Pakistani Academics Victims or Crooks?

The Strange Case of Dr Arshad Ali, Executive Director of HEC, and Dr Mujahid Kamran, former VC Punjab University
November 30, 2018
Pakistan's Daily Times reported on October 18, 2018: “HEC fails to take action against executive director charged with plagiarism”. Business Recorder identically reported in its own lede passage the same day, October 18, 2018: “The federal government and the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan has not taken any action against Executive Director HEC Arshad Ali despite the findings of various committees that most of the papers and publications referred to in his CV are plagiarised.” The distinguished scholar, who received his Phd from the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, the “2006 Distinguished Scientist of the Year” award from the President of Pakistan, and was, until recently, the incumbent Principal of NUST School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (SEECS) in addition to being the executive director of HEC, only reluctantly resigned as reported by Dawn on October 22, 2018: “Senior HEC official quits over plagiarism”. And only after a year of stoically resisting his good conscience since being caught out by a simple syntax pattern matching technology, as was reported by The News on December 28, 2017: “HEC software shows its director’s paper 88pc plagiarised”. I could only exclaim with consternation: naqal kay leeyea bhi aqal zaroori hai (Urdu proverb: one needs brains to even copy). HEC News reported its Chairman endorsing the resignation of his Executive Director on October 22, 2018: “the Commission appreciated Dr. Arshad Ali's sacrifice to protect the organisation from further controversy.”
After almost a year of adverse news reportage with stony silence from Dr. Arshad Ali, The News on November 13, 2018, voiced Dr. Arshad Ali's clarification in his own words: “A number of committees were convened (interestingly without having members from computer sciences or relevant fields who could objectively judge the charges against me) but at every stage, I was neither provided copies of the detailed minutes regarding the deliberations and allegations nor an opportunity to present my defence, ... The internet record from ARXIV shows that the paper was submitted by Prof Richard McClatchey on 5 July 2004 at 15:48:43 UTC. This paper did not go through a peer review process, and was produced by an undergraduate student (Atif Mehmood) as part of his project. This is also based on material put together for a project report, and the leading author Prof McClatchey has already confirmed this to be the case and the paper was withdrawn by the authors in 2004 before the conference. I therefore confirm no deliberate plagiarism has taken place in my case, and the accusations being made are totally baseless and inaccurate. An independently constituted committee of leading computer science editors can confirm the above,”

The 2018 plagiarism case of scientist Prof. Dr. Arshad Ali,
Executive Director HEC, Principal at the NUST School of EECS
Dr. Arshad Ali's case is most bizarre, to say the least. His co-authors are internationally renowned faculty along with one or more of his undergraduate students. [12] [12a] [12b] [12c] [12d] [12e] If this calibre of scholars was going to steal, they'd be at least smart enough to use semantic plagiarism and steal something of consequence worth risking their career and their good name for! Not this idiocy. Such lunacy is usually seen in single authored papers as the case of the masterpiece of plagiarism by I. R. Durrani. Dr. Arshad Ali's case in question, as reported in the news [12c]:
'However, the commission has apparently failed to take any action against its own Executive Director. Dr Arshad’s CV (available online at [ Resume Apr 2013 ]) mentions his paper: “A Taxonomy and Survey of Grid Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Grid Enabled Analysis Environment,” published in July 2004. But the problem is when the same paper is tested with Turnitin, a software which has been officially provided by HEC to the universities, it appears that Dr Arshad’s work is mainly copied from already published paper titled “Survey and Taxonomy of Grid Resource Management Systems” [ link ] authored by Chaitanya Kandagatla University of Texas, Austin America in February 2004.'
It is item number 28 in Dr. Arshad Ali's CV Resume Apr 2013.pdf, which lists a total of 112 publications on its pages 9-17:
28. Ali, A; Anjum, A; Mehmood, A; McClatchey, R; Willers, I; Bunn, J; Newman, H; Thomas, M; Steenberg, C, “A Taxonomy and Survey of Grid Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Grid Enabled Analysis Environment” California USA, CHEP 05 July 2004
The authors appear to be alphabetically listed, so it is hard to tell just from the paper who is the first author. Here is pg1 of that paper which lists 9 authors. According to Arshad Ali [12e], it is mainly the work of his undergraduate student Atif Mehmood at NIIT, and Arshad Ali claims [12e] the paper was withdrawn in 2004 before it was presented, as presumably the cut and paste job was detected by the lead investigators. In his earlier resumes, CV_05-2010 and CV Feb 17, 2007, the same co-authored paper is listed at the same item number 28 on page 9; an old listing that's probably been there since the plagiarized paper was created in 2004. It at least indicates that Dr. Arshad Ali was likely not even aware of its contents being mostly cut-and-paste job by his student from the very beginning, or he'd be the most stupid professor in history to list an inconsequential survey paper by an undergraduate student knowingly on his otherwise most accomplished resume.
Caption Arshad Ali, Atif Mehmood plagiarism compare CHEP05July2004 arxiv 0407012.pdf Page1
( compare to KandagatlaReport.pdf )
Here is the last page of the paper which lists the source paper (Kandagatla item 3) that it is copied from:
Caption Arshad Ali, Atif Mehmood plagiarism compare CHEP05July2004 arxiv 0407012.pdf Page8
Here is the paper withdrawal notice on, but it is dated January 14, 2018: “(Submitted on 5 Jul 2004 (v1), last revised 14 Jan 2018 (this version, v2))”. Whether or not the plagiarized paper was withdrawn from CHEP 2004 before the conference as claimed by Arshad Ali [12e], the notice of withdrawing the paper from, its main repository site since July 2004, is only from 14 Jan 2018 (14 years later).
Caption “This article was submitted in error in 2004. The author list is incorrect and the body of the paper should be attributed to another paper. We request withdrawal of the paper forthwith to avoid inconsistency in our records. Submission history From: Richard McClatchey [v1] Mon, 5 Jul 2004 15:48:43 UTC (169 KB), [v2] Sun, 14 Jan 2018 15:17:42 UTC (0 KB)”
Caption “This article was submitted in error in 2004. The author list is incorrect and the body of the paper should be attributed to another paper. We request withdrawal of the paper forthwith to avoid inconsistency in our records.
Submission history From: Richard McClatchey
[v1] Mon, 5 Jul 2004 15:48:43 UTC (169 KB),
[v2] Sun, 14 Jan 2018 15:17:42 UTC (0 KB)” [ link ]
What is the plagiarizing student's complete name, as he is listed sometimes as Atif Mehmood and other times as Muhammad Atif? Is it the same student or two different people? Nope, same student. Paper number 45 on Arshad Ali's CV listed his full name: Muhammad Atif Mehmood.
Caption Full name of the student listed as co-author: Muhammad Atif Mehmood
Caption Full name of the student listed as co-author: Muhammad Atif Mehmood
This identification is necessary in order to follow this student all the way to his Phd at ANU to examine his subsequent papers and Phd thesis. He is listed at ANU as Muhammad Atif. As also on this NUST page that called him “defaulter of the Government of Pakistan” (see Arshad Ali Take-2: With More Time On My Hands below).
Here is Dr. Arshad Ali's home page at NUST before it was taken down:
Caption Prof. Dr. Arshad Ali, Distinguished Scientist Award Recipient, motto: “Success is being happy on a personal level and being useful on a social level”, NUST,, 20170508
Caption Prof. Dr. Arshad Ali, Distinguished Scientist Award Recipient, motto: “Success is being happy on a personal level and being useful on a social level”, NUST,, 20170508
Caption Prof. Dr. Arshad Ali, NUST Backgrounder, 20170804
Caption Prof. Dr. Arshad Ali, NUST Backgrounder, 20170804 Dr. Arshad Ali's Resume Apr 2013.pdf.
The news report states: “The allegation of plagiarism against Dr Ali was established after three consecutive meetings which reviewed his three sample papers out of 26 alleged papers.” [12a] What those other two sample papers were, is not mentioned in the news reports. It is possible that one of these is paper 39 on Dr. Arshad Ali's resume. It is the exact same paper presented at a second conference, the DCABES 2004 held in September in Wuhan, China. Many questions arise here. I address those pertinent to the student below and those pertinent to the paper in subsection: Arshad Ali Take-2: With More Time On My Hands.
