Actress Meera has been stopped at Karachi airport on Tuesday for possessing two passports at a time.

According to reports, Meera had arrived at Karachi airport from America via Dubai. FIA has seized the both passports of Meera and sent it to DG FIA Islamabad. Meera is under investigations, reports added.

For a cricket board that is crying hoarse that it is being bled to death financially, it is quite strange that they have gone for a 17-man team (if you don’t include Imran Nazir going specifically for a three-hour event at the end) to play five ODIs. He should go down as a bigger specialist in his field than the best heart surgeon out there is in his.

We have lined up 17 players for one Twenty20 match coming five days after the end of the ODI series, which means six players will be warming poolside for six days, for after the ODIs it’ll be quite clear who the playing eleven for the solitary bash will be.

The gap between the vision of Australia and Pakistan’s cricket selection is evidenced by the fact that the hosts have literally announced their playing elevens for the first and second ODIs. Normally, it is the prerogative of the host side to have the luxury to choose from the entire talent available right up to a couple of days before the match.

If he was in mind for the ODI series, Fawad Alam would have cost more or less the same if he had stayed back in the team hotel when equated to a return Business Class ticket. And considering Khurram Manzoor wasn’t, he should have been the one to return. Before the Sydney Test, it was not expected that Misbah and Faisal would both fail to warrant Khurram’s inclusion also. Malik would have been the preferred choice anyway if one was being expected to fail, so why hold back Khurram? He did nothing exceptional in New Zealand to be saved up for the fallback role and, as expected, could not cope with the bounce being alien to such all his playing life.

Fawad had got 170 as an opener on his Test debut a few weeks ago and would have stepped into the No.3 position if required.

Sami was sent to lead the seam attack, otherwise why else would he be there? Yet he didn’t play in the first and even the third after taking three top wickets on opening day at Sydney. Richie Benaud summed up the ridiculous omission by asking if he was unfit. For probably the most astute reader of the game alive today, it was unthinkable that Sami wasn’t playing in seaming conditions and on a lively pitch.

Now he’s not in the ODI side. So why wasn’t he sent home on the morning of the third Test match if he was not in the plans for the ODI series?

At the end of my column in Dawn last week, I had suggested that Pakistan play with all four fast bowlers and ask Aamer to bat at No.6 instead of Misbah. If Malik was to be played at all it should have been at No.3 whether he likes it or not. I said this not just because of the maturity and technique that Aamer has shown, but also because in New Zealand he ended up with a batting average higher than Misbah and Malik, and three times the average of Khurram!

Younis Khan has been a far valuable Test batsman and in the past two years has struggled to have a desirable strike rate in the shorter game of any length. But he was held back from the last two Tests when the Pakistani batsmen had just not shown the potential for a big innings in either one of them. The reason was that he had to play himself back into form. Following 29 runs in four lackluster single figure innings against second eleven bowlers on the local scene, he is now suddenly cleared to face the Australian attack on home ground against which Yousuf has a current average of 31 from five innings (down to 23 if that one knock of 61 is taken out).

Rao Iftikhar should go into the Guinness Book of World Records as the most frequent bench warmer on tours. I think he’s sat out something like 20 ODIs in the last 18 months, despite being in the team. Yet if played, he should prove a vital cog. Would you believe that in ODIs he has the best economy rate among all fast bowlers in the squad except for Asif, over which he nevertheless enjoys a better strike rate?

There will be other accidental tourists and Pakistan could well have worked with a squad of 15. Considering Yousuf, Younis, Afridi, Farhat, Butt and Umar Akmal will play no matter what happens in the first two ODIs, we are carrying Khalid Latif, Fawad Alam and Shoaib Malik for the other three. They will only come in (and not all at the same time) if these six batsmen don’t do well in which case we would likely be 2-0 down and unlikely to win the rubber. So what’s the purpose of having them play the last one or two games? Having said that, I don’t see Butt and Farhat being separated after ODI-style starts in the Tests. So it’s improbable these other three will get a foot into the field, especially if Kamran is available in both capacities.

Lastly, I wonder how Yousuf will cope with more imaginative captaincy and tactics at a far faster rate than in Tests. And shouldn’t Intikhab morally stand down as coach in the Twenty20 match on Feb 5 considering he feels that is the bane of all Pakistan’s batsmen?

Pakistanis love emailing and text messaging quotes from hadiths and assorted religious paraphernalia. I usually ignore such messages because in my mind I imagine a holy punter who is convinced that each email or SMS of his is getting him that much closer to booking a cosy place in heaven. The truth is that this (albeit irritating) activity is actually better than a holy bum blowing himself up in public to find that same place in Paradise.

However, last Monday, as I again received my share of emails and SMSes quoting hadith and citing all that sophomoric stuff about ‘scientific proofs in the Qu’ran,’ I decided to answer one particular SMS; one I was receiving for the umpteenth time.

This is how it went: Munafiq ki Nishaanian (signs of the hypocrite) – Jhoot bolna (telling lies); Wa’da khilafi karna (breaking promises); Khiyanat karma (stealing); Gaali dayna (swearing).

So I replied: Sir/Madman, thank you for your SMS. But I think you forgot one more sign of being a munafiq, i.e. khaali khuli kay SMS karna (sending aimless SMSes).

