On Wed August 16 2006 10:53 pm, Badri Natarajan wrote: > I think that's the point (and the strength) of the Indian mentality, really > - we just treat terrorist attacks as a fact of life (and recognize how rare > they are in terms of actual odds).
Unfortunately I strongly believe that if we take the attitude that "terrorist attacks and some loss of life are inevitable" we are heading up the very path that I am complaining about. We are valuing some lives more than others. The Indian politician uses public money for z category security because he considers his life more valuable. People who travel in public transport are not entitled ro such security because their lives are less valuable. When you lay down laws and a constitution, how do you include within those laws the statement that some lives are more valuable that others? In what way is the concept of valuing one life more than other any different from a rehashed caste system? shiv
