Western Media’s War on Pakistan

Ahmed Bilal 134. . .

a) Everybody wants freedom, every bus driver wants freedom to be the only person on a route to the exclusion of every other bus driver . . . right . . . even Ladonia wants freedom (http://www.ladonia.com), does that mean every little splinter group wants freedom and will be given freedom?

b) OK, Kashmir wants freedom, hypothetically assume that was suddenly magic wand, so now what about all the non-Kashmiris resident in Kashmir and the Kashmiris resident in the rest of India, Pakistan, Birmingham etcetc? What about their views? Which era border of Kashmir does who choose?

c) India and Bangladesh/East Pakistan, please don`t even bother to compare this with Kashmir. Large parts of West Pakistan are still in a state of denial on the subject of the events in Pakistan leading to Bangladesh. Analyse them chronologically, have a public debate on it in Pakistan?

+++

This article was about media perception of Pakistan.

Tell you what, read my travelogue on my trip to Pakistan, and let me know why you think I did not carry a camera, and just took notes instead?

Bilal Sahib, you and Moeed Pirzada would make a better case for your country`s image if you petitioned the powers that be to simply permit media personnel to move around freely in atleast some parts of the country. Reportage when permitted liberties, gets tired of criticising . . . whereas reportage when blocked tends to only criticise.

+++

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

re:#126 by ankit
That is nothing.
Pak sent a borrowed, used satellite into orbit and claimed it is better than India`s!
http://www.defencejournal.com/2002/nov/pak-satellite.htm``

``The urgency to place its first satellite in the Geo-Stationary Orbit was realised in the middle of last year, by which time Pakistan had already lost four of its five allotted space slots. The five slots were allotted to Pakistan by ITU (International Telecommunication Union), way back in 1984, but the country failed to launch any satellite till 1995. That year Pakistan again applied for and received the five slots, but once again the government failed to put up a satellite in orbit, losing four of it slots in the process. According to officials, if Pakistan failed to launch its satellite by April 19, 2003, the country will loose its fifth and last 38-degree east slot, and the availability of these space slots is getting difficult every day.

he leased satellite is currently being used by Turkey but by December 23, this year, it would be moved from Turkey’s 50 degrees east slot to Pakistan’s 38 east. The Satellite is at present called Anatolia 1. (Its been called Palapa C1 / Hughes HGS 3 / Anatolia 1 / Paksat 1 !) Turkey itself is the third user of the satellite, which originally belonged to Hughes Global Services Company who are the operators of the satellite.``
So, the satellite was moved from its previous slot to this new slot.

This then is the story of how Pak has a satellite in Geostationary orbit. Technically it is true but Pak did not launch that satellite. It does not have the capablity.

The reality is: there are only a handful of nations with this capability at present, India being the last such nation.
http://www.blonnet.com/2003/01/07/stories/2003010700110900.htm

``The primary companies involved in this activity are ArianeSpace (Ariane) of France; International Launch Services (ILS) — a joint venture between the American defence and aerospace giant Lockheed Martin and the Russian organisations Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Centre and RSC Energia; the American Delta family of launch vehicles developed by Boeing; and Zenit Sea Launch, a joint venture between Boeing, RSC Energia, Kvaerner of Norway and SDO Yuzhnoye/PO Yuzhmash of Ukraine. Other players include the Chinese, who have developed the Long March rockets, and the Japanese, with their H-IIA launch vehicle.
With the launch of India`s first GSLV rocket in April 2001, India joined this group with the ability to launch a satellite into a geosynchronous orbit. Satellites in a geostationary orbit, 36,000 km above the earth on the equator, appear to remain fixed over a particular part because they move at the same speed and direction as the earth`s rotation.``
Sridhar

#131 by arjun_m on April 28, 2004 7:45am PT

Honesty can’t ever by a one way thing. Indians did the same “support, train, arm terrorist groups…” thing in East Pakistan. And Indian army in Kashmir is doing something similar to what Pakistani army was doing in East Pakistan (in the name of fighting terrorist groups, unleashing atrocities on a civilian population which wants freedom). None of this is anything to be proud of for either India or Pakistan. Anyway, the point is that India is managing to get away with murder (in Kashmir, “security forces have reportedly been responsible for the killing of over 250 civilians in targeted and indiscriminate violence since the beginning of 2003” according to Amnesty International) due to strong public relations. On the other hand, Pakistan is being unfairly demonized beyond all limits of normal criticism. And we certainly need to counter this through a well-focused media campaign. I think that’s what this article was about.

