What's new

UN Slams Indian Media distortions

The reaction of the Indian media aside, Mr. Haq still did misquote Mr. Moon.....and the fact that Mr.Moon rejected and denied making this comment is a great diplomatic victory.....

Whether the UN Secretariat sent out the statement does not alter the fack, this was still a major case of circulating misinformation by the individual aimed at trying to garner more punch to the statement....
His intentions are debatable....
 
Yh kya hua india ko mun ki perh gai :D
another attempt of India to defame the image of their own country. Hena jha?

Martin Nesirky, is a paid ISI agent..
 
This is called "Bolti bandh karna".

Indian media was the prime player in highlight the Kashmir issue this time :)
 
Pakistanis on higher post on International organizations will always try to defame India. Such organizations must make a note of it.

Any anti Indian slogan is of Pakistan origin for sure.
 
Pakistanis on higher post on International organizations will always try to defame India. Such organizations must make a note of it.

Any anti Indian slogan is of Pakistan origin for sure.

NO, like i said before

Martin Nesirky, is a paid ISI agent..

He is not of Pakistani origin.
 
What did Martin Nesirky say against India again?? Not a media house..//

He said all this, cant you read?
Nesirky also slammed the Indian press for suggesting Haq's "ethnicity" as a possible motivation for the remarks on Kashmir, which New Delhi has strongly objected to. Haq is an American citizen born in Washington DC with roots in Pakistan.


"I won't tolerate insults being directed against my colleagues," a visibly agitated Nesirky told journalists at the regular briefing at the UN.

"I really take exception to the insinuations based on ethnicity that I've seen in Indian publications. I firmly reject them," he said. "Not only are they offensive, they are wrong."

Nesirky clarified that the "media guidance" was prepared by the UN Secretariat and only distributed by the UN spokeperson's office.

Nesirky singled out a leading business daily from Delhi which ran a story "Pakistan man concocted UN Secretary General's J&K remark" and said he had written to its Editor pointing out that the media guidance was "not prepared or concocted in his office" but instead reiterated that it had come from the UN Secretariat.

"I reject absolutely any insinuation in this direction," the spokesperson said. "Its just plain wrong and it is offensive."


However indian media should focus on this guy Vijay Nambiar :D I think he is a traitor, he should be punished :flame:

Nesirky, however, did not offer any comment when asked by a Western correspondent about the role of Ban's chief of staff and former Indian diplomat, Vijay Nambiar, in the issuing of the original remarks and its later withdrawal.

Western correspondents have quoted sources as saying that Nambiar had approved the statement before it went out in July.
 
Did any statement come from Cameron about going back on his original comment. ??

Any way .. On topic... So observations

1. A aide of Pakistani origin releases a guidance misconstrueing it as a statement from UN Sec Gen
2. Pakistan goes to town claiming victory on UN's stand on Kashmir
3. UN issues an official statement clarifying that the original statement was not a statement from the UN Sec Gen and shouldnt be taken as such
4. Indian media reacts and blames the Pakistani origin of the aid who released the original statement for the deliberate mistake
5. UN defends the aide of Pakistani origin and objects to Indian media's Insinuation that the mistake was deliberate..
6. Pakistani folks are again claiming victory that the UN has ripped into the Indian media. (Not Indian state)
7. UN's stand on the original issue is still same that Ban Ki Moon did not make any statement on Kashmir
 
He said all this, cant you read?



However indian media should focus on this guy Vijay Nambiar :D I think he is a traitor, he should be punished :flame:

So refuting a claim made by a newspaper of that country amounts to making statements against the country :rofl:

And your second statement.. Doesnt that refute all the nonsense spewed on this forum that India pressure resulted in the withdrawl of the statement..??:azn:
 
So refuting a claim made by a newspaper of that country amounts to making statements against the country :rofl:

And your second statement.. Doesnt that refute all the nonsense spewed on this forum that India pressure resulted in the withdrawl of the statement..??:azn:

I am waiting for you to comment on Vijay Nambiar

The rest of your post is BS asusual.
 
