mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest
Canada denies visa to Indians on 'ridiculous' grounds.. Options
Cat
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:24:43 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/10/2010
Posts: 967
Neurons: 194,017
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
km said: 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.


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

I find the reason for the denied visas to be questionable. It doesn't mean I think it likely or not. I just don't see it as fact, but opinion.

km said: 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.

That they worked for the BSF, IB and such like organizations is not proof that they are not involved with violent or terrorist organizations.

This is petty on my part, I'm probably being too critical in wanting more factual information, but those were my initial thoughts.

The Lots of anger comment comes from my perspective as someone who has seen a lot of life and just can't get overly upset when life goes wrong. However, you are allowed to react how you want because your experiences are different than mine and my guess is that you've less years on the treadmill than I.

I'm really having fun with color, now that I figured out how to do it. Dancing
Maggie
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:25:59 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/27/2009
Posts: 727
Neurons: 2,128
kisholoy mukherjee wrote:

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.



So now you're telling me how to 'speak'. You brought the limits of the press into it. Perhaps I should have left off the descriptor "government-controlled". If you think there's a limit to how far the press will go in India, or any other country, than you're even more naive than I had imagined. The press will go as far as their own group bias will allow. For those who are totally controlled by the government, the only limits are those put on them BY the government.

As for the specifics of this issue: I agree with Peter. Until you get the spin from both sides, you're still in the dark. In fact, even AFTER getting 'both sides', we probably won't KNOW. We might suspect, we might form opinions based on limited 'data', but we won't actually KNOW.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:26:07 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
avatar wrote:
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.


Exactly. Even I was greatly taken aback at that comment. I didn't even suggest that they should, and so isn't the Indian govt.

If it were a matter of:

1.security: real reasons to deny visas, such as suspicious or malicious past of the persons concerned

or

2. decreasing the number of immigrants

then I wouldn't have had any problems with the denial of visas. But the Canadian govt. is not saying any of these. They are rather making false accusations about the very Indian army. It is seriously offensive, and I don't see anything wrong in taking offense in this!

I like people coming clean and straight. In-your-face kind of thing. If Canada has problems with India or Indians, then they can just say it, directly, that, NO, we don't want Indians in our country, so we ain't giving you any visas. Sorry. That is absolutely fine.

But this is two-facedness. They are obviously biased about the BSF in the 'violent Jammu-Kashmir region' and the IB. To not appear bad in front of the world, they were trying to do all this clandestinely. But of course, the 'whistle-blowers' are always there watching us, thankfully.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 2:33:05 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
Maggie wrote:
kisholoy mukherjee wrote:

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.



So now you're telling me how to 'speak'. You brought the limits of the press into it. Perhaps I should have left off the descriptor "government-controlled". If you think there's a limit to how far the press will go in India, or any other country, than you're even more naive than I had imagined. The press will go as far as their own group bias will allow. For those who are totally controlled by the government, the only limits are those put on them BY the government.

As for the specifics of this issue: I agree with Peter. Until you get the spin from both sides, you're still in the dark. In fact, even AFTER getting 'both sides', we probably won't KNOW. We might suspect, we might form opinions based on limited 'data', but we won't actually KNOW.


Maggie, your obsession with the word 'data' persists, I see. The 'data' you are referring to is HARD EVIDENCE of what the Canadian Govt. said, in clear terms, while citing reasons for denying the damn visas. How many times do I have to repeat this, I don't know.

The people, who have been denied the visas, have 'read out' those 'reasons' (like the BSF being a violent org. etc.) in front of the media. So, the Canadian govt. HAS heard all that. And if that 'data' were wrong, then the Canadian govt. would have already done their part of 'denying' (yet again, but this time..)the 'accusations' against them, about the grounds for denying the visas, by now. And did I mention that this thing, this row has been on-going for quite some time now. (enough for them to react; govts. are never late on reacting to something that they would deny or disagree)

So, yes, here the Media indeed could not have lied. Or else, they would have had to wrap up their business soon.
Isaac Samuel
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:01:16 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/2/2009
Posts: 674
Neurons: 1,222
Location: United States
Canada has always been compassionate to Indians because it is one of the commonwealth Countries.Prior to 9/11 Indians arrived its shores in droves without any papers and they were all sheltered with dignity and got settled.

