mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
Canada denies visa to Indians on 'ridiculous' grounds.. Options
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 6:07:56 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
Four Indians had been denied visas in Canada on grounds that they had 'worked for violent or terrorist organizations' when in reality they worked for the BSF, IB (Intelligence Bureau of India) and such like organizations. The Indian govt. has asked the Canadian Govt. to explain this and is reportedly 'awaiting an apology' from their Canadian counterparts. I agree that it is up to a country to frame their own immigration rules, but that doesn't mean that India's BSF (Border Security force, which is mainly garrisoned in the Jammu and Kashmir region) can be termed as a 'violent' organization. This is seriously offensive, and clearly shows some inexplicable bias. Quite rightly, the Indians who have been denied the visas, have asked if the Canadian govt. does the same to army officials from UK or US. The Canadian govt. indeed owes the Indian govt. an apology, besides a probe into the matter.

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/71698/canada-denied-visas-indian-officials.html

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-angry-over-visa-refusal-warns-Canada-of-retaliation/Article1-549106.aspx
peterhewett
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 7:29:07 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/15/2009
Posts: 2,452
Neurons: 3,698
Location: In my head
Are you in possession of all the facts KM? I think not. One may think it is discrimination but perhaps the Canadians see that differently... I do not know.

Canada has said that it is within its rights to deny working visa's to those who worked for organizations guilty of human rights violations. Perhaps Canada feels the work of the Indian IB is not free of the guilt of human rights violations. If so, if that is their view, then they are in order to behave as they have.

As laymen we are not in a position to know all the facts are we, so it is better not to let national pride dictate our responses.

If you are seeking the support of non-Indians against Canada and for India, then both sides of the story will have to be told.
Isaac Samuel
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 9:03:37 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/2/2009
Posts: 674
Neurons: 1,222
Location: United States
peterhewett:

Excellent Response.Spot on.
oxjox
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 9:12:29 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/20/2010
Posts: 45
Neurons: 147
Location: New Zealand
Peter makes a good point in reminding us that journalists are not the most direct and honest people ever (nor are they very good writers).
I don't know anything about this incident in particular, but quite often the tone of this sort of news is written in such a way that it smells of a subtle bias.
The only journalism that holds any worth to me is Fox News, and only then for the pure laugh-out-loud factor.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 9:15:00 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
Peter, it is the Canadian govt. which doesn't have all the facts. The BSF and IB are NOT violators of human rights. If Indians start denying visas to foreigners saying that their country's organizations including the military 'violate human rights', then also it would have surely created a huge uproar.

I repeat. The BSF work only within our borders. The constables and the other members of the Indian force are just like any other soldier in the world. Yes some of them have committed inhuman acts from time to time, by raping women and even misappropriating power. But, using that as a pretext for calling the entire unit 'violent and a terrorist group' is not just a blunder but also a crime.

British, American and soldiers of ALL nations have committed NUMEROUS acts which can be termed as inhuman. SO, does that mean their citizens or members of their army will not be granted visas on the basis of that bit of truth?? The entire world will be at war then.

It is a most ridiculous piece of discrimination.

Should I start listing all the acts of violence in Iraq, Afghanistan and tortures in Guantanamo by the Coalition forces?? I don't think TFD's servers can even hold that much data, which can be unearthed on that.
So, please do not go into that.

It WAS a terribly shameless discrimination, by a country where there are already plenty of Indians who are serving that nation well. The two countries have friendly ties, and Canada should come up with an apology to maintain the good bilateral ties.

BSF is a terrorist organization - that has got to be the joke of the millennium.

And I have full sympathy for those expats who are true to their roots, as opposed to those who are ashamed of them.

So, I guess I can get away with calling the US army a terrorist organization. So also the British army, and anyone that comes to my mind. How about that, fellas?
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 9:17:51 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
oxjox wrote:
Peter makes a good point in reminding us that journalists are not the most direct and honest people ever (nor are they very good writers).
I don't know anything about this incident in particular, but quite often the tone of this sort of news is written in such a way that it smells of a subtle bias.
The only journalism that holds any worth to me is Fox News, and only then for the pure laugh-out-loud factor.


