How Free is ’free?’

PU teacher threatened with sacking for writing on inflation

* Journalists, APNS vice president condemn notice

By Ali Waqar

LAHORE: A senior Punjab University teacher has been issued a notice under the Removal form Service Ordinance (RSO) 2000 by the Punjab governor’s secretariat for writing a column on inflation in a national newspaper.

Journalists and All Pakistan Newspapers Society (APNS) Vice President Mujeebur Rehman Shami, speaking at the PU Mass Communication Department, condemned the move as a violation of the right to freedom of expression.

bbabu u need to get your facts straight -- pakistani newspapers carried stories from international wire services of the london attacks -- by AFP, reuters and AP so on-- good you read the dawn editorial on the saudi women drivers issue -- perhaps you need to read dawn, the news and daily times more carefully -- and by the way, since you seem to be such an expert on the pakistani print media why not post under your real name -- oh, wait a min, i thought courage and integrity were things only pakistani journalists lacked -- haha

Many news items are not published simply out of (editorial) choice. Choice is a matter of values. `Man killed dog` may be very important news for dogs, but not for men, unless the dead dog belongs to an important man.

rozaiba #1
`` The media in Pakistan is indeed very free. ``

The Pakistani media (dawn, jang etc) are not completely free. They were very controlled in what they say.

1. The first response to the suspects in the London bombings was to identify them as South Asian as opposed to pakistani. The response was uniform among the English language newspapers.

2. They never reported on the Sudan civil war against Animist rebels. They did report the Darfur since the victims were also Muslim.

3. They danced around with the facts when anti-Chinese riots broke out in Indonesia.

4. They are pretty silent on anything critical of Saudi Arabia. This is the most serious criticism. I have seen only one editorial critical of women right to drive. It was last week. Maybe the checks did not arrive on time :-)

5. They are awfully quiet on the Burmese government which is among the top ten in terms of brutality and human right violations. Also it is a country that borders India and is in the neighborhood.

omar_r_quariashi

The tack you and most other Pakistani journalists adopt is completely different from the one taken up by Amir Ali. No one of us can say whether you guys are right or Amir Ali is right, but while the Pakistani government can safely ignore all you, they can`t ignore Amir Ali.

For instance, in your editorial, you make excellent points. You point out that the Pakistani government had said the right things but has not followed up sufficiently. The government has made attempts to reform Madrassas. It has tried to control militancy and curb religious fanaticism. It has sought to mobilize progressive and liberal Muslim scholars and intellectuals on behalf of an enlightened course. However, the government`s efforts were half-hearted and have failed.

That`s well stated, but Amir Ali has followed an entirely different direction. He has focused on uncovering specific reports that the Pakistani government has been pro-actively working with Jihadi terrorists and protecting international criminals.

In essence, you are alleging good-natured incompetence. Amir Ali is alleging criminality.

Re: # 40 kaal

Good points.

arjun_M -- morons of course will never learn -- you stupid idiot did you even read the Dawn/Daily Times editorials ? jai ram jee kee

mullah omar: The paki jihadis are freer than the paki press

To Many, Talk of a Crackdown in Pakistan Seems Hollow
By SOMINI SENGUPTA and DAVID ROHDE

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, July 19 - Three and a half years ago, in a speech that crystallized a post-Sept. 11 turnaround, President Pervez Musharraf vowed to eradicate extremism in his country. ``We will take strict action against any Pakistani who is involved in terrorism inside the country or abroad,`` he said.

That was Pakistan, Jan. 12, 2002.

This week, evidence that three of the four London bombing suspects had visited Pakistan for up to three months last year has thrown new light on old facts.

Despite government promises and denials, radical groups continue to operate in Pakistan. Religious schools, or madrasas, still indoctrinate and recruit would-be militants to fight abroad. Several leaders and members of these extremist groups, arrested in 2002, are back on the street. Militant training camps remain; one Western diplomat said they have just ``changed addresses.``

Now, Pakistani officials have answered the London attacks with an investigation into any potential links here and calls for a fresh crackdown on militant groups. But the question arises whether the new steps will be any more effective in snuffing out extremism than efforts past.

On Monday, an editorial in The Daily Times, an English-language newspaper, asked in a headline: ``Is Pakistan Still a Launch-Pad for Terrorism?``

If the London bombing suspects did arrive here seeking contacts with extremists, they may not have been the only ones, American and Pakistani officials say.

Another young Briton of Pakistani descent, Zeeshan Siddique, was arrested on his visit here last May. He is being investigated for ties to radical Islamist groups and bomb plots in London. A journal kept by Mr. Siddique includes a March 6, 2005, entry, in which he laments that one of his contacts is ``chickening out.`` A week later, he learned that ``wagon is now called off.`` British officials are trying to discern whether ``wagon`` refers to a planned attack.

#34 by omar_r_quraishi on July 20, 2005 1:43am PT


that, to you, is dwelling on generalisms??


Let`s see you name names....


