N snaps all contact with Gilani as premier

By: Abrar Saeed | April 29, 2012 | The Nation

ISLAMABAD - Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) has decided that the Leader of Opposition in the National Assembly would not engage himself in any sort of consultation with Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani, since “the latter was a convicted person and no more a legitimate chief executive of the country”.
Sources in the party informed The Nation that Leader of Opposition Ch Nisar Ali Khan was in the process of consultation with Leader of the House Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani on the appointment of the new Chief Election Commissioner, but the party leadership decided after the April 26 conviction of the Prime Minister to halt the process till a new chief executive is installed by the ruling coalition.
The party leadership, after the conviction of Prime Minister Gilani, held a detailed discussion in Lahore wherein it was also decided that the Punjab Government would no more accord protocol of Chief Executive to Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani and would also move all appropriate forums to stop him from functioning as the Chief Executive of the country.
Sources said that the party would also consider bringing “a reference” against Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani in the National Assembly in the light of the Supreme Court of Pakistan verdict and the date and time of submitting “the reference” to the Speaker National Assembly would be decided in the Monday meeting of the party at the Punjab House, Islamabad.
The final decision of the party's future course of action, both within and outside the Parliament, would be decided in the Monday meeting of the party as by the time the party leadership would also have taken into confidence the other political stakeholders in the Parliament.
Sources said that Ch Nisar Ali Khan also took into confidence both Mian Nawaz Sharif and Mian Shahbaz Sharif about his telephonic contacts with heads of various political parties including JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman, PPP-S chief Aftab Ahmad Khan Sherpao, PML-Likeminded chief Saleem Saifullah Khan and some other nationalist leaders who do not have representation in the Parliament.
Sources said Ch Nisar Ali Khan would be meeting Maulana Fazlur Rehman ahead of the party meeting on Monday as the PML-N wanted to evolve a consensus on the opposition’s strategy in the National Assembly when it would resume its session Monday evening.PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif declared open war against PPP the other day when he said that Gilani would have to step down or face a long march.

This news was published in print paper. Access complete paper of this day.

NewsPak

• NewsPak

Watch http://News-Pak.com for Latest News, Bricking News, Online TV channels, Bollywood News, Fashion News, Mack up Tips, Songs, Movies, and much more. Dear visitor please note that we are not broadcasting any channel only we are providing channel links from other Sites. The content of the channels are controlled by respective owners only. 

Click Here!

‘Senseless women’ minting money in the name of bill: JUI-F

By  Correspondent

Published: April 8, 2012

Activists dismiss accusations of hidden agenda as party vehemently puts its foot down.

ISLAMABAD:  Announcing a countrywide strike against the tabling of Domestic Violence Bill, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) demanded legal action against NGOs, and female NGO workers in particular, supporting the bill.

The JUI-F, which has already declared its opposition to the passage of the bill in its current form, said it would fight its passage ‘tooth and nail.’ The group had earlier warned NGOs to stop supporting a bill which represents ‘western culture.’
“We will not let these senseless women, who depend on American dollars, work against the constitution and the Islamic shariah,” said statement issued by JUI-F Islamabad media coordinator Jamshid Abbasi. “Minting dollars in the name of women rights, (women) representatives of these NGOs are earning a bad name for Islam,” the statement said.
NGOs dismiss ‘agenda’
In response to the statement, leading human rights activist, Dr Farzana Bari, said that the allegations were completely baseless. She said that protection of women from domestic violence was the right and demand of every Pakistani woman. The bill, she said, was drafted by the country’s lawmakers in standing committees represented by all political parties including the JUI-F.
Earlier on Friday, opposing protest rallies took place outside parliament. Rights activists chanted slogans in favour of the passage of the bill, while religious activists raised slogans opposing it.
Human rights activist and filmmaker, Samar Minallah, said the protest was against the language and insensitivity shown by JUI-F Chief in parliament when the bill was introduced on April 4, 2012.
“It was a protest against a particular mindset. A mindset that tends to trivialise and politicise all women rights issues,” she told The Express Tribune.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 8^th, 2012.

Click Here!

Pakistan's president visits India amid warming ties

By Harmeet Shah Singh

April 8, 2012 , (CNN)

New Delhi (CNN) -- President Asif Ali Zardari of Pakistan visits India on Sunday -- the first by a Pakistani head of state in seven years amid thawing relations between the two nuclear-armed archrivals.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India will host a lunch in honor of Zardari in New Delhi before the Pakistani leader travels to the shrine of a revered Sufi saint at Ajmer in Rajasthan state, officials said.