It is not a matter of journalists falsely reporting. I saw the actual people who were denied visas on tv 'reading out the exact words of the Canadian govt. citing reasons for denying the visas to these Indians'.
The report CANNOT be wrong.
Avonlea
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 9:30:15 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/26/2010
Posts: 168
You certainly set yourself up for peterhewett's wrath kisholoy! I noticed he was stalking this topic.
surejdev
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 10:30:25 AM
Rank: Member

Joined: 4/29/2010
Posts: 14
Neurons: 32
Location: Malaysia
THEY REALLY NEED TO LEARN THE DIFFRENTS BETWEEN TERRORIST AND AN INDIAN Think
"we are not the SAME....! Shame on you
we are not same part of the world.....
we don't speak the same language.......
we don't eat the same food..........
we dont even hate the same PEOPLE....

terrorist hate americans...indian hate each other.....
a terrorist will blow up an airport...indian like to work at the airport....

that would be come to productive....Drool

by. russel dominic peters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH3hzmGpnDo&feature=related

peterhewett
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 10:32:49 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/15/2009
Posts: 2,452
Neurons: 3,698
Location: In my head
Avonlea the following comment of yours is so childish ...do behave yourself please:

'You certainly set yourself up for peterhewett's wrath kisholoy! I noticed he was stalking this topic.'

I am not angry with KM don't be so silly
and stop trying to stir will you.
peterhewett
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 10:36:39 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/15/2009
Posts: 2,452
Neurons: 3,698
Location: In my head
I repeat KM we do not what the Canadian version is do we? Countries never reveal all in reports that anyone can see. Let's wait and see what transpires.
Ellenrita
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 10:47:40 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/20/2010
Posts: 1,348
Neurons: 3,889
Location: CANADA - Toronto
CSIS confounds us all, very secretive, sensitive to comments about lax border sercurity.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 11:00:36 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
peterhewett wrote:
I repeat KM we do not what the Canadian version is do we? Countries never reveal all in reports that anyone can see. Let's wait and see what transpires.


I agree that we should wait and see what happens next. Well, there is nothing more to be done anyway. Though the Canadian officials have already given in writing the reasons for turning down the requests for the visas. So, we already do know about their versions i.e. their interpretation of a friendly country's top organizations. It is not that I am against denying people visas all that much, depends on the circumstances really. Immigration laws, though needing to be uniform, are solely subject to change by the concerning country.
But the grounds on the basis of which these denials were made are quite ridiculous. BSF and IB are certainly not 'terrorist or unlawful or violent organizations'. Not any more than their foreign counterparts for that matter. So, it would be interesting to see Canada's reaction.

And yes I agree that your post was not one that reflected any anger. We can always disagree. So I concur with you on your reply to 'Avonlea'.

Avonlea
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 11:01:29 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/26/2010
Posts: 168
Just what I expected peterhewett right on Q.

Actually I agree with you. "Countries never reveal all in reports that anyone can see. Let's wait and see what transpires."
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 11:16:43 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
surejdev wrote:
THEY REALLY NEED TO LEARN THE DIFFRENTS BETWEEN TERRORIST AND AN INDIAN Think
"we are not the SAME....! Shame on you
we are not same part of the world.....
we don't speak the same language.......
we don't eat the same food..........
we dont even hate the same PEOPLE....

terrorist hate americans...indian hate each other.....
a terrorist will blow up an airport...indian like to work at the airport....

that would be come to productive....Drool

by. russel dominic peters
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iH3hzmGpnDo&feature=related



I wonder how this video is significant here. By the way, that guy is simply a racist. He was making a caricature of the Indian accent all of the time. Not all Indians hate each other. And no, not all Indians like to work at the airport. Again, there are 'terrorists' within India (muslim as well as non-muslim). So, by narrowing down 'terrorists' to only muslims, he was making a mockery of muslims as well.
One of those expats perhaps ashamed of his roots. Lol, how I pity these poor souls, they can't ever become white also, since then they would be called Michael Jackson.
StarSeeker
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 11:23:10 AM
Rank: Member