#130 by Humsab on April 28, 2004 0:26am PT

`` All non-muslim religions teach cruelty and way to lead a low-life. Only Islam tells its followers to lead an egalitarian life style. Only if those at helm of affair could look into the roots of violence perpetrated by these muslim militants! But everyone in the world is unreasonable and out to do all kind of injustice to the followers of this egalitarian religion.

Why oh why everyone in this world is unreasonable? ``

I know what you mean..... makes me cry... Bwaah... bwaaaahhhh..... bwaaaaaahhhhhhh

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

After Palestine, Chechneya, India, Philipine and whole of the western world, Thailand has also turned oppressor of Muslims and Human Rights of Muslims. Otherwise, there is no reason that all these muslim militants would have existed in Thailand. Like all other countries, societies in the world, Thailand has also enterd its name in the list of Nations which are againt Islam and should be fought against. Jehadi Inc. will now have another destination to expand its tentacles and then cry to the world about Injustice, Cruelty, Human Rights Violations of everyone except Muslims because all except Muslims are Tyrants and Cruel.
All non-muslim religions teach cruelty and way to lead a low-life. Only Islam tells its followers to lead an egalitarian life style. Only if those at helm of affair could look into the roots of violence perpetrated by these muslim militants! But everyone in the world is unreasonable and out to do all kind of injustice to the followers of this egalitarian religion.

Why oh why everyone in this world is unreasonable?

Did anyone notice that most of the news stories being sent by some of our friendly neighbors are full of statements which are from ``the official`` and ``the authorities``? I wonder why none of the respective governments (other than our neighbors of course) take any notice of these stories. On various occasions, one finds Indian reporters being politely asked to shut up during White House briefings when they unsuccessfully try to bring such stories in. However, these are all good examples of media war. But in the world where even petty shoplifters would get linked to terrorism because it is the latest buzz world in the global politics (since communism retired), it is not even funny anymore to read stuff like ``Terrorists born in UK, raised in Afghanistan, funded by Saudi Arabia, trained in Kashmir by Pakistan to attack targets in India were caught in Australia by US authorities while they were planning attacks against the penguin population of Antarctica``. You guys are getting too predictable and monotonous.

Tahmed32 #125

{{Throughout the 90`s, poor BJP tried its best to convince the west that Pakistan was an evil state.}}

For those who didn’t catch it right off the bat, Professor Tahmed apparently believes that the BJP was ruling India throughout the 1990’s – and also, by the way, that the current troubles in Kashmir began when the BJP changed the constitutional status of J&K.

Such is the man when in form.

#122 by His Excellecy

+++++
However, George Bush`s 7% rating in Pakistan is not surprising. Even in America, the man has been losing popularity for quite a while now.
+++++

George Bush has a 7% rating in Pakistan, so has Tony Blair while Osama Bin Laden has 65%. That just about sums up whether this opinion poll in Pakistan reflects ``Western Media’s War on Pakistan`` or ``Pakistanis` War On The West``.

+++++
The West (most notably America) spoiled its image in Pakistan through Pressler Amendment .....
+++++

His Excellency seems to be blissfully unaware that the Pressler Amendment was passed to actually help out the Zia ul-Huq regime by providing an escape hatch from the cutoff date mandated by the Symington Amendment. Here`s how a Pakistani newspaer describes the situation:

---

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_14-7-2002_pg3_8

Daily Times, Pakistan
July 14, 2002

..... at the time when the Pressler amendment was passed in 1986, it was intended to serve as an enabling device to allow US military and economic aid to Pakistan to continue, rather than as a punitive measure.