Press freedom ‘predators’ in 2004

PARIS: RSF released a 34-strong list of what it calls media freedom “predators” – leaders and organisations around the world it accuses of “direct responsibility for press freedom violations”.

RSF said that because of the individuals or organisations it named, “journalists have been murdered, imprisoned, physically attacked and threatened in 2004”.

New to the list are Bangladeshi Interior Minister Lutfozzaman Babor, Bangladesh’s Maoist party Purbobanglar, Ivory Coast’s Young Patriots militia, Gambian President Yahya Jammeh and Nigeria’s State Security Service. The list also includes the name of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. afp

This was in The daily times 04/29

Press not free in Pakistan, says Freedom House

By Khalid Hasan

Washington: Freedom House, which monitors the sate of freedom around the world every year, has placed Pakistan among countries where the press is “Not Free.”

According to Freedom House which released the survey this week, “Pakistan dropped from Partly Free to Not Free because of increased official harassment of journalists and media outlets, in addition to passage of a bill that increased penalties for defamation. The moves followed other aggressive measures taken over the last two years by military authorities to silence critical or investigative voices in the media. A number of journalists have been pressured to resign from prominent publications, charged with sedition, or arrested and intimidated by intelligence officials while in custody.” Only two countries - Pakistan and Kenya - registered a negative category shift in 2004, moving from Partly Free to Not Free. Pakistan was also among countries where Freedom House said “notable setbacks” had taken place. Others so listed were Kenya, Mexico, Venezuela, and in the United States itself.

ballu -- arent you the uncle tom muslim from india who used to criticize the likes of me endlessly and say that the pakistani press isnt free -- you are that very uncle tom , arent you?

Re: # 36
Bachoon jaisi baat mat karo............I am praising you for doing the right thing this time.........but sometimes you tend to show your immaturity when you get into the slanging and name calling (uncle tom!!) match.......

arjun_m -- i thought u were only an RSS lover and card-carrying VHP activist -- but your last post seems to suggest your also blind as a bat -- read the article again u moron -- its not generalized, it full of specific examples and policy measures taken by the MMA govt in the NWFP and is specifically on the hasba bill`s passage in the NWFP provincial legislature -- that, to you, is dwelling on generalisms??

and this is an editorial i wrote for my paper which appeared in the july 20 edition:


Not by rhetoric alone



PRESIDENT Musharraf has spoken the right words in combating rising religious extremism and fanaticism. Speaking at a national youth convention in Islamabad, he said that it was important to fight this scourge because if elected to political office such elements would take Pakistan back to the dark ages. With reference to the London attacks of July 7, he castigated those who advocated or supported such actions saying that it was in fact against the tenets of Islam to blow up oneself in order to kill innocent people. Without doubt, this is the right stance to adopt in dealing with the menace of religious obscurantism and fanaticism.

The only problem — and a major one at that — however, is that we have heard these words many times before. We have also seen that the some of the key institutions in the country which can take the initiative in fighting the fanatics have done little to expose the dangers of militancy. For instance, the government has completely failed in its half-hearted attempt to regulate the madressahs, to modernize their curriculum and to bring these institutions within the ambit of government monitoring. In fact, the whole approach to this issue of madressah registration has been obfuscated with the education minister supporting regulation and the religious affairs minister opposing it. The madressahs are now in the spotlight once again because three of the London bombers are believed to have visited some in Pakistan prior to the attacks. Similarly, the government has also failed in its attempts to stop mosque imams from routinely branding those of other sects or faiths as ‘kafirs’ or from glorifying a militant version of Islam at odds with, and bent on converting, the non-Muslim world. It has failed to mobilize the active support of Muslim scholars and intellectuals who believe in a progressive and liberal vision of Islam and who could be an important bulwark against religious intolerance and bigotry. And, there are now reports that jihadi training camps are back in business, although with much less publicity. So where is the government in all of this? The fight against religious extremism and for a more progressive and tolerant Pakistan has to be fought on these fronts but, regrettably, it is nowhere to be found. Until that happens, what the president has said will remain empty rhetoric.



you`re pretty much a paki-hating moron arjun_m -- i suggest for your own sake and credibility (if there is any) you try and be just a bit balanced

Re: # 34
Wel done Omar- I think the hour of reckoning for Mush`s Pakistan is going to be this Hasba bill and how he ensures that it does not go through.

Controls are ubiquitous. Distinctions arise regarding the scope, locus, and nature of control mechanisms.

Different control mechanisms have different degrees of (internal and external) legitimacy, and therefore create different `internal` consequences in the long-term.

In the short-term, and from objective external perspectives, they can certainly look very much the same.

Here`s where we indians are at.Maybe, paks should learn from india`s example??.Press freedom is a start.After all, Mr.Singh was born in Pakistan.His speech to the US Congress should be a matter of pride for Paks too.In the same token, i dare say your present dictatorship is the most enlightened , `cause Mr.Musharaf was born in India, and freedom and openness is part of our indian psyche.Here`s the BBC take on Mr.Singh`s speech....