Joined: 2/11/2010
Posts: 10
Neurons: 56
I don't see why Canada should grant visas to any Indian (or any other nation) that applies for it? Just because you have a big community here? What do you mean by 'served well the country?' Visas are judged individually, not by nations.
This kind of attitude reminds me of 'dictatorship of minorities'. If a white bloke cannot get something he would cry out that he didn't get it just because he's white, not because other factors would be involved, and so on with all races (I use white bloke example because I'm white and I'm allowed to make jokes about my own kind, I hope :-) ).
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 11:25:32 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
StarSeeker wrote:
I don't see why Canada should grant visas to any Indian (or any other nation) that applies for it? Just because you have a big community here? What do you mean by 'served well the country?' Visas are judged individually, not by nations.
This kind of attitude reminds me of 'dictatorship of minorities'. If a white bloke cannot get something he would cry out that he didn't get it just because he's white, not because other factors would be involved, and so on with all races (I use white bloke example because I'm white and I'm allowed to make jokes about my own kind, I hope :-) ).


That is not the point. They might as well do that, not giving visas as per their choice. Of course that would harm the relation between the two countries.

But the issue is something different: the visas were denied on totally baseless, false and insulting grounds.
boneyfriend
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 11:41:51 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 8/3/2009
Posts: 2,625
Neurons: 10,546
Location: Columbia, South Carolina, United States
Avonlea, I looked in my Atlas and can't find Sharanam. Is it a real place?
Pocketmole
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 12:34:31 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2010
Posts: 174
Neurons: 555
Canada will be hosting both the G8 and G20 Summits in June. The security demands (and expenses!) are astronomical! The Heads of State of 20 nations will be gathered in one place and Canada is under enormous pressure from all those nations to guarantee the safety and security of all. This of necessity requires minute screening of the aides and security personnel accompanying the Leaders. If there is even the slightest question in the minds of not only the Canadian government, but of other countries’ governments as well, with respect to the appropriateness of granting entry to any member of a country’s contingent, those visas will of necessity be denied. It has nothing whatsoever to do with discrimination, but everything to do with both the actuality and the appearance of safety and security for world leaders.

Here’s a link to a perhaps more balanced report of the situation:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/g8-g20/news/india-complains-about-denied-g20-visas/article1582554/

Also interesting is a description of the security measures being taken and their impact on downtown Toronto:
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/773133--downtown-to-become-a-fortress-for-g20-summit



Avonlea
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 12:45:21 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/26/2010
Posts: 168
Yes boneyfriend Sharanam is a real place but you won't find it on any map that I know of. It is the name of the house and 5 acres of land where I live.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 12:51:30 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
Pocketmole wrote:
Canada will be hosting both the G8 and G20 Summits in June. The security demands (and expenses!) are astronomical! The Heads of State of 20 nations will be gathered in one place and Canada is under enormous pressure from all those nations to guarantee the safety and security of all. This of necessity requires minute screening of the aides and security personnel accompanying the Leaders.


Those are valid points. Security of course is a primary concern. However, there must also be a limit to taking security precautions. And there must be solid evidence and proper reasons for denying a person his visa.

Pocketmole wrote:

If there is even the slightest question in the minds of not only the Canadian government, but of other countries’ governments as well, with respect to the appropriateness of granting entry to any member of a country’s contingent, those visas will of necessity be denied. It has nothing whatsoever to do with discrimination, but everything to do with both the actuality and the appearance of safety and security for world leaders.


Well, India will also represent the G20 summit. So, naturally, the likes of Manmohan Singh, the PM, and Pranab Mukherjee, the Finance Minister, would be wanting tight security in Canada as well during the G20 summit. But not at the expense of innocents in any way. There has to be an optimization of everything.
The Indian govt. is not happy with the discrimination. Yes, that is what it is. Being an ex-IB or an ex-BSF does not put anyone into the 'doubtful' category. Canada has simply made a huge mistake. Let's face it.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/g8-g20/news/india-complains-about-denied-g20-visas/article1582554/

The link above doesn't say anything that the previous links supplied by me didn't say. And both are equally 'balanced', IMHO.


kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 12:53:52 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
Avonlea wrote:
Yes boneyfriend Sharanam is a real place but you won't find it on any map that I know of. It is the name of the house and 5 acres of land where I live.