It seems to me that Dr. Arshad Ali is at least guilty of having listed a plagiarized student paper on his resume that he claims was mainly the work of one of his own undergraduate students at NIIT (12e). Here are some questions that beg commonsensical answers just from that observations:
  1. Why did Arshad Ali's student plagiarize?
    (did the student intend to deceive, or, was he just victim of poor academic grooming by his mentors as an undergraduate student at the time; Dr. Muhammad Atif Mehmood, the student in question, who later went on to do a moderately decent hands-on Phd thesis in high performance clustered-computing from Australian National University (ANU). I have read Atif's Phd thesis, and many Phd thesis in that field in the United States are the same medium calibre, small experimental and focussed projects making incrementally tiny contributions to the field. The remarkable advancements in clustered computing that has brought us the ubiquitous cloud computing today, has relied not on superheroes and prima donnas as in, say, shared memory and distributed shared memory symmetric multiprocessing which was a far more intellectually and technologically sophisticated problem to solve, but principally on thousands of small applied contributions by the collaboration of academe and industry, just like this one. Clearly, the student did well later in life, at least towards the completion of his Phd thesis in 2011, which I downloaded and scan-read. It's well-written, but rather mundane and boring topic on the fringe side-lines of high performance computing. Such topics and associated grunt labors are easily off loaded to a third world country like Pakistan without high expectations from its crop of poorly prepared student body and professors who are mostly coveting the name branding anyway more than any love and passion for their field or they'd never accept such low calibre participation – as most of the collaborative work of Arshad Ali with Caltech and CERN is as far as I can tell – and for the same reason, given to its equally poorly prepared graduate students studying in Western universities who are principally seeking the glories attached to a Phd more than anything else. This is the run of the mill Phd in engineering from third and fourth tier universities in the West that Pakistanis are adept at acquiring for the benefit of putting “Dr.” before their name. And within that category, Atif's is moderately decent hands-on Phd thesis. But back in 2004 in the plagiarized paper in question, the student did cite the reference from which he had copied his paper. So, did he really intend to plagiarize? Minimally, in hindsight, one can at least ask the pertinent question on this lapse in ethical standard: why was there no grooming for ethical standards and scholarship standards in Dr. Arshad Ali's group in 2004, especially with their high profile international collaboration? The first thing one might teach an engineering and science student is how to write a technical paper, especially survey papers which is typically the first assignment given to students to develop both their domain knowledge and their writing skills. Or is that just part of any learning curve and undeserved prominence was thrust upon a poorly prepared undergraduate student before he was ready? Arshad Ali had joined NIIT in March 2000 as Director, and promoted to Director General of NIIT in March 2003 as per his resume. A rather long learning curve for a seasoned administrator and educator. Or, is Dr. Arshad Ali's real forte more in administration and internation collaboration, fund generation, macro organizational and educational issues, as he mentions them all on his resume, rather than direct undergraduate student supervision that he perhaps left to his grad students and junior faculty as is even the case in the best American universities? As an anecdotal personal data-point to illustrate that this is not unusual, in my first UROP (Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program) at MIT, which was in the Center for Space Research, I worked for a grad student in X-ray astronomy as data analyst, and got a tiny mention in Acknowledgment in her paper co-authored with other senior researchers and the head of the lab. I was even surprised by that generous note of “thanks” as I didn't think I really contributed anything as a newbie on a learning curve. The lab head didn't even know that I existed, except perhaps when signing the weekly paycheck. My grad student mentored me during the time I worked in her lab. Is that what happened with Arshad Ali and the young lad in his lab? The buck still stops at the head man nevertheless, if he put his name down on his student's paper and it turned out to be mostly plagiarized! One can certainly fault Dr. Arshad Ali for poor student supervision and grooming, and for greedily taking credit for all work done in his lab by putting his name down as co-author on every paper produced in the lab which is customary in academe, but even when he didn't read them, which is not. However, did Arshad Ali plagiarize anything himself?)
  2. Why didn't Dr. Arshad Ali know?
    (if he's still listing the withdrawn 2004 paper in his 2013 resume, how did the other co-author, Richard McClatchey, know that the paper was copied and immediately withdrew the paper in 2004 before it was presented, as per Arshad Ali [12e], and Arshad Ali did not know, and they did not bother to inform the head of NIIT and their chief collaborator in Pakistan? As noted above, the arXiv site was only notified of its withdrawal in Jan 2018. That seems rather unnatural and bizarre, that Richard McClatchey would withdraw the paper in 2004, not inform Arshad Ali or any of the Pakistani co-authors, not reprimand the student, and only leave a notification on the paper's depository site after the scandal broke in Pakistan, 14 years later! So, it appears to me, that either none of them knew that the paper is plagiarized until HEC software detected it, which is also bizarre since it is a survey paper for heaven's sake with name-branded 9 co-authors and none of them knew, or all of them knew and did not report it sooner. The latter is also bizarre because high standards of ethics in Western academe invoke heavy penalties for not disclosing, lying by omission, lying after the fact to hide the fact, called obstruction of justice. It is almost always career-ending in Western academe when caught, which is why only fools would steal intellectual property so stupidly as to cut-and-paste plagiarize an inconsequential survey paper, and none of these academics appear to be particularly foolish.)
  3. Why did Dr. Arshad Ali not review his own student's paper?
    (if he did review it, why didn't he catch the copy-job himself? The paper in question is really a survey paper which anyone competent in the field would or should have known about? Lack of student supervision and student interaction that Arshad Ali could not tell that his own undergraduate advisee on his team could not have come up with the taxonomy himself; obviously that wasn't expected either from an undergraduate student. What was expected is that the student compose the survey in his own words, for surveys, by definition, are not original but reporting on existing work. A minor oversight in supervision on a) how to write a student paper; and b) reviewing it first before sending it on?)
  4. What was the consequences for the student?
    (evidently none if Dr. Arshad Ali is still listing the withdrawn 2004 paper in his 2013 resume; more importantly, the student acknowledges in his Phd thesis that he had won a scholarship from NUST to do his Phd at Australian National University; the thesis he completed in 2010 (the version I read), with his last few years funding coming from the Australian university --- obviously, this was no longer the naïve undergraduate who had not known how to write a survey paper; his Phd thesis is well written. Was there a reprimand and/or gentle corrective guidance given to him in 2004 so as not to demotivate a bright lad, but to groom him academically? Who did this grooming, obviously not Dr. Arshad Ali, otherwise why would he continue to list that cut-and-paste job on his own resume were he aware of this specific failing of his student that appears to have been corrected by the time he arrived in Australia? Dr. Arshad Ali should explain this rather inconsequential matter and all these questions posed here for his own self-interest, and that of NUST, and his hundreds of students who surely looked up to him and are now confused at the adverse media attention; if he is innocent of doing plagiarism himself as he appears to be, he should have shown HEC the finger and told them to do what they want, that he was not resigning on this ground no matter what and despoiling his name in perpetuity for “saving” [12m] a corrupt organization. By his own admission, Arshad Ali caved in only under immense pressure [12e] which he is trying to rectify in court. He can really only rectify it by coming clean with precision on all questions raised herein. This case has been blown way out of proportion in 2018 by HEC while all the real crooks with fake degrees and fake papers and fake reviews of plagiarized books given to their relatives and friends are still supping off the national gravy-train! And of course, only in the national interest!)
  5. What were the consequences for his team?
    (also evidently none as Dr. Arshad Ali continues to list the same three of the international authors as his references on pg. 8 of his 2013 resume since 2007: Harvey B. Newman, Caltech; Dr Ian Willers, CERN; Dr Richard McClatchey, University of The West of England, Bristol. Which means, one may intelligently surmise, that the matter was not deemed serious enough by such distinguished faculty, nor evidently seriously taken by them.... until January 2018 when they retracted the paper from after it had became a scandal in Pakistan, all of which indicates that this is making mountain of a mole hill, and begs the question: who is doing it at HEC, and why? There may be other issues with this case not touched upon in the newsmedia, but addressed in depth in Arshad Ali Take-2: With More Time On My Hands, which may turn out to be consequential for all co-authors. Their story doesn't add up.)
In the scheme of things gone awry at HEC and Pakistan's higher and lower education system, these are rather banal, pertinent more to NUST than to HEC. To see if there is a discernible pattern of lack of ethics and academic integrity in his NUST team, Dr. Arshad Ali's other papers listed on his resume co-authored with his plagiarizing student Atif Mehmood, including the many citations to the plagiarized paper which is troublesome, and Atif's Phd thesis and papers in ANU, are examined below in Arshad Ali Take-2: With More Time On My Hands.
Prima facie, something else appears to be in play at HEC to force Dr. Arshad Ali to resign under pressure for listing an unpublished plagiarized student paper on his resume, that even cites the paper from which it is mostly copied in its own references. Strange that HEC initially did not act for a whole year [12] [12a] (does not take that long to examine plagiarism, it took me just a few minutes to read both papers to adjudicate), and then came down hard on its own ED with the force of hammer. HEC has never done that before as far as one can tell. There have been other cases of plagiarism among HEC top honchos as reported in the press, and nothing ever happened, just as nothing happened for a year in Arshad Ali's case [12f] [12g] [12h] [12i] [12j], until the new government took charge which appears to have emboldened the new HEC chairman to finally cut all ties to legacy under any pretext. [12m] [12n]
Dr. Arshad Ali's counter-charges against the fakery Mafia operating in collusion with HEC, is existential. [12d] [12e] But are they really what's primarily behind the drive to oust Dr. Arshad Ali, or something else entirely?
