Arnab Goswami’s ‘shameless’ and ‘pseudo-liberals’ jibes after Rajdeep Sardesai questions media ethics on Kashmir crisis coverage


The ongoing unrest in Kashmir, where 23 people including policeman have lost their lives after Indian security forces killed Hizbul commander, Burhan Wani, has also ignited a raging debate on whether some channels in Indian media have resorted to playing patriot games over a militant’s death.

And once again, two big names of Indian TV industry have locked horns with no holds barred attack against each other.

It all started with the veteran journalist, Rajdeep Sardesai, taking to his blog questioning the ‘patriotic’/nationalistic credentials of Indian journalists particularly during the coverage of Wani’s killing and the subsequent protests.


In his well articulated blog, Rajdeep recounted the role of the BBC during the Falklands War in 1983 when the British national broadcaster was criticised by the then UK prime minister, Margret Thatcher, for not taking side with the British forces in its coverage.

To which, the then Director General of the BBC, John Birt, was reported to have reminded Thatcher that the journalistic organisation was not an ‘extension of the political authority’; its first commitment was to the truth, not to the nation state.

Many felt that Rajdeep’s anguish was targetted at his former colleague, Arnab Goswami, and his channel Times Now, which has become notorious for whipping up often unnecessary nationalistic fervour, thereby throwing objectivity out of the window.

Hours later, a visibly agitated Arnab launched a blistering attack understandably against Rajdeep to counter the latter’s ‘patriot games’ jibe with his own headline, ‘Don’t Romanticise Terror.’

Arnab resorted to name calling and frequently used terms such as ‘pseudo-liberals’ for his critics while describing their criticism as a shameful act.

Many felt that Arnab’s reply pretty much confirmed what his former boss had highlighted in his blog.

You can read both Rajdeep’s blog and Arnab’s response during his Newshour debate below and decide for yourself who’s right on the issue of media ethics.

Rajdeep Sardesai


During the 1983 Falklands war, a member of the Margaret Thatcher government angrily described the BBC as the ‘Stateless People’s Broadcasting Corporation’ because it referred to the forces as ‘British’ and ‘Argentinian’ forces instead of ‘our’ and ‘enemy’ forces. When an Argentinian ship was sunk, an incensed Thatcher responded, ‘only the BBC would ask a British prime minister why she took action against an enemy ship that was a danger to our boys’. That is when the BBC director general John Birt is said to have reminded the British prime minister that the journalistic organisation was not an ‘extension of the political authority’; its first commitment was to the truth, not to the nation state.

The Thatcher story is instructive at a time when the ‘patriotic’/nationalistic credentials of Indian journalists and news organisations are under the scanner for their coverage of the violence in the Kashmir valley. The newly minted I and B minister has already warned that he expects ‘responsible’ coverage from the media; army information teams have red flagged any attempt to send out any ‘negative’ news; the social media army of ‘proud Indians’ on Twitter has abusively accused journalists (including this writer) of being ‘terrorist sympathisers’, ‘anti national’ and questioned ones parentage.

Who is to tell my outraged friends in the Twitter world that journalism in its purest form doesn’t wear the tricolour on its sleeve. Yes, I am a very proud Indian, but my journalism demands that I tell the story of Kashmir, not as a soldier in army fatigues but as a mike pusher who reports different realities in a complex situation. Burhan Wani is a terrorist who has been ‘neutralised’ in the eyes of majority of Indians; he is a victim who has been ‘martyred’ for the thousands of Kashmiris who lined up for his funeral. A propagandist would only broadcast the narrative that suits the agenda of one side but a journalist must necessarily explore both stories: that of Wani the Hizbul terrorist who took to the gun and used social media as a weapon AND Wani as the posterboy for a localised militancy which feeds on tales of alleged oppression and injustice. A journalist must speak to the army which is trying to quell the protests on the street, but must also listen to the youth who have chosen to their vent their anger with stones. And he must then dispassionately and accurately report the ground reality without glamourising violence or terrorism but also without becoming a spokesperson for the Indian state.

