B.B.C wild allegations against me

--------

Recently, I received another statement from BBC World Service. Interestingly, this time with the so-called "statement", BBC is trying to make wild allegations against me.

The statement, dated on July 12, was written by Mike Gardner (BBC spokesman in 2001, BBC Press Officer in 2003, Head of Media Relations at BBC World Service). It is clear that on the same date the very statement was changed and edited in some parts by Richard Sambrook (BBC Head). On July 25th, again the mentioned statement was paraphrased by Mike Gardner, and finally without any attention was handed over to Zahir Tanin (Afghan Service Editor), who sent it to me THE WAY IT WAS on July 26th.

I really faced a number of problems in reading and understanding the text, because there was so many mistakes, crossed-out words and changes in structures in text that made it difficult to understand.

Below, I would like to highlight just a few points:

The BBC made a wild allegation against me claiming that I had a political motif behind my deeds. I do not know as to why is BBC trying to change the subject and instead of coming to the point is unsuccessfully making accusations versus myself. Will it help BBC get out from the facts that one of its employee has committed something which inappropriate under any situation in any office? Does BBC not know that all office resources, especially office properties such as computer, phone, fax, internet, vehicles and so on are STRICTLY impersonal? Why and how would an employee use office resources for personal benefits and agendas?

BBC stated aid that I had a written interview with but they could not publish for some UNKNOWN reasons. Following that lunched my complaints versus BBC staff. I am clarifying here that it is completely wrong and this can never be the root cause of that case.

I am however saying that I had an interview with them but I only asked: you gathered all the information about my identity but why didn’t you publish in the site. This was when I did not receive any answer from BBC and sent another message stating that if you do not explain the reason you got the information, I will complain.

The essence of the statement shows that it was written on July 12th, when BBC was trying to seriously investigate the case. If the statement got delayed until July 26th, and sending to me is a matter of concern. It shows that they have rendered a superficial investigation.

At first they asked me the evidence. I gave them the IP number which came along with the threats to my personal weblogs. After a couple of days, BBC said that they couldn’t find such an IP in their machines anywhere. As a result, I tried to control the traffic of incoming messages and visitor on my blogs. Undoubtedly, I found the exact private IP and the machine which launched the threats to myself.

BBC immediately changed its stance and started blaming myself. The claim was as if I had access to their machines from outside, a baseless and wild allegation that hey repaired very soon.

No later than a day, they were tying to acquittal themselves! BBC alleged that I had some visits in their building, and I was going into their office so frequently to send threats message for myself!

This is completely wrong. I had two times visits there in early July and did not have any intention, nor did I want to access any of the BBC resources. Simply because I was a visitor not an auditor or monitor. I know the rules and regulations, but they should ask their own journalist employee to understand this.

BBC accused me for asking dismissal of their staff. This is also baseless. I have never asked that. BBC has made this allegation wildly. How can I ask for dismissal of their staff? Luckily, I am not a decision making body in the management of BBC. Dismissal of the mentioned staff cannot solve this problem?

BBC directly asked me to remove all the remarks, comments and/or article which were prepared by myself about BBC in my blogs. Why is BBC asking me to remove my articles? If their journalist hasn’t committed the threats why they are they scared of my weblogs? BBC itself is an international company for media and is claiming that they are trying their best to defend the freedom of expression, but how comes they ask others to stop and remove their posts?
Why is that the BBC has this courage to ask from an independent cyber journalist to stop and remove his articles?

BBC directly asked me to finalize this problem. Also BBC directly asked me to find the way to talk to BBC and end this. After all, BBC has launched a wide investigation about my identity.

BBC accepts that the evidence which I gave to them. It clear to both sides that IP number does belong to a computer in BBC Kabul office. But now they say they couldn’t find the evidence that which particular staff has sent the threats message to me.

I am asking from BBC that I gave you the evidence and you accepted that the threats originated and were sent from BBC Kabul office, OK? Now who is this person who threatened me to death? This is BBC's job to find it. How many employees are working in one room which the threat-issuer machine is located there? I gave you the details of the person who sent threat message to me. If he is not the threat writer, so who is the real writer?

I am asking seriously to find the threat sender. As I said that I was receiving more that ten messages, some days two times most of them were deleted. So, you think some one came from outside and sent periodically threat message to me, who is that guy. Why is that you cannot find him or her?

In the last statement you assured me that no one is going to threaten me from BBC in the future any more? It means you found the threat source, and got the guarantee that he wouldn’t do it s again. If you couldn’t find the under-questioned person, how can you assure me that he is no longer a threat to my life in the future?

At the end i want to announce seriously that if any mishaps occur to my life in the future, the BBC journalist will be responsible for it. The person will be responsible for any incident based upon the threat message from BBC computer. The person, is working in BBC, will be responsible for whatever may happen to me. The world also knows this.