Canada's foreign policies were benign and inclusive and much more accommodating than USA. It has gotten tighter after 9/11 but from the list provided by Avatar I couldn't help noticing that there are some Americans and Brits as well, in that list. Indians were not singled out.

It is very embarrassing for me as an expat of India in the USA to read the posts of Mr. mukherjee and his ilks. I have been warning them to quit being ethnocentric and jingoistic
in an international forum—only to find rebuffed as "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."

I thought when I exposed KM for deleting my post would get rid of him, but he showed up his ugly head again unabashedly after 3 days.I get sick of reading his maniacal and menacing posts one after the other every day.
avatar
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:06:42 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/19/2010
Posts: 322
Neurons: 1,314
StarSeeker wrote:
You said that

Just because you read that in a local paper? Get serious.

Over.


The Hindustan Times is the Indian equivalent of the Canadian Globe and mail. It has a circulation of over 1.14 million and a readership of 6.6 million. Its world news coverage include, among others:

- Attempt to plug oil flow still inconclusive: BP.
- Four die in Guatemala plane crash
- India should respect Pakistan court verdicts.
- Hafiz Saeed's release from house arrest.
- Google allows Street View car inspection
- Facebook changes privacy tools
- Pakistan Taliban chief Maulana Fazlullah killed?
- Pakistani Taliban say America will "burn"
- Pakistani Taliban: homegrown militants now targeting US
- Probe in Times Square attack focusing on Pakistani Taliban
- Patil seeks China's support for UNSC bid
- Crime student held for three prostitutes' murder in Britain
- Pakistan's 2010/11 budget - what to watch for
- Greenpeace welcomes Indonesia's moratorium on deforestation
- iPhone maker Foxconn hit by 10th jumping death
- US seeks Pak crackdown on Taliban
- US to include homegrown terror threat into strategy
- YouTube ban lifted in Pakistan

And you call that a "local" newspaper?!!!


The Deccan Herald is a Southern India daily newspaper with a readership of 760,000 in the state of Karnataka (Indian Readership Survey (Round One) 2010). Its world news coverage include, among others:

- Obama reaffirms partnership with India
- Killer PhD: Student ‘ripper’ held
- US must fix education system: Prez
- Pak Taliban leader dead: Police
- 60-yr-old gives birth to twins in China
- Colombian model turns ‘narco queen’
- Haiti knowledge helps boy win geography bee
- Facebook boosts privacy controls amid criticism
- India should respect Pak court verdicts: Malik
- 26/11 case: Pak SC rejects Lakhvi's petition
- India a great and emerging global power: US
- US gave dossier on Shahzad to Pak
- Atlantis returns home for last time
- Cellphone no. suspended as 3 users die
- Obama’s net worth lowest for US leaders in 57 years
- Nations blocking justice’
- Korea threat
- Nepal holds 'secret' meeting with Prachanda to end standoff
- Indians held in UK for working illegally
- Fresh chargesheet against five suspects in Bhutto murder case
- Turbulence injures 10 on London to LA flight
- The mobile number that rang the death knell
- UN wants India, Pak, Israel to join NPT, CTBT

And you call that a "local" newspaper?!!!
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:08:38 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
@ Cat, Maggie and those who think that this entire episode is faked by the media:

The Indian foreign minister speaking on the issue at hand, clearly mentioning India's institutions and that we are proud of them and that Canada must understand (And respect) that.

http://www.timesnow.tv/videoshow/4346102.cms

Other videos:

http://www.timesnow.tv/Biased-Canada-insults-India-again/videoshow/4346032.cms

The following shows the questions asked to a BSF officer before being denied the visa:

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/canada-grilled-exbsf-officer-on-torture-posting/116384-3.html?from=rhs

Tomorrow I will give the videos of the live interviews of the concerned people, who will be seen reading out the Canadian govt's reasons for denying the visa. (I saw it only today, and that video hasn't been uploaded yet. The above have been there for a few days now)

Cat, no, being a BSF doesn't necessarily mean the person is not a terrorist, but is being a BSF enough to say that someone is not worthy of getting a visa? I think Canada better spill the beans now.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:14:19 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
Isaac Samuel wrote:
Canada has always been compassionate to Indians because it is one of the commonwealth Countries.Prior to 9/11 Indians arrived its shores in droves without any papers and they were all sheltered with dignity and got settled.