It is maintaining this delicate balance that defines good journalism. Sadly, there are few takers it appears for this challenging task. Instead, in a polarised, toxic environment, journalists are being asked to take sides, to state their preferences, to place opinion ahead of facts, to show off their macho ‘nationalism’, to be part of a ‘them’ versus ‘us’ battleground in tv studios and beyond. Which is why I wish to highlight the BBC role in the Falklands war. Here is a genuine public service broadcaster that is able to ensure that its commitment is to the British people, not to the government, even in a war between countries. The philosophy is clear: the truth, however inconvenient it might be for the power apparatus, must be told.

In Kashmir too, we need to tell truth to power: the truth of disaffected youth with limited opportunities for growth, of failed, corrupted politics, of an unshaken ‘azaadi’ sentiment, of army excesses, of a neighbouring country which sponsors terror, of a nostalgic notion of Kashmiriyat which was eroded when Pandits were driven out of their homes, of radicalised youth seeking to romanticise violence, of hard working twenty somethings topping the civil service exams, of an unacceptable distinction between terrorists and freedom fighters. As a vibrant democracy, we must be able to look into the mirror with confidence and face these competing ‘truths’. Too many of the stakeholders in Kashmir, Delhi and beyond have lived in denial for too long. Wani’s killing and its aftermath must end this mood of denial even as we in the media must learn to stop playing patriot games.

Post script: Many years ago, while reporting a story on Kashmir, I described those who had targeted a bus as terrorists. That evening, a local colleague in Srinagar suggested that I might be better off calling the perpetrators as ‘militants’. I asked him why. “Sir, they maybe terrorists, but here it is safer to use the word ‘militant’.” When even simple wordplay can get tangled in the minefield of Kashmir’s bloody politics, you realise the complicated nature of the journalistic challenge.

Arnab Goswami on Newshour

“For over 72 hours now since the SUCCESSFUL killing and MUCH WANTED killing of Hizbul Mujahideen commander Burhan Wani, a section of misguided pseudo liberals have gone on and on about how the Indian State must be more responsible. About how the Indian security forces must be more sensible. Now, some of these highly confused elements, who are in journalism say that they are in a dilemma today about how to report a terrorist’s death. They say they are in a dilemma about how to report the fallout of a terrorist’s death with mobs breaking out of control and attacking a police station. I feel sorry for these people, because they don’t realise that when it comes to right or wrong, black and white, nationalist and anti-national, for the Indian army, which protects us, and against the Indian army, for the tricolour and against the tricolour, for the sovereignty of the Indian State and against the sovereignty of the Indian State. there can be no prevarication, no grey area, no confusion and certainly no dilemma. Ladies and Gentlemen, this terrorist, Burhan Wani, had declared the Indian army as his biggest enemy. Burhan Wani was an identified and armed threat to the sovereignty of the Indian State. And just because he was KASHMIRI, does not make it ok for the pseudo liberals to build a case against his killing. He was a terrorist.

Today the self-proclaimed pseudo liberals, the same who speak of injustice to Afzal Guru and Yakub Memon have most unfortunately and SHAMELESSLY, come together to shy away from calling a known Hizbul Mujahideen terrorist a terrorist. To use the guise of human rights and peddle it to bestow martyrdom to slain terrorist and today we watch these pseudo intellectual brigade sitting in their high-armchairs refusing to call the killing of Burhan Wani, for what it is a FANTASTIC SUCCESS. A GLORIOUS success of our brave security personnel. Viewers, let’s come together tonight and let us junk this group and junk their bluff.. Let us not romanticise or confuse terror…And if you agree with me because this rubbish has been going on for three days now, then join me as we together take on the pseudo liberals and the Pakistanis after that in debate number one and debate number 2 of the Newshour.”


  1. Arnab is most uncivilized TV anchor
    Insult on Indian media, the way he shouts in debate looks like some body is coming out of asylum.

  2. Really Arnab is worst media person as v ever seen… In each panel discussion he just chaired jurist fobeia… Never ever ready to listen what ever panelists wants to say….. The real goon of indian media?

    • He is good because he control witches like you. He is good because he covers everyone not only the Muslims and communist.

      You people only like those who abuse the Hindu.

      I suggest you to go and check your DNA. It may match with some muslims or that type of person.