Zardari's visit Sunday, a private trip, comes in the wake of Pakistan's recent promise to grant India "most favored nation" trading status.

The South Asian neighbors have fought three wars, two of them over the Himalayan territory of Kashmir, since the 1947 partition of the subcontinent into Islamic Pakistan and Hindu-majority, secular India after independence from Britain.

Last year, both nations pledged not to let their fragile peace process unravel again over the range of thorny issues that put them at odds.

After meeting her Indian counterpart in New Delhi in July, the Pakistani foreign minister, Hina Rabbani Khar, said she believed that "it is the desire and commitment of both the governments to make it an uninterrupted and uninterruptable process."

Their meeting came barely two weeks after three deadly explosions ripped through Mumbai, killing 27 people. The attack revived painful memories of the 2008 terrorist siege in Mumbai, for which India blamed Pakistani-based extremists. Pakistan was quick to condemn the 2011 bombings of Mumbai while New Delhi was careful not to point the finger at Islamabad.

In 2004, the nations agreed to negotiations that cover eight issues, including Kashmir, terrorism and Pakistan's concerns over river dams on the Indian side of the border, which it sees as a threat to its water supplies.

Since then, successive governments have held talks in an effort to end the historical acrimony.

Singh and Zardari hailed results from the dialogue in September 2008 as the countries completed four rounds of diplomatic meetings.

But engagements were suspended two months later in November 2008 after the terrorist assault on Mumbai, which left more than 160 people dead.

Over the past two years, India and Pakistan have held a series of high-level meetings in their bid to put their peace dialogue back on track, a process considered crucial to regional stability ahead of the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan.

In 2011, New Delhi and Islamabad agreed to resume talks.

"It's a win-win situation when Pakistan and India are engaging in dialogue, are talking to each other, and are building better cooperation," Mark Toner, a deputy spokesperson for the U.S. State Department, said Thursday regarding Zardari's upcoming India visit.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani of Pakistan, who met Singh on the margins of a nuclear security summit in Seoul, South Korea, last month, also invited the Indian leader to his country.

"Zardari has chosen a visit to Ajmer as a reason to be in New Delhi," Sanjaya Baru, Singh's former media adviser, wrote in a column for the Indian Express on Friday.

Baru suggested Singh "could choose a visit to his place of birth, the village Gah, as a good reason to go to Lahore, and maybe even Islamabad."

Singh was born in Gah during British rule over the subcontinent. Today, the village is part of the Pakistani province of Punjab.

Gen. Pervez Musharraf was the last Pakistani president to visit India, in 2005, upon invitation by Singh to watch a cricket match between the two countries.

"Nothing need come out of such visits. No joint statement, no agreements, no final solution. But each such visit and the ensuing dialogue will make it easier for both governments to walk down the road that Singh and Musharraf defined," Baru wrote.

Other observers also said the Sunday lunch meeting between the Indian and Pakistani leaders was encouraging.

"The lunch being hosted by the prime minister for a Pakistani president on a private visit is a welcome step," said Uday Bhaskar, a strategic analyst. "These gestures are in the long-term interest of India and that of the region."

What Manmohan Singh should tell Zardari today

Click Here!

What Manmohan Singh should tell Zardari today

by Aakar Patel  , 8Th April 2012, Fristpost.India,

What should Manmohan Singh tell Asif Zardari about Hafiz Saeed when he meets him today?
He should say that the US move to squeeze Pakistan by putting a bounty on Saeed must be used to its advantage by Pakistan.
Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani says this is an internal issue for Pakistan. Arresting, prosecuting or simply containing Saeed does not concern the United States because Pakistan is equipped to deal with its citizen.
The question is: Has it succeeded? The answer is no. An editorial in the Daily Times explained why. Writing about the “November 2008 Mumbai bloodbath in which 166 people, including six American citizens, were killed”, the newspaper says about Saeed: “His subsequent arrest and trial however, yielded an acquittal from the Lahore High Court for lack of evidence. It is evident that our courts’ hands are tied if no credible evidence or witnesses are available. The former may be difficult to obtain given that our sleuths are not renowned for competence and also because people of Hafiz Saeed’s ilk have powerful protectors and friends in the intelligence community, which sees them as ‘strategic assets’. The latter are usually too frightened, or frightened off by open threats from organisations wedded to extremist jihad.”