The Symington amendment to the US Foreign Assistance Act was passed in 1977. Under this amendment, aid to countries believed to be developing nuclear weapons was to end within ten years — that is, by 1987. Pakistan was one of the countries that would have been hit by this deadline.

By the early 1980s, however, Pakistan had become a frontline state in the US-backed guerrilla war against Soviet forces in Afghanistan and the Reagan administration wanted to ensure that American aid to Pakistan continued beyond the cutoff date specified in the Symington amendment.

To get around this problem, the Reagan administration came up with the idea of persuading Senator Larry Pressler of South Dakota to sponsor an amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act that would allow aid to Pakistan to continue provided the US president certified at the start of each US fiscal year that Pakistan was not developing a nuclear bomb.

The administration threw its full weight behind the amendment, which was duly passed in 1986, about a year before the Symington aid cutoff date. The Pakistan-specific Pressler amendment allowed President Reagan to certify in October 1987 and again in October 1988 that Pakistan was not developing a nuclear bomb, allowing aid to this country to continue.

A similar certification was made by President George Bush in October 1989 and aid to Pakistan continued to flow. ..... the next certification date came up in October 1990. It was then that President Bush declared that he could no longer certify that Pakistan was not developing a nuclear bomb, thus bringing the punitive provisions of the Pressler amendment into effect.

---

+++++
The West (most notably America) spoiled its image in Pakistan through ..... the Middle-East policy.
+++++

Is it His Excellency`s contention that ``The West (most notably America)`` has changed its Middle East policy? He is most certainly wrong. The west remains as committed to the survival of Israel today as it has always been in the past.

This might help His Excellency to explain why Osama Bin Laden enjoys 65% approval in Pakistan while Bush or Blair enjoy 7% approval.

But more importantly, that just about sums up whether this opinion poll in Pakistan reflects ``Western Media’s War on Pakistan`` or ``Pakistanis` War On The West``.

+++++
The West (most notably America) spoiled its image in Pakistan through ..... the Middle-East policy.
+++++

His Excellency is being grossly unfair to the West and Israel alike. Sometimes it is wise to walk a little in the other party`s mocasins before giving vent to one`s outrage.

Cooler tempers might prevail if His Excellency mulls over what he would have done in 1948 if he were a holocaust survivor. Wouldn`t he have done everything in his power to defeat the Arab armies that invaded Israel?

More importantly, His Excellency might want to mull over the fact that Palestine was a two-way street at that moment in history. Yes, many a Palestinian ( 0.5 million?) fled his ancestral home in the wake of Palestine`s partition. But at least an equal number of Jews got thrown out from Arab countries (from Morocco to Iraq) and even from Iran.

Today, the majority of Jews in Israel are Shephardic Jews most of whom have either lived in Palestine for centuries or are from Arab lands.

In fact, the downfall of the Labor Party in Israel and the rise of the hard line Likud is specifically related to this demographic mix - the better educated Ashkenazic Jews (of Yiddish heritage) yielding to the numerically dominant Shephardic Jews.

Needless to say, these Shephardic Jews have no reason to feel that they owe anything to the Palestinians who had lost their ancestral home. More importantly, the Shephardic Jews have genuine cause to resent the Arab countries that threw them out of their ancestral home in the aftermath of Palestine`s partition.

If His Excellency mulls over the facts, I am sure he`ll see how illogical and unreasonable it was for him to denounce the Jewish people and use that as an excuse to explain the Pakistanis` war on the west.

More importantly, he will realize how unreasonable are those that will not settle for peace for anything less than the Palestinians` right to return to their ancestral land.

bbabu #123 I feel your pain brother, along with that of many Indians, that Pakistan has been let off too easily on terrorism. It wasnt for lack of trying though on the part of the saints who run India. Throughout the 90`s, poor BJP tried its best to convince the west that Pakistan was an evil state. Didnt work. Then the noble souls in Delhi tried to blow a few peaceful nukes on Pakistan`s borders. Didnt work (laynay kay daynay par gaye!!!). Sent a million chaps to the Pakistan borders to try and convince Pakistanis. They were refused even simple tourist visas so they could come and try to explain the situation. FINALLY, the US stepped in and got poor bloody BJP off the hook.

