Footnotes and Comments on the Manama Story

As I See 

Adel el Baz

The new story published by Dr Muzamil Abul Gasim in his Facebook page, two days ago, on a meeting between Lieutenant General Kabashi and Abdeul Rahim
Daglo, and which was republished by (Al Ahdath) newspaper, has spurred varied reactions, amongst them three trends stand out:
The be news is not correct as Kabashi could not within the current fury and the reports speaking about the army achieving progress in the field, to engage in secret negotiations with the Janjaweed criminal Abdu Rahim Daglo, and thus those for the falsehood of the news opted to totally deny it in full and in details.
The second view opted for the correctness of the report, but at the same time think the time was not good to publish such a story for two reasons: it will demoralize the army which is fighting now at all fronts, thus how could the hands of the leadership be extended to traitor behind the back of the army? The second is that publishing such a news was only aimed to debase Lt Gen Kabashi by colleagues within the leadership circle and ultimately burn him out.
The third view concerns the professional aspect of publishing the story. This is a news that has been sourced. But the source is anonymous which could mean Dr Muzamil was the victim of a leak with vested interest.
In journalism in general, the first thing we look at is the source of the news. If we have doubts or the source is lacking, we turn to the person who reported the news. Who is he? What is his history in reporting news? In this case, the source named source was lacking and the news reporter was present. We know that he is not a young, ignorant journalist looking for fame by publishing exciting news, nor can he harm his reputation and name by publishing false news like this. He is known to be not in a hurry in publishing everything that he comes across, whatever news comes into his hands. Is this the first time that Muzamil has reported news from sources, and its authenticity has been proven after a while?
As everyone knows that Al-Muzamil has large and reliable sources that he has built up over many years through his extensive relationships, then the integrity of the news reporter cannot be questioned, nor can it be imagined that he fell victim to a leak, as news like this cannot pass under the hands of the youngest journalist in the editorial room of “Alyoum Al Tali,” of which Muzamil was editor-in-chief of for years.
In general, Muzamil is not known to be biased toward a party or group, and therefore there is no reason for him to target Lieutenant General Kabashi personally. Rather, I bear witness that he was a fan of him.
Let us come to the second opinion. I do not know how the news of negotiations with Abd al-Rahim Dagalo demoralizes the army, as two weeks after the beginning of the war, began in Jeddah negotiations were announced, and continued for months. Then, soon, direct negotiations and a meeting between Burhan and Hemedti were announced. The army was not demoralized. The army remained as it was, fighting as it always did with valor.

As for the argument that the timing was not appropriate, these are editorial positions. One newspaper can publish the news, and another newspaper would estimate that the timing was not appropriate, and that does not cast doubt on the credibility or professionalism of the news.
Personally, I published this news in this newspaper, after I confirmed it from a source other than Dr. Muzamil, and I added information to it that I published yesterday, and there is additional information that I kept.
We publish part of it in this issue. What concerns me here is that we, as journalists, do not get involved in the conflicts and positions of politicians, nor should we question the credibility of our colleagues, because we do not want to publish news that does not agree with our political and intellectual positions.


The matter is very simple. If the news was fabricated or false, the Sovereign Council or the army could have published the corrective publicly and demanded that we apologize or even take the matter to a court of law. As for the authorities to remain silent and leave the newspapers to debate the veracity and inaccuracy of the news, this is the greatest confirmation of the truth. It acknowledges the veracity of the news, and it will not help to leak news here and there that denies what was published. “The days will reveal to you what you did not know.”
What is interesting in this uproar is that the responsible press is still alive and continuing its path of leading public opinion, and exercising pressure on the country’s leadership, its parties, and its politicians, and that is a great blessing in the midst of this nothingness.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Check Also
Back to top button