USA must Apologize Narendra Modi before Obama’s invitation is accepted
"A concealed truth, that's all a lie is. Either by omission or commission we never do more than obscure. The truth stays in the undergrowth, waiting to be discovered." Josephine Hart.
The President of USA, Barrack Obama congratulated Narendra Modi, the future Prime Minister of India, on his stunning and spectacular victory in spite of the ban imposed on him by the US government. First thing first. Enough is enough. US must tender an unequivocalapology to Narendra Modi and people of India for failing to apply impartial, balanced, and universal approach in implementing the law on religious freedom. This ban is not just on Narendra Modi but it is an insult to the people of India and Indian diaspora, an affront to the legal system of the land, an offensive to the vasudaika kutumbam (universal family) ideology that pervades the land, and an insult to the principle of ahimsa (no-injury).
US must apologize before Narendra Modi accepts the invitation to visit USA.
The stunning victory of Narendra Modi and Bharatiya Janata Party changed the course of history of India and its relation with other nations. No nation can ignore the will of the largest democracy on the planet. No other democratic nation would have similar claim. It is no wonder that US media, politicians, businessmen are waking up to take full advantage of the potential of Indian economic growth and to tap the Indian genius. Selective News media is creating a proper climate recognizing the double standards US imposed on Narendra Modi.
“India’s Narendra Modi went from international outcast to invited guest, as the U.S. and U.K. saluted his opposition bloc’s triumph in national elections.” Jonathan Allen and Rajesh Kumar Singh of Bloomberg News observed. The Wall Street Journal stated that“Narendra Modi is the only person ever denied a U.S. visa based on a little-known law on religious freedom.”Thus Modi was shunned by USA and many European nations on a manufactured charge that he failed to stop the outbreak of religious riots in the State of Gujarat in 2002 when he was a Chief Minister. Reuters recognizes, “a seismic political shift that gives the Hindu nationalist and his party a mandate for sweeping economic reform.”
Following the election results,US president Barack Obama called and told Modi that he looked forward to working closely with him to "fulfill the extraordinary promise of the US-India strategic partnership.” The White House said “The president invited Narendra Modi to visit Washington at a mutually agreeable time to further strengthen our bilateral relationship." The White House spokesman Jay Carney said,"The prime minister of India will be welcomed in the United States," "We congratulate Narendra Modi and the BJP on winning a majority of seats in this historic election.Once the government is formed, we look forward to working closely with the prime minister and the cabinet to advance our strong bilateral relationship based on shared democratic values."
By this invitation, the US government has shunned its own policy, its own human rights approach, its own moral stance, its own philosophy and may be working against their democratic principles.
Who is behind the ban visa for Modi?
US government was swayed away by the Evangelical religious lobby groups whose interest is to demean Hinduism which is considered a threat for their deceptive, devious, inhuman practices of converting Hindus into Christianity. US was also influenced by Muslims with almost unlimited Petro dollars, NRI with their so called secular philosophy, some brown Hindus who were drenched in the syndrome of Macaulay’s putras (Raju Rajagopal from California), Indian Christians who are bent on destroying the only surviving ancient religion, US politicians who are sold to the lobbyists, and so called liberals whose selective vision failed to see the atrocities of other religions and failed to see the denial of human rights in most of the Islamic countries.
Who was behind the visa ban? Zahir Janmohamed, who was part of the campaign to deny visa to Narendra Modi, wrote about the orchestrated efforts by certain groups in revealing article “U S Evangelicals, Indian Expats Teamed up to Push Through Modi Visa Ban.” He says push to ban visa for Modi “came about from a highly unusual coalition made up of Indian-born activists, evangelical Christians, Jewish leaders and Republican members of Congress concerned about religious freedom around the globe.”
Zahir should know. He said, “I had a front-row seat to these events as they unfolded. I worked in Washington. D.C., from 2003 to 2011, mostly at Amnesty International and in the United States Congress, and I was a part of the campaign to deny Mr. Modi a visa.”
Why USA denied Visa in 2005
President George W. Bush, who was a Christian fundamentalist, who has close ties with evangelical Christian groups, used relatively unknown law for the first time in its history to deny Modi a visa in 2005 on the grounds of "severe violations of religious freedom."Fareed Zakaria called the U.S. ostracism of Modi "selective, arbitrary and excessive."
On February 27,2002 the trouble started in the State of Gujarat when about 60 Hindu pilgrims were burnt alive in a train. It was believed that Muslims locked the compartments to prevent the passengers to escape and set fire to the train. The riots broke out. About 1000 people were killed – about 300 Hindus and 700 Muslims. Media and critics charged that Modi, being a Hindu fundamentalist, did not do enough to stop the carnage. Modi has denied of any wrongdoing vehemently. Cases were filed against Modi for the riots and the killings.
Supreme Court absolved him of all the charges
The case was filed in Supreme Court which appointed SIT (Special Investigation Team) to investigate the culpability and report it back to the Court. 1) A Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) said on February 9, 2012 that it has no evidence that Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi had any role in the 2002 deadly religious riots in the western Indian state, a local court reviewing the report said.
