Neutral, Your analogy is misleading. Here's why. A fataha is, by definition, a fataha, someone whose currency -- as the adjective implies -- is falsehood. And falsehood is a no-no under any circumstances. No matter how "rare" a fataha is, no democratic society will ever find him/her important. And this effectively ENDS the validity of your analogy in that comparing kafal and orange to decide which gives more juice will never make sense. ***** But having a DIFFERENT number-one political priority for Nepal -based on the information one has, and - based on how one privately ranks the importance of freedom and democracy for Nepal is simply being different. It's just, well, having a different set of political priorities. Thankfully, in my worldview, one person's subscribing to one set of political beliefs (say, being against Maoist violence as the most important goal) does NOT negate another person's subscribing to another set of political beliefs (say, being anti-king or whatever else as that person's most important goal). In democratic struggles, both beliefs and MORE have their places under the sun so long as they do not involve violence. And so, this simple equation: (A) anti-Maoist violence = (B) pro-king is simply FALSE. The world and our minds are NOT so singular to believe that if one is A, then one must also be B. It is NOT, and that's fine. Let's grow up about this, shall we? On a personal aside: True, I understand that my ranking of priorities drives some people out there crazy, prompting them to call me everything and anything -- things for which they are ALWAYS, I might add, unable to provide proofs of any sort. That's fine. [Then again, I think to myself: If one wants to live and work in Nepal and do something really important whatever that is, then learning how to deal with such a flood of false accusations with equanimity is a priceless skill, and I thank Sajha for giving me opportunities to sharpen such skills]. oohi democracy = views that are right, wrong and even disagreeable minus the violence ashu