Canada's foreign policies were benign and inclusive and much more accommodating than USA. It has gotten tighter after 9/11 but from the list provided by Avatar I couldn't help noticing that there are some Americans and Brits as well, in that list. Indians were not singled out.

It is very embarrassing for me as an expat of India in the USA to read the posts of Mr. mukherjee and his ilks. I have been warning them to quit being ethnocentric and jingoistic
in an international forum—only to find rebuffed as "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."

I thought when I exposed KM for deleting my post would get rid of him, but he showed up his ugly head again unabashedly after 3 days.I get sick of reading his maniacal and menacing posts one after the other every day.


Firstly, I tried to shrink your post to save space, but it won't s(hr)ink as low as you can. So, sorry for that. Secondly, what colorful language!! I have tried to emphasize on the most blazing parts.
What post deleted? Oh that one, where you called srirr and me acolytes of each other? Where you had manifested your sheer LACK of knowledge about India? Should I post it again, for everyone's convenience? Hmm? I can do that just that easily. Huh! And how can anyone forget that thread when you falsely accused me of giving a staged picture. What a spineless one you are; you couldn't even bother to try and find out what the topic was about. There is no honor in not knowing, Mr. isaac.
You can keep lying. That is all you can do. Anyway, your posts smack of, uh well, I have said that already. Thank goodness you don't have any Indian part to your name. Would have brought us Indians real shame.
Just try getting acquainted with the world affairs first (start with your country, wait what would that be? lol. Figure that one out first, that's your first exercise), before embarking upon trying to implement your racist ideals to belittle your own country men. Shame, shame on you. Dhikkar hain aap par. And also, my favorite: na ghar ka, na ghat ka.

Yeah, aren't you the real joker, the funny guy? The Russel Peters of TFD, huh? Making a mockery of his nation to gain some name, no shame, anything for fame. Haha, silly game, pretty lame.

Taking a leaf out of Peter's book: toodly bye.Speak to the hand
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 3:18:01 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
Avatar wrote:
And you call that a "local" newspaper?!!!


Indeed avatar, some people can go to such extents to prove their points, even though there isn't any.
RuthP
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 5:38:57 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/2/2009
Posts: 5,408
Neurons: 87,618
Location: Drain, Oregon, United States
Perhaps there is too much focus on the "violence" part of the exclusion and too little on "espionage". While it is impossible to tell from the snippets of information in any of the sources, it is quite possible that the wording is standard boiler-plate for a refusal and simply means that one or more of these are concerns and therefore the visa is not granted.

The serving intelligence officer was granted a visa (per km's two sources) after a protest by the Indian government. It is entirely possible his initial denial was more of a bureaucratic SNAFU than anything else.

km, I would not be quite so fast to assume this is because these folks are Indian. Spies and ex-spies are not generally appreciated, trusted, or wanted in countries outside their own. Current spies, acknowledged by their government (as with your intelligence agent) may be tolerated for the security concerns of visiting dignitaries.

Known ex-spies, who are no longer under the direct control of their home government may well not be trusted or tolerated. I would not be at all surprised to discover known ex-CIA agents are personna non-grata in Canada and are denied visas. (And, truthfully, I think that's very reasonable.)
avatar
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 6:21:44 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/19/2010
Posts: 322
Neurons: 1,314
Ruth's comment is rational.
abcxyz
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 6:29:08 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 11/13/2009
Posts: 1,056
Neurons: 3,200
Location: India
"... it is quite possible that the wording is standard boiler-plate for a refusal and simply means that one or more of these are concerns and therefore the visa is not granted."

