India-Canada, Mexico and South America: News and Discussion

R_Kumar · Post by **R_Kumar** » 22 May 2010 05:17

There should be a strong action. But we all know what is going to happen.
Shameless Congress helped many anti India groups to get Modi's U.S visa denied. He is a democratically elected CM of a state but no one in the authority spoke against it.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 22 May 2010 05:21

But isn't that the next step?

The Canadian letter told Mr. Pandher that he was being denied a visa "because there is reason to believe you are a member of the inadmissible class of persons" involved in war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Doesn't MMS have command responsibility for the BSF?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 May 2010 08:21

as PM > HM he is ultimately responsible though president is nominally commander in chief and marshal kutuzov of the forces.

at the very least the diplomat who signed off on this has to be declared persona-non-grata and asked to vacate the country within 48 hrs AND a official apology from the canadian embassy.

not even in there remotest wet dreams canada would dare to do this in beijing - they very well know the big panda is able and WILLING to inflict pain in return,

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 22 May 2010 08:25

Singha wrote:as PM > HM he is ultimately responsible though president is nominally commander in chief and marshal kutuzov of the forces.

at the very least the diplomat who signed off on this has to be declared persona-non-grata and asked to vacate the country within 48 hrs AND a official apology from the canadian embassy.

not even in there remotest wet dreams canada would dare to do this in beijing - they very well know the big panda is able and WILLING to inflict pain in return,

This was an incident in 2005 and not sure if the same person is there now.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 May 2010 10:02

can you elaborate ?

Dileep · Post by **Dileep** » 22 May 2010 11:21

We should deny visas to any RCMP officers in retaliation.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 22 May 2010 12:48

Dileep wrote:We should deny visas to any RCMP officers in retaliation.

Yes, I agree.

There have been rumors of violent and unethical behavior of the mounties with caribou in the canadian tundra.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 22 May 2010 12:55

And now for some furious back pedaling.

http://www.indiapress.org/gen/news.php/ ... _of_India/

We have great respect for India's armed forces: Canada
May 22, 2010, 10.49am IST

NEW DELHI: In an attempt to control damage caused by stinging remarks by one of its diplomats against BSF, Canada today said it has "great respect" for India's armed forces and that it was "reviewing the situation" that has risen.

Canada's foreign ministry spokesperson Catherine Loubier said in an e-mail statement that "vibrant people-to-people" connections are one of the "greatest strengths" of India-Canada relations which continue to be strengthened.

"I would like to stress that Canada has the highest regard for India's democratic institutions and processes. Canada has great respect for India's armed forces and related institutions," she said in the statement.

The statement came in the wake of revelation of remarks of a First Secretary of the Canadian High Commission here that BSF was a "notoriously violent" force which indulged in "systematic attack" and "systematic torture" of suspected criminals. The diplomat had made the comments while rejecting the visa application of a retired BSF constable.

lsunil · Post by **lsunil** » 22 May 2010 14:12

The client state is growing b@lls and it's all hot air. They need to be put in there place.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 25 May 2010 04:16

The success of Kites should be posted in this thread.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 26 May 2010 01:06

Jamaica drug raid toll reaches 27

On Tuesday, the third consecutive day of unrest, thousands of heavily-armed police and soldiers continued their assault into the capital's most violent slums, battling masked gunmen loyal to Mr Coke. Gangs from slums just outside the capital also joined the fight, erecting barricades on roadways and shooting at troops, the AP news agency reported.

Mr Coke is said to lead a gang called the Shower Posse - owing to the volume of bullets used in shootings - and operate an international smuggling network.
The gang has also been blamed for numerous murders in Jamaica and the US.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 26 May 2010 04:10

Trinidad snap election unseats PM Patrick Manning

Former Attorney General Kamla Persad-Bissessar may now become Trinidad and Tobago's first female prime minister.

Indian-origin granny is PM of Trinidad

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 26 May 2010 14:42

At least 4 Army officers denied visa to Canada in last 2 years because they were involved in "violent activities": NDTV

IB official denied visa to Canada: NDTV

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 26 May 2010 16:20

Canadian armed forces are actively involved in ISAF and operations in Afghanistan. There should be reasons to believe that all Canadian security personnel are involved in "systematic torture" and "war crimes" against Talebans and other Afghan civilians. They should similarly be denied visas. We can do this while maintaining the highest possible regards for the supposed democratic institutions of Canada and its armed forces.

abhischekcc · Post by **abhischekcc** » 26 May 2010 17:14

chetak wrote:
Dileep wrote:We should deny visas to any RCMP officers in retaliation.