What lies behind the 2018 NAB corruption case brought against former VC of Punjab University?
It appears to me that given the heavy-handed way in which the specious case of corruption against Dr. Mujahid Kamran, former VC of Punjab University, has been publicly handcuffed by NAB and the respected professor unceremoniously jailed without a competent law court passing indictment, there is concerted effort afoot to discredit any remaining decent professionals in Pakistan's academe with extreme measures. Perhaps to set en example for others. Where does this happen any place else on earth? No, it happens only in Pakistan. What's going on?
The powers that be only want a decrepit wreck left of the nuclear armed nation before their coup de grâce of de-nuking Pakistan with the help of her own fifth columnists. Fourth and Fifth generation warfare which demoralizes the targeted nations from within, is what is being waged against Pakistan for a very long time. Only off late has its recognition even become part of the public discourse, with the Army Chief calling it by the misnomer “hybrid war”. There is nothing more hybrid about it just because it has a variety of modalities than there is about Third-gen warfare fought on land, sea and air (and space and cyberspace) with a variety of weapons and its own modalities. It's a new more diabolically unified type of whole warfare with its underlying political theories, of which fabricating all the “colored” revolutions, internal chaos, debt-burden leading to austerity measures and local discontent, economic collapse, loss of domestic tranquility, terrorism, heightened and perpetual climate of fear, civil war, are all equally an integral part of the whole. Its overarching purpose is to defeat nations and their sovereignty from within, with the threat of Third-gen warfare only as the backdrop that is cunningly brought in at the right times under pretext of solving intractable problems that they have themselves manufactured. Ultimately, the coup de grâce, either as the merciful savior on victor's terms, or dismemberment / re-partition under victor's justice in the interest of peace. Not much different in final outcome than during World War I and II which successively remade the world order.
We are headed for the next phase of that, towards another world order. The final outcome sought is Global Governance under a single international political and financial authority, also called one-world government. Nations and regionalized Unions may continue to fly their own flags, but under global laws and global policies which are enforced from the central place. To transition to this one-world order, this new type of warfare has been chosen, as Third-gen warfare alone could not take a fiercely nationalistic world clinging to national sovereignty, to that outcome.
This modus operandi already has its own developed taxonomy and its own final outcome that is being sought in small baby-steps. Read the war literature of which plenty is available publicly from the Pentagon, private foundations and their liberally funded think-tanks, and in the writings of political philosophers seeking that final outcome. My old articles, and former Pakistani journalist now living in exile, Abid Jan's articles, already spoke to this treacherous warfare more than a decade ago, right after 9-11. Then, we were only 'conspiracy theorists'. Now that Pakistan's Army Chief has only partially woken up to its reality and speaking to it publicly in subdued tones, without identifying the principal nemesis or the final outcome sought, the pseudo intellectuals of Pakistan are suddenly echoing the same as if they have chanced upon a brilliant discovery or knew it all along. Better late than never, but sometimes, it is too late to be late. As the cliché goes, in love and war, matters are time-critical.
Defending against this type of intellect-driven warfare needs intellectual sophistication and bold cunning, not weapon systems hardware and large standing armies. Even the USSR could not survive this diabolical type of imposed warfare, which was only in its preliminary stages during the Cold War. Today, it demands even more sophistication to thwart, which is evidently entirely lacking in the Pakistani national psyche – elites and plebes alike – regardless of how piously patriotic the establishment may pretend to be. Only sophistication in thought and sophistication in warfare can ease Pakistan out of its long running dilemma as a servile client state, not more begging bowls and more outstretched hands. From the war-mongers' point of view, getting rid of establishment minds capable of such sophistication among their nemeses is the first order of business. That recognition also appears to be lacking in Pakistan's intelligentsia and its establishment thinkers, that it is by design that mental midgets, only cunning in the modalities of domestic corruption, but otherwise compliant to every will of the massa regardless of its morality or long-term consequences to the nation, continually preside over her destiny. Does it take rocket science to discover that? Or only commonsense? Or perhaps having the courage of one's convictions?
None in the universe can tolerate a Muslim nation being nuclear armed (with real teeth as opposed to boogieman's show-teeth) at this stage of the world in transition to Global Governance, and here we have our newly elected super-patriotic Prime Minister along with the notable Army Chief going out with begging bowls in delegations once again to tyrannical and murderous rulers. Why are they seeking charity from the same proxy-service providers of powers that be who'd like to see Pakistan de-nuked? Are they too stupid, or too savvy? What is the quid pro quo being offered, and has already been committed to over the years as payment for our services in secret handshakes?
In my five open letters to Prime Minister Imran Khan, and one open letter to Chief Justice of Pakistan, Mian Saqib Nisar, I had boldly advocated breaking the bonds of servitude to our masters in both form and substance. And here I see our rulers pursuing exactly the opposite course of action while making all the appropriate noises in public relations. Acts speak louder than words even in 'naya Pakistan'! I am certain the big brass know what they are doing when they shake all those dirty hands, for heavy lies the head that wears the crown. It is the public who does not know, and has to intelligently add two plus two to make four amidst the sea of deception and co-option that the rulers appear to be a part of. Should we all shut our eyes lest we glimpse the unspeakable truth, or, heaven forbid, dare to speak the unspeakable? Summun, bukmun, umyun, appears to be the better part of valor in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan!
Destroying Pakistan's higher and lower education system is very much a part of this Fourth and Fifth Gen warfare, to produce only fanatics, useful idiots, mental midgets and cunning mercenaries among its new generations, and get rid of any intellectual opposition. Make the nation so starved, and so without ma'arifat (wherewithal), that they'd be easy to control by house niggers cunningly installed by the massa employing its staple of workhorses, from dictatorships to crippled democracies.
I see what's happening to both Dr. Mujahid Kamran and Dr. Arshad Ali partially in the light of this overarching backdrop. Nothing in a “system” is ever in isolation. All its matters, big and small, are interconnected, but like the 90% of iceberg, may remain submerged beneath the surface. As Max Planck had observed, and the tracing of which had led to discovering the plagiarism case examined in this report:
Modern physics has taught us that the nature of any system cannot be discovered by dividing it into its component parts and studying each part by itself, since such a method often implies the loss of important properties of the system. We must keep our attention fixed on the whole and on the interconnection between the parts.” --- Max Planck
This “interconnection” is easily visible at least in the case of Dr. Mujahid Kamran, who happens to be the only institutional scholar in Pakistan who has even had the courage to commonsensically question and deconstruct the official narratives of empire, while all the rest of likkha-parrha jahils in the establishment of Pakistan and its barren intellectual space simply tow the official party-line whatever it may happen to be at any given time. The critics too retain the core axioms and presuppositions of the party-line in their mostly gibberish dissent. If the axioms are specious, the theorems and corollaries will be gibberish no matter how eruditely conceived! Only mental midgets and house niggers unable to reason from observations and first principles despite high-falutin credentials, are ever deceived by them. The rest are mercenaries!
I am, in fact, surprised that it took so long to nab Dr. Mujahid Kamran, and this tells me that his former political bosses had protected him. Why? I don't know, since they themselves towed the empire's party-line no matter how patently absurd, to stay in power. All politicians, all prominent public intellectuals in Pakistan with one exception, including our learned supreme court chief justices and retired military generals who routinely come on television to enlighten the masses, either publicly echo the same absurdities, or stay silent on them as if they see nothing. The lone prominent exception in Pakistan, of a respected and accomplished institutional intellectual straying away from the party-line, is Dr. Mujahid Kamran. The world sees 10% of visible iceberg and is easily burdened by it. I am burdened seeing all the rest of it and none pay any attention. But someone evidently paid attention to Dr. Mujahid Kamran. Not the kind he had intended, but surely expected. Socrates only partake of Hemlock, nothing else. That is the burden of seeing the rest of the iceberg, and being foolish enough, or driven enough, to shout it to warn the Titanic merry-makers before the fact. See Mujahid Kamran Take-2: With More Time On My Hands below.
Similarly, only in the new government is Dr. Arshad Ali suddenly strong-armed, while earlier the allegations of plagiarism did not seem to muster much weight even within HEC. Is that the quid pro quo for Imran Khan coming to power? To eliminate difficult intellectuals and decent professionals from Pakistan in his 'naya Pakistan'?