    • What about NDTV. And people like Barkha Dutt, Rahul Kanwar, Ashutosh, Rajdeep, Rabish kumar, Karan thapar and many more…

  3. Since Rajdeep seems to be following the footsteps of BBC in not being an extension of a national policy, he needs to introspect on the scenes at Madison square where he asked someone assembled there about their opinion on Modi. He got a positive response. Rajdeep was not happy. He turned the mike to another person asking what is his opinion. Same response. Was Rajdeep following the footsteps of BBC by looking for someone in desperation to get an anti Modi comment? Due to his frustration he reminded someone that US had banned Modi and was US wrong in banning Modi. Was this reminding an unpleasant incident akin to following the footsteps of BBC? In his frustration Rajdeep ended up having an ugly scene with those assembled and caught the collar of one of them and pushed him. Is this how one should follow the footsteps of BBC. If this is the way one must follow the footsteps of BBC in trying to prove that they are trying to present “an impartial ground situation” by creating an ugly ground reality right outside Madison square with millions watching the ugly scene then it is time for Rajdeep to stop following the footsteps of BBC.

    • You r again proving Rajdeeps point as correct. When he asked the crowd about Modis ban is a right thing to do bec it was a fact. So when Modi was banned bef and suddenly now its euphoria of Modi in US taking over its gutsy and right thing to ask what changed suddenly from before to now.

    • Yours is a wrong perception. How do you know he was not happy at the first answer. And he should have continued with the same person. Being a journalist he has to turn mike to as many people as possible.

  4. The comparison of Falkland War incident with present one is totally wrong. There you can directly find the enemy and the other stupid nation called Paki is not there. If you take the history of Kashmir, you will not say that truth is the first probity. Where does these so called journalists, when the actual Kashmir King was ready to join with India and Paki was to vacate the position as per UN resolution. Who made this mess. The stupid decision of the first PM and subsequent wars with neighboring countries is the sole reason to have this situation. No one can be peaceful if you have a fight with neighbors. Whether it is man or country. The situation went from bad to worse because of many reasons and the media never exposed those things. What is the situation is the POK? Can media expose those things? Can this guys cover the present living conditions is POK? No, because they conveniently ignore and as long as they get all the benefits from those guys, they will never say a word but when these comforts are stopped, whole world will shout a loud. Now the indian media is totally in an unimaginable position and have least ethics. Only TRP and comforts are the first priority.

    • You are right that the king drciddecided to join Indian union. But I think the Kashmir issue was allowed to get worse from bad by denial of a refrendum as called for by UN resolution on Kashmir. And Pakistan took advantage of it by making it’s claim on Kashmir?

  5. Dear Arnab

    You will say only what the Hindutwa Forces and the RSS want to say whereas Mr. Sardesai will say what his heart & soul says. Arnab u are sold commodity.

  6. I want to meet parents of Arnab and ask them how they brought up Arbab, Is there any medical history or any genetic change he has gone through. He really needs a good psychiatric Otherwise He is gonna to infect whole of India with Arnabola virus which will bring shame for the nation at International level Please save My India?