Yes, I agree.

There have been rumors of violent and unethical behavior of the mounties with caribou in the canadian tundra.

Why stop at RCMP? All Canadians can be banned on the suspicion of being drug runners. canada is the biggest supplier of drugs to the US, and is a key player in the global criminal economy.

Jaspreet · Post by **Jaspreet** » 26 May 2010 17:34

and is a key player in the global criminal economy

Can you substantiate this with facts? Not opinions.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 26 May 2010 17:41

if an excuse is what we want, support to khalistani terror groups and LTTE is reason enough to throw out any canadian govt official.

Jaspreet · Post by **Jaspreet** » 26 May 2010 17:50

if an excuse is what we want, support to khalistani terror groups and LTTE is reason enough to throw out any canadian govt official.

I cannot speak on what GC does in secret, i.e., whether govt. agency has sympathy for and provides support to terrorists, but as far as public opinion goes, I can tell you that people loathe them with a passion.

Ujjal Dosanjh in one of his interviews on Kanishka had said that at that time (1980s) Canada had no intelligence operatives within the Indian community. He cited this as one of the reasons and not GC's support to terrorists.

At this time, there are calls within Canada to cooperate more with India for trade etc. By knee-jerk reactions such as what are being espoused in this forum, this relationship mending gets further delayed. What is needed a well-thought out response and not revenge.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 26 May 2010 17:58

my impressions are primarily from the kanishka investigation and trial, which I believe was conducted in a very lax manner without any real intention to punish the perpetrators. would be glad to be corrected.

however, not reacting to this nonsense in order to conserve relations etc would be a mistake. linking it with larger Indo-Canadian relation is also self defeating. if this incident is due to one or a handful of consular officials, the reaction should also be limited to that set but is has to be strong enough to send a message.
otherwise it sets a very bad precedence which would continue to be emulated by all and sundry.

what's worse, not reacting means, de facto, we are admitting to these charges.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 26 May 2010 18:43

WTF??

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/canada-embas ... ml?from=tn

Canada embassy insults India again
CNN-IBN
Posted on May 26, 2010 at 17:29 | Updated May 26, 2010 at 18:03
New Delhi: The Canadian High Commission surely needs a lesson in diplomacy. It first called the Border Security Force (BSF) a "notoriously violent force" and now it turns out it claimed the Intelligence Bureau is involved in terrorism.

CNN-IBN learns the High Commission in New Delhi rejected the application of a retired Intelligence Bureau (IB) officer, who had applied for a temporary resident visa to visit his son who is settled in Canada.

The High Commission told the former officer, who held the rank of deputy director, in March 2010 that the IB is involved in terrorism and also snoops around.

The Union Home Ministry, which oversees the IB, has lodged a strong protest and called the High Commission’s comments discriminatory. The matter is now with the External Affairs Ministry. "Immigration will get back to you, as it falls under their responsibilities," said a spokesperson for the Canadian foreign minister when asked to comment on the High Commission's comments.

CNN-IBN learns that Canadian High Commission also rejected the visa applications of retired Army officer Lt. General A S Bahiya and his wife because he had served in Jammu and Kashmir.

Earlier, in a diplomatic blunder, the High Commission called the BSF a "notoriously violent force" that engaged in "systematic torture".

The High Commission, while denying visa to Fateh Singh Pandher, a retired constable of BSF, told him that his visa application was "inadmissible" as he had served in a force that engaged in "systematic attacks on civilians".

Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao on May 26 reacted sharply to the High Commission’s comments on the BSF and said India takes the matter “very seriously”.

“The matter was taken up immediately with the Canadian high commission. We take this matter very seriously. We have expressed concern and we continue to take this seriously,” Rao had said.

krithivas · Post by **krithivas** » 26 May 2010 20:08

The only language these Western minions understand is the language of the brute. Deny the Canadian thugs their visa, and harass them on entry, and these midgets will take up. India must slap back, and slap back hard. One such action is more valuable than millions of Manmohana-mumblings or Nirupama-musings ....

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 26 May 2010 20:57

And Pakis like Tahawwur Hussain Rana get citizenship.

I mean who are they trying to impress by this grandstanding? Deny visa to every Indian, without any reason...... okay fine it is their sovereign right..... but this sh!t they have pulled is so dumb it makes Canada look like a banana republic.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 26 May 2010 21:04

There might be a Khalistani influenced officer in the canadian embassy or a khalistani himself there.