The PM should say the US move to squeeze Pakistan by putting a bounty on Saeed must be used to its advantage by Pakistan. AP Photo

There is another reason for Gilani to consider doing more on Saeed. It can be argued that the LeT’s attacks on India damaged Pakistan more than they did India. After the attack on Parliament in 2001, India mobilised for war. President Musharraf was pressured to ban LeT and Jaish e Muhammad. Little benefit accrued to Pakistan from the event except a devaluation of assets.  After the attack in Mumbai, the United Nations Security Council (under GA 9527, modifying resolution 1822) accepted India’s and the United States’ case that Hafiz Saeed and Zaki ur Rehman Lakhvi were responsible and they were put under sanctions. The world stopped accepting Pakistan’s deniability.
As strategy, such attacks are more fulfilling emotionally than effective. The idea that India has been slapped by 10 men who kept its economic centre under siege for three days is satisfying to those who hate India. But other than killing some Indian women, children and men, this did not achieve much. Of course, it is valid to assume that the LeT saw value, including for propaganda, but the attack did not move it towards its goal. LeT’s goal is to free Kashmir from Hindu rule and have the crescent of Islam hoisted again at the Red Fort.
I would say the attack made the goal more difficult because it is LeT that was squeezed after it, not India.
The benefit such assets bring Pakistan is little compared to the cost. Their actions are not effective for three reasons:
First, India’s economy has escaped the orbit of South Asia’s low growth curse. LeT’s bloodiest attack could not change that. Second, Indians have a cultural ability (which Pakistanis also share) to absorb trauma. Traumatic events are episodic and put behind us more easily than by the West. Third, such attacks have failed to provoke communal rioting because there is a consensus that it is Pakistan that does it.
On Pakistan’s side, allowing space to LeT has led to other problems. Saeed is the moving force behind Difaa e Pakistan. This group has made the Parliament’s delicate job of repairing relations with the United States more difficult. There is a side to the Difaa e Pakistan which is not about Hindus, Christians and Jews, but threatens Pakistan’s own communities.
For this reason Gilani is right about Saeed being an internal issue, but only if he sees it in terms of both sovereignty and as a problem.
The truth is that even if the US put the bounty to please Manmohan Singh, and I believe it did, the beneficiary will be Pakistan. If they cannot successfully prosecute Saeed, Gilani and Zardari should use this opportunity to convince the army to shut LeT down.

Djokovic completes Miami treble

By: AFP | April 03, 2012 | The Nation

MIAMI  - World number one Novak Djokovic defeated Andy Murray 6-1, 7-6 (7/4) on Sunday to win his second straight ATP Miami Masters title and third overall. Djokovic, who won here for the first time in 2007, became just the third man to win the title three or more times, along with Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras.
For his third straight match, Djokovic cruised through the first set before finding himself in a tense tussle in the second. However, even though the second set went with serve until the tie-breaker, it was Murray who was under pressure most, fighting off break points in three of his service games.
“I thought I played a great match from start to end,” said Djokovic, who didn’t drop a set in the tournament. “There was a couple of service games I had a chance to break him in the second set. He’s such a quality player, you never know. That’s why he’s right at the top — he always comes back, even if you feel you have control of the match,” Djokovic said. “I’m really happy to close it out in straight sets.”
Djokovic, 24, captured his 30th ATP title, and his second this year after his triumph at the Australian Open. It marked his 11th victory in the ATP’s elite Masters 1000 series. Murray had beaten Djokovic in the semi-finals at Dubai in February, and the Serb was then upset by American John Isner in the semi-finals of the Indian Wells Masters last week.
Djokovic said that made this win, which made him the first man since Roger Federer in 2006 to successfully defend the Miami crown, all the sweeter. “I had a great tournament after that tough loss in the semi-finals at Indian Wells,” said Djokovic, adding he recalled his 2007 triumph in Miami as a springboard to his current success.
Murray, who beat Djokovic in the 2009 Miami final, was playing his first match since Wednesday, when he downed Janko Tipsarevic in the quarter-finals. He advanced to the title match on a walkover when world number two Rafael Nadal withdrew before their semi-final with a left knee injury.
Oddly, that was Murray’s second walkover of the tournament, after Canadian Milos Raonic pulled out of their scheduled third-round clash with an ankle injury. Whether it was the layoff or not, Murray wasn’t at his sharpest, his 39 unforced errors making things easier for Djokovic.
His only break chance in the entire two hour, seven minute encounter came in the fifth game of the first set, but he was unable to convert it and stem Djokovic’s momentum. The Serb had gained the upper hand in the fourth game of the opening set, which Murray led 40-0 but ended up losing on Djokovic’s second break point.
Djokovic eventually closed out the opening set with his first ace of the match, and Murray promptly found himself in a 0-30 hole in the first game of the second — typical of the pressure he faced throughout the second set. “Maybe it took a few games to get used to the pace,” Murray said, but added he thought the set was closer than the score reflected.
“There were a lot of close games in the first set. He played better on the big points in the first set. In the second set, it was very close. If I was sluggish and I was only a couple of points away from winning the set, I’d say that’s a very good sign.” Murray said his biggest problem was his return game, normally his strong point.
“If I had returned a bit better I would have been right in the match,” he said. “That’s the only thing that I’m surprised that I didn’t do well, because it’s normally the strongest part of my game.”