2) "No evidence has been found against any of the 62 accused as per the SIT report," City Magistrate M.S. Bhatt said on local television news channels Tuesday.
3) SIT examined five different speeches given by Mr. Modi and concluded by saying that it established his commitment to punish the guilty and uphold the law.
4) After discussing a number of events, the SIT concluded: “In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the interpretation made on alleged illegal instructions … appear to be without any basis.” Because, “everywhere the genesis and intention was one and the same, i.e., to punish the culprits responsible for the Godhra incident in an exemplary manner, so that such incidents did not recur ever again.”
Does US respect the law of the land?
The SIT report was submitted in February 2012 absolving all the charges against Narendra Modi. If the US has any respect for the law of the land, it should have reexamined the ban, accepted the decree of the highest court of India, apologized to Narendra Modi and revoked the ban. Instead, they were singing the same old song to the tune provided by evangelical Christians, select group of anti-Hindu US Congress representative such as Joe Pitts, Frank Wolf, Trent Franks, and Keith Ellis assisted by John Conyers. They showed no respect for the justice system of India. Did any of these Congressmen question the Supreme Court decision on the election of George Bush?
They even spoke in December 2012 in front of the Capitol Hill against the revocation of the ban. That only shows how blind they were to the law of the land, how they may have been forced to speak the language of evangelicals, and how they becamedeceptively anti-Hindu since Modi is described as a Hindu Chauvinist. It is amazing to find out how these Congress men who hold hearings on everything except the massacres of Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh and take no action against these countries. Furthermore,25 US Congressmen in a letter written in December 2012 had urged Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to denying visas to Modi as his government has not adequately pursued justice of the victims. This letter suggests that they are determined to ostracize Modi for the sake of pleasing the evangelical Christiana, Muslims and selected India Hindu haters and shed their own judgment, reasoning, objectivity, rationale and fairness. So much for justice and preservation of religious freedom.
Hypocritical policy toward Religious Freedom
If the US is embracing and advocating the freedom of religion for all religions, not just for Christians and Muslims, it had enough evidence to examine and revoke the ban. In many cases, US has been on the wrong side supporting the leaders and countries that have denied the religious freedom and subjected the other religious people to rape, torture, conversion and killings.
If we look at the history of United States that it has supported the political leaders that have violated the religious freedom of other religious people and turned its blind eye toward the atrocities committed against the humanity in many counties. In fact they have invited the leaders whose hands were drenched with blood. Aseem Shukla observed that “Hypocrisy is never a lonely noun on Capitol Hill. The United States protects the leader of Rwanda despite his support of genocidal Tutsi rebels in the Congo. Chinese leaders enjoy visits here despite their violent religious persecution of Tibetans, and Burmese leaders got a President Barack Obama visit in spite of that government's summary executions and rape of the Indian-origin Rohingya people.”
In Bangladesh there were about 28 percent Hindus at the time of Independence in 1947. At present there are less than 7 percent Hindus. They were forcibly converted, raped, tortured or killed. Their Hind Temples were destroyed and their Gods were mutilated. Did the US Congress had any hearings about the plight of Hindus? Did they find out why their population was declining year by year?Abdul Ghaffar Chowdhury, a columnist and liberal activist from London lamented that "After seeing what is happening to the minorities, I am ashamed to say I am a Muslim," Did the US Congress ban any Visas from Bangladesh?
Similarly, Hindus in Pakistan at the time of Independence was about 20 percent and now it declined to less than one percent. Did US Congress or Human Rights Watch took notice of the plight of Hindus? Not only they did not bar Pakistani officials from entering USA, they invited them to white house with proper protocols. Moreover the US government funnels Billions of dollars without ever asking a serious questions about the violations of freedom of religion.
US welcomes the dictator of Saudi Arabia with red carpet who would not grant any religious freedom to Hindus and other religions, confiscate the pictures of their chosen Gods, tear up all the religious books at the airport, and arrest non-Muslims for practicing their religion. Nelson Mandela was listed as terrorist by US until 2008 for his fight against apartheid policies that have denied the human rights to blacks. Where were these organizations such as Human Rights Commission, Human Rights Watch, US Congress, Amnesty International, Institute on Religious and Public Policy,andUnited States Commission on International Religious Freedom who profess to monitor the violations of human right, the denial of religious freedom, and the ethnic cleansing?
In fact US government supported the dictator of Chili, Shah of Iran, Marcos of Philippines, and every despot from Middle-East, and Africa, whose hands were smeared with blood. US has attacked and destroyed Iraq under false pretext without having any evidence of biological weapons.
Apology is in ORDER by USA to Narendra Modi for imposing a selective, exclusive policy that denied his visa. US has no moral integrity to deny him while embracing all the country leaders who have engaged in human rights violations, conducted ethnic cleansing, denied freedom of religion, depleted Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh, and remained silent when Kashmiri pundits were forced flee their homes to live in tents. |