Seems unlikely, doesn't it? I don't think Canada lumps members of all those listed by avatar under the section "INADMISSIBLE CATEGORIES OF INDIVIDUALS AND ORGANIZATIONS ENGAGED IN VIOLENCE, ACT OF ESPIONAGE OR SUBVERSION"(copyright:avatar) and uses terms like 'a notoriously violent unit' that engages in 'systematic torture' to officially describe them. There were some among the visa seekers who weren't looking for permanent citizenship. One was going to participate in a golf tournament in Canada, as far as I can remember. However, I'm waiting for more information.

I agree completely with your comments on not having an amiable attitude towards spies or ex-spies and the reason of it. My objection was at the Canadian official description of govt military organisations.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Thursday, May 27, 2010 11:05:37 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
RuthP wrote:
Perhaps there is too much focus on the "violence" part of the exclusion and too little on "espionage". While it is impossible to tell from the snippets of information in any of the sources, it is quite possible that the wording is standard boiler-plate for a refusal and simply means that one or more of these are concerns and therefore the visa is not granted.

The serving intelligence officer was granted a visa (per km's two sources) after a protest by the Indian government. It is entirely possible his initial denial was more of a bureaucratic SNAFU than anything else.

km, I would not be quite so fast to assume this is because these folks are Indian. Spies and ex-spies are not generally appreciated, trusted, or wanted in countries outside their own. Current spies, acknowledged by their government (as with your intelligence agent) may be tolerated for the security concerns of visiting dignitaries.

Known ex-spies, who are no longer under the direct control of their home government may well not be trusted or tolerated. I would not be at all surprised to discover known ex-CIA agents are personna non-grata in Canada and are denied visas. (And, truthfully, I think that's very reasonable.)


I would only touch upon what has abcxyz has already said above.

I agree that ex-spies can be a source of worry. It didn't sound too bad when Canadian govt. said that the spy might 'snoop around'. Honestly, I had a chuckle when I first heard that. But please consider this for a moment, aren't there ex-spies of other countries (perhaps including India?) already there in Canada? AM I to believe there isn't a single one of them there? IF so, then why the extra 'honor' for this guy? Also, India and Canada have a very friendly relation. So, this is surely not going to count as cute in India, and the relation might be worsened. Fortunately though, India's present foreign ministry has some 'cool as cucumber' heads in SM Krishna and Nirupama Rao.

What really sounded offensive was how the Canadian govt. described the BSF - as a 'violent organization that violates human rights and involves in continued torture'. They were making it sound like a extremist leftist rule like NK or even Saddam's regime. So, either they should come up with an explanation as to why they said all that, or they should give an apology. Granting or denying the visas isn't the focal point, on what grounds the latter is done is what is important.

It is about India, Ruth, because it is about 'BSF' in particular. I don't know if they have said something like this about other countries as well, and if they've, that is equally condemnable.
avatar
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 12:41:15 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/19/2010
Posts: 322
Neurons: 1,314
KM said "So, either they should come up with an explanation as to why they said all that, or they should give an apology."

The explanation is: THEY ARE BROWN!!!
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 12:50:18 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
avatar wrote:
KM said "So, either they should come up with an explanation as to why they said all that, or they should give an apology."

The explanation is: THEY ARE BROWN!!!


I don't know, one of them had a lot of white beard on his face. And I think another one was slightly reddish too. Think

On a more serious note, that would be racial profilingd'oh! And that is exactly what I fear it is.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 2:12:32 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
This is a report on the Indian Government's reaction to the whole issue.

Excerpts:

India is a democracy. All institutions function under our Constitution. We are proud of our security forces and agencies and the services rendered by them to the nation. We expect the Canadian authorities to address the situation appropriately,” said Krishna (India's foreign affairs minister; also see the video I gave above of this speech)


"Official sources said Caron was told unequivocally that remarks against India’s security forces were not acceptable.
They, however, emphasised India’s grouse is not against the denial of visas to individuals, and it recognises that grant of visas is the prerogative of the host country. They said India was peeved with the completely unwarranted remarks against the security forces.
"

“We want the Canadian high commission to apologise, take back the comments made in the rejection letters and also initiate action against the officers responsible for rejecting visas,” said an official.