Right away the sender SMSed his/her reply: SMS technology wasn’t invented when the hadith were compiled. So you can’t say SMSing is a sign of being a munafiq.

He/she quite obviously missed out on my sarcasm. No matter, I thought. At once, I SMSed him/her my reply: Brother/Sister, in that case, I am sure SMSing is haraam. In future I think you should use a pigeon to send your wonderful messages, or better, bring good tidings on a camel.

There was silence for about 10 minutes. Then my phone buzzed again. He/She replied: I am female, so you can call me sister. I sense that you are making fun of my SMS. Very unfortunate, indeed. What was it that you found offensive in my SMS?

I wrote back: Sister. You can call me Nadeem. There was nothing offensive in it, as such. I just wondered what made you the one to tell everybody else what a munafiq is. Are you suggesting you are not one yourself? If not, then do share with me the signs and nishaanian of a person who thinks he or she is not a munafiq.

My phone buzzed again. This was her reply: Bhai, I was just spreading a good saying. I am not an angel, but at least I am conscious of avoiding things that can make one a munafiq. I send the SMS to many people, and most of them were happy and thankful.

“Did they have a choice?” I wrote back. “You don’t even know me. SMSing unrelated men. A very un-Islamic thing to do, no?”

“Dear, brother,” she SMSed, “I can’t see you, and neither can you see me. You are calling me sister, and I am referring to you as brother.”

“Sister,” I wrote, “You speak well … in parables. Should I read your SMS metaphorically or literally?”

“Brother,” she relied, “my SMS was only about good, clear advice. Read it as it is.”

“But why bring religion into it?” I wrote back. “Can’t an irreligious person be good as well; or can’t he or she too give good, clear advice?”

The phone beeped again: “Brother, I can’t understand how a person can be irreligious.”

“Sister,” I replied, “An irreligious person is as much a human being as a religious person. What’s the confusion?”

“Are you irreligious?” She wrote back.

“What do you think?” I replied.

“I think you are,” she wrote.

“I see. If you think I am irreligious, does SMSing me make you a munafiq?” I wrote back.

“No,” she replied. “Maybe my SMS will make you rediscover God.”

“Rediscover God through an SMS?” I replied. “How very tech-savvy of you, dear sister.”

“So are you irreligious or not?” she asked.

“What if I was?” I replied.

Bang came another advice: “A man without God is like a fish without water!”

“Dear sister,” I wrote back. “How expectantly presumptuous of you. Are you also suggesting that the Taliban who also claim to believe in God are better than an irreligious person who may be a lot less violent?”

“They are not Muslims!” she replied.

“Oh? And how is that?” I wrote.

“They are non-Muslims being paid to bring disrepute to Islam,” she replied.

“And how do you know that, dear sister?”

“It’s obvious. No Muslim would kill another Muslim.” she wrote back.

“But it’s okay if he kills a non-Muslim?” I replied.

“Yes, if he is attacked by a non-Muslim.”

“So,” I wrote, “this should mean that the Taliban who are killing Americans in Afghanistan are Muslim, but the Taliban who are killing Muslims in Pakistan are non-Muslims being paid by kafirs?”

“Yes,” came the reply.

“Dear sister,” I wrote back, “you just presented yourself to be a glaring example of a munafiq! Jazaak Allah. I now truly understand.”

“You have no right to say that,” she replied. “You are not even a Muslim!”

“Did I say that I wasn’t?” I wrote.

“No, but it’s obvious.”

“How come everything is so obvious to you?” I replied.

“That’s because I am a fish with water,” she wrote, with a smiley face.

“Oh, you got that wrong, sister.” I wrote. “You are a fresh water fish stuck in salt water!”

“Well, in that case, sorry to bother you. Have to go. My credit is running out,” she replied.

“Oh, boy,” I wrote. “How can a good, honest, non-munafiq spreader of Islam not have what all good, honest, non-munafiq spreader of Islam should have?”

“And what is that?” She replied.

“A post-paid connection.”

KOLKATA: Former captain Wasim Akram severely criticizing Pakistani cricketers playing in Australia, has advised the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) to give chance to new cricketers.

Wasim Akram, who is present in India for coaching of the Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR), said that senior players are the cause of chaos in the Pakistan team and they are scoring less runs. Therefore, they should be replaced by such young players who by learning in a year may be able to serve the country for the next two decades.

Wasim understands that Test cricket is the only game of cricket and it is like a long race for which every team requires special talent, mental fitness and spirit. Presently, Pakistan cricket team lack all these qualities.

Wasim Akram termed Mohammad Yousuf an inexperienced captain but added that he has the potential of looking a better captain in coming days.

BEIJING: More than 24 million Chinese men of marrying age could find themselves without spouses in 2020, state media reported Monday, citing a study that blamed sex-specific abortions as a major factor.

The study, by the government-backed Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, named the gender imbalance among newborns as the most serious demographic problem for the country’s population of 1.3 billion, the local paper said.

Researcher Wang Guangzhou said the skewed birth ratio could lead to difficulties for men with lower incomes in finding spouses, as well as a widening age gap between partners, according to the paper. Another researcher quoted by the newspaper said men in poorer parts of China would be forced to accept marriages late in life or remain single for life, which could “cause a break in family lines.”