Arshad Ali Take-2: With More Time On My Hands
Is Dr. Arshad Ali an honest competent scientist being victimized for an agenda other than what's presented on the surface by HEC as plagiarism? Or, am I simply mistaken about Dr. Arshad Ali and all along, he was just a stupid comic book character who heisted petty change from the bank teller instead of the loot in the bank vaults, and the newly appointed superhero HEC Chairman, the Harvard Phd establishmentarian economist imported from the University of Utah, Dr. Tariq Banuri, is finally rescuing Pakistan from its academic scum top down? Brought in to lead HEC as one of the last acts of PML-N substitute Prime Minister, Shahid Khaqan Abbasi, [12k] I wonder if this superhero's tenure is also going to turn into another Alice in Wonderland show as everything else in HEC and Pakistan are --- Wrapped in Absurdities!
Not if the new head of HEC reads this report with patience, and at least the due diligence with which it has been written, acquires ma'arifat into the systemic problem of higher education in Pakistan, that it is not individuals, but the system that needs fixing. High quality papers don't just happen by magic. High quality papers require high quality research, and high quality projects to conduct such research in, and high quality professional interest with high quality love of learning to conduct such research, and high quality leadership under whose direction and mentorship research is led, and high quality in work ethics and personal integrity to not take short-cuts for pecuniary gain and accolades, and high quality in system egalitarianism rather than system cronyism that make seeking careers in academe both satisfying and rewarding rather than bastion of mediocrity to hide under.
Can the imported Pakistani superhero from the United States fix all that without the gestalt shift outlined in this report? Do we need Western imported Herculean superheroes to clean the Augean stables, or one fearless and competent local intellectual at the top who does not care for his own self-interest but for his nation? Just one such Pakistani is sufficient. Does that person exist in Pakistan? Otherwise, a hundred thousand successful and prized academics imported from the Untied States and the West are useless! HEC already experienced the tyranny of good intentions of Dr. Atta-ur-Rahman that has made a wreck of Pakistan's higher education! When house niggers preside over the destiny of a nation, they will always have imported saviors and other house niggers come rescue the field niggers. The end result is that nothing will ever change except for window dressing at best. To understand mental colonization and this non politically correct taxonomy which is well established, but infrequently employed to study the long-festering problems Pakistan faces, see [19], [19a], [19b], [19c], [19d].
In full disclosure, I met Dr. Arshad Ali for the first time in the summer of 2005 when I tried out HEC for exactly two weeks before leaving. A few years later when I had written him from the United States inquiring about the possibility of teaching at NUST, Dr. Arshad Ali invited me to join the NIIT faculty of which he was the Director General at the time. Unfortunately, I could not followup on his invitation. I have since not spoken to him. Dr. Arshad Ali was also not on the original 2011 email distribution list of this plagiarism report either. He may not even remember me. That's full disclosure.
Let's begin with Dr. Arshad Ali's CV ( Dr Arshad Ali Resume Apr 2013.pdf ) and examine all papers co-authored with his plagiarizing student Muhammad Atif Mehmood. “Atif Mehmood” and “Muhammad Atif” is the same student. Paper 45 lists his full name. The CV lists following papers:
28. Ali, A; Anjum, A; Mehmood, A; McClatchey, R; Willers, I; Bunn, J; Newman, H; Thomas, M; Steenberg, C, “A Taxonomy and Survey of Grid Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Grid Enabled Analysis Environment” California USA, CHEP 05 July 2004 (already examined above)
39. Arshad Ali, Ashiq Anjum, Ian Willers, Richard McClatchey, Julian Bunn, Harvey Newman , Atif Mehmood, “A Taxonomy and Survey of Grid Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Grid Enabled Analysis Environment” International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications to Business, Engineering and Scienc(DCABES),Wuhan, 2004.

[ Note that title of paper 39 is identical with paper 28 already examined above; the same paper was evidently submitted to two conferences simultaneously that were to be held two months apart! Most people at least change the title and add some new results or something. Analysis below]
45. Arshad Ali, Ashiq Anjum , Ian Willers, Richard McClatchey, Julian Bunn , Harvey Newman ,Atif Mehmood, "Predicting Resource Requirements of a Job Submission in Grid Environment" Chep 2004
[ Computing in High Energy Physics, Interlaken, Switzerland, 2004, paper 273.]
[ Note that paper 45 mentions the full name of Atif: as Muhammad Atif Mehmood ]
55. "Resource Management Services for the Grid Analysis Environment", Arshad Ali, Ashiq Anjum, Tahir Azim, Adeel Zafar, Atif Mehmood, Harvey Newman, Ian Willers, Richard McClatchey, Julian Bunn, Waqas-ur Rehman, 2005 International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP-2005) Oslo, Norway [ The 2005 International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP-2005) Oslo, Norway, Pages: 53-60. DOI=10.1109/ICPPW.2005.76 ]
89. Muzammil A. Khan, H. Farooq Ahmad, Arshad Ali, Faran Javed Chawla, M. Atif, Hiroki Suguri, and H. Ghulam Mujtaba “An Efficient Algorithm for Aligning DNA Sequences”, ISCA 21st International Conference on Computers and Their Applications (CATA-2006), March 23-25, 2006 Seattle, WA, USA. pages 407—412
I was curious about the Phds done under Dr. Arshad Ali's supervision and went through the thesis mentioned on the CV:
PhD Thesis Supervision: under Joint Supervision
  1. Mr. Ashiq Anjum (Completed): “Physics Analysis Applications for handheld device in Grid environment” 2007 University of The West of England UK
  2. Mr Waseem Hasan (Completed): “MammoGrid: A Service Oriented Architecture based Medical Grid Application” 2009 University of the West of England UK
  3. Mr Sarmad Malik (Completed): “Distributed computing for high performance physics analysis applications” 2010 NUST, Pakistan
  4. Muhammad Atif (In Progress): “Adaptive Resource Relocation in Virtualized Heterogeneous Clusters” Australian National University 2011
  5. Abdul Ghafoor (In progress): “CryptoNET: Generic Security Framework For Cloud Computing Environments” KTH Stockholm, Sweden 2012
I located Muhammad Atif Mehmood's Phd. thesis supervisor: Peter Strazdins, at the Australian National University (ANU), who lists the following publications with Muhammad Atif (“Mehmood” appears to have been dropped from the name).
  • Muhammad Atif, PhD, July 2011. Adaptive Resource Relocation in Virtualized Heterogeneous Clusters (Jabberwocky project). Now Manager, HPC Systems and Cloud Services, NCI.
    TR-CS-11-01 Muhammad Atif and Peter Strazdins. Adaptive Resource Remapping InVirtualized Environments - Framework. May 2011
Cloud and Cluster Computing, Virtualization
  1. Claudio Barberato, Peter E. Strazdins, Eric McCreath and Muhammad Atif. Efficient Evaluation of Scheduling Metrics Using Emulation: A Case Study in the Effect of Artefacts, Proceedings of the 47th International Conference on Parallel Processing Companion, article 40, 10 pages, Eugene USA, August 2018.
  2. Muhammad Atif and Peter Strazdins, Adaptive parallel application resource remapping through the live migration of virtual machines, Future Generation Computer Systems, 37 (2014), pp 148-161
  3. Peter E. Strazdins, Jie Cai, Muhammad Atif, and Joseph Antony, Scientific Application Performance on HPC, Private and Public Cloud Resources: A Case Study Using Climate, Cardiac Model Codes and the NPB Benchmark Suite, Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium Workshops, Shanghai, May 2012, pp 1271-1276
  4. Muhammad Atif and Peter Strazdins, Adaptive resource remapping through live migration of virtual machines , Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Algorithms and Architectures for Parallel Processing (ICA3PP 2011), Melbourne, Oct 2011.
  5. Muhammad Atif and Peter Strazdins, Optimizing Live Migration of Virtual Machines in SMP Clusters for HPC Applications, Proceedings of the 6th IFIP International Conference on Network and Parallel Computing (NPC 2009), pp. 51-58, IEEE, Gold Coast, October 2009.
  6. Muhammad Atif and Peter Strazdins, An Evaluation of Multiple Communication Interfaces for Virtualized SMP Clusters, Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Workshop on System-level Virtualization for High Performance Computing, European Conference on Computer Systems, pp 9-16, Nuremberg, Apr 2009, ISBN:978-1-60558-465-2 [CR]
Analysis of Citations of the Plagiarized Taxonomy Paper
In the book “Evolving Developments in Grid and Cloud Computing: Advancing Research”, Edited by Emmanuel Udoh, 2012, link, paper 39 in Arshad Ali's resume above, is cited by one of the papers reproduced in the book as: “Paper presented at the 2004 [September] International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications to Business, Engineering and Science (DCABES 2004), Wuhan, China”:
  • Peer-to-Peer Desktop Grids Based on an Adaptive Decentralized Scheduling Mechanism,
    Citation: on pg 64, Reference Item #2: (DCABES 2004, September), Wuhan, China,
    and the same on pg 317 under Compilation of References
    link1 & link2
That citation piqued my interest. Just a little bit of typing into Google scholar brought the following list of citations which reference this plagiarized Taxonomy paper (which automatically beg the commonsense observations listed at the end):,31&sciodt=0,31&hl=en
  1. Grid Resource Negotiation: Survey and New Directions, Kwang Mong Sim, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews) ( Volume: 40 , Issue: 3 , May 2010 ) Page(s): 245-257, Date of Publication: 26 January 2010
    Citation: 18. A. Ali, A. Anjum, A. Mehmood, R. McClatchey, I. Willers, J. Bunn, H. Newman, M. Thomas, C. Steenberg, "A taxonomy and survey of grid resource planning and reservation systems for grid enabled analysis environment", Proc. Int. Sym. Distrib. Comp. Appl. Bus. Eng. Sci., pp. 1-8, 2004.