Another important point. A serving IB official, who is going to Toronto next month with PM Manmohan Singh for the G20 summit, was also denied the visa recently. Only after the external affairs ministry intervened, was he given the visa.
srirr
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 2:18:25 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 12/29/2009
Posts: 8,507
Neurons: 484,288
KM has raised a valid discussion. And the point is not that some Indians are denied visas. Point is the reason stated for this denial. Because they had served BSF and IB. For those who do not know about these organizations (and still jump in the discussion), BSF is a paramilitary force in India to maintain security at Indian borders, which is under administrative controls of Govt of India. And, IB is India’s intelligence agency under administrative controls of Govt of India.

BSF and IB have been labeled as notoriously violent units engaged in systematic torture.

@Peter:
You are correct in saying that the report should be balanced. But you also donot know anything (from either side). It is good that you are keeping yourself aloof from this.

@Starseeker:
You said: Just because you read that in a local paper? Get serious.

Well replied by Avatar. You donot know about media in India and call the leading and trustworthy news agencies to be local.

You said: To debate, come on in with articulated explanation and arguments.

Well said. So, why don’t you come out with any “articulated explanation and arguments” that prove Canadian Government’s allegation that BSF and IB are notoriously violent units engaged in systematic torture.

@Cat:
You said: I don't trust your opinion because it appears to be drawn from the media which I don't find reliable.

Can you please help us provide some reliable source which throws light on this? You do not find media reliable. I reckon in Canada, it is not. That’s why, you donot find it reliable. But I must inform you that Indian media, especially the ones quoted here, are trustworthy and genuine.

You later said: I find the reason for the denied visas to be questionable.

So do we. That’s the point. Why? Is it correct? Is the reason valid?

@ Maggie:
You said: There is NO limit to which a government controlled media can lie.

Same as what I wrote for Cat’s comments.

@ Pocketmole:
You said, but everything to do with both the actuality and the appearance of safety and security for world leaders.

I agree. I hope you might be knowing next Commonwealth Games are being held in India in a few months from now. What if Indian officials have doubts (?) about national security agencies of other nations and deny visas to foreign officials just because they had served some security agency earlier? Will there be no hue and cry?

@Isaac Samuel:
You said: but from the list provided by Avatar I couldn't help noticing that there are some Americans and Brits as well, in that list. Indians were not singled out.

LOL. You are so childish and filled with prejudice, I think. You should read the complete thread, and not only the ones that you like or dislike.

Avatar said:
That was my sarcastic way of expressing my outrage at the Canadian Government.

Well put, Avatar. If ex-IB and ex-BSF personnel are banned, those from the ones in your list must also be banned.

@RuthP:
Your comments are rational. I agree with you. But the reason of denial of visa was not being ex-spy, but was association with a government security agency. (in sync with abcxyz)

KM said:
Being an ex-IB or an ex-BSF does not put anyone into the 'doubtful' category.

Completely agree.
And if BSF and IB are guilty of human rights violations (as Canada says), there are many other organizations/agencies which fall under this category. Is there any restriction on other such “guilty” organizations?
peterhewett
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 2:29:09 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/15/2009
Posts: 2,452
Neurons: 3,698
Location: In my head
So far there is only one side to the story... the Indian one. I do not think any of the Indian posters know the facts. Canada has a large Indian population so they are not racially motivated here. Why does everyone assume offence?

Canada has the right to control its borders. It does not have to publish reasons. We should all wait and see.
If the reason for refusal is not racist... and I very much doubt that it is... then what is the reason? It could be a valid one. Indian nationals should acknowledge that it may be the case, and wait and see instead of indignantly posturing great offence on lack of knowledge and thus putting Canada in a bad light.

kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 2:29:37 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
Well put, srirr. (I say, again at the risk of being labeled, you know what!!)

[image not available]
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 2:30:49 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
peterhewett wrote:

Canada has the right to control its borders. It does not have to publish reasons. We should all wait and see.


It has published reasons in the rejection letters.
peterhewett
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 2:35:09 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/15/2009
Posts: 2,452
Neurons: 3,698
Location: In my head
Well then those reasons should be accepted in good faith since that is how they view the matter. They have a right to their view and a right to act upon it. You KM and any other Indian poster here do not know the facts... you blindly accept all you hear in the Indian press and media, never doubting the veracity of what you are told.