England strike back after collapse

 

England strike back after collapse

By: AFP | March 28, 2012 | The Nation

GALLE  - England bounced back after being spun out cheaply by Sri Lanka to leave the first cricket Test evenly poised at the Galle International Stadium on Tuesday.
At the end of an eventful second day’s play in which 17 wickets tumbled on a slow pitch, Sri Lanka led the tourists by 209 runs with five second innings wickets in hand.
Left-arm spinner Rangana Herath grabbed six wickets as England were bowled out for 193 in their first innings after skipper Mahela Jayawardene’s 180 had lifted Sri Lanka to 318 earlier in the day.
But the hosts slumped to 84-5 in their second knock, four of those wickets falling to off-spinner Graeme Swann, to set up a thrilling finale. Swann, who had failed to take a wicket in the first innings, ripped through the top order in the final session of play.
At stumps, Dinesh Chandimal was unbeaten on 17 and Suraj Randiv was on two. England lasted just 46.4 overs as the world’s number one Test side, still to recover from a 3-0 thrashing by Pakistan in the United Arab Emirates earlier this year, once again fumbled against spin.
Ian Bell top-scored with 52, but England lost their way before defiant batting by the tailenders pushed the total from a shaky 92-6. Stuart Broad smashed 28 in a 30-run partnership for the seventh wicket with Bell, taking 18 runs in four balls from seamer Suranga Lakmal that included three boundaries and a six.
Swann’s 24 runs came from six fours and England’s tail prospered further when James Anderson (23 not out) and Monty Panesar (13) put on 36 runs for the last wicket. England will slip to number two behind South Africa in the official rankings if they lose the two-Test series.
The tourists lost opener Alastair Cook in the second over of the innings before a run had been scored when he was trapped leg-before by Lakmal. Jonathan Trott and captain Andrew Strauss put on 40 for the second wicket, before both fell in successive overs from Herath.
Trott was stumped for 12 and found himself knocked to the ground after colliding with celebrating wicket-keeper Prasanna Jayawardene. Strauss departed in Herath’s next over for 26, given out leg-before by the TV umpire after on-field official Asad Rauf turned down a loud appeal by the Sri Lankans.
Kevin Pietersen failed to add to his lunch score of three when he was bowled off the inside edge of the bat by an incoming delivery from seamer Chanaka Welegedara. Earlier, Sri Lanka added 29 runs to their overnight score of 289-8 before being dismissed 30 minutes after the start of play.
Anderson finished with a five-wicket haul when he ended Mahela Jayawardene’s 394-minute knock through a catch by wicket-keeper Prior. The Sri Lankan captain hit 22 boundaries and three sixes in his 30th Test century which helped the hosts recover from a disastrous 15-3 on the opening day.
ScoreCard
SRI LANKA 1ST INNINGS: (OVERNIGHT: 289-8):
L Thirimanne c Swann b Anderson    3
T Dilshan c Strauss b Broad    11
K Sangakkara c Prior b Anderson    0
M Jayawardene c Prior b Anderson    180
T Samaraweera run out    20
D Chandimal c Bell b Patel    27
P Jayawardene lbw b Anderson    23
S Randiv run out    12
R Herath lbw b Patel    5
C Welegedara lbw b Anderson    19
S Lakmal not out    0
EXTRAS: (lb14, nb4)    18
TOTAL: (all out, 96.3 overs)    318
FOW: 1-11, 2-11, 3-15, 4-67, 5-128, 6-170, 7-191, 8-253, 9-307, 10-318
BOWLING: Anderson 20.3-5-72-5, Broad 21-3-71-1, Panesar 23-11-42-0, Swann 23-3-92-0, Patel 9-1-27-2
ENGLAND 1ST INNINGS:
A Strauss lbw b Herath    26
A Cook lbw b Lakmal    0
J Trott st P Jayawardene b Herath    12
K Pietersen b Welegedara    3
Ian Bell b Herath    52
M Prior lbw b Herath    7
S Patel lbw b Herath    2
S Broad lbw b Herath    28
G Swann c Dilshan b Randiv    24
J Anderson not out    23
M Panesar lbw b Randiv    13
EXTRAS: (lb2, w1)    3
TOTAL: (all out, 46.4 overs)    193
FOW: 1-0, 2-40, 3-43, 4-65, 5-72, 6-92, 7-122, 8-157, 9-157, 10-193
BOWLING: Welegedara 11-2-46-1, Lakmal 9-2-45-1, Herath 19-5-74-6, Randiv 7.4-0-26-2
SRI LANKA 2ND INNINGS:
L Thirimanne b Swann    6
T Dilshan b Broad    0
K Sangakkara c Bell b Swann    14
M Jayawardene c Anderson b Swann    5
T Samaraweera st Prior b Swann    36
D Chandimal not out    17
S Randiv not out    2
EXTRAS: (b1, lb3)    4
TOTAL: (5 wkts, 34 overs)    84
FOW: 1-4, 2-8, 3-14, 4-41, 5-72
BOWLING: Anderson 5-0-18-0, Broad 5-2-8-1, Swann 12-2-28-4, Panesar 7-1-19-0, Patel 5-2-7-0
Toss: Sri Lanka

