[FirstPrinciple]

I disagree. We should be upholding human rights of everyone, be its Americans or innocent Moslems in any part of the world. The problem with India is that if you disagree with the govt, you get labeled as a terrorist group. Freedom of association is not readily available in India.

[swarthyguy]

>>The problem with India is that if you disagree with the govt, you get labeled as a terrorist group. Freedom of association is not readily available in India.

And you wonder about ad hominems.

[Cronos]

The problem with India is that if you disagree with the govt, you get labeled as a terrorist group. Freedom of association is not readily available in India.

The Indian govt allows all the freedom of speech within limits (not inciting violence), like ours. If they did not, how can you explain the plethora of political parties with different views? If freedom of association was NOT allowed, then you'd have a one party state like in the slammie or commie world. THe last I heard they've got so many parties, they have had coalition governments for over a decade.