There are plenty of them there, in the UK, Canada, and the US. Most of these guys freely distribute literature related to khalistan, host rallies, and try and keep the issue in the news. It serves their purpose and their accomodating governments.
1. There is a nice little asylum scam going on where alleged persecution by India is given as the grounds for asking for it.
2. The host governments, there see a vote bank, see a leverage and pressure point.
3. Eventually these groups get vocal and numerous enough to be able to have a political pressure point in their host countries.

There are indications that the Khalistani movement is on a revival mode. I have certainly seen some signs in the US.

lsunil · Post by **lsunil** » 26 May 2010 21:34

The khalistani angle is rubbish. This seems to be a policy change on the canadian part. Why would the canadians jeopardise it's relations with india by listening to the khalistani's?

They are indirectly meddling in kashmir.

Canadian or khalistani, it doesn't matter. Canada should have known better. It is a country which is responsible for systematic genocide, occuping illegal land and waging wars by invading afghanistan and iraq.

Deport criminals to that country on purpose. Pakistani does the same thing.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 26 May 2010 23:53

Canada denies visa to IB man, grants it after govt talks tough

The Canadian authorities were conveyed about the "discriminatory" attitude towards the Indian security agencies and told firmly that its nationals, working in war-ravaged Afghanistan, may also face similar problems if such discrimination did not come to an end, the sources said.

The IB officer was later given a visa after the Canadian High Commissioner took up the matter with his country, the sources added.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 27 May 2010 00:17

So now Canada has egg all over its face-bloody poor show on the part of Canada's minor officials.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 27 May 2010 01:21

"There is a nice little asylum scam going on where alleged persecution by India is given as the grounds for asking for it."

Even that would have some validity if 1) Punjab were ruled by an Idi Amin or Kim Jong type dictatorship, entirely propped up by the Indian central government 2) there was no freedom of expression, movement, employment and religion/language of Sikhs in Punjab and throughout India and 3) if Sikhs were blatantly discriminated against at all phases of Indian society, including government. Any reasonably intelligent person can see this last one would be totally false, on first appearances alone!

As another poster said, the Khalistan angle is very improbable. No, this may be more an Islamic angle, with Canada trying to do its part to woo Moslems and 'solve' the Afghanistan problem by forcing India to make concessions on Kashmir. There could also be some muscle flexing by a small country to show off how tough they are, and massage their egos by forcing India to change something or other.

Varoon Shekhar · Post by **Varoon Shekhar** » 27 May 2010 01:46

sanjaykumar wrote:So now Canada has egg all over its face-bloody poor show on the part of Canada's minor officials.

Among a vocal tribe of academics, journalists, political figures including diplomats and maverick commentators( like Ingmar Lee for example) there is a lack of honourablity and depth of character in the failure to appreciate the efforts of a non-white, non-Christian, non-aligned, hugely diverse, poor developing country to progress within the framework of a pluralist democracy. Keeping in mind also India's unfavourable geo-political location. And needless to say, an utter failure to point to some example in the world for India to emulate. They are better at being judgemental or whining.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 May 2010 02:30

http://www.hindu.com/2010/05/27/stories ... 260100.htm

Canada has denied visas to a member of the Armed Forces Tribunal, three Brigadiers, a retired Lt. General and a former official of the Intelligence Bureau on the grounds that their organisations are engaged in violence.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 May 2010 02:39

Remove visa officer, India tells Canada

The letter written by First Secretary (Immigration) Sophie Auger to retired IB official SS Sidhu described Intelligence Bureau as an agency “for espionage” and even for “engaging in terrorism”. The highly provocative letter, citing reasons for the denial of visa to Sidhu, prompted the Home Secretary to write to his counterpart in the External Affairs Ministry.

“Based on the information available to me, I am satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that you are a member of the inadmissible class of persons described in subsection 34(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which states that a permanent resident or foreign national is inadmissible on security grounds for:

(a) engaging in an act of espionage or an act of subversion against a democratic Government, institution or process as they are understood in Canada; (b) engaging in or instigating the subversion by force of any Government; (c) engaging in terrorism; (d) being a danger to the security of Canada; (e) engaging in acts of violence that would or might endanger the lives of safety of persons in Canada; (f) being a member of an organisation that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in acts referred to in paragraphs (a), (b) or (c),” stated the Canadian High Commission’s First Secretary.

“Specifically, your past membership in the Intelligence Bureau gives me reasonable grounds to believe that you are described in A 34(1)(f) coupled with A34(1)(a) of the Act. I am, therefore, refusing your application,” she added.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 May 2010 02:44

The BSF jawan case occurred last year... fellow named Eric was the First Sec then.