Pietersen wary of Sri Lanka heat

By: Agencies | March 24, 2012 | The Nation

COLOMBO - Kevin Pietersen believes the searing heat will be the biggest challenge facing England in their Test series against Sri Lanka, but admits his old nemesis of left-arm spin must also be tamed.
England have worked hard at acclimatising to the soaring temperatures and draining humidity by training in the middle of the day but Pietersen ranks it as the most physically demanding trip of his career. He is also aware that Rangana Herath, Sri Lanka's first-choice spinner, is waiting to test the theory that Pietersen has a blind spot against slow left-armers but he is clear about which problem he is most concerned about. "Sri Lanka have magnificent players - obviously the likes of (Mahela) Jayawardene, (Kumar) Sangakkara and (Tillakaratne) Dilshan - but their attack is very good too," he said. "They've got a left-arm spinner, Herath, who bowls wicket to wicket and you saw against Pakistan what a guy like Abdur Rehman did to us. Left-arm spin is a huge part of the game now and it's not going to be easy at all. But it's not really the spinners (we have to worry about) out here, it's the heat. I that will be the biggest threat to us.
"It's unbelievable, make no bones about that, but it's something we have to try and get over as quickly as possible. I'm trying to just not do too much and to conserve a lot of energy, not run around like a crazy fool like you do in England or Australia or South Africa, where you can afford to do that.
It's something we have to try and control. On days off we need to get out, swim in the sea, spend some time in the sun and let your body get used to it. If you only spend time in the dressing room or in the ground and you try and take conditions in like that it's not going to work. You need to get out as much as you can." England's pre-Test preparations suffered something of a blow on Thursday when it was revealed Ravi Bopara is suffering with a side strain that will rule him out of bowling in the Test series.

