Paras Sarkar thanks everyone who wished him well and also those who didn't wish him well. He realizes that in the past he has not behaved upto everyone's expectations but that he will be a changed man after this near death experience.

Calling him sarkar or not is the individual right, that should not be an issue in a democratic society.

Criticizing somebody for calling anybody sarkar is the individual right, that should not be an issue in a democratic society.

I had a feeling that he will be a changed man.. lets hope so

Slackdemic, good one. then he sould be called "SARDAR" not "SARKAR" he he

 

 If he's really changed and he were to be forgiven for his deeds......

He would go back to Nepal, surrender himself to the authorities for killing a civilian, undergo due process, serve the jail sentence (perhaps join a rehab at the same time), get out and serve the interests of Nepal (or his family)...

OR else,

he's just another crook  that got away with a lot of crime as he was untouchable under the royal rule.

is he still in bangkok?
whats his latest status.

Kiddo calling someone Sarkar is individual right but criticizing someone's individual right is not very democratic. It is individual right to drink pepsi, coke or water, if you think it's individual right to criticize a person for drinking their choice drink then you have to reconsider the meaning of individual wrong attitude.

Snurp, maoists who have buried people alive and killed thousands of people in daylight are roaming free in Nepal, protected by Baburam Bhattarai. Paras' case was an accident while those murderers are roaming free under government protection. Accident could happen to you, I hope you will learn to forgive yourself if it happens to you. Do you know how many percentage of accidental killing are forgiven by even the court?

Dayasagar thank you for asking. Paras Sarkar is in good spirits. God bless him.

I don't think you understood the meaning of democracy. The two things you compared are definitely not similar, but they are both democratic. If somebody is not allowed to criticize a person or principle then it is not democratic.

Pee_Didi,

The whole argument Paras and his fans present is " Maoists are bad too and thus we should be allowed to be the masters of Nepalese again"

Two things to understand here.

First one being....The concept of "Sarkar" is a 14th century concept. No modern world should have a King and his people. There should be citizens and they should be their own master regardless of how good they are at being their own master.

Secondly, at a personal level, Paras is just a loser, he leaves a beautiful wife at home and fks around other trashy woman (whores) around the world. This man has no consideration for his kid and his wife and is all about his personal happiness. When he enjoyed the Royal protection this guy would pick up a fight with the locals and beat them up. He would just do whatever he wanted in the clubs of KTM and if he was challanged he would get Royal Nepal Army to beat the crap out of the locals. Don't forget the incident in Chitwan when he took the RNA to beat up the whole village. Who knows how many other Paras crimes there are that Royals were successfully able to hide when they were in power. Lets not even talk about the known murders and the rapes that he got away with and the conspiracy of Royal Massacre.

Right now Paras fans are trying to justify their crimes and wrongdoings pointing at Maoist crimes and wrong doings but one day Maoists will be at where Royals are right now and there will not be other worse people to compare with.

Kiddo if you want to keep going around in circles then you are free to do that. But if you want to ctiticize the criticizer and someone criticizes you it becomes a never ending loop so if you go back to the initial question and ask if you should have the freedom to follow your religion. Then you tell me if you criticizing someones individual rights or not?