India-US Relations : News and Discussion

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 17 Mar 2015 21:38

^^http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/ ... india.html

Immigration atty wrote:
Despite being the world’s largest democracy with 1.22 billion people, thousands of Indians regularly leave India to seek asylum. According to the Times of India, for example, 13,000 Indians applied for asylum in various countries between 2011 and 2013, mostly in Europe. (See “13,000 Indians applied for asylum in the last 2 years,” by Kounteya Sinha, March 24, 2014.) In the United States and Canada, 1,393 people from India sought asylum in the years 2012 and 2013 alone.

Historically, most Indian refugees have been Sikh. They flew directly to the U.S., entering at either New York or San Francisco and joining large Sikh communities. This began changing in 2013, when South Asians reportedly began flying into Central America then journeying overland to reach the Southern United States. Many Indians entering this way approach border officials and ask for asylum, after which they are given a date for a credible fear interview(conducted by an asylum officer to determine whether the applicant has a credible fear of returning to his or her country). (See, “Arizona sees surge of asylum seekers from India,” by Daniel Gonzalez, the Arizona Republic, 9/8/13.)
Do Many People Gain Asylum From India?

In 2013, the U.S. granted 3.24% of the asylum cases originating from India. On the list of asylum grants by country, this moved India from 7th (2011 and 2012) to 4th (2013). (See FY 2013 Statistics Yearbook, U.S. Department of Justice, EOIR.)
What Type of Asylum Claims Are Typical From India?

According to the U.S. State Department, crimes against women in India are widespread. The 2013 report states that “rape, domestic violence, dowry-related deaths, honor killings, sexual harassment, and discrimination against women” remained serious problems. (See State Department "Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2013," India.) Nevertheless, most asylum claims from India are made by Sikhs who say they have been persecuted or fear persecution by the Indian government on account of their Sikh religion or their political opinion.

The height of violence against Sikhs in India occurred in 1984, when thousands of Sikhs were killed after an incident involving the Golden Temple, a Sikh holy place (retribution for the murder of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by her Sikh bodyguards). Thirty years later, Sikhs still leave India claiming to have been persecuted by the government. Most claim to be part of the Akali Dal Mann, a separatist group that advocates for a Sikh homeland in Punjab.
What Are Common Reasons for Denial of Asylum Claims From India?

A U.S. immigration judge or asylum officer may deny a claim if the applicant is not credible -- that is, not detailed, consistent or plausible in his or her testimony. Importantly, there is more evidence that Sikhs are living quietly in India than there are articles exposing Sikh persecution in the years since 1984. Since an asylum applicant must have an objective as well as subjective basis for fear, lack of objective evidence can be a reason for denial. Also, if a judge or officer suspects ties to a designated terrorist group, an applicant can be disqualified for asylum.
What Can Indians Do to Increase The Chances of a Successful Asylum Claim?

If you are Sikh and have been persecuted or fear persecution, it is important to substantiate your case with as much objective evidence as possible. Find country conditions information from authoritative sources that supports your claim, as described in Nolo's article, "Preparing Persuasive Documents for Your Asylum Application." If you claim to belong to a Sikh organization, make sure you prove that it is not a terrorist one.

Sikh applicants should also be prepared to prove they are Sikh. If you claim to be religious, you should be able to explain your religion to the judge or officer. If you are not religious, you should be able to explain why you don’t practice your religion and how any persecutor would be able to recognize you as Sikh.

mostly Sikhs ..some may be khalistani..others using it as an opportunity to get citijenship of land of milk and honey..

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 17 Mar 2015 21:44

Racism and bigotry, pure and simple.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 17 Mar 2015 22:44

by Pandugiri
Amber G. wrote:
He articulated it pretty well how India and US are good friends..

Come rain, come shine. But India and USA can never be truly friends. As Rajiv Malhotra puts it- we will tolerate each other but there will never be mutual respect.

But as some say- never say never ever.

But by that logic India will not have any friends around the world.

If you do not know the history of USA. At one time England was arch enemy of USA and burned down white house in 1812. It is only past 1900 that USA and UK have become friends.

UK was controlling what is now called "Canada" and it sill has "Queen's" picture on its currency., along with Aussies and Kiwis. Since 1776 USA was the first country to stop paying taxes to the UK king.

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 17 Mar 2015 22:57

Let me ask you a counter question:

Has the USA treated any people from outside Europe with respect and dignity? You must certainly know one Dr. Bhagat Singh Thind and how he was treated by the US. That was an eminent Indian intellectual (not using the words sarcastically) who was getting his citizenship consistently revoked at the same time when US was sucking out the poor people from Italy who by all means, never could hold a candle to Dr. Thind's contributions to this world.

The US is no friend of the coloreds. Make no mistake about it.

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 17 Mar 2015 22:59

Off course I know Bhagat Singh Thind

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagat_Singh_Thind

What I am saying is that as the power of non-whites increases in USA it is bound to change. USA is not like Germany of Japan that is controlling the immigration.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 17 Mar 2015 23:48

If you have time to waste > While the video is abt China, it provides a super quick intro to US policy wrt to other countries. Watch his presentation and especially focus on his theory of great power politics. Substitute India for China and then think about the future of Indo-US relationship.

