Modi says that if USA can be friend to the President of Pakistan who supported Talibans, what is his fault that USA has refused him an entry visa on grounds of violating religious norms?
New Delhi, March 18: In a stinging snub to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi, the United States on Friday denied him a diplomatic visa and revoked his tourist/business visa under a law that bars such a privilege to anyone who carries out severe violations of religious freedom.
This moron (Modi) has the blood of 3000 innocent Muslims on this hands as an accomplice to the carnage of Gujrat. America has shown a stern moral fibre and I for one take this opportunity to salute the land of the free.
Legbreak, the rate of inflation is really high nowadays. From a thousand people out of which around 320 were hindus, it has reached 3000 muslims, by two more years it will be 5000 muslims and in five years it will be 10,000 muslims.
There was a strong email campaign going on on muslim List_servs and groups to petition US lawmakers to deny visa to Mr Modi on account of his involvement in muslim massacre in Gujarat.
While there was also the push from various hindu organizations to get Mr Modi the visa.
Seems like in this case, the hindu lobby didn't get what they wanted. Good.
oh it was not 3000 but only 1000 people that died in them riots, damn what were we thinking, this modi guy is practically a fookin angel…oh how misguided we were, and how wrongly we judged thee..
well those numbers get exxxxxagerated also, bit it dunn mean what was done was right.
whether modi is repsonsible for 1000 murders or 3000, he is responsible.
but i see your point, i guess legbreak confused people with cars, cuz reports suggest that 3000 cars were vandalized in the terror orgy there by idiots.
from what i gather, Modi is certainly deserving of a much greater punishment than denial of visa for the U.S.....however, on what actual grounds did the U.S revoke the visa? the allegations against him are vague, and there is no substantial evidence to support them, let alone a trial and result.
according to a spokesman, a visa can be denied to a government official who is "responsible for or directly carried out at any time, particularly severe violations of religious freedom"....like i mentioned, the primary allegation against him was non-action regarding stoppage of the riots, and the evidence remains elusive.
that is certainly true in this case, but not always.
regardless, my point was that the allegations are vague in nature and there is no substantial evidence against him, let alone a conviction at trial. so on what grounds would the U.S have justification to revoke his visa?
of course, the US has the authority to grant and deny visas to whoever. the part in bold is the spurious piece of this issue. since when would the U.S make such a bold move based on speculation and no evidence? what have they based their “feeling” on?
this seems to be cold war political tamasha rather than a chain-mail success story.
Modi said that if the President of Pakistan and the Prime Minister of Bangladesh can go to US - given that minorities have been completely wiped off from both nations - so can he.
“Can the Indian government stop an American government official from visiting on the basis of what has happened in Iraq?” he asked.
There is no freedom of religion for non-Muslims in Araba countries, though the rulers of these countries get red carpet welcome in USA.
He is right Busharaf should not be allowed to go either. A sovereign nation like US should not welcome a military dictator. But unfortunately the situation is totally different. He is in power in the first place because of US.
Muslim lobbies in the west are doing real well.
In Britain: Muslims sent BNP leader to jail.
In Austria: Hijab law is not being passed.
In America: Modie was disallowed to come.