  2. Concurrent Negotiation and Coordination for Grid Resource Coallocation, Kwang Mong Sim ; Benyun Shi, Published in: IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics) ( Volume: 40 , Issue: 3 , June 2010 ) Page(s): 753 - 766, Date of Publication: 30 October 2009
    Citaton: 1. A. Ali, Α. Anjum, J. Bunn, Η. Newman, M. Thomas, C. Steenberg, I. Willers, R. McClatchey, A. Mehmood, "A taxonomy and survey of Grid resource planning and reservation systems for grid enabled analysis environment", Proc. Int. Symp. Distrib. Comput. Appl. Bus. Eng. Sci., pp. 1-8, 2004.
  3. Relaxed-criteria G-negotiation for Grid resource co-allocation, Kwang Mong Sim, Newsletter ACM SIGecom Exchanges Homepage archive Volume 6 Issue 2, January 2007 Pages 37-46 ACM New York, NY, USA
    Citation:1 {1} A. Ali et al. A Taxonomy and Survey of Grid Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Grid Enabled Analysis Environment. Proc. of the 2004 Int. Sym. on Distributed Comp. and Appl. to Business Eng. and Science, Wuhan, China, pp. 1-8.
  4. An adaptive decentralized scheduling mechanism for peer-to-peer Desktop Grids,Abdulrahman A. Azab ; Hisham.A. Kholidy ,Published in: 2008 International Conference on Computer Engineering & Systems Date of Conference: 25-27 Nov. 2008 Date Added to IEEE Xplore: 03 February 2009
    Citation: 8. Arshad Ali, Ashiq Anjum, Atif Mehmood, Richard McClatchey, Ian Willers, Julian Bunn1, Harvey, "A Taxonomy and Survey of Grid Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Grid Enabled Analysis Environment", International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications to Business Engineering and Science, 5 Jul 2004.
  5. Supporting resource reservation and allocation for unaware applications in Grid systems, Antonella Di Stefano, Marco Fargetta, Giuseppe Pappalardo, Emiliano Tramontana, Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience Volume 18, Issue 8, First published: 17 November 2005,
    1. A. Ali, A. Anjum, A. Mehmood, R. McClatchey, I. Willers, J. Bunn, H. Newman, M. Thomas, and C. Steenberg. A Taxonomy and Survey of Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Grid Enabled Analysis Environment. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications to Business Engineering and Science, 2004.
  6. Framework for Resource Management in A Grid Environment, Chana, Inderveer Bawa, Seema (Guide), 9-Jun-2009Appears in Collections: Doctoral Theses@CSED
    Citation: [30] Arshad Ali, Ashiq Anjum, Atif Mehmood, Richard McClatchey, Ian Willers, Julian Bunn, Harvey, “A Taxonomy and Survey of Grid Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Grid Enabled Analysis Environment”,
    pg 152-153
  7. A Concurrent G-Negotiation Mechanism for Grid Resource Co-allocation,Benyun Shi ; Kwang Mong Sim ,Published in: IEEE International Conference on e-Business Engineering (ICEBE'07) Date of Conference: 24-26 Oct. 2007, Date Added to IEEE Xplore: 12 December 2007
    Citation: 5. A. Ali et al., "A Taxonomy and Survey of Grid Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Grid Enabled Analysis Environment", Proc. of the 2004 Int. Sym. on Distributed Compo and Appl. to Business Eng. and Sci., pp. 1-8, 2004.
  8. A new resource allocation model for grid networks based on bargaining in a competitive market, S Somayyeh Haghtalabi, Reza Javidan, Ali Harounabadi - Journal of Soft Computing and Applications …, 2014, Available online at Volume 2014, Year 2014 Article ID jsca-00036, 17 Pages doi:10.5899/2014/jsca-00036
    Citation: [17] A. Ali, A. Anjum, A. Mehmood, R. McClatchey, I. Willers, J. Bunn, H. Newman, M. Thomas, C. Steenberg, A taxonomy and survey of grid resource planning and reservation systems for grid enabled analysis environment, in Proc. Int. Sym. Distrib. Comp. Appl. Bus. Eng. Sci.,Wuhan, China, (2004) 1-8.
  9. [C] Zarządzanie zasobami gridowymi z użyciem parawirtualizacji J Kosiński - 2009 - Ph. D. dissertation, AGH-University
    Citation: pg 189, [4] Arshad Ali, Ashiq Anjum, Atif Mehmood, Richard McClatchey, Ian Willers, Julian J. Bunn, Harvey B. Newman, Michael Thomas, Conrad Steenberg. A Taxonomy and Survey of Grid Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Grid Enabled Analysis Environment. The Computing Research Repository (CoRR), 27(1), styczen 2004
  10. Peer-to-Peer Desktop Grids Based on an Adaptive Decentralized Scheduling Mechanism, H. Arafat Ali (Mansoura University, Egypt), A.I. Saleh (Mansoura University, Egypt), Amany M. Sarhan (Mansoura University, Egypt) and Abdulrahman A. Azab (Mansoura University, Egypt) Source Title: International Journal of Grid and High Performance Computing (IJGHPC) 2(1) Pages: 20 DOI: 10.4018/jghpc.2010092801
    Citation: 2 Ali, A., Anjum, A., Mehmood, A., Richard, M., Willers, I., & Julian, B. 2004, September. A taxonomy and survey of grid resource planning and reservation systems for grid enabled analysis environment. Paper presented at the 2004 International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications to Business, Engineering and Science DCABES 2004, Wuhan, China.
  11. Solving Scheduling Problems in Grid Resource Management Using an Evolutionary Algorithm, Karl-Uwe StuckyWilfried JakobAlexander QuinteWolfgang Süß, OTM 2006: On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2006: CoopIS, DOA, GADA, and ODBASE pp 1252-1262, Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4276),
    Citation: 10. Ali, A., Anjum, A., Mehmood, A., McClatchey, R., Willers, I., Bunn, J., Newman, H., Thomas, M., Steenberg, C.: A Taxonomy and Survey of Grid Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Enabled Analysis Environment. In: Proceedings of the 2004 International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications to Business, Engineering and Science, DCABES 2004, Wuhan Hubei, P.R. China, September 13th-16th (2004)
  12. Aglets Mobile Agent based Grid Monitoring System, Choudhury, Arindam Chana, Inderveer (Guide), 6-Aug-2009, Appears in Collections: Masters Theses@CSED
    Citation: pg 65 [23] Proceedings of the 2004 International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications to Business Engineering and Science...
  13. Intelligence in Scheduling for Grid Computing, R. JOSHUA SAMUEL RAJ, In partial fulfillment for the award of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, KALASALINGAM UNIVERSITY JANUARY – 2014
    Citation: 14. Arshad Ali, Ashiq Anjum, Atif Mehmood, Richard McClatchey, Ian Willers, Julian Bunn, Harvey Newman, Michael Thomas and Conrad Steenberg(2004), ‘A Taxonomy and Survey of Grid Resource Planning and Reservation Systems for Grid Enabled Analysis Environment’, Proceedings of International Symposium on Distributed Computing and Applications to Business Engineering and Science.
Commonsense Observations on These Citations to the Plagiarized Taxonomy Paper
How can the plagiarized Taxonomy paper be cited if it is withdrawn from the conference? If the plagiarised paper was published in the proceedings from which it's being cited for years to come, what's the consequence to all its other co-authors? Why has no scandal been heard of thus far? What's the explanation?
Additionally, if this DCABES 2004 submission was not withdrawn alongside the CHEP withdrawal [12e], then his team actually presented the plagiarised paper in Wuhan China conference knowing that it was plagiarised and already withdrawn from the California CHEP conference two months earlier! Or did they not know when they showed up at the conference?
Here is the presenter list from the DCABES 2004 PROCEEDINGS Hardcopy, Wuhan, China September 13-16, 2004 --- Arshad Ali and his two students are listed at number 3 in the first session on Grid Computing. Did these Pakistani scholars et. al. actually show up, or was it a no-show? How can one verifiably ascertain that 14 years later? Note the funny statement in its Preface, of all papers in this proceeding being peer-reviewed!