Why China Cannot Rise Peacefully

@45 mins > Question on how the US will view the rise of Brasil? Use the same logic for India's rise and US response to such an event.
@59:10 mins > 3 most powerful arguments against his theory > 1. Nuclear weapons 2. Economic interdependence 3. Nationalism

The most powerful political ideology around, contrary to the what most people think, is not democracy but nationalism.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 18 Mar 2015 00:58

Congressman Aaron Schock resigns amid spending controversy
http://news.yahoo.com/congressman-aaron ... 23696.html
ongress.

The 33-year-old Congressman made the announcement amid controversy over his alleged unethical spending of campaign contributions and taxpayer money.Politico first reported on the news that the young Republican is stepping down.“Today, I am announcing my resignation as a Member of the United States House of Representatives effective March 31,” Schock said in a statement, obtained by the news site. “I do this with a heavy heart. Serving the people of the 18th District is the highest and greatest honor I have had in my life.”He thanked his constituents for their faith in him to represent their interests in Washington, D.C. – saying he gave his all over the last six years.Schock says that “constant questions” have become a distraction and made it too difficult for him to serve the people who elected him with the high standards they deserve and he expects of himself.“On Monday, new details emerged about a business deal between a political donor and a shell company that has been linked to Schock – raising even more suspicion of potentially dishonest practices.



Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 18 Mar 2015 06:41

Amber G. wrote:The relationship is not a binary bit, and people may have different views.
...
The situation is changed dramatically. Modi was welcomed in US like a rock star.

Two things
1. It was not a bilateral visit, but a visit to the UN, which ALL heads of the state do. Even Ahmadinejad attended it a few times. Your SD clarified that Modi being a head of state was automatically entitled to something called an A1 visa. As Tuvaluan pointed out, US SD has very cleverly left it unclear if Modi will be given a visa if he were to apply as a civilian. To me it appears that the circumstances forced the situation to change.

2. Modi was welcomed as a rock star in US, yes. But it was not done by the GoTUS or the PoTUS. The welcome was organised by a group of NRIs, US citizens of Indian descent and saw the particiipation of a few India friendly (or Modi friendly?) personalities in US such as Tulsi Gabbard, Aaron Schock, Hugh Jackman

Amber G. wrote:But time will tell how far this good relationship will go.

Agree.

Getting back to Obama's speech -

Amber G. wrote:There was a small but powerful lobby which blocked NaMo's entry in US. Many of them were still abuzz telling us how even after NaMo's trip to US, NaMo was only a person "who represents some of the people of India.. They wrote only negative parts (mostly manufactured) about NaMo.

So you mean to say that "this lobby" influenced Obama's speech to include their "negative parts"? Thanks for agreeing with many of us on BRF.

Amber G. wrote:The situation is very similar.. they have their "counter part" which will project negativity only.

Of course equal-equal, only..

Amber G. wrote:Listen to speech -- See audiance's reaction.... no one was feeling insulted .. no one was booing ..NaMo did not complain (in fact he still considers Obama's trip a huge success)..etc..

If Obama's speech was that insulting as some like to say, why didn't GOI lodged any unhappiness?

Just obvious things, I suppose.

I did listen to the speech. Did you take some time out to see the reaction of senior government officials, common folk around the country, on social media etc.?

Or did you miss these?

"The best example of India's tolerance was the Dalai Lama sitting next to Obama," union minister Arun Jaitley said. It’s a part of India’s tolerance that even he found it comfortable and India found it comfortable to absorb him in the society"

Rajnath Singh said [], “As far as religious tolerance is concerned, it is embedded in our Indian tradition. India is the only country in the world where all the communities including various divisions of Muslims and all sects of Christians are present.”
“The biggest speciality of the Indian culture has been that there has never been discrimination on the basis of caste, community, religion or sect,”

Just obvious I suppose.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 18 Mar 2015 07:19

Aaron Schock has resigned today over some spending irregularities in his office.

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 18 Mar 2015 07:45

i actually liked the chap..he showed so much promise... introduced a rather bold legislation on medical training .. friend of Modi..(NDTV might take a cue - and add this in their series of "BLOW TO MODI" headlines)

Karan M · Post by **Karan M** » 18 Mar 2015 08:24

US seems to be losing its political talent ..

Bade · Post by **Bade** » 18 Mar 2015 09:00

Stay away from Illinois politicians

to keep a clean image.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 18 Mar 2015 09:03

Karan M wrote:US seems to be losing its political talent ..

I wonder if it has any as for as international relations go in the first place. It need to allow itself blackmailed by people like pakis and pay billions to them. It needed not kill Gadaffi when that idiots is almost ready to be its dog. At least in recent past its decisions in international relations are mostly stupid. Creating an enemy out of Russia and Putin??? Is there any need for it when you can otherwise make Russians to agree for most of your ideas???

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Mar 2015 09:24

Killing its perceived and actual enemies is an old Yanqui sport.Even a UN Sec-Gen was fair game.Read this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ories.html

Did Western agents assassinate the UN Secretary General in 1961?: Four theories
As the UN reopens its investigation into the plane crash that killed Dag Hammarskjold, its second secretary general, some are pointing fingers at the United States and Europe

UN Secretary general Dag Hammarskjold is welcomed by Moïse Tshombe, leader of the Katanga province, at Elizabethville ( now Lubumbashi) Airport in Belgian Congo in 1960 Photo: AFP/GETTY

By Philip Sherwell, New York and David Lawler in Washington
17 Mar 2015

The United Nations has ordered a new investigation into the mysterious 1961 African plane crash that claimed the life of its secretary general at a time of high international intrigue and intervention by outside powers as the post-colonial continent took shape.