Something disturbed the Canadian authorities and they acted upon that. The ban does not apply to all Indians... it is not racist.

The problem lies in objectivity. "
It has nothing to do with anti-Indian feeling at all.

KM You should except your limited knowledge on the matter. You are not in possesssion of the facts...you are a layman.

The bottom line anyway is a countries right to decide.

kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 2:38:03 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
peterhewett wrote:
Well then those reasons should be accepted in good faith since that is how they view the matter. They have a right to their view and a right to act upon it.


Peter, you're in Thailand working for the British govt's terrorist organization aka the British army. Now please understand that it was said in good faith and that is how I view the matter.
uncoverer
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 3:03:55 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/13/2010
Posts: 129
Location: USA
Km I have been watching your jingoistic rantings for quite a while now.
I marvel at how you fudge facts and sensationalise news.
Really you are the epitome of yellow page journalism.

What you have said kisholoy are opinions kisholoy .Your opinions and the facts given by you have been half baked,put out of context and doctored to suit your needs.

However international diplomacy is not a matter of opinion lest of all yours.


I did some research and here is an article from a paper of your own country ,India.

I refuse to believe that you did not know about this article.
Clearly your not mentioning them shows how you manipulate information.


http://www.telegraphindia.com/1100528/jsp/frontpage/story_12496601.jsp



Excerpts:


Canada is nearly unique among countries big and small, developed and developing, in revealing to visa applicants the reason for denying them permission to enter its territory .It is this rare openness in the Canadian visa process which has now left that country’s high commission in New Delhi and its officials in Ottawa preparing for the Prime Minister’s visit with egg on their faces.




Like the US, most countries never reveal the reasons for visa denial, much less communicate those reasons to applicants in writing as Canada does. This is because every country, including India, treasures the right to admit aliens as a sovereign right which is sacrosanct....


Unlike most countries, Canada asks applicants from all over the world even for visas for short visits whether they have been in military, militia or civil defence units and whether they have served in an intelligence organisation or police force.

In Canadian application forms, this question, obviously a possible reason for being considered an undesirable alien, ranks only slightly lower as a potential disadvantage to having contracted tuberculosis or having been in close contact with someone ailing from tuberculosis of the lung.



Such questions are similar to those previously in US visa application forms demanding to know if those who want to visit America have ever been members of a communist party.

Canada has a long history of strong human rights advocacy but the questions about military service and allied matters are a relatively new additions to the visa forms after the tragic massacres by government supported militias in places like Rwanda, which shook the world's conscience...


Canada also has very liberal asylum rules, which have made it possible for suspects in political murders and human rights violations to not only get into the country but also gain permanent residence.

In recent years, however, there is an effort to prevent those who have misused Canada’s liberal traditions, such as Khalistanis and Tamil Tigers from gaining entry.

The detailed scrutiny of a broad category of applicants, including those associated with paramilitary forces as in the case of Indians who have been denied visas, is the result of these developments.

END QUOTE


I am interested as to how you put a spin on your tale this time.
This is no Western Media.
This is Indian Media.
However since you are only interested on arguing for arguing sakes I do not expect anything better from you.


Obviously incidents where the Indian Govt has denied visas can be found if one digs a little ,but I think I have made my point here.
Mr.Kisholoy:
You have a penchant for drumming up national pride and misguiding others to suit your own personal agenda.

However I refuse to believe that most of your fellow countrymen are should we say "intellectually naive" as you show yourself to be.

And since you really love defending the indefensible (as exemplified in your posts supporting incestous or grandmother marrying her grandson incident) this should keep you busy for quite a while.










kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 3:31:08 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
There is nothing much to say about the pointless shouting that was posted above. It is obviously a ploy to derail the topic. However, it isn't going to work.

What Canada or any other nation for that matter did in the past is not important now. And if India has done such things, then that is also equally condemnable. And that can only come out into the open through the media. Countries should be open about these matters, as to why they are denying visas. Canada is not doing India or any country a favor by doing so, but if they do it regularly, it is certainly good and will help bring such matters to public attention more often. Other countries, including India, should also follow their example. So, now that it has come out into the open, it should be dealt with and not ignored, just because such cases have been under the wraps all this while.

