Visa denial hurt national pride? [ SATURDAY, MARCH 26, 2005 11:37:37 PM ] http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1062980.cms
The US has to look at its own record before it can point fingers at others, says BJP general secretary, Arun Jaitley.
The denial of a US visa to Gujarat CM Narendra Modi raises a question of diplomatic courtesy, a question of how one should deal with constitutional functionaries and elected representatives of the people. After the unfortunate riots in Gujarat in 2002, elections were held and Modi was re-elected as the chief minister in a democratic manner. It's the voters who decided who would be elected. Then, what's the basis for the US denial of a visa for Modi? Are they basing it on facts or on propaganda? If it is on facts, then there must be an FIR, a chargesheet, an indictment or a probe commission report on the basis of which the US authorities have acted. But none of these exist.
If the US action is based on NGO documents that 'prove some guilt' on the part of Modi, then that's like the justice meted out by kangaroo courts. Then justice would be based on propaganda, not facts.
Even in the US, NGOs have spoken out against the Iraq war, but has anyone taken action against the US government based on those reports? Thirdly, the US has a long and detailed record of dealing with theocracies where it would be impossible to carry even the Bible or the Gita.
Some of these countries are even close allies of the US. In the face of all this, if it takes a stand that there was a riot in a state and hence is denying a visa to the head of that state, then it's an exemplary case of double standards by the US. Also, for long, the Indian government has been giving irrefutable evidence of cross-border terrorism by our neighbouring country which is being patronised by the US. But nothing much has happened on that score.
It is very evident that the denial of visa to Modi is not a well thought-out action by the US government.
After they issued the order, they have been hunting for reasons to justify it, quoting this report and that report. In the 1960s and '70s, there were doubts in India over certain US actions — for example, when its Seventh Fleet entered the Indian Ocean. But bilateral ties have improved since then and under the NDA government, the relationship has been strengthened.
Now, had the US allowed Modi to visit that country and address one or two functions there as per schedule, then the visit would have passed off as any normal event.
But denying him that opportunity has raised questions in India of US motives. The US has to look at its own record before it can point fingers at others.
(As told to Saira Kurup)
------------------------ Also see what this anti-hindu Jihadi (name sake Hindu, perhaps a christian) put his counter points welcoming illegal US action. These traitors are real enemies of Hindus and Bharat, not the US. For this Jihadi, "Modi has become infamous for his role in the most brutal massacre since India became free, including the mass slaughter and rape of hundreds of women and children." Look at his wordings, most brutal masacre since independence.. Was not roasting 59 HIndus inside train brutal? Was not butchering 5000 sikhs in the heart of national capital brutal? Was not butchering over 10,000 Hindus in Kashmir Valley was brutal? A National movement is need of the our to crush these traitors and anti-hindu forces. Bharat
Because of his record, Modi qualifies for isolation by the national and international community, says writer-activist, Harsh Mander . http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1062986.cms