a centralised state structure, where the military was the symbol of national unity. And second, to silence opposing social and political forces, making the people believe that dissenting forces are a threat to national solidarity.

Imbued with the spirit of religiosity, a web of mythical events was created to help the establishment continue its power game by relying on retrogressive means. To make this ideology part of the people’s collective consciousness, an abridged history was promoted. The school textbook system, institutional codes, madrassa education and political dogmas of religious parties were all considered vital parts of the history project, which mainly aimed to construct national identity on uncontested mythical lines. Had such measures intended to benefit the country and its people, the outcome would have been different than what it is today.

Instead, this reductionist approach enabled the civil-military establishment to create a paranoiac situation in which, pluralistic social and democratic forces suffered the most. That is why militant forces supportive of the state ideology are always considered an asset. Years of terrorism should have helped civilians differentiate between a criminal and a saviour. However, the lethal binary of the good and the bad Taliban has created widespread confusion. By personifying the saviour and the savage within the same metaphor, this deceptive binary is not letting civilians differentiate enemy from friend and, therefore, much confusion has ensued.

Alarmingly, the state apparatus is also the victim of this confusion, which is evident in the lack of a cohesive approach to deal with the threat of militancy. Some official sections are committed to fight against the Taliban. But others believe that Taliban militants are their undeclared partners to materialise offshore projects. There is no doubt that the Pakistani security forces have rendered great sacrifices in fighting militants. However, these sacrifices have still not led to the dismantling of the channels of militants’ support. Understanding the state’s ideological foundation is important before militancy can be dismantled. Without doing so, merely mobilising military logistics is not going to win us this war.

In the given situation, Pakistanis need to understand the motives behind decades of official investment in creating a false history of the country. The media has a major role to play here, but it can only make a difference if journalists stop playing the role of ideological recruits. The media must challenge the structured nature of militancy. Otherwise, blaming only politicians for not controlling violence is as detrimental to democracy as the media’s own role in glorifying militant commanders.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 28th, 2013.

Portraying terrorist as heroes – The Express Tribune

poop from poop factory.....the real criminals are indian sponsered TTPs and the indian army of occupation in kashmir......

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

Civilians are purposefully targeted in modern warfare. You need to look at the numbers of innocent people got killed in world wars 1/2 and recently in Afghanistan/Iraq and compare it with those who lost their lives in suicide blasts or other terrorist activities. Why more civilians lost their lives during wars? When you drop bombs on enemy nation then you know that its going to take lives of many innocent people but you don't care because you can easily get away with it because you are wearing Army uniform. They say war is terrorism of rich man while suicide blast is terrorism of poor/helpless man who cannot afford conventional war

Again If you kill a person intentionally or unintentionally don't matter because he get killed in both cases for no valid reason. I don't think a mother/father will feel less pain because her/his son got killed because drones or bombs of army instead of suicide blasts of a terrorist..they both bring same terror and suffering for a family who lost their innocent son

I believe , that mental intent or mens rea to kill innocent civilians should be a major consideration before labeling an act as a terrorist act.

A drone missile that kills 3 civilians in a case of mistaken identity is not terrorism.

A terrorist who kills 3 civilians by planting bomb in a marathon is certainly terrorism.

Yes, if the drones deliberately target civilians , knowing that there is no terrorist there , then that is terrorism.

Mens Rea

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

I dont think wal ur rehman was treated as hero after his death.....his death was considered a loss because he was in favour of peace talks and was mature and sobre personality compared to hot-headed hakimullah mehsud....