South African batsmen dominate in Wellington

By: Agencies | March 24, 2012 | The Nation

WELLINGTON (AFP) - South Africa took control of a weather-disrupted opening day in the third Test against hosts New Zealand, compiling 136-2 on Friday on a wicket expected to favour the bowlers.
At the close of play at Basin Reserve, Alviro Petersen was unbeaten on 44 with JP Duminy on 23, while the New Zealand bowlers were left to rue their failure to capitalise on a green-tinged wicket and overcast conditions. Only 42 of the possible 90 overs were bowled following overnight rain that ruled out the morning session and bad light forced an early end to the day.
New Zealand captain Ross Taylor had no hesitation opting to bowl when he won the toss saying he hoped "for some early wickets", and had cause to celebrate with the disputed dismissal of Graeme Smith for five and the total at 13. However, from there the honours rested with South Africa -- who lead the three-Test series 1-0 -- with Hashim Amla (63) and Petersen putting on 93 for the second wicket.
Amla posted his 23rd half-century in an effortless batting display, pushing the bowlers to all corners and offering few opportunities to the field. He brought up his 50 taking 14 off one over by Dean Brownlie after Taylor turned to the part-timer in a desperate move to break the partnership.
Taylor also had spinner Daniel Vettori operating after only 13 overs as his quick bowlers failed to show the required aggression to dictate terms to South Africa. Doug Bracewell, the pick of the New Zealand bowlers, was fortunate to claim Smith's wicket, caught behind by Kruger van Wyk in the sixth over.
The South African captain appealed against the decision and television replays were inconclusive with a clear sound as the ball passed the bat but no touch registered with the hotspot detector. Mark Gillespie, New Zealand's top bowler in the second Test, had difficulty with his line when bowling with the wind in the first session, but had better control and success running into the breeze after the tea break.
He lured Amla into attempting a pull shot with a short pitched delivery and the batsman ended up getting a top edge which was safely claimed by the South Africa-born van Wyk to have the tourists at 106-2. Bracewell finished the day with one for 30 off 11 overs while Gillespie had one for 37 off nine overs.

SCOREBOARD

SOUTH AFRICA 1ST INNINGS:
G Smith c van Wyk b Bracewell    5
A Petersen not out    44
H Amla c van Wyk b Gillespie    63
JP Duminy not out    23
To bat: AB de Villiers, J Rudolph, M Boucher, D Steyn, V Philander, M Morkel, M de Lange
EXTRAS: (w 1)    1
TOTAL: (2 wkts; 42 overs)    136
FOW: 1-13, 2-106
BOWLING: Martin 9-3-21-0, Bracewell 11-1-30-1, Gillespie 9-1-37-1, Vettori 11-3-28-0, Brownlie 2-0-20-0
TOSS: New Zealand
UMPIRES: Aleem Dar (PAK), Richard Kettleborough (ENG)
TV UMPIRE: Billy Doctrove (WIS)
MATCH REFEREE: Ranjan Madugalle

ICC backs Ajmal's bowling action

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/sports/20-Mar-2012/icc-backs-ajmals-bowling-action

By: AFP | March 20, 2012 | The Nation

NEW DELHI  - The International Cricket Council on Monday backed Saeed Ajmal's controversial bowling action following reports that India had complained about the Pakistan off-spinner.
Indian television channel NDTV, quoting unnamed sources, said the team management had spoken to the ICC about Ajmal's action after Sunday's Asia Cup match between the arch-rivals in Dhaka. ICC chief executive Haroon Lorgat, however, clarified that the governing body saw no problem in the off-spinner's bowling style.
"We have tested Ajmal, checked him and monitored him in match situations, and found he bowls within the allowed degrees of tolerance," Lorgat told the Times Now news channel. "We must be careful at what the eye sees and what the reality is," Lorgat said.
Ajmal claimed the wicket of batting superstar Sachin Tendulkar as India produced their best ever one-day chase to surpass Pakistan's commanding 329-6 with five wickets and 13 balls to spare. It was the first match between India and Pakistan since the World Cup semi-final at Mohali in March last year.
The 34-year-old Ajmal, who has played 20 Tests and 63 one-dayers since his international debut in 2008, has found himself under the spotlight several times due to his action.
He was first reported by match officials during a one-day series against Australia in the United Arab Emirates in 2009, but was later cleared to play after remedial work was done on his action. Doubts about his action were again raised during the recent Tests against England at the same venue, but both the ICC and the Pakistan Cricket Board absolved Ajmal of any wrongdoing.