While i admire certain aspects of the Indian Media in general, at times many of them let go of journalistic ethics when they see a chance to bash anything Pakistani. It is also true for many on this side of the border.

When you publish one-sided news, it is bound to bounce back. Ofcourse, this kind of news sells given the tensions and no questions are asked.

But this is where role of media becomes critical. If media were to cater to the mood of the public, it would be compromising on it's first primary rule, unbias reporting. But, as they say, truth is the first casualty of war. And many in the media are also a pawn of those who are fighting this one.
 
I am waiting for you to comment on Vijay Nambiar

The rest of your post is BS asusual.

If you read before writing, you will see I have responded to your Vijay Nambiar comment...

---------- Post added at 01:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:16 PM ----------

While i admire certain aspects of the Indian Media in general, at times many of them let go of journalistic ethics when they see a chance to bash anything Pakistani. It is also true for many on this side of the border.

When you publish one-sided news, it is bound to bounce back. Ofcourse, this kind of news sells given the tensions and no questions are asked.

But this is where role of media becomes critical. If media were to cater to the mood of the public, it would be compromising on it's first primary rule, unbias reporting. But, as they say, truth is the first casualty of war. And many in the media are also a pawn of those who are fighting this one.

Very nice...:cheers:
 
Karan Ban Ke Moon Spokesperson has clearly given the statement that Mr Haq did not distort any statement.The statement came directly from UN Secretariat but Indian Media started jumping as if Mr Haq made the statement himself.
Nesirky also slammed the Indian press for suggesting Haq's "ethnicity" as a possible motivation for the remarks on Kashmir, which New Delhi has strongly objected to. Haq is an American citizen born in Washington DC with roots in Pakistan.

"I won't tolerate insults being directed against my colleagues," a visibly agitated Nesirky told journalists at the regular briefing at the UN.
Ban Ke Moon later changed his statement but Indians were jumping as if Mr Haq made the statement.
 
Karan Ban Ke Moon Spokesperson has clearly given the statement that Mr Haq did not distort any statement.The statement came directly from UN Secretariat but Indian Media started jumping as if Mr Haq made the statement himself.

Ban Ke Moon later changed his statement but Indians were jumping as if Mr Haq made the statement.

Sure.. I dont dispute that UN has backed up Haq's on Indian media's insinuations about his Pakistani origins.

However Haq did mislead the reporters by saying that the statement was from the UN Sec Gen while it was not. It was a press guidance from the UN Secretariat.

And the Indian media never said that Haq made the statement up. It just highlighted (and went overboad) that Haq misrepresented the source of the statement and blamed his Pakistani bias.

btw, UN still maintains that the statement was not from the Sec Gen.
 
Ban's office denies Kashmir remark, role of Pak-origin spokesperson under scanner


The role of the Pakistani-origin spokesperson of UN Secretary-General Mr Ban Ki-Moon has come under scanner with the denial of the UN chief's controversial remarks on Kashmir by his office.
Spokesperson Mr Farhan Haq e-mailed a statement to journalists at the UN headquarters in New York last week stating that Mr Ban “is concerned over the prevailing security situation” in “Indian-administered Kashmir”. This was a reference to the turmoil in the Kashmir valley in which a number of lives have been lost.
Mr Haq went on to say that the Secretary-General called on “all concerned to exercise utmost restraint and address problems peacefully.” Concerned over the gratuitous remarks, which were seen as a departure from diplomatic norms, India took up the matter through its mission to the UN.
The ministry of external affairs said in a statement here today that Mr Ban's office has clarified that no question about Kashmir was raised at any Press conference “nor was any such comment made by the UN Secretary General.”
This denial also applies to another part of Mr Haq's statement which talked about Secretary-General's backing the resumption of composite dialogue between Indian and Pakistan which New Delhi does not favour unless Islamabad addresses the issue of terrorism.
The denial flies in the face of Mr Haq's statement which said: “He (Ban) encourages both sides to rekindle the spirit of composite dialogue which was initiated in 2004 and had made encouraging progress on some important confidence building measures, and to make renewed efforts to address outstanding issues, including on Jammu and Kashmir.”
Diplomatic observers here were of the view that either Mr Haq had issued an unauthorised statement or Mr Ban's office was backtracking in the face of Indian reaction.