The flight was carrying Dag Hammarskjold, the UN’s Swedish chief, on a high-stakes mission to negotiate with rebels in Katanga, a breakaway mineral-rich province of Congo that was backed by Belgian mercenaries and Western governments and business.

Pilot error was officially blamed after the DC6 plane carrying the UN’s second secretary general crashed into the bush, killing all 16 onboard, in the then British protectorate of Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia).

But there were immediately competing theories that the plane had been shot down, possibly by American agents or European mercenaries, as Hammarskjold was believed to be about to broker a deal opposed by Western interests.

A commission of retired international judges in 2013 called for a new investigation after hearing "persuasive evidence" that the plane was shot down.

Dag Hammarskjold

The UN has now announced that it is ordering a new review by an independent panel led Mohamed Othman, a Tanzanian jurist, and assisted by Kerryn Macaulay, an Australian aviation specialist, and Henrik Larsen, a Danish ballistics expert.

The team of experts is expected to travel to the crash scene. But for their mission to succeed, they will also need access to intelligence held by the US, Britain and other European states who have been urged to hand over the material.

More than five decades later, the new panel may be the last chance to determine what really happened to Mr Hammarskjold’s plane that night.

Theory #1: Pilot error

Evidence: The aircraft was flying overnight in central Africa at a low altitude. As John Mussell, the former Royal Rhodesian officer who coordinated the search for the plane, told the New York Times: “It doesn’t matter how fatigued you are or how experienced you are. If you are in Africa and going into unfamiliar territory, it’s not difficult to make a serious mistake.” There were three major enquiries after the crash, two were inconclusive and a third, by the Rhodesian government, blamed pilot error.

Counterpoint: Even back in 1961, that conclusion sounded a bit too convenient given Hammarskjold's powerful foes. Former president Harry Truman's take? “He was on the point of getting something done when they killed him," said Truman. "Notice that I said ‘when they killed him’.”

Theory #2: The Americans shot it down

Possible motive: When turmoil over land and minerals engulfed Congo, Hammarskjold sent UN troops to support Patrice Lumumba, the prime minister. President John F Kennedy was known to regard Lumumba as a destabilising force and a possible Soviet ally.

Evidence: Two American intelligence officials at stationed at listening posts on the night of the crash claim to have heard the plane taken down. One of them says he heard radio transmissions in which a voice said: "The Americans shot down the UN plane." The other says he heard someone say: "It's the plane.... I've hit it. It's going down."

Theory # 3: Mercenaries took down the plane on behalf of European industrialists (and perhaps with British help)

Motive: Hammarskjold did not just anger the Americans with his intervention in Congo. Even more incensed were European industrialists who stood to lose control of the country's mines.

Evidence: According to the Guardian, two top aides to Hammarskjold were convinced that mercenaries had been hired to take out the plane, and that the British government aided in the ensuing cover-up.

Theory #4: A Belgian pilot shot the plane down 'by accident'

Evidence: Susan Williams, a British academic who wrote an in-depth account of the crash, wrote that a "Belgian pilot called Beukels" claimed to have shot the plane down "by accident" after it had failed to divert to a different landing strip.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 18 Mar 2015 15:01

At the time, opinion around the world was that it was shot down. I am surprised that "pilot error" was the report.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 18 Mar 2015 22:29

Kashi - This may be becoming a little repetitive so one last time..

Kashi wrote:
Amber G. wrote:The relationship is not a binary bit, and people may have different views.
...
The situation is changed dramatically. Modi was welcomed in US like a rock star.
Two things
1. It was not a bilateral visit, but a visit to the UN, which ALL heads of the state do. Even Ahmadinejad attended it a few times...

Yes, as you said Sharif also attended the UN meeting. I hope you are not doing a strange = = and diminishing Modi's visit . Let me point out obvious -

1- Indian PM was also invited and welcomed to White House, State Department, MSG (where 20,000 Americans, including who's who in US Govt, Governors, Congressmen, prominent scientists, and other leaders)), Central Park (60,000+ americans).. As many correctly said, this was unprecedented in US (or for Indian leader). Period.

2- He saluted ..(in those exact words, repeatedly) US youths, appreciated and praised US (GOI, and its citizens), invited them to invest in India, promised good governance, (no red tape, no riots, no hate) so that their investment will be benefit to ALL.

3- He, as he himself said in most clear voice, was touched by goodwill shown by US people. Such as POTUS taking him out to a private visit to MLK memorial. Sure the yahoos who hate kept spinning their hate, but if you believe NaMo's own words, he was deeply touched by that gesture of Potus.

4- NaMo, many times clearly said he India puts a VERY HIGH priority in having good US/India relationship. He is very optimistic, mentioning his "friendship", and personal chemistry with US leader.

Above are just a few obvious examples...

As Tuvaluan pointed out, ....