Six ways the media has misreported Syria

March 16, 2012 | The Nation

AFSHIN MEHRPOUYA
As in the case of Libya, from NY Times to Fox News, from Guardian to National Post and from Le Monde to Le Figaro, the Western mainstream media’s coverage of the Syrian conflict has been mostly simplistic and black & white with a Hollywoodian good (opposition) and evil (Syrian government) story. The basic storyline reported is: “The dictatorial Syrian government is torturing and killing Syrian protestors and civilians including women and children and that the Western counties and the Arab League want to protect these Syrian civilians”. These outlets use any information that supports their stance regardless of its source and quality, and dismiss or ignore any information that brings it to question.
The bloody suppression of protestors by the Syrian government and also instability resulting from the armed insurgency aggravated by a complex set of foreign forces, each with its own set  of vested interests, have resulted in significant suffering for the people of Syria. Western media’s unquestioning, consensual, biased and melodramatic coverage of the Syrian events risks moving this conflict to a full blown war with grave consequences for the Syrian people and the region.
Here are the six ways that the Western media, across the board, have been uncritical and misleading in their coverage of the Syrian conflict:
1. What do the majority of Syrians want?
In the mainstream Western media coverage, there is an implicit assumption rarely questioned that the majority of the Syrians support the armed insurgency and that they want immediate departure of Bashar Assad. However, the only opinion poll that has been carried out by the Qatar based YouGovSiraj, since the start of the conflict claims that about 55% of Syrians do not want immediate departure of Assad. The methodology for this poll is not robust. In addition, this stance might be not due to support for Assad rather, because the Syrian people are afraid of instability and civil war or because some believe in the reform intentions of Assad and still others because they might be benefiting from the existing regime. The 89% backing of the new Syrian constitution in the recent referendum with a turnout of 57% was also dismissed because of the ongoing violence on the ground and lack of independent supervision on the referendum.
Nonetheless, given the West’s backing of the Syrian opposition is based on the “will of the Syrian people”, for the media it is essential to expose and debate such polls and try to establish what the majority of the Syrians want before adopting a position on behalf of the Syrian people.
2. Is the Syrian National Council (SNC) and the militarised insurgency representative of the Syrian opposition?
The opposition is primarily represented by Syrian National Council (SNC) headed by a Syrian expatriate professor, Burhan Ghalioun who is based in Paris. This organisation which is run mostly by expatriates has been demanding foreign intervention in Syria and it rejects any sort of dialog with the Syrian government. Several independent media outlets and other Syrian opposition groups have questioned SNC’s lack of transparency about its members, funding and foreign links and whether it is a legitimate representative of the Syrian opposition.  Another organisation claiming to represent the opposition is the Syrian Opposition Coordination body operated from inside Syria which is against foreign intervention and is for a dialog-based solution after an end is put to the violence and the political prisoners are freed. In addition, several militarised groups operate inside Syria such as Free Syrian Army who have been engaged in an armed conflict with the Syrian army and also have been attacking government buildings and other assets. These militia are reported to be a mix of deserting soldiers, foreign mercenaries and armed civilians and they are armed by cross border smuggled arms allegedly funded/provided by foreign governments including those of Saudi Arabia, Qatar.
All these organisations are non-transparent and little is known about who runs them and who they are accountable to. The media has an important unfulfilled role in exposing the governance of these organisations and their internal and foreign political sidings and ideological agenda. Currently there is no proof that such organizations represent the will of the majority or a significant part of the Syrian people or the opposition.
3. How many casualties and killed by whom?
There have been casualties due to government suppression of civilian protests, due to armed conflict between government soldiers and armed militia and also due to reprisals and bombings by the armed militias. The number of total victims reported by the UN Human Rights Council which is now at 7,500, is regularly used by the Western media to refer to the extent of the repression in Syria. However, no breakdown is provided as to what percentage of this number represents civilians, what part opposition armed forces and what percentage soldiers. The UN has estimated that as of Feb 15, 2012, 1,345 Syrian soldiers have been so far killed in the conflict. This is a strong indication that what is happening in Syria is an armed insurgency verging on civil war and not only a government “killing and torturing its people”. The violence perpetrated by both sides was exposed in the report prepared by Arab League monitors, which is the only existing first-hand account of what is happening on the ground. However this report was mostly ignored because it did not back the black and white account of the Arab League and the Western media. The Western media should show more responsibility in its use of casualty numbers, because such numbers are highly influential in driving international public opinion about the conflict.
4. Are the information sources unbiased and credible?
Operation of foreign journalists in Syria is limited by safety concerns. Consequently the Western media has been using other sources, mainly the Syrian Observatory on Human Rights and other opposition sources. Sometimes the media simply cites “activists” or a new largely unknown entity named “Local Coordination Councils” as the source for information without further detailing its sources.  Syrian Observatory on for Human Rights (SOHR), which is the most common source, was originally run by a single person (Rami Abdulrahman) from Coventry, UK.  SOHR has been recently contested by a competing organization with the same name. There is an ongoing bitter fight between the two SOHRs over who is the “authentic” SOHR. The latter SOHR blames the former of links with the Syrian regime and of over-reporting of soldiers’ and security officers’ death. The former SOHR states that it wants the “bloodshed to stop” and that it is against foreign intervention, while the latter states that it supports a no-fly-zone in Syria. Obviously all such opaque organisations, which are openly against the Syrian regime, have an interest in biased and inflated reporting of the casualties in the conflict. High quality journalism necessitates thorough verification of sources and including the account of both sides of the conflict to ensure a balanced coverage. However, so far the Western media has unquestioningly used the numbers and coverage of these organizations in a one-sided manner without sufficient questioning.
5. What are the interests of countries pushing for regime change and foreign intervention?
The current conflict in Syria is smeared and complicated by the interference of a long list of foreign stakeholders each with its own political agenda.  Some of these interests are:
    Saudi Arabia and other GCC countries US and Europe: Replacing a Alaawite (Shiite) run government allied with Iran with a Sunni government more aligned with the GCC – On December 2, 2011, head of SNC, Ghalioun, said that if his party takes over Syria it would end the military relationship to Iran and cut off arms supplies to Hezbollah and Hamas, and establish ties with Israel; Distracting the international media from repression of peaceful opposition in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia; Removing a government allied with Iran which will help decrease the Iranian influence in the region; Removing a government with a mostly independent or anti-Western / Israel line of politics.
    Israel: Removing a government allied with Iran and Hezbollah. Syria is a key country bordering with Israel with an open pro-Palestinian agenda – Ghalioun announced that his future government will cut its military ties with Iran and Hizbollah; and Distracting the Middle Eastern media coverage from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
    Russia:  Stopping the fast expansion of US allied governments in the Middle East (after Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya) and loss of one of the last of its allied Middle Eastern governments where it also has its last offshore military based
    Iran: Protecting one of the last of its allied countries in the region. If the Syrian government falls, Iran would face increased isolation and pressure and risk of foreign intervention backed by the GCC, Israel and the West.
    Turkey: Maintaining its influence in the post Assad regime which has geopolitical importance for Turkey . The media has so far been shallow in its coverage of the goals of the nations that are playing an active role in this conflict. The simple story is that all these governments want to “protect Syrian civilians”. However the complex mesh of vested interests is mostly left unexposed.
6.    What are the “democratic credentials of the countries who want to take democracy to Syria?
One key block of countries pushing for military intervention and regime change in Syria has been the Arab League and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). It is important to remember that most GCC countries including Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are run by totalitarian regimes facing local protests. Saudi Arabia recently sent troops to Bahrain to suppress peaceful protests. The Western media should do a better job in debating the legitimacy of such actors in pushing for democratic change and for protecting civilians in Syria.
As in the case of Libya, this one-sided coverage of the Syrian conflict is facilitating the escalation of the conflict towards a civil war and foreign military intervention which might serve the short-term interests of many foreign countries and forces but would be disastrous for the people of Syria. The Western media has a significant and grave moral responsibility to move from the current one-sided and biased media lynching of the Syrian government to a more balanced, nuanced and comprehensive approach.
Afshin Mehrpouya is an independent writer on Middle East politics and social issues. He is a university professor in Paris, France. – Counterpunch