One understands that proceedings are published ahead of time. But DCABES 2004 in Wuhan, China, September 13th-16th, was more than two months after the CHEP 05 July 2004 in California, United States, when the plagiarized paper was supposedly withdrawn as per claim made by Arshad Ali in [12e]. Even a time-slot is arranged for the presentation at Wuhan 2004, on Monday, September 13, 2004, 10.40 am, as mentioned in the DCABES program. The statement in the Preface is enjoyable if only for its considerable laughter therapy value ---- some peer-review! So, Arshad Ali's claim in [12e] is prima facie false that the plagiarized paper was not peer-reviewed! It was peer reviewed the same way everything else is “peer reviewed” [17]. In the information age where celebrity appeal more than content has become the inevitable yardstick of scholarship, who can resist Caltech / CERN name-branding to pay close attention?
Cacheof-DCABES 2004 PROCEEDINGS-Sept-13to16-PresenterList-Arshad-Ali.jpg
Cacheof-DCABES 2004 PROCEEDINGS-Sept-13to16-Preface-peer-reviewed-and-carefully-chosen-Ah!.jpg
Caption “It is the second time for the DCABES international conference to be held in Wuhan China. We are gratified that this time nearly 400 papers submitted which cover a wide range of topics, such as Grid Computing, ... All papers contained in this Proceedings are peer-reviewed and carefully chosen by members of Scientific Committee and external reviewers. Papers accepted or rejected are based on majority opinions of the referee’s. All papers contained in this Proceedings give us a glimpse of what future technology and applications are being researched in the distributed parallel computing area in the world.” [ link1 ] [ link2 ]
It's a minor survey paper which, on the face of it, appears entirely to be an oversight in giving to an unsupervised undergraduate to write, and not reviewing it before submitting it to conferences. However, what happened afterward is more interesting. The co-authors submitted the same plagiarized paper to two independent conferences on two continents where it is accepted by each one! Last time I checked, conferences discouraged that; it is considered unethical, but perhaps China is more forgiving? Not if we believe their Preface. The Western academe certainly isn't forgiving at all. To knowingly present the plagiarized paper at the second conference after Arshad Ali claimed it was not presented at CHEP?
Nothing makes any sense here, unless they all agree to say that none of them knew until HEC magic software caught it fourteen years later. So Arshad Ali would have to make a U-turn on his statement in [12e] if that were the case. Would anyone believe that even if all 9 co-authors agreed to state under oath that the first anyone learnt of the paper being plagiarized is when the scandal broke in Pakistan in December 2017? I sure would not. It would spell their doom even so, as a mediocre crappy group who don't know their own field and thought for fourteen years that the stolen paper they listed to pad their resumes was their own work! See analysis in first part above where the issues pertaining to not knowing are fleshed out in detail.
Since this paper is being used to victimize Dr. Arshad Ali, some clarity with extended precision in his explanation is required. Such “small” things can even bring down governments in the West, for lying!
Meaning, if one committed a crime, then lied about it when caught, the latter deceit is often seen to be more consequential to one's existence in the West! It is called “obstruction of justice”. Nixon's star fell principally because of that the last time I checked. Had he come clean immediately, arguably he may have survived his impeachment drive with a humble “Mea culpa”!
Prima facie facts betray that the paper was published, and presented, and only withdrawn this year after the scandal broke in Pakistan. That is a major problem, as someone is lying. The plagiarized paper has been cited by at least 13 separate papers as reproduced above from Google scholar indexing of these citations, all citing the Wuhan conference; and available for download from multiple places since 2004. This PDF-link on its page still works as of this writing (I saved the PDF and ArXiv page in with today's timestamp). And while there is withdrawal notice on the latter as snapshot above, if one accessed the PDF-link directly, there is no notification that the paper is withdrawn. Since other co-authors don't seem to care very much about the implication of their plagiarized paper being cited over the past 14 years, there is obviously some simple explanation why they don't seem to care.
Aren't they worried that for 14 years the pretense was publicly kept up that the stolen paper was theirs? Nor did Arshad Ali seem to care until now, since he continued to cite both submissions of the plagiarized paper on his own resume. Something obvious must be missing here. What is it? An ex post facto “Mea culpa” in the waiting, and only after being caught? What's its worth?
That's what you get, mud in your face, for putting your name down on something that you know nothing about, or haven't read, in the greed to increase publication count, impact factor. Why 9 co-authors on a survey paper? Most of Arshad Ali's papers listed on his resume are like that --- many co-authors. They help each other artificially inflate their publication count --- because that's what it takes to get ahead under HEC rules for promotion and tenure. But what about the foreign authors? Did they even know that their names are on this paper? Obviously Richard McClatchey did. Did these co-authors do any of the work that is reported in these Arshad Ali papers? Obviously not on the plagiarized paper! So what's the big idea of putting 9 co-authors on a survey paper? Isn't a simple mention in Acknowledgment sufficient?
Pakistan, Pakistan, Pakistan! Integrity challenged across the board.
And yet, for all Pakistanis, it is still dil dil Pakistan, jaan jaan Pakistan.
However, despite that noble song which still sings on its own in many a broken Pakistani heart, until that pernicious disease is recognized as the fundamental first-cause of Pakistan's cancerous problems across the board, in every sphere of our existence, nothing is ever gonna get fixed in Pakistan regardless how many superheroes are imported from the West, and how many U-turns our illustrious leader and his circus clowns teach the public to make. Should be obvious. It is self evident.
Reading Atif's Phd Thesis and other Papers
So I went through the abovementioned papers and his Phd thesis. Nothing notable, nor negative. It is decent medium-level hands-on engineering thesis. Most of these types of theses are like this. They individually make no significant contribution to the field per se, but a hundred of these move the field incrementally forward. Mostly such work is undertaken not for making significant contributions to the field, but for earning the license to a respectable meal ticket that a phd gets one. The Western academic system keeps these poorly prepared scholars hungry for meagre academic work, honest despite the natural inclination to get ahead at all cost. Which is perhaps why his papers and thesis appear to be well-written, no more than two or three or four co-authors, one of which is his Phd advisor, with clear citation of what is from where, and in my quick read, I did not see any hint of cut-and-paste work. The thesis is tediously laborious and rather mundane work, making measurements of physicists' templated workloads to see what ad hoc predictions might be usefully extractable from patterns of execution to aid in future scheduling of compute and I/O intensive jobs typical of High energy physics more efficiently. I am sure some think it is an important problem to spend one's productive educational years on. Under the direct supervision of his Australian academic mentors, it would not have been possible, nor profitable in any case, to be crooked. Being honest in the West pays, just as being dishonest in Pakistan pays. So one goes where one is paid --- when one's ethics are dependent on the survival strategy outcome. This is Atif's academic page where he proudly announced his Phd: “I am PhD in high performance computing (Computer Science). Currently working at ANU Supercomputer Facility (also known as NCI-NF)”. I am sure his mother is very proud of her son.
However, and unfortunately so, this is the NUST page on Muhammad Atif Mehmood, the student who screwed his Pakistani professor due to the Pakistani professor's own lack of academic foresight and lack of academic ethics in ensuring that his student is supervised and groomed if he is a member of his team; teaching him no ethics, no sense of responsibility, no sense of pride in having dignity and self-respect in one's word; all up for sale to opportunism & expediency – which, our noble prime minister of 100 days, Dr. Imran Khan, has now transformed into a noble virtue that is next to godliness by asserting with a straight face: “those who don't make U-turns are not leaders” – making Dr. Atif Mehmood Phd, what he is today: “defaulter of the Government of Pakistan”!
Caption “Mr Muhammad Atif was awarded scholarship during Oct 2006 for Australian National University (ANU), Australia under NUST Faculty Development Programme for PhD in “Robotics & Automation”. He had signed a bond to serve NUST for 05 years after completion of PhD but he did not join back NUST to fulfill his bond obligations. Till date, the scholar has neither joined back NUST nor refunded the amount spent on him, which makes him defaulter of the Government of Pakistan.”
Caption “Mr Muhammad Atif was awarded scholarship during Oct 2006 for Australian National University (ANU), Australia under NUST Faculty Development Programme for PhD in “Robotics & Automation”. He had signed a bond to serve NUST for 05 years after completion of PhD but he did not join back NUST to fulfill his bond obligations. Till date, the scholar has neither joined back NUST nor refunded the amount spent on him, which makes him defaulter of the Government of Pakistan.”
Many such national scholarship defaulters from Pakistan are at large throughout the world. Their numbers are probably at least in hundreds, if not thousands. So here is one more making a U-turn.