You may like to worship Tuvaluan all you wish. I will rather trust Narendra Modi's own words.
From what I have seen posted by Tuvaluan, to put it generously but bluntly, his posts, apart from vicious name calling has zero validity. (more of this later)

2. Modi was welcomed as a rock star in US, yes. But it was not done by the GoTUS or the PoTUS. The welcome was organised by a group of NRIs, US citizens of Indian descent and saw the particiipation of a few India friendly (or Modi friendly?) personalities in US such as Tulsi Gabbard, Aaron Schock, Hugh Jackman

As wrong as it could be. Those who welcomed him were not "modi-friendly" crowd alone, but ordinary American people like me, Bill Gates (support to clean India), Ranadivé (whose daughter rendered the US anthem in MSG), Noble prize cancer specialists ( who agreed on Modi's request to help India in health matter), CEO's etc ... Yes as I said, it included who's- who form US govt - from all parties). To describe it as a small "modi friendly" crowd, as Pankaj Mishra type tried to do it, is simply wrong.

Getting back to Obama's speech -

Amber G. wrote:There was a small but powerful lobby which blocked NaMo's entry in US. Many of them were still abuzz telling us how even after NaMo's trip to US, NaMo was only a person "who represents some of the people of India.. They wrote only negative parts (mostly manufactured) about NaMo.
So you mean to say that "this lobby" influenced Obama's speech to include their "negative parts"? Thanks for agreeing with many of us on BRF.

No I did not say (the underlined part). In fact, that is one of the silliest CT propagated..I don't believe in such silly things. There was no "negative parts" put by "lobby" in Obama's speech. It was a historic speech. Of course as they say haters gonna hate and spinners going to spin...

To be clear, by "writing negative parts".. I mean the absurd refrain that spinners spin.."Obama Insulted India by 'lecturing' India".. It was clutching at straws to see if there is anything negative be found and publicize it, in the hope that some may believe it. In Modi's case, various fractions brought out silly points like NaMo was wearing saffron... NaMo called Obama by his first name... etc.. trivial stuff really but trying to make it look like sinister..Just like Pankaj Misra, those who find "insults" in BO's speech tells me more about their mindset than anything else.

Amber G. wrote:The situation is very similar.. they have their "counter part" which will project negativity only.

Of course equal-equal, only..[/quote]

Yes, in my opinion, there is zero difference as far as logic of arguments go in these two "counter parts".

***
Any way, this will be my last post here on this. I already see there is no point to "debate" when people start name calling

just an example of typical argument against me wrote:Judging by the quality of your posts, you seem to lack the intellectual depth or holistic understanding of issues and yet you want to deliver sweeping generalizations and want everyone to acknowledge your conclusions. This may cause people not to respect you as much as you want to be as this is a nationalist forum. Its not because you are a woman, man, gay, straight, white, black, northie, southie, etc - its just that you are trying to debate people who have a better grip over issues.

If I may advise, please take a break - educate yourself with facts and then join back in fact-based discussions with a sole focus on issues

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 18 Mar 2015 23:27

Clearly it takes very high IQ to equate speeches made by politicians for public consumption as the equivalent of policy decisions made by the government. I was under the illusion that government decisions incorporate data and information not publicly available, and only available to the highest echelons of decision making.

Wish I had figured out this solemn truth about public speeches of politicians to understand the world better. I have to watch all the speeches made by all the Indian politicians to understand India better...so much stuff to catch up on.

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 19 Mar 2015 00:14

SBajwa wrote: But by that logic India will not have any friends around the world.

If you do not know the history of USA. At one time England was arch enemy of USA and burned down white house in 1812. It is only past 1900 that USA and UK have become friends.

UK was controlling what is now called "Canada" and it sill has "Queen's" picture on its currency., along with Aussies and Kiwis. Since 1776 USA was the first country to stop paying taxes to the UK king.

Do we need to start all the explanations about WASP, white supremacy, fractal recursivity, USAID, bILLARY, US 7th fleet, Bakistan etc. again. I joined BRF quite late, but I have read up. Perhaps you should too. Unfortunately, living in US gives SOME stars-stripes tinted spectacles.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Mar 2015 00:23

Folks we now know where the posters stand and let it rest.

No one is going to convince any others.

The thread is in downward spiral.

So no more replies to each other.
Thanks to all for making positions clear.

ramana

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Mar 2015 05:27

American quandary:
http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/item/ ... tegic.html
"Strategic Challenges After The 9/11 Wars by Amb. Thomas E. McNamara (ret.) "

It does not take a "foreign policy wonk" to notice that U.S. global influence today is weaker than at any time since the end of World War II. There are many reasons for this, but two rarely get mentioned, yet they are critical.

We and our European allies have moved apart in the past ten years. This is a major weakness for both sides of the Atlantic because, Asian "pivot" or not, the Atlantic Community has determined and will determine the influence, wealth, and power of The West for the foreseeable future. Make no mistake, the U.S. would never have been a superpower but for the development and unity of the Atlantic Community in the 20th C. The Community has kept Western thought, values, culture, and institutions in the forefront, despite being undermined by two devastating civil wars in Europe.

A second, important reason for our decline is that domestically, we are suffering from a most bitter, dysfunctional, political partisanship, which permeates all levels of our politics—the worst in my professional lifetime as a career diplomat. It is so bad that Ebola has become a political football.

We are not properly governing ourselves. We know it, and our friends and adversaries know it. The American public decries the divisions, yet it votes to continue, and even enhance, them. The righteous militants insist they have absolute answers, failing to see that their absolutism is a principal cause of our inability to govern.