Just kidding. I have read your earlier posts, and know you are a sincere and intelligent person, and not a piece of trash like some of your countrymen on chowk. I am with you 100 percent on the issue of jehadists. They are a threat to civilized society and need to be treated as the criminials they are. The Pakistan govenrment should never have tolerated them.


As for your simple question for Pakistanis. The answer is obvious: because the government did not stand up to them, and because the governemnt sponsored teh taliban who sponsored all kinds of islamist scum from around the world - middle east, central asia as well as from pakistan.

120# by sridhar

// re: Paki fantasies //

this is what they call the equal equal game..

consider this. when professing establishment of trade ties with india, pakistani ambassador to india said that while pakistan will benefit from India`s expertise in IT and software, India stands to gain from Paki ``expertise`` in textiles..!! Now where did that come from?

#123 by bbabu
//....how come Arabs like Osama and Ayman Zawahiri are hiding in Afghanistan-Pakistan border but not in their home countries...//

One more ``hate-mongerer``. (Pakis - add this guy to your list)

How could you ask such a question? You are a ``hate-mongerer``. Which is not surprising because there are so many Indian hate-mongeres in chowk.

`` While most Pakistanis complain of a media blitz against their country and society, few have given serious thought to what this means in the longer term. It may be time to realize that in the evolving information and disinformation driven global order, many small and developing states can virtually disappear if they fail to understand and control the way in which they are projected. ``

What media blitz ?? If anything Pakistan has been treated too easily ??

`` Iraq may not be a good example as it was physically attacked, but at the same time, it is important to remember that it was stripped of its legitimacy to ``self rule`` through a sustained media-led disinformation campaign. Ironically, the way in which events are unfolding, Iraq might not be able to survive as one national unit for very long. ``

Under Saddam Hussein did the Iraqis have self rule ? If Iraq fragments it is due to infighting between Arabs, Kurds, Shites and Sunnis. Score an assist for Bush and USA

`` Similarly, the dehumanization of the Taliban had been going on for quite some time before the tragic events of 9/11. The terrorist attacks acted as an immediate catalyst but the Taliban, who were out of sync with reality, had forfeited their right to survival a long time ago. It may be relevant to raise the question: If Pakistan is a ``media-targeted`` state then what are the implications? ``

Dehumanization of Taliban ?? I did not know they were human :-)

`` Recently, Pakistan`s former minister for information Mr Javed Jabbar contributed a piece to this newspaper titled ``Facing a media world war``. That analytical piece was, within the limitations of a newspaper article, a ``tour de force``, on the subject and is a must read for all those who profess a serious interest in media challenges faced by Pakistan. ``

Media challenges is for countries that need to lie and to deceive. The list of deceptions from Pakistan is long -

1. We do not support the Taliban
2. We do not give weapons to Kashmiri rebels
3. We did not trade nukes to North Korea

A simple question for Pakistanis is
how come Arabs like Osama and Ayman Zawahiri are hiding in Afghanistan-Pakistan border but not in their home countries.

#119 by nakhok

The opinion polls that you posted present the other side of the coin. While Pakistan`s image in the West is negative (despite some improvement since 9/11), the West`s image in Pakistan is also very poor. Pakistan spoiled its image in the West by supporting Taliban in the 1990s and proliferating nuclear technology. The West (most notably America) spoiled its image in Pakistan through Pressler Amendment and the Middle-East policy.

However, since 9/11 the relationship as well as the image is on the mend. America has removed all sanctions against Pakistan, given it MNNA status and also debt relief. Pakistan on the other hand, has ditched the extremist Taliban leadership and become a frontline ally in the war against terrorism. (On the nuclear issue, Pakistan has still much more cleaning up to do).

However, George Bush`s 7% rating in Pakistan is not surprising. Even in America, the man has been losing popularity for quite a while now.