In the present case, the Canadian govt. has maligned India's name, by calling BSF and IB, which are under India's govt., violent and inhuman organizations. That is the truth and so all my posts were absolutely to the point, unlike the useless one above. Canada was WRONG to label these govt. organizations of India as ones that violate human rights. So, they owe India an apology. They can deny visas to as many individuals as they want, whether from India or elsewhere, but they should give proper justification for that. This is a preposterous accusation against India's govt.

Secondly, the matter has gone beyond just media reporting now. The govt. of india has taken up the matter and has clearly said that the Canada govt. was wrong in describing the IB and BSF as violent, human rights violating organizations. Obviously, my detailed and elaborate posting was overlooked by obnoxious individuals of little worth. No problemo! Here is the link again.

The government of India, in particular the external affairs ministry has clearly told the Canadian govt. to come up with an explanation and take back all the comments by the Canadian authorities. This is not my opinion, but of people much more learned than yourself, Mr Uncoverer.

So, saying what I wrote as 'intellectually naive' and to be 'bending the truth' is equivalent to calling the Indian govt. all that.

Clearly shows the low merit of such audacious individuals who make these allegations.

srirr
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 4:13:20 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 12/29/2009
Posts: 8,507
Neurons: 484,288
Peter said:
You KM and any other Indian poster here do not know the facts... you blindly accept all you hear in the Indian press and media, never doubting the veracity of what you are told.

You also donot know anything. You should keep yourself out of it because you donot know. Indian media is transparent to the extent it should be.

Something disturbed the Canadian authorities and they acted upon that. The ban does not apply to all Indians... it is not racist.

It has nothing to do with anti-Indian feeling at all.


Correct. It is not racist. It is not anti-Indian. Who told this? Why are you putting these words unwantedly? If your analysis says it to be anti-Indian and racist, you should better learn to read the complete text and see what others are saying.

KM You should except your limited knowledge on the matter. You are not in possesssion of the facts...you are a layman.

You are a layman. Why dont you keep yourself aside?



Uncoverer:

Thanks for the link. But, have you read it completely? Or have you just copied a few excerpts without relating it with the context in which it is written?
For your convenience, I also put forward some excerpts from the same link.

Canada’s visa denial to Indians associated with its security framework is the result of Ottawa’s inability to balance its tedious habit of preaching to others with its commendable openness in every area of governance.

(You too have quoted) Such questions are similar to those previously in US visa application forms demanding to know if those who want to visit America have ever been members of a communist party.

(In addition)The late Bengal chief minister Jyoti Basu refused throughout his life to apply for a US visa or visit America because he considered it humiliating to have to answer that question, posed as if it was a crime to be a communist.


However, I could nowhere find where this article justifies denial of visa to ex-Indian security professionals. Do you interpret it yourself?

I can quote some more excerpts (from your provided link). But that may lead the thread to other debates. The topic here is question mark on denial of visa by Canada. So, I would limit myself to that only.
abcxyz
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 4:25:31 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 11/13/2009
Posts: 1,056
Neurons: 3,200
Location: India
Let me phrase it in clear words : Canada has every right not to grant visas to the applicants, nobody is questioning that right. If Canada has a problem with admitting serving or retired members of military or intelligence organisations, no problem at all. But they have absolutely no right to call BSF or any other govt forces/bureaus terrorist organisations and equivalent insults.

uncoverer's article does not say a word about the incident except that it left Canadian officials with 'an egg on their faces'(annoying phrasing, lacking in information, hardly any news - that's why I cancelled my subscription for Telegraph). It chiefly revolves around Canadian immigration policies(the parts uncoverer quoted) which, though has relevance, does not throw any light upon this particular incident. In this context it's useless.

P.S. If the post is long, the default font size is preferrable, since otherwise it takes up a lot of space, quite unnecessarily.

