What you may not be awareabout is the fact that ONCE USA bars anyone from getting a Visa, he can NEVER get it, even if he becomes PM/President or whatever else.And I DREAD to think a person like Modi becoming PM of India.That would be sad, because he has already bought SHAME, even if you dont think so, to our Country.He tried to sneak inot USA on Diplomatic Status, having known he would be turned out if he had gone on his original visitors Visa!!!There is more to it than what meets the eye.
RE:USA Invite Modi?
by Murali on Jul 18, 2005 09:57 AM Permalink
People like Modi can easily change their name, face, color, passport etc to remain in power. Hope US improves its technology before Modi applies for US visa next time.
I agree with you in every respect Fr.Fernandes.Raman and the horde of suddenly born again patriots,who comfortably forget the atrocities that we Hindus have perpetuated on the lower caste Hindus for centuries, and it was Gandhi and you Christian missioneries who lent their voice and showed them some comfort.Dont worry all these hi-faluting Journos will shut their opinions soon.
It sounds SOOOO funny when you call it an EXCELLENT article.Our email journos express a lot of intellectual muscle,and that is that.As i have written elsewhere, Modi deserved what he got, and plese donot become emotional about Indian pride being hurt.I donot recall any opinion from Raman when the riots took place in Godhra.Why now?
I think this is more rhetoric than rationale. I tend to agree that Modi being denied visa is audacious because a)These are diplomatic matters and such denials tantamount to a diplomatic policy. Modi is not an individual he represents the Govt of India. Sure he is a first class scoundrel but that is our internal affair. We should have kicked him out ourselves. But since we decided to keep him on the job we better face the music stand by him. If Modi is refused a visa then the PM should also be refused. After all he is ultimately responsible for whatever happens in the country. Right? b)As everyone states.. US does not have a clean human rights record themselves. But when did they care for that? Might is right after all!! However, the author making claims that Indians and esp. so-called secularists are responsible for it to me exhibits symptoms of the chronic hindutva virus. His insinuations are all in the air without any substantial grounding. Who are the so-called secularists? How have they influenced the US? And why does he believe that the US is a willing duck to the Machiavellian tactics of the secularists? And why has secularist become a dirty word in our country?
RE:Rhetoric over Rationale ?
by Indian on Apr 09, 2005 10:11 PM Permalink
a) This is not a diplomatic matter, since diplomatic reasons were not involved in Modis application for visa. Modi doesnt represent Govt. of India, but the State of Gujarat. Modi is refused a visa because of Modis (in)actions. If Modi is refused a visa, why should the PM be refused visa? The buck stops at the office of PM, but he is not responsible for phenomena such as post polarization victories this countrys statesmen make following genocides. So, wrong, the PM is not ultimately responsible for whatever happens in the country.
b) It is one thing that the US does not have clean human rights record. But that is no reason for that country to necessarily grant visas to other human rights violators. No thief would want his own stuff robbed.
If the secularists are behind this visa denial, then, good for them. A huge effort from their side, a slap on the wrist for a genocide perpetrator.
Dear Editor, I see you are publishing selective responces to Mr.Ramans column.I cant insist on my comments being published, but it does show how biased you are.It leaves me sad and wanting. Partha Biswas
"I have been strongly critical of Modi after the widespread anti-Muslim riots in Gujarat in 2002 and warned that the failure of the Gujarat police to effectively deal with the rioters could drive aggrieved Muslims into the welcoming arms of the likes of Osama bin Laden."
..Don't know if you heard "Better to die on one's feet than to live on one's knees."
I am no advocate of Modi at all.. but such phrases tend to debase the integrity and brawn of a nation.
It's easy to critisize, but we need to be more realistic. Indian youth and population is a humongous force that no one (police, outsider or insider) can control if there is an epidamic of any sort. We shouldn't be in that situation first, but once we are in there it's difficult to control for any government. Just my personal opinion.
