I switched on the TV to a English news channel- Times now, in my opinion among the more credible ones in operation. And surprise, surprise there was an interview going on between the anchor and guess whom- a ex chief of the Pakistani ISI. Now these media guys should have some decency and sense of responsibility- when you are interviewing the ISI it is as good as interviewing the captured terrorist. I do not see any distinction between the two. The question being asked is does the media house believe with a hand on its heart that there is a distinction between the ISI and the terrorists? The channel itself has been crying hoarse as have all of India- the intelligence agencies, as well as the Americans about the hand of ISI in training and arming these guys. So what is the logic of trying to interview the very perpetrators of the crime. The media should desist from giving them a voice to either deny the crime or even try to justify it. Our media needs to be more vigilant.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
I switched on the TV to a English news channel- Times now, in my opinion among the more credible ones in operation. And surprise, surprise there was an interview going on between the anchor and guess whom- a ex chief of the Pakistani ISI. Now these media guys should have some decency and sense of responsibility- when you are interviewing the ISI it is as good as interviewing the captured terrorist. I do not see any distinction between the two. The question being asked is does the media house believe with a hand on its heart that there is a distinction between the ISI and the terrorists?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1531,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[112,47,76],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6956","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-mumbai_terror_attacks","category-news","category-terrorism"],"yoast_head":"\n