It is an Indian word or rather a Sanskrit word. But you said you are not from India. Where are you from then? (some place outside India that uses a sanskrit word to name a house?? Malaysia, Philippines etc.)
StarSeeker
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:01:26 PM
Rank: Member

Joined: 2/11/2010
Posts: 10
Neurons: 56
You said that

That is not the point. They might as well do that, not giving visas as per their choice. Of course that would harm the relation between the two countries.

But the issue is something different:the visas were denied on totally baseless, false and insulting grounds.


Nope, that will not hurt any relationship between Canada and India, if any. Actually, I suppose that you would like so because it's a matter of ego, not one of judgement. Baseless? Just because you read that in a local paper? Get serious. I notice that you have a sense of pride but don't exaggerate.

On the other hand, so what?
1. Is this the end of the world for those guys? Plan B or something? Is India so bad that almost everyone wants to get out of it?
2. If Canada is so bad and dumb, why aren't they trying to go elsewhere? If they are so good and marvelous.

My person opinion on this is that you want everybody to agree with you and cry out together, based on few words on a local newspaper and I see that you get frustrated because no one is on the same thought like you.
We have different realities and different truths. To debate, come on in with articulated explanation and arguments.

Please, don't take it personal but try to think with your own mind, not with others, and don't let yourself manipulated. And pride should be dosed.

Over.
avatar
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:10:01 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/19/2010
Posts: 322
Neurons: 1,314
SUCCINCT LIST OF "INADMISSIBLE CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS ENGAGED IN VIOLENCE, ACT OF ESPIONAGE OR SUBVERSION"

- Indian BSF Border Security Force and its personnel, active and retired.
- Indian Intelligence Bureau and its personnel, active and retired.
- Indian Armed Forces Tribunal and its personnel, active and retired.
- Canadian International Boundary Commission and its personnel, active and retired.
- Canadian Security Intelligence Service and its personnel, active and retired.
- Canadian Office of the Judge-Advocate General and its personnel, active and retired.
- United Kingdom Home Office and its personnel, active and retired.
- United Kingdom Secret Intelligence Service and its personnel, active and retired.
- United Kingdom Armed Forces Tribunals and their personnel, active and retired.
- United States Border Patrol and its personnel, active and retired.
- United States Central Intelligence Agency and its personnel, active and retired.
- United States Armed Forces Military Tribunals and their personnel, active and retired.
abcxyz
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:12:22 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 11/13/2009
Posts: 1,056
Neurons: 3,200
Location: India
The fact that visas were denied isn't really a big deal, but the official opinion of Canadian govt on BSF is that it is a 'notoriously violent unit' that engages in 'systematic torture'(source: Pocketmole's link)? Unbelievable, really. 'Terrorist organisation'? Govt forces? Well, that's practically calling India a terrorist country.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:25:24 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
avatar wrote:
SUCCINCT LIST OF "INADMISSIBLE CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS ENGAGED IN VIOLENCE, ACT OF ESPIONAGE OR SUBVERSION"

- Indian BSF Border Security Force and its personnel, active and retired.
- Indian Intelligence Bureau and its personnel, active and retired.
- Indian Armed Forces Tribunal and its personnel, active and retired.
- Canadian International Boundary Commission and its personnel, active and retired.
- Canadian Security Intelligence Service and its personnel, active and retired.
- Canadian Office of the Judge-Advocate General and its personnel, active and retired.
- United Kingdom Home Office and its personnel, active and retired.
- United Kingdom Secret Intelligence Service and its personnel, active and retired.
- United Kingdom Armed Forces Tribunals and their personnel, active and retired.
- United States Border Patrol and its personnel, active and retired.
- United States Central Intelligence Agency and its personnel, active and retired.
- United States Armed Forces Military Tribunals and their personnel, active and retired.


Where did you get that list avatar? Please mention the source.
dev_sircar
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:26:44 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/31/2010
Posts: 234
Neurons: 5,932
Location: Kolkata, Bengal, India
KM has quoted from news reports that "Four Indians had been denied visas in Canada on grounds that they had 'worked for violent or terrorist organizations' when in reality they worked for the BSF, IB (Intelligence Bureau of India) and such like organizations."

