Hindu dominated India has some peculiar problems of its own resulting
in a
caste system of criminals. Certain criminals always get away, and
certain
people are always spared from terror. Certain people always get
incriminated
and another group always is at greatest risk from terror.
OK -- now how does one get from here to needing to choose sides?
If you listen to Thug A, who says "you must be on my side, because I am
your friend and protect you from that fear-mongering Thug B"*, you run
the (rather high) risk that insofar as Thug A makes any change, it only
extends as far as a certain redistribution of the "certains", such that
it is the A-criminals who always get away, and the non-A-people who are
at greatest risk from terror.
Is it not preferable for innocents to get away, criminals to get
incriminated, and everyone to be spared from terror?
-Dave
* fortunately for thugs, the penalty for irony is generally much less
severe than for misdemeanor.