It is important to put this second observation up front because our position in the world depends critically on the strength of the nation at home. Another way of saying it is (apologies to A. Lincoln) that a house divided cannot long maintain primacy in global affairs. As a result, we are still the primary world power, but no longer the indispensable nation.

This is not the lament of an old warrior, unable to see the vision of a new tomorrow. It is the observation of a professional diplomat who spent half his career functioning under a coherent national security strategy, and half without one. Our primacy in 1945 was unchallenged, as it was in 1992. In the two decades since, we have stumbled, and not because of one president or one party.

Our main problem is not the complexity of the issues we face, though they are many and serious. Neither is it the strength of those wishing to displace us, though they have significant power. The main cause is our failure to establish strategic priorities and ensure that we have the diplomatic, economic, and military capability to implement them.

Until we set priorities, we are driven by tactics, which means by headlines, pressure groups, conflicting demands, and partisan considerations, instead of by national interests. Without defined priorities, we cannot say to ourselves, or others, that we have a strategy. Without a strategy our allies and partners deal cautiously with us, uncertain of what we will do. Our adversaries are suspicious and quick to oppose, not knowing what our intentions are.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Mar 2015 05:34

http://www.theolympian.com/2015/03/18/3 ... itary.html

In a first, the Indian army last week sent a three-star general to Joint Base Lewis-McChord on a trip that could lead to increasing partnerships between the South Asian nation and military units in Washington State.

Lt. Gen. P.R. Kumar, the Indian army’s operations director, spent three days at JBLM meeting with senior Army offiicials and observing military exercises. His visit followed President Barack Obama’s January trip to India, in which Obama observed a national military parade and pledged to collaborate with India on several environmental and economic initiatives.

Lt. Gen. Stephen Lanza, the senior officer at JBLM, recently told The News Tribune that the Army would like to invite its counterparts in India to participate in domestic military exercises, such as the ones that occur at the Yakima Training Center.

JBLM Army units have collaborated with forces from Japan and South Korea at joint exercises in Yakima and in Southern California. JBLM last year sent infantry units to Indonesia, Malaysia and Japan for joint military exercises.

“As we’re engaging with these different countries, we’re helping build a professional military. Building that professional military contributes to good governance, which leads to stability,” Lanza said.

Normally, India sends a delagation to Army Pacific headquarters in Hawaii to plan joint exercises. This year, Army Pacific Commander Gen. Vincent Brooks chose to set the meeting in the South Sound to underscore JBLM’s renewed responsibilities overseeing West Coast Army units that regularly partner with Asian allies.

“This is very, very significant that we’re doing it here,” Lanza said.

The Army did not invite civilian media to cover Indian military leaders on their visit. JBLM this week released its own news stories documenting the trip.

Read more here: http://www.theolympian.com/2015/03/18/3 ... rylink=cpy

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 19 Mar 2015 06:07

Amber G. wrote:***Any way, this will be my last post here on this.

I hope not, you bring in fascinating insights into the topic

Amber G. wrote:I already see there is no point to "debate" when people start name calling

To be fair, you are into name calling and ad hominems as much as the next person. For instance, merely pointing out a reasonable comment by a fellow poster implies "worship" in your opinion.

Amber G. wrote:If I may advise, please take a break - educate yourself with facts and then join back in fact-based discussions with a sole focus on issues

There goes the neighbourhood. You simply cannot resist from stooping to personal insults and ad hominem do you? I wonder how such comments fit in "fact-based" discussions. Of course they are only facts if they agree with your perceptions don't they?

Kashi · Post by **Kashi** » 19 Mar 2015 06:08

ramana wrote:Folks we now know where the posters stand and let it rest.

No one is going to convince any others.

The thread is in downward spiral.

So no more replies to each other.
Thanks to all for making positions clear.

ramana

Apologies, sir I saw your response after my reply, which will be my last on the subject.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Mar 2015 11:59

Been saying it for years. Clinton is a PRC rent-boy and now the CFoundation is receiving moolah from a PRC entity.

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 4&cid=1101
Clinton Foundation received US$2m from firm with ties to Beijing
Staff Reporter 2015-03-19

2.Chinagate:

The discovery that a Chinese conglomerate owned by a delegate to the country's parliament has been contributing generously to the Clinton Foundation has raised questions about the political influence China might have on former US secretary of state and first lady Hillary Clinton if she is successful in her bid to become the next president of the United States.

In a report earlier this week, CBS revealed that Rilin Enterprises, a private Chinese construction and trade conglomerate and run by billionaire Wang Wenliang, an delegate of China's National People's Congress, had pledged US$2 million in 2013 to the Clinton Foundation, a non-profit organization run by former Bill and Hillary Clinton, and their daughter Chelsea.

Founded in 2001, the Clinton Foundation has invested millions every year into fighting HIV/AIDS and to the empowerment of women. According to the CBS investigation, however, the NGO has also raised at least US$42 million from foreign governments and at least US$170 million from foreign entities and individuals.

Apart from the 2013 donation, public records show that Rilin has spent US$1.4 million since 2012 lobbying the US Congress and State Department. The company is also one of the contractors that built the Chinese embassy in the US, which demonstrates just how close the conglomerate is to the Chinese government, says US-China relationship expert Jim Mann.

As Mann told CBS, the embassy contract proves that Rilin is "as close to not just the Chinese government and as close to the Ministry of State Security as they could possibly be."