In my view, the moot point is not whether Canada can exercise its sovereignty when they consider an organisation as violent or terrorist organization; but whether it is appropriate to act unilaterally, without qouting the basis of forming their opinion, when relationship between two civilised countries is involved.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:31:57 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
StarSeeker wrote:
You said that

That is not the point. They might as well do that, not giving visas as per their choice. Of course that would harm the relation between the two countries.

But the issue is something different:the visas were denied on totally baseless, false and insulting grounds.


Nope, that will not hurt any relationship between Canada and India, if any. Actually, I suppose that you would like so because it's a matter of ego, not one of judgement. Baseless? Just because you read that in a local paper? Get serious. I notice that you have a sense of pride but don't exaggerate.

On the other hand, so what?
1. Is this the end of the world for those guys? Plan B or something? Is India so bad that almost everyone wants to get out of it?
2. If Canada is so bad and dumb, why aren't they trying to go elsewhere? If they are so good and marvelous.

My person opinion on this is that you want everybody to agree with you and cry out together, based on few words on a local newspaper and I see that you get frustrated because no one is on the same thought like you.
We have different realities and different truths. To debate, come on in with articulated explanation and arguments.

Please, don't take it personal but try to think with your own mind, not with others, and don't let yourself manipulated. And pride should be dosed.

Over.


I think it is you who needs to get serious. I didn't just read the news in some local newspaper, as you so bluntly put it, to undermine the gravity of the matter. It is an issue that has transcended the barriers of any single nation.
You are incapable of giving any inputs which are worthy of debating on. So indeed it is better that you leave the discussion if you have no wish of contributing to it.
You have completely derailed by bringing up the issue of immigration and its justification. How the hell should I know why some one would want to leave India and want to stay in Canada? But, everybody is a free individual and they have their rights to settle anywhere they want. AS per the rules of immigration of the foreign country of course. But why are you bringing that up? It just shows that you are short of arguments in favor of your support of the ludicrous comments on esteemed Indian organizations.
I and anybody have good enough reason and arguments to call the maligning comments by the Canadian govt. 'baseless'. They certainly are baseless.

What arguments do you or anyone else have in favor of the statements that
1. BSF is a terrorist organization.
2. IT engages in 'violence' and has violated 'human rights' (any damn war is in some way or the other a human rights violation)
3. BSF engages in 'systematic torture'

Well, I am all ears...
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:35:26 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
abcxyz wrote:
The fact that visas were denied isn't really a big deal, but the official opinion of Canadian govt on BSF is that it is a 'notoriously violent unit' that engages in 'systematic torture'(source: Pocketmole's link)? Unbelievable, really. 'Terrorist organisation'? Govt forces? Well, that's practically calling India a terrorist country.


Exactly. And we cannot even say that it is a ridiculous way to describe these orgsd'oh!
Cat
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:38:46 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/10/2010
Posts: 967
Neurons: 194,017
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
Wow! Lots of anger KM. I don't trust your opinion because it appears to be drawn from the media which I don't find reliable. Truth "spinned" is not the whole truth. I'm in Canada but am American. It took me over three years to get a Permanent Resident Card even though I moved here with my Canadian husband and two children. The kids automatically received Canadian citizenship through their father. I was scrutinized. Did I complain? No. It knew it would happen eventually and understood that 9/11 has changed the world. If you want to find discrimination, you will find it. I'm reminded of a conversation I overheard once between a Canadian and an Indian who was complaining about not be accepted in Canada because of his race. The Canadian asked him what would be the case for him (the Canadian) if he were to move to India? The reply: Your life would be in danger. Now, I think he (the Indian) was exaggerating because of his anger, but it's food for thought (as a wise person once said).
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:47:59 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
Cat wrote:
I don't trust your opinion because it appears to be drawn from the media which I don't find reliable.


Which opinion? You don't find the media reliable, fine with me. But there is obviously a limit to which they can lie.
What do you not believe in this whole episode??

Do you think...

1. The Indians were not denied visas at all. It is just a story!
2. The Indians were actually terrorists (who by the way ALL appeared in front of camera. I will post the video tomorrow) so they were rightly denied their visas
3. The Indians were denied visas for some other reasons (even though the media quoted the exact phrases and words used in the written documents of the reasons given by Canada for denying the visas. The 2 Governments have also reacted, or are you saying they are flummoxed by the media tooBrick wall )
4. The BSF and IB are really 'black-listed' organizations, at par with the Al Qaeda and LeT.

