The Sick Minds!

The successful return of Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri did not please majority of the political analysts, anchorpersons and the columnists. On top of it, the support of MQM for him added fuel to their feelings. They seem to be busy in criticizing him in a way as if they are not raising logical questions on Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri`s stance, rather displaying their personal rifts with him.   

Honestly speaking, like every one, political analysts, anchorpersons and columnists have the fundamental right to express their views on the moves being taken by different political parties. However, two things are indispensable that need to be considered while analyzing these. The first is the impartiality that is the assumed to be its essence. While the second one is the ethics so that no one can have the feeling of disgrace. These are the two rules that must be followed for the sake of neutrally analyzing and, the thereafter, expressing honest vies accordingly.

Unfortunately, both of the principles are severely violated by many of the analysts. That is the reason why different columnists, political analysts as well as the anchorpersons are labeled of being supporting or opposing specific parties or leaders. This thing came up again during the talk shows discussing the announced Long March from Dr. Tahir-ul-Qadri. Majority of the media men and the political analysts made him and his Long March the target point not only for criticism, but also for direct and indirect allegations. Even in a talk show during the discussion, one anchorperson made sarcastic comment regarding the mental health of the Dr. Tahir–ul-Qadri.   

The question is, can such remarks anyhow be considered as morally valid? Does criticism allow anyone to make fun of the mental status of a person? Ethically, even a mentally retarded person is not allowed to be humiliated by anyone all over the world, then why is a religious scholar being disgraced by the other learned people? Where are the principles of ethics, morality and Islam that these anchorpersons have been quoting in their programs? Why do they themselves not act upon them?  

Anyway, if even a well-known religious scholar can be thought of being mentally unfit, the question is, what about the mental status of the politicians, generals, judges and the media person who have been involved in as well as protecting the countless illegal and unconstitutional activities in the country? Can a mentally fit person ever think of being the member of the Parliament by way of fake degrees? Consequently, can the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan allow the fake degree holders to be the members of the Assemblies again in contrast to the Articles 62 & 63?

Logically, should the people of Pakistan consider the politicians mentally healthy who take bride from the secret agencies of the Armed Forces following the conspiracy to defeat a specific political party in the elections? Do those judges deserve to be called mentally sound who declare the unconstitutional acts of the Military Generals as legally and constitutionally valid?

The anchorpersons should give their judgments also on the mental fitness of the judges who forcefully order to retire the PCO judges as a punishment, but do not apply this rule to themselves despite committing the same crime openly? Should the people of Pakistan not doubt the sanity of the judges who declared Gen. Musharaf`s military take over as constitutionally valid in 1999, but then took the U-turn in 2007? How will any impartial legal expert consider CJP as mentally healthy who has required everyone to come into the courts, but himself came on the street in 2007 instead of pleading his case in the court?

The question is, how can people consider the Army Generals mentally sound who, in spite of being constitutionally sub-ordinates, sack their democratically elected Prime Ministers by force? As per the blackest part of the history of the United Pakistan, the Army Generals and the soldiers surrendered in front of the enemy forces in 1971 in the name of saving human lives, but did not hesitate to kill their own Muslims brothers and sisters. Should the people of both formerly East and West Pakistan not have solid doubts about the mentally status of those army men?

In addition to these, how will our religious leaders prove themselves as mentally fit when they keep raising their loud voices on any sort of injustice against the Muslim community in other parts of the world, but sealed their lips on the genocide of their own Bengali Muslims in East Pakistan?

Why do these so called impartial and honest columnists, political analysts and the anchorpersons discuss these facts and give their conclusive remarks about the sanity or insanity of the people involved? When they don`t, why should the viewers not consider not such biased media persons as mentally sick who disgrace others in the name of criticism, but do not ever like to look at their own obvious contradictions? Shame on them!