However, in the thesis of his other more visibly competent student, Ashiq Anjum, one sees the following note of gratitude and praise for his mentor Dr. Arshad Ali, which is more heartening. My own brief interaction with Dr. Arshad Ali many years ago also exposed his avuncular personality:
“Third, I highly acknowledge the marvelous support, encouragement and counseling from Prof. Arshad Ali who is also my third supervisor. He always supported me financially, morally, technically and even psychologically when I used to be in trouble, always helped like an elder brother and father. He introduced me to the deep sea of research and I can still remember the mid-night video conferences with Caltech to sort out the research related issues in the early days of my research in 2002.” --- Ashiq Anjum, Phd thesis, Data Intensive and Network Aware (DIANA) Grid Scheduling, July 2007, Acknowledgment, page 3
Reading that, I instinctively liked Anjum. His thesis is also a bit more interesting to read on a sleepless night. It is revealing of personal character however, that Muhammad Atif Mehmood made no mention of Dr. Arshad Ali in his thesis, even while Arshad Ali lists him as being under his supervision (in item 4). Not seeing even a mention of his own professor who must have been instrumental in getting him the scholarship from NUST to attend ANU, I took an instinctive dislike to Atif. He did thank NUST though, in these vacuous words: “My very special thanks to National University of Sciences and Technology (NUST), Pakistan for providing me a scholarship for the first three years of my candidature at the Australian National University.” NUST has him in the wanted list.
The basic issue once again comes back to loss of ethics and integrity among Pakistanis. We are taught from birth, it seems, to be opportunists. We use others to get ahead. We are honest only until we are caught (or when it pays being honest)! And surely, the best scam is to appear to be a noble opportunist in the National Interest. U-turns are now legit. I think I am back in Alice in Wonderland! At least, Alice can always wakeup from her silly nightmare.
If Dr. Arshad Ali has no real case of plagiarism against him other than his student Atif Mehmood's; if HEC's new superhero, Dr. Tariq Banuri, wants his own dream team in place and wishes to get rid of legacy to start afresh, surely there is more ethical way to terminate the contractual services of Dr. Arshad Ali. Otherwise, I see little difference in opportunism, except for scale: one is of the pirate, and the other is of the emperor. It may be pertinent to end this study of Dr. Arshad Ali's strange case with the foundational thought that anchors the latter day Western civilization to its Hellenistic and Roman imperial roots. It is even ubiquitously on display in Pakistan as the epitome of ethical values that are actually cherished in Pakistani society, as opposed to those that we so religiously pay lip-service to:
“When the King asked him what he meant by infesting the sea, the pirate defiantly replied: 'the same as you do when you infest the whole world; but because I do it with a little ship I am called a robber, and because you do it with a great fleet, you are an emperor.'” --- The City of God against the Pagans, Page 148

Mujahid Kamran Take-2: With More Time On My Hands
Is Dr. Mujahid Kamran an honest competent intellectual being victimized for an agenda other than what's presented on the surface by NAB as corruption in recruitment at Punjab University outside the established bureaucratic protocol for faculty recruitment?
In full disclosure, I knew Dr. Mujahid Kamran's late father and late uncle, brothers, cousins, family, and as a teenager and best friends with his equally brilliant younger brother, read every book his dear father ever published that I found at his home. These were the honest men of intellect of Pakistan of the yore who set high standards of personal and professional ethics for themselves. I harbor the belief that integrity and ethics are Mujahid Kamran's pedigree just as crookedness may be others. We watch our parents while growing up, and we become what they feed us!
While I also keenly comprehend co-option; how good people sell-out their conscience one day at a time, regardless of the color of their blood. It is equally inconceivable to me that one can be so high placed as the VC of the most distinguished public sector university of Pakistan in corruption and mediocrity entrenched Pakistan, and not have made any Faustian bargains with the political masters who put one there. Thus, I am keenly interested in figuring out Dr. Mujahid Kamran's case from the public records, as I believe that the reason he is in trouble with NAB has little to do with academe, and everything to do with him being a politically savvy intellectual who also has some ma'arifat of the powers that run the world, and is unafraid to publicly express it. That character trait of genuine gadfly with some ma'arifat has become rare and unusual in Pakistan; never tolerable in a slave-state being brought to its knees.
I must surmise therefore, and disclose my presumption going into this inquiry, that part of any quid pro quo with his political masters was the obvious protection he received. What he did for them in return to deserve that longevity as the free-wheeling VC of Punjab University, one will never really know from the public record alone. Much of such quid pro quo is in nods, winks, handshakes, and looking the other way; not in signatures that can be traced back to you. All signatured corruption is always done “legally” by intelligent crooks, through approved bodies and other people. This is rather obvious and an open secret. I even read about it as a teenager in Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People. The most effective operators easily take it to the next logical level in a politically charged climate --- how to get things done without one's name being associated with it.
Therefore, whether honest excuse or crooked caveat, Mujahid Kamran's singular public defence against NAB's charges of recruiting hundreds of competent faculty outside the public sector university's official recruitment protocol, is something to the effect that can be expected from a man with smart brains: “Syndicate approved it”, and “there is not a single piece of paper with my signatures on it in this matter”. Neither is Dr. Mujahid Kamran a bhole-badshah (a new born baby), nor am I. If the administrator found a short-cut to hiring competent people, I look at that as cutting the red tape of bureaucracy --- being an effective administrator --- but then I come from a no nonsense competitive private sector background and don't have much patience for bureaucratic procedures that give safe harbor to age, seniority, and degree pile over competence.
The problem is that in the public sector, it is illegal to bypass bureaucratic procedures and established standards regardless --- only the top-brass can circumvent laws without consequence as these are mostly for the underlings to follow anyway in a country like ours! Thus, smart operators find creative ways to circumvent “legalities” when it gets in the way of their getting their job done. Both honest ones seeking noble ends, as well as crooked ones seeking ignoble ends. The cliché “ends and means both noble” only works in text books. Advanced societies have altered that platitude to “ends and means both legal” with which they abide by, even in making immoral wars under the sound of trumpets. In the case of Dr. Mujahid Kamran who has not been charged by NAB with benefiting either his relatives or himself through these recruitment short-cuts, arguably he was only being an effective no nonsense administrator who wanted to attract competent faculty to raise the academic standards at his university in a hurry.
Therefore, barring discovery of evidence to the contrary, as far as I am concerned, NAB charges appear to be an eyewash and a non-issue. The matter of persistently circumventing procedure in recruitment could easily have been addressed in a proper way within the university system itself or some other higher body. NAB's involvement and its humiliatingly handcuffing Dr. Mujahid Kamran, keeping him in oppressive jail conditions for interrogation without indictment, lumping him with the politicians who are in its custody for massive open corruption that the entire country sees, is very very peculiar indeed.
Thus, I look more closely at the big picture in “system context” in Mujahid Kamran's case. Why does Mujahid Kamran have to be discredited the moment the new government comes into power? Neither PPP nor PML-N ever bothered with him, and he was VC of PU during both their tenures, irrespective of the pertinent question of how he got to that top position in the first place without some quid pro quo. Why in Imran Khan's new government is he being brought up on this low order bit charge of out-of-band faculty recruitment, when much bigger fish having done far greater corruption in significantly higher order bits, still roam freely? What's really going on?
I should also disclose that while I knew his family well, I don't know Dr. Mujahid Kamran personally; I may have met him once only, if memory serves me, when I visited his cousin, Dr. Mansoor Sarwar, who is head of PUCIT (Punjab University College of Information Technology) and is my good friend and classmate from UET Lahore from the 1970s; correspond with him occasionally on current affairs (mostly send him my articles to which he never responds); and Dr. Mansoor Sarwar over a decade ago managed to invite me to come teach computer science at PUCIT under Dr. Mujahid Kamran's watch as VC. Sadly, I could not followup up on that invitation. I should also disclose that in all of Pakistan, Dr. Mujahid Kamran is the only intellectual to ever cite any of my humble work in current affairs [19], even if it was only a sentence or two of gratuitous praise in his oped in Dawn. That's full disclosure.
Let's find out about Dr. Mujahid Kamran. Let's begin at his website: to locate his CV ( MK CV details Jan 2017_2.pdf ). It mentions the following publications summary:
Sixty three (63) research publications in refereed journals outside Pakistan / presented at conferences abroad (list appended; 48 in foreign (impact factor) journals, 2 in local journals, 13 Conference presentations / contribution in International Conferences abroad)
Ninety four (94) articles, mostly on aspects of science and higher education, as well as on global politics, published in national and international magazines and newspapers (list appended)
Fourteen (14) books including two text books (4 of the 14 are in Urdu language; 5 of these books deal with the lives and works of great physicists of the twentieth century).