Armed and ready to play Tak Ball, a stunning game

 

Armed and ready to play Tak Ball, a stunning game 

 Published on Mar 6, 2012

1
i

L.A. Nightlight's Thomas Taylor runs with the ball to score a goal as Philadelphia Killawatts' players chase him with stun guns during an Ultimate Tak Ball (UTB) game in Bangkok on March 2, 2012. The rules are simple: throw a ball into the goal to score a point. But what makes this game unlike any other is that all the players are armed and ready with stun guns. -- PHOTO: REUTERS

 BANGKOK (REUTERS) - The rules are simple: throw a ball into the goal to score a point. But what makes this game unlike any other is that all the players are armed and ready with stun guns.
It's Ultimate Tak Ball, the brainchild of a few hardcore sports fanatics who say it is the sport of the future and are in Bangkok for an exhibition game.
Each game consists of three periods that last for 7 minutes each, with two teams of four players each. Any player in possession of the 60cm medicine ball is open to unlimited shocking by the players on the opposite team.
The stun guns pack 3 to 5 milliamps of electricity, which is only about 10 per cent of the power of the taser stun guns used by police. Fired on contact with an opponent, the guns produce a twitching feeling, according to players. 'It never gets better, you just get less afraid of the stun,' a smiling Mr Damien Ryan, 24, said during a break in a match in Bangkok. 'But it's one of the best feelings ever.