Last Updated: Tuesday, 19 July, 2005, 16:36 GMT 17:36 UK

BBC News

India assures US over nuclear aid

Mr Singh is being treated as an honoured guest in the US

India`s Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has told the US Congress his country can be trusted with nuclear technology.

US President George W Bush said on Tuesday he would push for Congress to lift sanctions on supplying civilian nuclear technology to Delhi.

Mr Singh told Congress that India and the US must draw on shared democratic values to boost trade and fight terror.

Correspondents say Mr Singh`s US trip is set to cement a major alliance in the new diplomatic landscape.

The Indian leader on Tuesday became one of a small group of trusted allies invited to address both houses of the US Congress.

He told US lawmakers the ``field of civil nuclear energy is a vital area for co-operation between our two countries``.

We are at a juncture in history where we can embark on a partnership that draws both on principle and pragmatism

Manmohan Singh


Breakthrough in India-US ties

India has obeyed all international laws aimed at checking the proliferation of nuclear technology, Mr Singh said, even though ``we have witnessed unchecked nuclear proliferation in our own neighbourhood`` - an apparent reference to neighbour Pakistan.

India and Pakistan conducted tit-for-tat nuclear tests in 1998, sparking sanctions and condemnation from the US.

President Bush`s willingness to share nuclear technology with India marks an important shift in US foreign policy, correspondents say.

UN reform

Mr Singh told Congress that India and the US had much in common: ``You are the world`s oldest democracy, we are its largest.``

He said the ``openness of our societies makes us more vulnerable`` to terrorism.

He urged the US to invest in India`s development, particularly in information technology.

``We are at a juncture in history where we can embark on a partnership that draws both on principle and pragmatism,`` Mr Singh said.

Congress also cheered as Mr Singh spoke of the need to reform the United Nations, arguing the case for India to be included on the Security Council - a proposal President Bush has opposed.

``The voice of the world`s largest democracy cannot be unheard on the Security Council,`` he said.

#14 Miriamk (part)

The corporations you mention are generally so large that their interests cover too many diverse areas – they do not protect or project any one particular point of view on ANY issue. They are profit-driven and they mostly do not interfere with the day-to-day operations of news organizations – they mostly leave it to the judgment of the day-to-day operatives – not so much because it is the “right” thing to do, but because it is simply the most practical thing to do – why would anyone do something oneself when one has more experienced brains available (and one is paying them) to do the same work.

(An important exception when higher level ownership DOES get involved in a lower-level decision is when an issue can mess up the corporate image of the larger entity. Examples from the past would include R.J. Reynolds on tobacco, many corporations on disinvestment from the (then apartheid-practicing) South Africa, etc. The bottom line rule is – it is just not good business to be controversial if you are trying to enlarge your market base to the whole population. This is also the reason that many corporations would withhold advertisements from “controversial” programs.)

Because of the curiosity raised by your remarks regarding James Madison ([solution: well, the founding fathers (especially james madison) thought it was important that the public and not the merchants own the media. hmmm…wonder why?]), I felt inspired to go back and read on him some. (As you know, Madison made a major contribution to the ratification of the Constitution by writing, with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, the Federalist essays – which eventually proved to be one of the triggers that led to U.S. independence.)

The problem I see is you make statements and attribute to Mr. Madison without any basis. Freedom of press was just one (relatively minor) issue in Madison’s drafting and supporting the “bill of rights” – what we would call the dangers of a rough-shod majority appears to have been the main driving force. Madison never said anything regarding private ownership of press – the argument advocated by you, which clearly appears to be a product of YOUR idle imagination. Here is what I see is the bulk of the story regarding Madison and the freedom of press.

In introducing the draft of what became the “bill of rights”, here is what Madison’s version of the speech and press clauses (introduced in the House of Representatives on June 8, 1789) said: “The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.” The final language (“Congress shall make no law respecting … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; ….”) was agreed upon in conference.

Madison, like other American founding fathers, was probably heavily influenced by the model of common law set forth by William Blackstone in the 1700s, who stated: “The liberty of the press is indeed essential to the nature of a free state; but this consists in laying no previous restraints upon publications, and not in freedom from censure for criminal matter when published. Every freeman has an undoubted right to lay what sentiments he pleases before the public; to forbid this, is to destroy the freedom of the press: but if he publishes what is improper, mischievous, or illegal, he must take the consequences of his own temerity. …Thus, the will of individuals is still left free: the abuse only of that free will is the object of legal punishment. Neither is any restraint hereby laid upon freedom of thought or inquiry; liberty of private sentiment is still left; the disseminating, or making public, of bad sentiments, destructive to the ends of society, is the crime which society corrects.”

An interesting trivia: “Madison wrote 24 of his 29 Federalist essays in seven weeks, at the remarkable pace of three essays a week. Many of these essays rank among the best political thought ever produced.” Some people – when they get going – there is no stopping them!

(Unsought advice:) Please use initial caps appropriately in your remarks (and thus not “belittle” the U.S.)