Just tell me, which part of the whole thing do you describe as 'my opinion' and what is not 'reliable'.

*Lots of anger* Lol
Maggie
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 1:57:36 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2009
Posts: 727
Neurons: 2,128
[quote=kisholoy mukherjee]
Which opinion? You don't find the media reliable, fine with me. But there is obviously a limit to which they can lie.
/quote]

I disagree. There is NO limit to which a government controlled media can lie.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:09:47 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
Maggie wrote:
[quote=kisholoy mukherjee]
Which opinion? You don't find the media reliable, fine with me. But there is obviously a limit to which they can lie.
/quote]

I disagree. There is NO limit to which a government controlled media can lie.


Maggie, please speak keeping in mind the context. Just picking up a single line from my post for conveniently finding faults with it is not justifiable. That line has direct connection with the latter part of my post.

And by the way. The media is NOT govt. controlled in India. In Pandit J. Nehru's words: "I would rather have a completely free Press with all the dangers involved in the wrong use of that freedom, than a suppressed or regulated Press.”

avatar
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:11:23 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/19/2010
Posts: 322
Neurons: 1,314
kisholoy mukherjee wrote:
avatar wrote:
SUCCINCT LIST OF "INADMISSIBLE CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS ENGAGED IN VIOLENCE, ACT OF ESPIONAGE OR SUBVERSION"

- Indian BSF Border Security Force and its personnel, active and retired.
- Indian Intelligence Bureau and its personnel, active and retired.
- Indian Armed Forces Tribunal and its personnel, active and retired.
- Canadian International Boundary Commission and its personnel, active and retired.
- Canadian Security Intelligence Service and its personnel, active and retired.
- Canadian Office of the Judge-Advocate General and its personnel, active and retired.
- United Kingdom Home Office and its personnel, active and retired.
- United Kingdom Secret Intelligence Service and its personnel, active and retired.
- United Kingdom Armed Forces Tribunals and their personnel, active and retired.
- United States Border Patrol and its personnel, active and retired.
- United States Central Intelligence Agency and its personnel, active and retired.
- United States Armed Forces Military Tribunals and their personnel, active and retired.


Where did you get that list avatar? Please mention the source.



I created the list myself:

I selected the countries mentioned in the stories, and the countries of origin of some of our peers who posted a comment: India, Canada, the UK, and the USA.

I listed the Offices mentioned in your articles: Indian BSF, IB, and Indian Armed Forces Tribunal.

Then I used the Internet to find out the name of the equivalent Offices in the selected countries.

I formed the title by quoting words and phrases from the articles.

That was my sarcastic way of expressing my outrage at the Canadian Government.
avatar
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:16:22 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/19/2010
Posts: 322
Neurons: 1,314
StarSeeker wrote:
I don't see why Canada should grant visas to any Indian (or any other nation) that applies for it?


They obviously don't.
Articulate Dreamer
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:23:40 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/16/2009
Posts: 12,649
Neurons: 95,031
Location: Bangalore, Karnataka, India
peterhewett wrote:
Are you in possession of all the facts KM? I think not. One may think it is discrimination but perhaps the Canadians see that differently... I do not know.

Canada has said that it is within its rights to deny working visa's to those who worked for organizations guilty of human rights violations. Perhaps Canada feels the work of the Indian IB is not free of the guilt of human rights violations. If so, if that is their view, then they are in order to behave as they have.

As laymen we are not in a position to know all the facts are we, so it is better not to let national pride dictate our responses.

If you are seeking the support of non-Indians against Canada and for India, then both sides of the story will have to be told.


Canada should talk! They have dismissed the case against the men guilty of blowing up an Air India plane in the early 1980s; they continue to harbour and nurture fringe Indian separatists: specifically the Babar_Khalsa sect, refusing to negotiate India's demands for criminal procedings and/or extradition.
The record of the West in human rights might be better than many repressive states but the present case against the Indians is obviously doctored.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.