  7. Heroes are not pawns: Army officer’s daughter exposes pseudo nationals ‘I love our defence force, but I’m critical about how it functions in Kashmir.’
    Just to widen this nationalism versus jingoism debate.
    I’m the daughter of an Army officer and I would never let anybody undermine the agonies of an Army man who guards his nation by keeping his own body at the border! Since childhood I’ve heard endless stories of war times, of bravery, of how he survived on extremely low quantities of food in unimaginably cold weathers.
    I’ve also heard of the rigours of times, and of times when war was over and only a cold memory remained, when soldiers returned home but their sleeps were scarred with splatters of blood and sounds of the cannon going off every minute.
    I was too small the last time he had to report for war, but I remember not seeing my father for months together. Twenty-seven years have passed and my father still serves in the Army, and has made me believe it’s one of the toughest and most efficient institutions in the country.
    Having said that, it doesn’t mean that an average citizen like me can’t discuss (anything) about the nation; for not having put my life on the frontier too. I can complain, deliberate, ridicule, praise, sympathise, empathise with any idea that’s in tune with causing no destruction to the society. To put in simple words, I can empathise with Kashmir.
    I love the Army, but I’m critical about how it functions in Kashmir. To have to live in a state with constant surveillance and seeing guns at every corner is suffocating. Three weeks of struggle for Rohith Vemula at campus was enough of seeing the lathis and tear gas vans.
    Imagine being born into it, being a terror suspect for existing, being checked, being enslaved to a nation that does all this and more in the name of your security. While the rest of the country protests against beef ban and censor board, Kashmir’s definition of liberty is still stuck at demanding the abolishing of AFSPA, and freedom of movement.
    Is it possible to love the Army and feel the angst of Kashmiris, Manipuris, Dalits, tribals, et al?
    Yes, which is why my anger directs to the state, to the government which is using Army as a pawn to reinforce its nationalism and cover up its misgovernance. It’s easy to hail the Army and forget what they were fighting for.
    Is it justified when they fight poor tribals who’ve been denied rights on the forests that were a part of their existence for centuries? Is such a soldier less of a soldier for fighting his own people?
    I’m amazed how the nation remembers the Army only to get a dirty pleasure in claiming its nationalism: Look at our soldiers. Guarding our borders blah blah… or when a natural calamity (strikes). Why didn’t anybody give some thought to them when One Rank One Pension had to be sealed by the government and our veterans went on a series of hunger strikes?
    Dear jingoistic/pseudo nationals, don’t drag the Army into this dirty game. Specially you, Mr Arnab Goswami.
    In tune with what Umar Khalid and what Kashmiris demand, I read this quote on regarding AFSPA.
    Resting my case with this.
    A retired Army officer once recounted: Sometimes we behaved like militants and the militants like security forces. The state machinery was perceived as a tool of oppression and seldom seen as a guardian. AFSPA is a bad Act. But if you remove AFSPA, the Army will lose whereas if you continue with AFSPA for 25 years then India is surely losing the war.
    (This post first appeared on the writer’s Facebook page .)

  8. Rajdeep Sardesai was clearly in the wrong by glorifying a terrorist like Burhan Wani. Arnab was absolutely correct in calling out the pseudo liberals who seem to condone terror.

    • Arnab Goswsmi is an anchor on Times Now, know for his aggressive attitude with panelists. Who often tries to put his words in panelists mouth. But reportedly he is now under the influence of Rght Wing Sanghatan, of late his reporting is being questioned for being against journalists ethics.

  9. This is high time that the Supreme Court should interfere in Media affairs of this country to instruct the Media to make them public about their funds receive by Media and given by Media to any political party or organisation in order to know the viewer that this particular Media is working for who ? Party ? Organisation ? Nation ? or Truth ?

  10. Times now has been my destination for english news but lately Arnab attitude and behaviour has changed a lot, instead of giving informative news he has started stressing for pro Modi govt. news nd in debates also his bais attitude reflects and he does not allow anyone to speak out his ponit of view.This is bad for journalism

  11. The true essence of journalism is lost when a journalist, instead of reporting facts, only puts forth the baised views in the name of patriotism. It’s very simple…if a person is killed by security forces and when half the nation calls him terrorist while the other half calls him a martyr ..then the journalist should be neutral in his stand and wait for the probe before calling him either a martyr or a terrorist.

  12. A lot of confusion has been created by some media persons by comparing Kashmiri quest for ‘Azaadi’ with India’s quest for freedom. Here is my take on it-

    First of all, Bhagat Singh never killed anyone. The grenades he threw in Punjab Assembly in Lahore were designed to create only sound and no destruction. The bombs Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev threw in Assembly KILLED NO ONE. Burhan Wani was a killer….and a preacher of hate.

    Indian demand for freedom, was different from Kashmir’s demand for so called ‘Azaadi’. For decades, Indians, via their political platform Indian National Congress, just demanded dominion status (internal autonomy like Australia and Canada) and the main reason for asking dominion status was economic exploitation by British. It is no secret that many famines in British India were British made (most noteworthy was Bengal famine of 1944 was British made as they diverted all the food grains out of Bengal to the war effort). Apart from that, British destroyed Indian cloth industry and steel industry (both of these industries were highly diversified with numerous small scale manufacturers scattered all over India) to create market for their products. Govt of India never did that with Jammu & Kashmir. On the contrary, Government of India has pumped Indian taxpayer’s money (equivalent to 3 big states) in to J & K year after year and is still doing that. Poverty rate in Jammu & Kashmir is lesser than even the most prosperous states of India- Punjab and Haryana.