The published books of particular interest are:
  • 2) M. Kamran: The International Bankers, World War I, II and Beyond: University of the Punjab Press, 2015; 560 pages, ISBN 978‐969‐9325‐24‐3
  • 4) M. Kamran: Saniha e September aur Nia Aalmi Nizam (Urdu translation of 9/11 & the New World Order by Mohsin Peerzada): University of the Punjab Press, 2014; 452 pages, ISBN 978‐969‐9325‐17‐5
  • 5) M. Kamran: 9/11 & the New World Order (English): University of the Punjab Press, 2013; 396 pages, ISBN 978‐969‐9325‐13‐7
  • 7) M. Kamran: The Grand Deception ‐ Corporate America and Perpetual War: Sang e Meel Publications,2010, 429 pages ISBN‐10: 969–35–2406–3, ISBN‐13: 978–969‐35‐2406‐2
The under preparation books of particular interest listed on his CV are:
  • 4. M. Kamran: Operation Gladio: Global Subversion: 126 pages written so far
  • 5. M. Kamran: The JFK Assassination: 217 pages written so far
  • 6. M. Kamran: The World Order: How It Works; 289 pages written so far
None of these topics are new or first hand researched. While I have not read his published books, there are already tons of books, articles, essays, exposés, on these subjects, many I have read with a yawn, and these are some of the topics that I have also researched and written about since 2003. It is difficult to say without actually having read his books, what new and original insights Dr. Mujahid Kamran has to contribute to this space of current affairs and recent history. But apart from his own analysis which I am sure would be interesting to read and perhaps unique in magical ways, the factual material is down into its fourth or fifth or even sixth generation regurgitation. I have immersed myself in this domain full time over the past two decades and I am hard pressed to see what new understanding someone sitting in his Vice Chancellor's office in Lahore Pakistan without any first hand knowledge of the facts but with access to an internet connection to look up what others have amply written of these facts, can uniquely come up with that others have not yet seen. In any case, this is how understanding of political reality that is almost always wrapped in layers upon layers of deceit, incrementally moves forward. Forensically un peeled, layer by layer, by people of courage revisiting data. This is the domain of finer activist-historians who study “contemporary history” --- history that is contemporaneously in the making --- with the potential of disrupting its making if purdah-faash (unmasked) prematurely; before events become fait accompli. But academic contribution to the domain is not the issue, even if there may be some unique aspects to Dr. Mujahid Kamran's perspectives which I look forward to reading someday, hopefully without a yawn, and improving my own meagre understanding of reality.
The issue at hand is something entirely different. And this needs to be understood perceptively, with ma'arifat. The cowards won't get it, nor will mental midgets and mercenaries. You are what you eat!
The issue is to speak up on unpopular truth, and dispel popular falsehoods. It does not matter who else has done it before you, or is doing it now, or not doing it at all. In this space, one man who has it right is sufficient majority to act alone despite the threat of hemlock. If it is now your truth, then regardless of who else holds it, it's now as much yours as the ones whom you may have learnt it from. Those who make that principle their categorical imperative, they continually strive to implement it to the capacity of their very being. In this context, it is not what academic contributions Mujahid Kamran may or may not have made to the field of current affairs. That is an irrelevant and impertinent question.
What is relevant and pertinent in our context is that once you learn what the truth of a matter really is, a) you strive to bring that truth to your audience, to your society, to your people, to warn them, to awaken them; and b) you live that existence come what may, the best way you can. For an academic scientist, it is through writing books and in public speaking that she might take a stand, just as Muhammad Ali, the peerless world heavy-weight boxing champion, took his bold stand by taking a bold step backwards when called upon to serve in Vietnam. That stand is of their conscience. But even that would not be so remarkable for any ordinary person taking it by the diktats of her awakened conscience --- that's the majority of plebeian conscientious objectors to the villainous narratives of power. No one pays any attention to plebes.
What is remarkable here is that a prominent establishmentarian Muslim from Pakistan, an academic and administrative head commanding respect and stature in society, a physicist no less whose mind none can believably fault as not being logical nor analytical, should be speaking up.
Dr. Mujahid Kamran is the only Pakistani establishmentarian that I can recall, who has called 9/11 an inside job, years after many stellar minds in the West had already done so. But no respected Pakistani living in Pakistan commanding the respect of his audience, can be permitted that luxury in a client-state whose utility is still apparent on the Grand Chessboard. The sacred axioms of empire must continue to remain the official narrative of its principal client-state for its imperial mobilization agendas, as the precondition for filling its begging bowls and permitting it to limp along without the kind of economic sanctions being forced upon Iran. These may not be too far away if Pakistan's establishment actually drifts into giving up America's sacred axioms to chart its real independence.
If an established physicist is unafraid to call a spade a spade, and does not wear the chains of mental servitude in a slave colony, my goodness, that can be precedent setting for other intellectuals to follow suit. And we cannot have that, now can we?
The Roman empire set a catching precedent for that, for not tolerating any setting of precedent for resistance, no matter how inconsequential it may appear in the beginning. Even as Johnny come lately, real resistance – as opposed to faux dissent that is the staple of empire's own toolkit for manufacturing consent on its sacred axioms by crafty social engineering – is intolerable for massa's colonies.
Dissent is only tolerated in the West because it lends useful illusions to its democratic dispensations under which Western hegemony, Western primacy, Western supremacy, Western values, and Western products are easily promulgated throughout the world. And dissent is only tolerated so long as it remains ineffective. Which is why all Western dissent has always turned out to be ineffective in derailing any of empire's imperial mobilization projects. Dissent in the West is a well-calibrated steam-valve that maintains necessary illusions of freedom. Those illusions are also maintained in the Global South somewhat, but not of real dissent with empire's own core truths, if empire can help it.
It is pertinent to end this case study with words of wisdom from empire's own mouthpiece, its famed columnist writing for its famed opinion maker news rag:
“The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist -- McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the builder of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley's technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. "Good ideas and technologies need a strong power that promotes those ideas by example and protects those ideas by winning on the battlefield," says the foreign policy historian Robert Kagan. "If a lesser power were promoting our ideas and technologies, they would not have the global currency that they have. And when a strong power, the Soviet Union, promoted its bad ideas, they had a lot of currency for more than half a century." ” --- Thomas Friedman, A Manifesto for the Fast World, NYT, March 28, 1999
The exercise of that “strong power” to promote its axiomatic truths and values unchallenged in its colonies, is what lies behind disgracing Dr. Mujahid Kamran – a free man with a free mind unafraid to speak up – in public. The handcuffs, incarceration as a petty criminal for investigation of a low order bit issue which could have easily been conducted in a more civilized manner, all part of that game-plan to which the enabling participants may not even be privy themselves. The brown sahib is often more white than the white man. He carries the white man's burden with alacrity and discipline. He obeys every wish before it becomes a command. And when the truth of the matter is brought before it, like the inveterate house nigger gratefully collecting crumbs fallen off the massa's table, glibly asks: where's the proof! Proof, my dear Watson, is in being able to add two plus two to make four!

Mujahid Kamran Take-3: With More Time On My Hands
[ To be continued as a fascicle here ]

[12] HEC fails to take action against executive director charged with plagiarism, October 18, 2018, Daily Times, Pakistan,
[12a] No action initiated against HEC official despite proven plagiarism, October 18, 2018, Business Recorder, Pakistan,
[12b] Senior HEC official quits over plagiarism, October 22, 2018, Dawn, Pakistan,
[12c] HEC software shows its director’s paper 88pc plagiarised, December 28, 2017, The News, Pakistan,
[12d] FIA probing fake degrees attestation by HEC officials, November 12, 2018, The News, Pakistan,
[12e] Ex-HEC ED says fake degree mafia behind his ‘forced’ resignation, November 13, 2018, The News, Pakistan,
[12f] Plagiarist at the helm of HEC’s affairs, May 22, 2018, Daily Times, Pakistan,
[12g] Major plagiarism in two books of ex-chairman of HEC, April 30, 2018, The News, Pakistan,
[12h] HEC chief accused of plagiarism, August 21, 2013, Dawn, Pakistan,
[12i] Plagiarism probe: CTRL+C, CTRL+V, Javed Laghari found ‘guilty’, January 27, 2014, The Express Tribune, Pakistan,
[12j] Confession: Ex-HEC head apologises for plagiarism, March 28, 2016, The Express Tribune, Pakistan,
[12k] Dr Tariq Banuri appointed as HEC chairman, May 28, 2016, PakistanToday,
[12m] HEC to Revisit Tighten Policy on Plagiarism, Says Chairman, October 22, 2018, HEC News,
[12n] HEC’s new management prohibits staff from keeping contact with former management, July 30, 2018, Daily Times, Pakistan,

Published November 30, 2018 2:00 pm 13596
Last updated for typofix and dcabes 2004, on Sunday, December 2, 2018 12:00 pm 13673

Pakistani Academics Victims or Crooks? By Zahir Ebrahim | Project 38 / 38