The Clinton Foundation is exempt from American laws prohibiting foreign interests from investing in US elections because it is technically a charity, though analysts believe the organization is a unique position because of its name and the enormous political clout wielded by its founders. Mann was quoted by CBS as saying that it is undoubted that the Clinton Foundation has political influence because it is backed by prominent US politicians, which is precisely why people donate to it.

Hillary Clinton defended the foreign donations to her foundation last week, saying, "I think that to people who want to support the foundation, [they] know full well what it is we stand for and what we're working on."

The Clinton Foundation also released a statement noting that should Clinton run for president, ""we will continue to ensure the Foundation's policies and practices regarding support from international partners are appropriate, just as we did when she served as Secretary of State."

Rilin has also spoken out about its 2013 donation, releasing a statement noting that the Clinton Foundation is just one of many organizations to have received a donation from company chairman Wang, who has "a long history of generous philanthropic giving to institutions of higher education and organizations that work on and promote global relations."

Yang Hengjun, a former senior fellow of the Washington-based think tank Atlantic Council, says it is "understandable" that some of China's most powerful companies would make legal donations in foreign countries. Such donatons are almost always linked to their personal interests, and may even influence the foreign government's policies on China, he said, adding however that the CBS report could end up having a negative impact on Clinton's presidential campaign.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liu_Chaoying

Further reading:
1.Year of the Rat --- How Bill Clinton Compromised U.S. Security for Chinese Cash by Edward Timperlake and William C. Triplett, II
http://www.haciendapub.com/medicalsenti ... erlake-and

http://gopcapitalist.tripod.com/clinton-scandals.html
2.Chinagate:
Attempts were made by Communist China to funnel money to the Clinton campaign and influence elections in 1996. Charlie Trie, one of Bills trusted DNC fundraisers, attempted to funnel this money. When faced with indictment he fled to China for refuge. Another money funneler for the communists and Clinton campaign, Johnny Chung, is now in jail. The funds came from divisions of the Chinese army, one of which had been caught only months earlier while attempting to smuggle AK-47's to LA street gangs. This is the government of RED CHINA - definitely a serious matter. If any scandals do catch up with him, which probably will happen, this is by far the worst. Amidst the sex scandals another DNC fundraiser scandal, Johnny Chung, openly admitted to knowingly taking funds from the Chinese government. Chung also testified that the DNC knew the source of this money was communist China. They accepted it anyway. The money is said to have been funneled through Chinese government official Liu Chao-ying then Chung and then to the DNC. Even more revealing was that Liu Chao-ying, daughter of Liu Hauqing (recent head of the Chinese military and top official of the Chinese communist party) and a Peoples Liberation Army and Chinese space agency official, attended a DNC fundraiser. Here she was photographed with Clinton. Chung also visited the White House over 45 times. Chung took several thousand dollars from commies and contributed them to a partisan candidate for President of the United States and leader of the free world. Chung was only a powerful campaign contributer/supporter with ties to the DNC and White House. Johnny Chung testified under oath to Congress on his admitted relations with the Chinese Commies and the ties to the President. Ironically Chung is one of a very small number of people who had greater White House access than Monica Lewinsky! Chung is said to have made over 50 visits compared to Monica's 39! Even better, only a week later Charlie Trie entered a guilty plea for his fundraising crimes and agreed to talk with investigators! Who next? Well it happened to be John Huang! Huang, another Clinton cronie, pled guilty to funneling Chinese funds less than a week after Trie! Well, at least we know the commies endorse Bill Clinton for president.

More on the Chinese general's daughter,Liu,Bill's "frequent visitor"!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liu_Chaoying

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 19 Mar 2015 16:14

50 vs. 39. Presumably b4 Monica L?

That oughta teach him! Chinese wimmen keep mouth shut except when (never mind)

But isn't the author there casting nasty aspersions with that comparison? How many times did Donna Shalala, Hazel O'Leary and Madeline Albright visit the Oval Office with the door shut, hain? Those were GOTUS employees just like Monica L, whereas Chung was at most a Party Fan (Democratic? CPC? Same thing?)

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 19 Mar 2015 16:18

http://eprahaar.in/us-holds-1st-global- ... it-rights/
US holds 1st global conference on ‘Defending Dalit Rights’

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Mar 2015 18:21

"Oh Bloodgy 'ell!" Is O'Bomber making the Dalits a minority in the list of US subjects? What about his own community of Black Afro-Americans? What about their rights? Slippers of for him!

member_22733 · Post by **member_22733** » 19 Mar 2015 18:30

I just got invited to this conference, its being held in the prestigious Ferguson Hall of Justice, across from the Trail of Tears Victory monument.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 19 Mar 2015 18:50

http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/letterfromwashington/bin-ladens-document-haul-holds-many-keys-for-india/