===========

MOD EDIT: Adding UN response to comments in Indian media attacking Mr. Haq:


An extraordinary attack on the Indian media and defence of Pakistani-origin aide of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon marked another round of the raging row over Kashmir at the world body's headquarters here.

Ban's chief spokesperson Martin Nesirky defended his colleague Farhan Haq, associate spokesman, who is in the centre of the controversy, against attacks in the Indian press that suggested Haq was responsible for the remarks concerning the violence in Kashmir, which came out of the United Nations on July 28.

Nesirky also slammed the Indian press for suggesting Haq's "ethnicity" as a possible motivation for the remarks on Kashmir, which New Delhi has strongly objected to. Haq is an American citizen born in Washington DC with roots in Pakistan.

"I won't tolerate insults being directed against my colleagues," a visibly agitated Nesirky told journalists at the regular briefing at the UN.

Ads by Google Tata Orissa Steel Project Together for Growth & Prosperity A Promise to New Orissa.Kalinganagar.tatastePakistan News and Photos Latest and Exclusive Pakistan News Politics, Photos, Business, SportsCentralAsiaOnline.coHow to Spot Multibaggers 4 Proven Approaches to Identify High-Return Stocks More Easily!Equitymaster.com/Mul

"I really take exception to the insinuations based on ethnicity that I've seen in Indian publications. I firmly reject them," he said. "Not only are they offensive, they are wrong."

The e-mail containing controversial remarks was originally sent out by Haq to journalists of three Pakistani publications who had been asking questions about Kashmir since the unrest mounted after June 11 when a 17-year-old student died after being hit by a teargas shell fired by police during a protest.

The remarks noted that the Secretary General called on "all concerned to exercise utmost restraint and address problems peacefully" and he "encourages both sides to rekindle the spirit of the composite dialogue".

Following protests by the Indian government, the UN backtracked from the statement and described it as a "media guidance" and not a "statement by the Secretary General."

Nesirky clarified that the "media guidance" was prepared by the UN Secretariat and only distributed by the UN spokeperson's office. Haq, however, has been slammed by the Indian media for his role in the passage of controversial e-mail.

Nesirky singled out a leading business daily from Delhi which ran a story "Pakistan man concocted UN Secretary General's J&K remark" and said he had written to its Editor pointing out that the media guidance was "not prepared or concocted in his office" but instead reiterated that it had come from the UN Secretariat.

"I reject absolutely any insinuation in this direction," the spokesperson said. "Its just plain wrong and it is offensive."

Nesirky, however, did not offer any comment when asked by a Western correspondent about the role of Ban's chief of staff and former Indian diplomat, Vijay Nambiar, in the issuing of the original remarks and its later withdrawal.

"No I can't (comment)," he said, even as Western correspondents have quoted sources as saying that Nambiar had approved the statement before it went out in July.

New Delhi has taken offence to both parts of the statement -- the first, which calls for exercise of restraint in Kashmir and the second that touches on India-Pakistan peace negotiations.

The Indian government has asserted that these remarks have been seized upon by separatists and Pakistan to back their cause.

For instance, Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, this week, cited Ban's remarks as reflecting the "collective concern of the international community at the human rights violations" in Jammu and Kashmir.

The Indian sides also insisted that the remarks were made in complete disregard to the Indian position that the composite dialogue can only be renewed after Pakistan prosecutes the terrorists who were responsible for the 26/11 attacks in Mumbai.
--
Indian Media exposed yet again.:yahoo::yahoo:
Well obviously ethnicity is a main factor why this was brought up all of a sudden. UN better back its statements up next time with contrary evidence to what is visible on the proof rather than retaliating when caught with their stupid pants down.

First of all, that spokesman guy shouldn't have given this to the media as though it is from Ban Ki Moon himself. First he says nonsense and then retracts back only for the UN to stupidly retaliate.

UN should either make official announcements or learn to keep its officials under control.
 
Back
Top Bottom