Indian officials told The Hindu that the Canadian letter, signed by Eric Verner, First Secretary (Immigration)

He went home and the new First Sec, Sophie, continues with the policy.
This is not the act of one official.

Eric, Sophie and brethren need to be shown the door.

Canada bars Lt-Gen over J&K 'record'

Canada insults India; denies visas to security officers

In another report, it is revealed that two brigadiers were denied visas in 2008 and another in 2009; a retired lieutenant general, RN Batra, too was refused visa in 2008 on similar grounds.

This nonsense has been going on for two years!

Canadian aspersions open a can of worms

The Foreign Office here claims that it learnt of the rejections “very recently” and took up the matter with the Canadians.

Jaspreet · Post by **Jaspreet** » 27 May 2010 05:10

Looks like only Sikhs are being denied visa.

vina · Post by **vina** » 27 May 2010 05:40

Ujjal Dosanjh in one of his interviews on Kanishka had said that at that time (1980s) Canada had no intelligence operatives within the Indian community. He cited this as one of the reasons and not GC's support to terrorists.

Right.. But there is a minor point of the RCMP "accidently" deleting recorded conversations of the perpetrators of the Kanishka bombing and therefore couldn't get a conviction. Such "accidents" actually point to a deep rooted collusion and support for anti India terrorism by Canada. Sorry. The Canadians are/were hand in glove with the entire Kanishka episode and giving aslyum and safe havens to terrorists who were active in Punjab in the 80s and who were responsbible for serious murder and carnage there.

At this time, there are calls within Canada to cooperate more with India for trade etc. By knee-jerk reactions such as what are being espoused in this forum, this relationship mending gets further delayed. What is needed a well-thought out response and not revenge.

. Canada is a DOG . I have always maintained that the only kind of relationship India should have with that is something on those lines. You dont "talk" to dogs, you kick it or wield the stick if it barks at you. If any talking needs to be done, we should talk to the US, it's master. Why talk to dog when you can talk with it's master?

For starters, India should do the following.

1) Declare Canada a state sponsor of terrorism for sheltering , abetting and failing to persecute the Khalistanis and also elements of the LTTE

2) Economic sanctions on Canada. Have an unwritten policy to make sure that NO Canadian company can do business in India. For starters, get the Income Tax, Enforcement Directorate and other guys to raid SunLife/ it's JV/associates in India. Get the word out to all the airlines as, no business with Bombardier , also get the word out to all the Metros (upcoming and current) on further rail related activity.

3) Start finger printing and putting in police reporting requirementsfor all Canadian citizens visiting India. Give a Pakistan like, city/location specific visa to them.

We really have little or no economic relations with Canada. The Indian origin population there or rather specifically disproportionate numbers of descendents of Sikhs who moved there 3 or 4 generations ago seem rather culturally isolated, dislocated, ghettoized and seem to have retreated into a very toxic extrememly intolerant and fundamentalist version (the sikh equivalent of islamic fundamentalism) and are upto little good. There is no reason to give any of those a free run on India. Actually I am amazed at the number of Sikh WOMEN who seem to be turbaned and take up forms of extreme piety in US and Canada. I have not seen a single Sikh woman turbaned in India.

All in all, basic point. Treat dogs like dogs , we will be fine. Try treating it like a human, it will act uppity.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 27 May 2010 06:11

Jaspreet wrote:Looks like only Sikhs are being denied visa.

Japreet,
Is that an appropriate conclusion?

Are they not Indians?

Jaspreet · Post by **Jaspreet** » 27 May 2010 06:31

But there is a minor point of the RCMP "accidently" deleting recorded conversations of the perpetrators of the Kanishka bombing and therefore couldn't get a conviction. Such "accidents" actually point to a deep rooted collusion and support for anti India terrorism by Canada.

I agree with your "accidental" part and therefore a non-conviction but from there to conclude that there exists a deep rooted collusion is a bit far-fetched. I don't have access to internal govt. records. Perhaps you do and can quote it here to tell us how you arrived at that conclusion.

Since the arrival of Indians hundred years ago, most of who were Sikhs (but who were called Hindus), the Canadians have hated them. A little bit of history reading will verify that. Last year a survey by MacLeans found Sikhs are the second most disliked group after Muslims. They have been hating them for the past 100 years. That GC colluded with them to down an Indian aircraft sounds to me as fantastical as a Pakistani blaming all Jews for world's ills. If you have proof, lay it down.