It is a truth well established that Pakistan is a major thorn in Indo-US relations. Both sides try to live with it but sometimes it burrows deep and draws blood. This is one of those times.
It turns out the Obama Administration has been sitting on a treasure trove of intelligence information hauled from Osama bin Laden’s digs in Pakistan which it apparently didn’t fully exploit because it would have interfered with the narrative of “success” for Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign. The narrative: Osama was dead, al-Qaeda was a spent force, the anti-terrorism campaign was ending and America was winning. The truth was anything but.
The White House apparently blocked access to the rich haul of material to its own intelligence agencies after a quick “scrub” of the documents for actionable intelligence. Access was denied for almost a year until a bureaucratic battle allowed the Defence Intelligence Agency a “read-only” access. Then the White House released 17 handpicked documents for analysis which supported the story of success while the bulk of the information remained out of reach.
This beats House of Cards and Homeland hollow but then reality is stranger than fiction. These stunning disclosures were made in a recent piece on the opinion pages of The Wall Street Journal—admittedly no friend of the administration. However, there is far too much credible reporting in the column to dismiss it as a right-wing hatchet job.
But there was, perhaps, another equally important reason behind the hands-off order by the White House. It is called Pakistan. If bin Laden’s many hard drives, thumb drives and DVDs were allowed to circulate among various US agencies, it would have been impossible to control the narrative on Pakistan. The ISI’s role in keeping bin Laden safe in his “humble abode” would become impossible to ignore in public. Leaks would have inevitably followed, causing ripples among allies and strategic partners alike.
India would have raged and the Obama Administration’s emphasis on the trade and business side of things, which helps to sometimes obscure the security differences, would dilute. Access to bin Laden’s library would have corroborated what Indian intelligence had been telling the American side —that the ISI was in regular touch with bin Laden.

Now the case has been made in a few new bin Laden documents submitted earlier this month as evidence in a trial of a Pakistani in New York. They nail the Pakistani establishment, the Brothers Sharif, two former ISI chiefs and the large web of lies that has become a natural way of being for our western neighbour. Not that anyone in India would be surprised but can the latest evidence bend the arc of the American mind away from constant rationalisations about Pakistan?

A letter submitted to the Brooklyn court was by Atiyah Abd al Rahman, described as the general manager of al Qaeda. The letter talked of Shahbaz Sharif wanting to cut a deal at “any price” with the Pakistani Taliban with al-Qaeda’s blessings to spare Punjab from terrorist attacks. By implication, it was OK to attack India, the US and other parts of Pakistan. We know that Nawaz Sharif benefitted greatly in the last election from his brother’s outreach when his party was spared while the terrorists targeted PPP candidates mercilessly.
The letter to bin Laden, dated July 2010, also talks of a “Shuja Shah” —a possible reference to Ahmad Shuja Pasha who headed the ISI at the time. “Shuja Shah” wanted to talk to al-Qaeda and “we gave them the same message, nothing more.”
The message was that al-Qaeda and Pakistani Taliban have planned “earth-shaking operations in Pakistan” but had shelved them “to calm things down” because America remained the main enemy. Here was ISI, the beneficiary of Washington’s billions, saving its skin and endangering Americans in a deal with the terrorists. The main messenger for the back-andforth between Abbottabad and ISI was Fazlur Rehman Khalil, the head of Harkat ul-Mujaheddin, a man close to both the ISI and bin Laden. So chummy were they all that former ISI chief, Hamid Gul, practically a jihadist himself, also attended a meeting.
ISI’s repeated message to al-Qaeda: bear with us while we try to convince the Americans to negotiate with you just as we are. In turn, the ISI helped the terrorists stay safe from American intercepts. These were not rogue ISI elements but the core itself.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 19 Mar 2015 19:51

How America Was Misled on al Qaeda’s Demise

arshyam · Post by **arshyam** » 19 Mar 2015 20:05

A_Gupta wrote:http://eprahaar.in/us-holds-1st-global- ... it-rights/
US holds 1st global conference on ‘Defending Dalit Rights’

Posting the article for the record, for it's a friendly neighbourhood conference, full of benevolence and non-interference, no doubt. Nothing we should complain about. In fact, I can't wait to hear Obama's pronouncement on this to us, have we invited him to attend Aug 15 celebrations yet?

The first global conference on Dalit rights will be held here to increase awareness about injustices faced by nearly 260 million people across the globe including in India due to caste-based discrimination.

The three-day conference on ‘Defending Dalit Rights’ entitled ‘Establishing Justice, Dignity, Equality and Humanity’ is being organised by the International Commission for Dalit Rights (ICDR) and Global Conference Organizing Committee (GCOC) from today at Trinity Washington University.

At the conclusion of the conference, GCOC will announce its strategy and the Declaration of Dalit Rights during a human chain demonstration in front of the White House, a statement has said.

The demonstration will implore US President Barack Obama and Congress members to support Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton’s House Resolution that calls for Congress to condemn discrimination against Dalit people.

“The purpose of the Global Conference is to increase awareness of the injustices visited upon an estimated 260 million caste-affected individuals worldwide, who face caste-based discrimination, exclusion, inequality, and violence,” ICDR statement has said.

While caste-based discrimination is widely practised in South Asian nations like India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, it can also be found in other parts of the world including Japan, Yemen, Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal and Somalia, it said.

President of ICDR, D B Sagar Bishwakarma has said they are expecting senior US Government officers, Congressional and Civil Rights leaders, along with Dalit-rights leaders and dignitaries from South Asia, Europe, Japan, and other parts of world to attend the conference.

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 19 Mar 2015 20:08

LokeshC wrote:I just got invited to this conference, its being held in the prestigious Ferguson Hall of Justice, across from the Trail of Tears Victory monument.

pay a vijjit if you can...

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 19 Mar 2015 22:17

While caste-based discrimination is widely practised in South Asian nations like India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, it can also be found in other parts of the world including Japan, Yemen, Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal and Somalia, it said.