Edit: I saw srirr posted excerpts from the article. I didn't go to the link, I read the parts uncoverer quoted, and it contains almost nothing about the incident.
addngkr
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 4:36:41 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/12/2010
Posts: 166
Neurons: 512
Location: Face of Earth
I see that you folks are really mistaking us(Indians). Kisholoy never said that he was angry with the Canadians for NOT allowing the Indians on their soil. It is their country and they are entitled to frame their visa laws. What he meant Was that Blaming the Indian Defense Organizations of "Terrorist Activities" was not good, that too on baseless grounds. THIS WAS WHAT HE MEANT!!. And when he(or any other Indian here) tried too prove his point, was showered by accusations calling biased and one person even termed him "ethnocentric and maniac". (That was very shameful!)
srirr
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 4:40:06 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 12/29/2009
Posts: 8,507
Neurons: 484,288
There are pepole of all sorts, addngkr. You can stop a slapping hand, but you cant stop a foul mouth. (Old proverb) They donot read the posts, donot know a thing, but want to justify themselves by false accusations and allegations.
addngkr
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 4:49:38 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/12/2010
Posts: 166
Neurons: 512
Location: Face of Earth
peterhewett:
Something disturbed the Canadian authorities and they acted upon that. The ban does not apply to all Indians... it is not racist.

The problem lies in objectivity. "
It has nothing to do with anti-Indian feeling at all.



Again peter, we ARE NOT accusing the Canadians for racism!! You have gravely mistaken the issue. And as for the disturbance that was caused to the Canadian authorities, that is precisely what we want to know - What was the reason?
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 4:54:38 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
Thanks to all those including abc, srirr, avatar, addngkr and others for focusing on the real issue - maligning the name of BSF and IB (and hence indirectly the Indian govt.)

I hope that those, like Cat, who thought I was only giving 'my opinion' about the reasons for denying the visas, have understood that I was not. There is sufficient proof of that.

And those who think that it is my opinion (only) that calling BSF and IB 'violent orgs' was justified, please refer to the last few posts above mine.
addngkr
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 5:28:31 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 1/12/2010
Posts: 166
Neurons: 512
Location: Face of Earth
Canada ‘apologises’, assures visa policy review.

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article440300.ece

I think this will suffice. Do lend your attention on the third paragraph!
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 5:39:19 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
addngkr wrote:
Canada ‘apologises’, assures visa policy review.

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article440300.ece

I think this will suffice. Do lend your attention on the third paragraph!


Applause Good. India deserved the apology and Canada have responded well.
Peace :)

Clearly, it was the Canadian officials who had wrong information, and that too from dubious sources. So, we Indians, were indeed informed well. Good job, media. (Times, for eg) They helped bring the matter to notice of govt. in the first place, through interviewing the persons who were denied the visas. Our local newspapers really did well, didn't they? Haha.

"It has now come out that these officials drew on “open sources” of information while telling visa officials that their serving or former organisations were human rights violators. "
srirr
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 5:52:48 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 12/29/2009
Posts: 8,507
Neurons: 484,288
addngkr wrote:
Canada ‘apologises’, assures visa policy review.

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article440300.ece

I think this will suffice. Do lend your attention on the third paragraph!


Let all the contributors to this thread read the news article and formulate their views.

Thanks addngkr for bringing this news article to our notice in time.

P.S: By the way, it is not from a local newspaper.
kisholoy mukherjee
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 5:55:34 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/31/2009
Posts: 3,729
Neurons: 7,777
Location: here and there
srirr wrote:


P.S: By the way, it is not from a local newspaper.


Indeed it isn't srirr. But perhaps some will find The Hindu (with over 3.4 million readers) a local newspaper anyway. And even Times of India perhaps, India's most read English daily, with a readership of 13.4 million.
peterhewett
Posted: Friday, May 28, 2010 6:02:38 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 5/15/2009
Posts: 2,452
Neurons: 3,698
Location: In my head
Tell me KM, do you think India is squeaky clean? The US has the CIA the British has its intelligence angencies and the Russians too... and so it goes on. No one knows what the agencies of these countries get up too. Do you really think India has no shady organization that does questionable things that it does not want others to know about?

My gut feeling is that the Canadian Visa officials were most likely right but because of the hue and cry on the part of the Indian government they have been made scapegoats.

You may feel you were justified, but you are lucky over the outcome, and your appeal was sheer rank nationalism. Be assured India like others has shady orgaizations that you are not in the know about.
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.