Canada is a DOG . I have always maintained that the only kind of relationship India should have with that is something on those lines. You dont "talk" to dogs, you kick it or wield the stick if it barks at you. If any talking needs to be done, we should talk to the US, it's master. Why talk to dog when you can talk with it's master?

These are the kind of things Canadians say about Indians whenever Indians in Canada are found to have committed a crime. I see that the words are same, only the target is different.

Actually I am amazed at the number of Sikh WOMEN who seem to be turbaned and take up forms of extreme piety in US and Canada. I have not seen a single Sikh woman turbaned in India.

So what is the intent of that statement about Sikhism here in the discussion of things Canadian? Why won't you let them practice what they want to?

BTW, if you haven't seen a Sikh turbaned woman in India then you haven't looked. As for them taking up extreme piety once in US and Canada then again your observation is flawed.
(a) You only looked for certain things and when you found them you say that there existed only those things.
(b) It is well known that when a people of any culture go to some other country they become more keen followers of their own culture. This is true of all cultures and religions. People that I know (of all religions) who visit India are horrified by the amount of skin girls are showing in India. They have a static image of the culture that existed when they left India and want to instil it in their children.

You found the women who wear turbans, but did you find the large percentage of men who don't?

The Indian origin population there or rather specifically disproportionate numbers of descendents of Sikhs who moved there 3 or 4 generations ago seem rather culturally isolated, dislocated, ghettoized and seem to have retreated into a very toxic extrememly intolerant and fundamentalist version (the sikh equivalent of islamic fundamentalism) and are upto little good.

Many of Sikhs are fundamentalized is correct. I don't know whether that's true of "disproportionate numbers of descendents of Sikhs." All of those that I know are as much Indians as the intensity of your hatred towards Canada.

Jaspreet · Post by **Jaspreet** » 27 May 2010 06:33

Is that an appropriate conclusion?

I am hypothesizing that some segments of GC are deliberately following this policy. I may be wrong, therefore, I wrote "hypothesizing."

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 27 May 2010 06:35

Canada denied visas to army officers; Govt angry

Doesn't look like only sikhs are targetted, based on the names though.

Lt Gen (retd) A S Bahia, a decorated Indian military officer who is now a member of the Armed Forces Tribunal in Chandigarh, was refused visa in May this year, contending that he had served in a "sensitive location" of Jammu and Kashmir [ Images ].
...
A retired Lt General R N Bhatia was also refused visa in 2008 on the similar grounds.

S S Sidhu, a retired IB officer, was denied visa on March 26 this year, with the Canadian High Commission saying that he belonged to the "inadmissible" category of persons.
...
...

And I agree with Ramana, they are targeting Indian institutions like the Army, BSF, CRPF etc not just individuals!

It looks like it was a BSF soldier and not a high ranking officer who was pissed off by the canadians calling BSF as a human-rights violator. Wonder why all these officers haven't raised the issue till now?

India should start retaliating by denying visa to any canadian who has served in RMCP or canadian armed forces, whether serving or retired!!

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 27 May 2010 06:40

I have to say that Sikhs are viewed more negatively than Black people and perhaps at par with natives. I really don't know why this is. Most Sikhs in Canada are hard-working, law abiding ordinary folk.

There are stereotypes built in for those who wear turbans. Oddly a more westernized appearance by Indians goes a long way to acceptance. It is ridiculous that Sikhs are victimised on so shallow grounds, but German Hutterites are not.

Jaspreet · Post by **Jaspreet** » 27 May 2010 06:45

I have to say that Sikhs are viewed more negatively than Black people and perhaps at par with natives. I really don't know why this is.

This is a different discussion and outside the scope of this thread. The point I was trying to make was that I believe that the Canadians didn't deliberately support Khalistani elements. They are horrified by the lack of justice in the Kanishka trial. I listened to a radio program after the person who supplied the bomb was convicted and was punished of five years imprisonment. Caller after caller expressed their horror at it.

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 27 May 2010 06:52

Now, Canadian mission humiliates Punjab police

The requests of additional director-general (crime) Rajan Gupta and Patiala SSP RS Khatra for a Canadian visa were turned down by the mission as they were involved in “anti-military activity” and therefore, party to human rights violations in Punjab.

Sources said police officers applying for a Canadian visa now need to fill a separate form mentioning the places where they were posted. It is learnt that the Canadian embassy has identified six districts, including those on the Indo-Pak border, where the police have come down heavily on militants to quell violence.

IPS officials feel the commission’s decision may be due to pressure from Canada-based Sikh human rights organisations, which had been taking up the cause of Punjab militants from time to time. Police officers feel this is another attempt by some organisations to run them down for their fight against militancy.