    The main reason behind the demand of Azaadi in Kashmir is religious fanaticism. In late 80s, when Afghan Mujahideen, funded by America and Saudi Arabia and motivated by Wahabi Islamic ideology repulsed a superpower (USSR) out of Afghanistan, a few Kashmiri leaders started hoping that they would be able to repulse India out of Kashmir Valley at least, if not whole of Jammu and Kashmir state (which includes Hindu dominated Jammu and Buddhist dominated Ladakh). That’s when disturbances started…. First step was to terrorise Kashmiri Pandits out of Kashmir valley. Kashmiri Pandits who formed less than 10% of population of Kashmir migrated overnight and took refuge in Jammu and other parts of India. Then they period of Pakistan supported (and sponsored) militancy began. They had thought India won’t be able to take it for more than a few years, but Indian State, Indian people and her economy sustained these attempts to divide India for decades. In the first decade of 21st century, Kashmiris started showing signs of tiredness, tiredness borne of continuous militancy and violence. The common Kashmiris were being ground between the militants on one side and Security forces on the other. On international level, Musharraf was pressurised by Americans to stop all militancy in Kashmir (after attack on Indian Parliament by Kashmiri terrorists in 2001 and military build up on border by both India and Pakistan for almost a year). As a consequence of these 2 events, by the middle of the first decade of 21st century, militancy in Kashmir had come to grinding halt. Then Kashmiri youth provoked by Islamic Jehadi preachings in Mosques of Kashmir (especially in Srinagar) started pelting stones at Indian security forces (including J & K Police).

    The CURRENT UNREST has been FUELLED by EMOTIONAL SUPPORT provided by Indian pseudo-liberals especially after JNU incident of February 9, 2016.

    The demand for Kashmiri Azaadi is not secular, and if India were ever to make mistake of conceding to that then it will kickstart many Islamic jehadi secessionist movements in India.

    The solution of Kashmir terrorism is four fold-

    1) Remove Article 370.

    2) Isolate the problem. Divide J & K into distinct political entities. Make Jammu a separate state, and Ladakh-Kargil a Union Territory.

    3) Crush militancy in Kashmir Valley with utmost rapidness with unified command and control system among various security forces. Use plastic bullets against stone pelters. Shut down jehadi mosques. Don’t allow people to gather. Punish by cutting water and power supply in the areas from where the stone pelters emerge.

    4) The most important- Don’t show any signs of weakness in political will.

    • Lack of historical facts;it was Indian Prime Minister who approached UN to arrange for cease fire in 1948 with a promise to conduct referendum in J&K so that people of J&K could decide their fate,i.e. go with India or Pakistan or become a free & sovereign country.The Indian Govt.for got its promise & till date has evaded going in for a referendum as promised.Base your opinion on evidence rather than beating about the bush.
      As regards investment of Indian tax payers money in J&K,v Kashmiris contribute to tax kitty of India more than what HP,UK & Goa contribute.In tax collection v r at par with Bihar. Secondly any investment in infra structure is keeping in view the strategic position of the State viz.-a-viz Chinese threat.Had J&K been a state like MP,it would have never found such investment in infrastructure.Investment in infrastructure is in the interest of India rather than for v Kashmiris.

  13. But Arnab u seem to Identify certain section of people as terrorist, what about the rest… May be being a journalist you Must know what others means.

    • Of course he is well aware. But he will point out a particular section only. Some say he is directed by a remote control?

  14. Arnab Goswami is a big shame to the Indian journalism! He’s a just a mere mouthpiece of the Indian government. He’s a puppy fed by the present masters of our beloved nation!

  15. Did Rajdeep not glamourise Burhan Wani by comparing him to Bhagat Singh?

    I wonder why Rajdeep is comfortable with Kashmiri youth taking out their anger on streets with stones, but uncomfortable with Indian youth taking out their anger on social media. He himself can’t even take verbal anger on social media, which he can switch off anytime…but expects Army to be normal even while taking on physical, mental, verbal and social media violence. Doublespeak, eh?

  16. Right from Godhra incidence in 2002, one needs to scrutinize “pure journalism” of Rajdip Sardesai. He has been bias against Mr. Modi. He never bothered to report sufferings of Hindu Families whose dear ones were burnt alive in the train. Rajdipji is against everything Hindu. His pure journalism does not prompt him to report the brital killings of Kashmiri Police and our security forces. His pure journalism blossoms only when some terrorist gets killed and the protests erupts in the valley. At the same time I must agree that the shrill that takes over in Arnab’s so called debates is unacceptable.

  17. Rajdeep is within his rights to report whatever, whichever way he is able to, but I object to the smugness in his tenor while reporting anything anti India, confusing it with anti Modi. Obviously he seems to b not aware of it. Ironically, the equanimity, he is referring to is lacking in his reporting.

  18. During the chennai floods when no national channel covered the same for 3 days raj deep was the first to come and apologies to the chennai people for not covering and giving importance to some silly matter in parliament
    What did Arnab do cover the same with arrogance and no apology to the people of chennai raj deep is for true journalism Arnab is for sold and paid news latest example is the modi interview how it was rigged

  19. Empty vessels make much noise. This seems to hold in this case as well. Good jourlism is an art. Everyone cannot become a journalist. I read both the sides and found Arnab’s disgusting. He hides behind jargon of words without an iota of understanding of the subject. Rajdeep is Sachin Tendulkar of journalism.

  20. Arnab has singlehandedly Changed Media reporting in India. Sardesai must accept that he is a spent bullet. In any case integrity is not Rajdeeps forte. After all his father was a known friend of Dawood. Some of the u tube clips are damning enough. TRP is after all a measure

  21. maybe arnab is bit loud most of the times but atleast he is not a bias againt modi or a particular group of people… he is equally intolerant of all the people who are wrong irrespective of which party that person belongs to… moreover he atleast have the guts to say that the terrorist was a terrorist that was killed by the army who is always standing right in the protection of the country.
    people like rajdeep sardesai barkha dutt and such other “pseudo liberals” should be ashamed of present the terrorist so softly and generate sympathy for him. what do these idiot pseudo liberals want to generate some more terrorist within the country by inspiring them.
    I salute my army and congratulate for the encounter of this terrorist and think there are lots more terrorist to be killed.
    final words…. may be I found arnab goswami very much loud that sometimes annoy mee to… but I always appricieate his solidarity for the things that is right and his will to oppose the wrong unlike these idiot pseudo liberals who just want to earn more TRP’s in the name of journalism

    • You are absolutely right. Apparently all Muslims are giving negative comments against Arnab. I wonder how can they support a terrorist like this !

    • Rajdeep is no saint. But Arnab is worse. I used to like how Arnab grills politicians. But it seems success and popularity has gotten into his head. Getting ridiculously absurd everyday

  22. Arnab seems to have sold every bit of his shame and sense, little is he realiseing that he has lost all his shame. We do look forward for facts as the news and not fakes built up by sand.

  23. It is ironical that comes down so heavily on terrorism. He himself is “terrorist journalist”. All educated elites should come down heavily on him. He does exactly what a terrorist does. Shoot down people without listening to them. Like a gang leader ordering fire. The only difference he can do it only in his channel. So Arnab Goswami is actually a terrorist sympathizer as he adopts their methods and style.

  24. Arnab is the same person who made JNU students terrorists supporters by airing doctored video and making everybody Anti natinals who opposed his views… hebis clearly desteoying the serenity of reporting journalism… His jibe at Amir Kh’ans statement over intolarance was a clear cut twisting of what Amir really said. He setsnthe sanghi agenda before his show and make people listen what he has to say and when somebody objects he will jump and twist the subject…. at the end call names

  25. I think if we are talking about journalism of truth and even beyond nationalism than why they did not expose kashmiri pandits brutal exit, years of patronization to terrorism by so called separatist motivated by no.1 terror export country, years of communalist polytics by congress party,communal appeasement in politics,rampant conversion in northeast by funding of MNCs n uninterrupted migration of Bangladeshi in India,why they were silent to all these act for years ..or all of a sudden they get this divine knowledge of journalism of truth…

  26. The problem is that when it comes to Right Wing Hindutva Bashing then Mr. Arnab & Mr. Rajdeep are both good at it. When its being critical about Left-Wing or Cross Border Insurgency then Mr. Arnab goes ahead but Mr. Rajdeep sticks a tape on his speech !!!! 🙁

  27. In his own style. There has to be thorough Investigation by a Sitting Judge of a Supreme court ( As CBI and NIA are not independent anymore ) into the corrupt, Bias, Partial & unjust practices being followed by a few Journalists , who bring shame to the Jurnalist Community on a whole and the Times Now in particular. I am making this clear tonight on this Channel that these few corrupt fellows are not going to be good for the India as a nation , for Indians in Particular and Humanity as general. They should be sent behind bars, so that it gives an example to devils,crimanals & Murderers of Professionalism in this Country.

  28. I would like to share after reading the above article that rajdeep has more knowledge about Kashmir on ground situation than arnab who thinks all Kashmiris should be killed . Allah na kare if same situations would prevail for arnabs state I would like to see what will be his take that time.
    My dear Arnab , rajdeep rightly said journalism is a sacred task and one has to show both sides of the coin to public, you arnab are just trying to cheat people by giving them only 5% of news and 95% false adulterated news
    Have anyone of u ever tried to push government to ask what actually Kashmiris want
    We live in a largest democracy of the world right ,is this the democracy .Go and cover the news what AIIMS team, which is treating the injured here in Srinagar hospitals has to say .
    Let me quote what they have said, ” we have never seen injuries like this , this is open war ” on pellet injuries
    If Kashmiris are pelting stone they have stone proof rakhsakh vehicles they can use water tanks to control protesters using these heavy and deadly weapons over stone pelters they are only feuling the situation
    I am a Kashmiri who never pelted any stones but if they are gona kill us like this I afraid all Kashmir will pelt stones or even more
    By killing burhan who could have been easily got arrested ,they have only feulled the militancy in Kashmir as per my perception


  30. India is a democracy…and everyone has a freedom of speech. Barkha Dutt & Rajdeep Sardesai have every right to say what they want. There are many socio- economic factors which forces a young man pick up an automatic weapon instead of a pen.


    Burhan Wani picked up a gun. He’s nothing but a brainwashed killing machine hell bent on killing and terrorising . Let loose a ‘HERO’ like Burhan in an Indian city….and he’ll turn it into a killing field . After that he’d possibly post a selfie with mutilated Indian corpses.

    There are thousands of things I hate about my country . But IT IS MY ONLY LINE OF DEFENCE AGAINST TERRORISM..
    It stands between death of teeming millions like me and impending death.

    So ARNAB is right.

    It’s sad that what Rajdeep and Barkha said in name of free speech is now hijacked by pro militant terrorist groups.

    Oops!! That will probably make me a Sanghi and a BJP supporter isn’t it?
    Well… I’m not.

  31. So now.. who is going to report some truth.. Is our army doing the right thing to get the situation under control ? Are innocents being killed in the act. What is the local and central govt doing to ease up things ? Is there any merit in the claims by the stone peltors ? All I could gather is that it is not a BLACK or WHITE situation. Branding kashmiris as terrorists or victims may not be right. As a citizen of this country I prefer to know the truth.

  32. The most dangerous terrorist in Indian Media… is Arnab…he shud b put behind bars… all bullshit barking in his debate..

  33. So terrorists are better called ‘militants’ right Rajdeep?

    How did you call the people involved in attacks in Paris, Nice?.

    Did you even have bottle to call them ‘militants’??Or that sensitivity doesn’t apply if the affected persons are Westeners?. Your great example of BBC also exibits the same bahvior.

    I am not saying what Arnab says is correct. Bu I think you all seem to justify the term ‘Pseudo Liberals’

    Shame on you all journalists

  34. The problem in India is not pseudoliberalism. It is pseudo-nationalism of the kind Arnab Goswami professes and supports, which is harming the nation and promoting divisiveness.