Musings Own Thoughts

The NaMo interview is too tempting for me not to blog We will analyze each answer and see. Is it frustrating that many people still define you by 2002? People have a right to be critical. We are a democratic country. Everyone has their own view. I would feel guilty if I did something wrong. Frustration comes when you think “I got caught. I was stealing and I got caught.” That’s not my case. You can say what u want but i do not care since i was not caught. I made sure that i destroyed as much evidence i could, bought over and threatened as many witnesses i could and rewarded or punished the police officers who obeyed or disobeyed me. So who can catch me??? Do you regret what happened? I’ll tell you. India’s Supreme Court is considered a good court today in the world. The Supreme Court created a special investigative team (SIT) and top-most, very bright officers who  overlook oversee the SIT. That report came. In that report, I was given a thoroughly clean chit, a thoroughly clean

This is an issue existing for a long time and in particular in a vulnerable soft state like India, the popular view can easily lead to dangerous consequences. An overburdened inefficient criminal justice system, along with pliable unaccountable investigative agencies will often allow criminals and terrorists to escape, the clutches of law. So then many citizens believe that terrorists whose crimes are inhuman cannot expect to be recipients of human rights. When someone wages war against state in the name of religion or in retaliation for perceived injustice then that person risks getting killed like in a war situation. Is this acceptable for a democracy like India? Specifically where the political polarization on religion lines reaps rich electoral dividends and even national security becomes a victim of adversarial politics, should we accept encounter killings of suspected or confirmed terrorists as the price for national security. While no state or political system is perfect, we