And when are Indians hosting human rights meet of prestige about African Americans, Aboriginals, Roma of Europe, natives, and so on. Our own leftist space is completely inactive with elbow room here and there only for self loathing.

Few days back I was thinking about how well would an Australian like to understand or even hear about Indian cultures and nuances, and it occurred to me that chance of that would be less than finding heaven in the Australian Outback region!

The only ones who would actually try to understand Hindu culture would be Aboriginals in Australia.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 21 Mar 2015 16:25

http://bdnews24.com/bangladesh/2015/03/ ... he-pacific

US Congresswoman Grace Meng will sit at the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific.

Her office announced that she has won a seat at the panel, which oversees US foreign policy towards all Asian countries, including India, Bangladesh and Pakistan.
...
Democrat member, Meng represents New York’s Queens Borough, which has a large population of Bangladeshi and Chinese descent.

She will continue to also sit on the Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa and serve as a member of the House Small Business Committee.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 21 Mar 2015 23:18

India, US ink critical 'nuke-tracking' pact

...
The agreed arrangements, signed by India's department of atomic energy and America's department of energy, eliminate the final policy hurdle holding back the implementation of the India-US nuclear deal.
..
But senior officials familiar with the final agreed text have told The Telegraph that Delhi will share data on its use of the American reactors without actually allowing US officials to inspect Indian nuclear complexes.

The new agreement is in keeping with a practice that India and the US followed with the Tarapur reactors that New Delhi had bought from American firms Bechtel and GE in the 1960s before India first tested nuclear weapons in 1974, the officials said.

Then, as now, US law required the country's department of energy to track the use of nuclear material exported to any country that was not a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty.
....
...
The Indian negotiators have quietly sidestepped a second potential hurdle too - the absence of a nuclear deal with Japan, whose firm Toshiba is the parent company of the American Westinghouse.

"The absence of civil nuclear cooperation with Japan is currently not an obstacle for cooperation with other partners," Akbaruddin said in response to a question today.

India and the US, officials confirmed, have convinced Japan to insulate India-US nuclear trade from its domestic laws by arguing that while Toshiba is Japanese, its subsidiary Westinghouse remains listed as an American company.

"Once the Japanese realised the India-US complexities had been sorted out, it became easier to convince them," an Indian official aware of the back-channel talks with Japan said.
...
...

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 22 Mar 2015 03:30

vishvak wrote:
While caste-based discrimination is widely practised in South Asian nations like India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, it can also be found in other parts of the world including Japan, Yemen, Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal and Somalia, it said.
And when are Indians hosting human rights meet of prestige about African Americans, Aboriginals, Roma of Europe, natives, and so on. Our own leftist space is completely inactive with elbow room here and there only for self loathing.The only ones who would actually try to understand Hindu culture would be Aboriginals in Australia.

There few issues to be discussed. Compensation for slavery and market rate land price to American Indians and Aborigines. reservation in schools,private enterprises, lagislative, judicial institutions etc.
Then comes the case of payment with interest for colonialism and genocide using all possible methods of cruelty. Above all, penalty to be paid for mental anguish caused by all these inhuman activities.

arun · Post by **arun** » 22 Mar 2015 07:44

"Despite the growing bonhomie with the United States, India suffered by far the highest number of L-1B visa denials between 2012 and 2014" :

At 56%, Indians record highest US work visa rejection: Report

arun · Post by **arun** » 22 Mar 2015 07:52

John Yoo (Heller Professor of Law at the University of California at Berkeley and former Deputy Assistant U.S. Attorney General) and Riddhi Dasgupta (“international law expert and author of International Interplay”) writing in Fortune call for a “Concert of Asia” with Indian and US participation:

How the U.S. can strengthen economic and military ties with India

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 22 Mar 2015 18:45

https://in.newshub.org/india-opposes-ne ... 48857.html

Geneva, Mar 22: India and other members of the G-33 grouping have opposed a new US proposal for a permanent solution to the factious issue of food stockholding for food security in developing countries at the second informal meeting at the WTO this year.

India said the US proposal may result in an outcome where countries are advised as to what kind of food security programmes they should adopt, which is not part of the existing mandate.

In trying to address the food security issue vis-a- vis the proposal, one of the outcomes could be a decision on public stockholding whereas the mandate is the other way round, India argued.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 22 Mar 2015 20:28

Jhujar wrote:
vishvak wrote:<SNIP>
And when are Indians hosting human rights meet of prestige about African Americans, Aboriginals, Roma of Europe, natives, and so on. Our own leftist space is completely inactive with elbow room here and there only for self loathing.The only ones who would actually try to understand Hindu culture would be Aboriginals in Australia.
There few issues to be discussed. Compensation for slavery and market rate land price to American Indians and Aborigines. reservation in schools,private enterprises, lagislative, judicial institutions etc.
Then comes the case of payment with interest for colonialism and genocide using all possible methods of cruelty. Above all, penalty to be paid for mental anguish caused by all these inhuman activities.

Sir, we need to to have Samvaad programs (the way US consulate has outreach programs in India) with ALL minorities and disadvantaged groups in USA. Just as we need to have Samvaad programs in Israel for all Jews ethnically cleansed from surrounding Arab countries after 1971 war. Leftists, bleeding-hearts and humanitarians will surely support such initiatives totally and by all means.