mishra Posted November 15, 2016 Share Posted November 15, 2016 1 hour ago, Crookbond said: Lets start again. Make your claim and support your claim with evidence. You made a fclaim. Refer your earlier post. I assumed it was correct on face value. We Discussed it within perimeters of your claim and found it was false. Then you claim that "not enough evidence" theory. You do realise that what we were talking about BD sensational /irresponsible devoid of common sense reporting is beyond those perimeters i.e. Multiple instances independent of each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diga Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 NDTV balance sheet... Literally a miracle of Jesus that they are able to survive .... https://twitter.com/smarket/status/799191070416441344 Tibarn and tweaker 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jalebi_bhai Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 29 minutes ago, diga said: NDTV balance sheet... Literally a miracle of Jesus that they are able to survive .... https://twitter.com/smarket/status/799191070416441344 They are essentially a mouthpiece for foreign propaganda. mishra and tweaker 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 This arguement runs both ways. If Barkha Dutt was at fault during the Kargil conflict and during the Mumbai terror attacks making the same mistake of giving away positions of our forces twice, the powers that be, military or civilian should have never let her into the Pathankot airbase. Are those who let her channel in the middle of a military operation also punished? What kind of precedent does this set? How is the quantum of punishment decided upon? Too many unanswered questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted November 18, 2016 Share Posted November 18, 2016 51 minutes ago, Mariyam said: This arguement runs both ways. If Barkha Dutt was at fault during the Kargil conflict and during the Mumbai terror attacks making the same mistake of giving away positions of our forces twice, the powers that be, military or civilian should have never let her into the Pathankot airbase. Are those who let her channel in the middle of a military operation also punished? What kind of precedent does this set? How is the quantum of punishment decided upon? Too many unanswered questions. They probably don't have the power to selectively stop any particular channel based on past behavior.It must be either all or none. Besides do we want to give the military the power to choose who gets to report and who not. In a free country...they probably don't have much power. I think the govt should take this issue to court and let the curt decide the guilt and the punishment otherwise they get accused of trying to interfere with media freedom.Let the defense minister take the issue to court on behalf of the military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted November 22, 2016 Share Posted November 22, 2016 On 11/15/2016 at 10:35 PM, mishra said: You made a fclaim. Refer your earlier post. I assumed it was correct on face value. We Discussed it within perimeters of your claim and found it was false. Then you claim that "not enough evidence" theory. You do realise that what we were talking about BD sensational /irresponsible devoid of common sense reporting is beyond those perimeters i.e. Multiple instances independent of each other. Someone else made a claim without a reference. That is what my reply was to - if you use the same benchmark for my response to the original comment, you will receive the same conclusion for the original comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishra Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 8 hours ago, Crookbond said: Someone else made a claim without a reference. That is what my reply was to - if you use the same benchmark for my response to the original comment, you will receive the same conclusion for the original comment. Thanks for confirming that you make outrageous false claim if "you think" evidence from others is "not good enough". I am checking if there is ignore button on the forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishra Posted November 23, 2016 Share Posted November 23, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 On 11/4/2016 at 4:44 PM, mishra said: Above was from the report. So Terrorist were being relayed what was closest or how can they reach these locations. Post Kargil, one would have thought Barakha and NDTV have learned. Post Mumbai attack, media was told what NOT to divulge detaills in middle of attacks. Its time Government starts doing harsher punishment to these profit hungary, news manufacturing media I'd take this with a pinch of salt. For one, why were journalists allowed in during the firefight and not in the aftermath as is always the case? Secondly, we can be sure that the terrorists weren't watching NDTV during the attack. If their handlers were instructing them on the basis of NDTV reporting, and these signals were intercepted, why aren't they made public. More importantly, why weren't the signals blocked/jammed cutting off the terrorists. If the allegation that NDTV repeatedly give away military positions is true, then a 1 day ban is a joke of a punishment. If it isn't true, it is impinging on freedom of press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mishra Posted November 24, 2016 Share Posted November 24, 2016 The point you make why journos were allowed is very valid. But IMO journos are not interested after fire fight and once operation is over, security guys go back to looking at id cards and telling people off or reminding them "No Photogrphy" specially at military positions. In west, they make it sure that no media enters terrorist operation spot. I have been observing this trend in western media reporting for quite few years now (Sydney hostage crisis-2014). Use Jamming device and all can be argued both for and against. Since Pakistan and world wants links to Pakistan, phone conversation and phone numbers used in conversation and locations has pointed to Pakistan. For example 7/11 attacker confession on tv camera is NOT a evidence. He was used more for later intelligence. But the recorded voices and phone numbers of handlers during attack is a credible evidence. The law can not be applied retrospectively. But NDTV broke it after it became a law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts