Temujin Khaghan Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/4300-hindu-and-sikh-refugees-from-pakistan-and-afghanistan-get-citizenship-in-india/article7316028.ece?utm_source=Vuuklemail&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Newsletter --- The NDA government said on Sunday it had granted citizenship to nearly 4,300 Hindu and Sikh refugees from Pakistan and Afghanistan in its one year of being in power, nearly four times the number granted to such persons in the preceding five years under UPA-II. According to officials in the government, this rapid increase in granting citizenships is in keeping with the BJP’s stated aim of positioning India as a ‘natural home’ for Hindus fleeing persecution anywhere in the world, a policy similar to Israel’s Law of Return that grants only Jews the right to return and settle there. This policy was outlined in the BJP’s election manifesto for the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. A safe haven: » Earlier, the Centre had decided to grant citizenship to Hindu immigrants from Bangladesh. » There are about 400 Pakistani Hindu refugee settlements in cities across Rajasthan. » Since May 2014, nearly 19,000 refugees in M.P. have got long-term visas. 11,000 such visas were given in Rajasthan and 4,000 in Gujarat. The Hindu had, in an exclusive report on May 10, said the BJP government would soon submit to the Supreme Court a plan to grant citizenship to thousands of Hindu refugees from Bangladesh who had crossed over into India after 1971. This process would be simultaneous with the BJP’s continued efforts to rid India of ‘infiltrators’, a veiled reference to Muslims who crossed over from Bangladesh. Officials say there are about two lakh Hindu and Sikh refugees from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan living in India. During the entire tenure of UPA-II, they said the total number of citizenships granted to such persons was only 1,023. Ever since the Modi government assumed charge in May 2014, nearly 19,000 refugees have been given long-term visas in Madhya Pradesh, around 11,000 in Rajasthan and 4,000 in Gujarat, official sources said. In April, the Home Ministry had rolled out an online system for Long Term Visa applications and for their processing by various agencies. The decision was taken to address the difficulty being faced by Hindu and Sikh minorities of Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan who had come with the intention of settling permanently in India. There are 400 Pakistani Hindu refugee settlements in cities such as Jodhpur, Jaisalmer, Bikaner and Jaipur. Hindu refugees from Bangladesh mostly live in West Bengal and the northeastern States.
mishra Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 Well, These guys shouldn't be treated as migrant. They just couldn't make it to India at the time of partition. Border should have remained open for them long after partition.
zen Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 Well' date=' These guys shouldn't be treated as migrant. They just couldn't make it to India at the time of partition. Border should have remained open for them long after partition.[/quote'] +1
Gollum Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 Lovely to hear. In spite of it's share of faults BJP is miles ahead of any other party in India.
Texan Posted June 15, 2015 Posted June 15, 2015 This article seems to refute the news in OP: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/rti-reply-punches-holes-in-home-ministry-claims-of-high-number-of-indian-citizenship-granted-to-pak-afghan-hindus/ (unless a large number of migrants were granted citizenship in the last couple of months)
moniker Posted June 16, 2015 Posted June 16, 2015 Don't mind refugees already in India for quite a while being offered citizenship, but hope this doesn't trigger an influx of more refugees from crossing the border. An overpopulated country ridden with poverty can't afford to take in more people.
Shivaji bhonsle Posted June 16, 2015 Posted June 16, 2015 Don't mind refugees already in India for quite a while being offered citizenship' date=' but hope this doesn't trigger an influx of more refugees from crossing the border. An overpopulated country ridden with poverty can't afford to take in more people.[/quote'] would you rather allow them to die in Pakistan?
moniker Posted June 16, 2015 Posted June 16, 2015 would you rather allow them to die in Pakistan? Even Shias, Ahmedis etc die in Pakistan. If the idea is to save human life, take them all in. Saying that you'll only save hindu lives and let everyone else die sounds despicable.
Shivaji bhonsle Posted June 16, 2015 Posted June 16, 2015 Even Shias' date=' Ahmedis etc die in Pakistan. If the idea is to save human life, take them all in. Saying that you'll only save hindu lives and let everyone else die sounds despicable.[/quote'] So, Shias and Ahmedis are not Muslims? Didn't they got a country for Muslims carved out of India? If you are going to take Muslims, why do they have a separate Muslim country? Anyway, Shias and Ahmedis will not come to India and seek refuge in the first place.
moniker Posted June 16, 2015 Posted June 16, 2015 So, Shias and Ahmedis are not Muslims? Didn't they got a country for Muslims carved out of India? If you are going to take Muslims, why do they have a separate Muslim country? Anyway, Shias and Ahmedis will not come to India and seek refuge in the first place. At the risk of asking a personal question and offending you, let me ask this - will you be willing to accommodate a person driven out of his place in your house, who will be sharing your resources along with other members of a large family just because he practises your religion? Yes, his life may be in danger if he goes back to where he came from, so you might provide asylum for a couple of days out of compassion, but wouldn't you ask him to eventually leave and make his own arrangements? My analogy might be dumb, but I cannot get myself to share my country's resources with someone from another country when I know that there are people in my country struggling to make ends meet.
Shivaji bhonsle Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 At the risk of asking a personal question and offending you, let me ask this - will you be willing to accommodate a person driven out of his place in your house, who will be sharing your resources along with other members of a large family just because he practises your religion? Yes, his life may be in danger if he goes back to where he came from, so you might provide asylum for a couple of days out of compassion, but wouldn't you ask him to eventually leave and make his own arrangements? My analogy might be dumb, but I cannot get myself to share my country's resources with someone from another country when I know that there are people in my country struggling to make ends meet. yaar, you have millions of Bangladeshis living in India illegally leeching out of our economy. These are few thousand people who came to India to save their lives.. We gave asylum to Dalai lama and his followers...who had no connection with India.. Where do you think these Hindus should go? China? Ofcourse they will come to India and we should help these people. Im involved in charity for few years now. given a chance, I'll personally adopt a family and provide them with basic necessities.
zen Posted June 17, 2015 Posted June 17, 2015 Im involved in charity for few years now. given a chance' date=' I'll personally adopt a family and provide them with basic necessities.[/quote'] :nice:
mishra Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 @Moniker, There are economic migrants, like the one from Bangladesh, We dont need to support them. There are refugees, like Hindus/Sikhs from Pakistan who in all probability will be finished in coming years if they dont get help, We have moral obligation towards them
gs Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 @Moniker, There are economic migrants, like the one from Bangladesh, We dont need to support them. There are refugees, like Hindus/Sikhs from Pakistan who in all probability will be finished in coming years if they dont get help, We have moral obligation towards them :hatsoff:
moniker Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 @Moniker, There are economic migrants, like the one from Bangladesh, We dont need to support them. There are refugees, like Hindus/Sikhs from Pakistan who in all probability will be finished in coming years if they dont get help, We have moral obligation towards them Of course, people who are here seeking better pastures like the Bangladeshi immigrants should be thrown out. But it'd be cruel and inhumane to ask refugees who are already settled here to leave the country so I don't mind granting them citizenship. But we can't open our borders and invite more people. They might be running away from persecution, yes, but millions are facing poverty in our own country and we should make sure to alleviate their situation before taking a decision to share our country's already depleted resources with citizens of other countries. It'd amount to betrayal of our own countrymen.
randomGuy Posted June 20, 2015 Posted June 20, 2015 At the risk of asking a personal question and offending you, let me ask this - will you be willing to accommodate a person driven out of his place in your house, who will be sharing your resources along with other members of a large family just because he practises your religion? Yes, his life may be in danger if he goes back to where he came from, so you might provide asylum for a couple of days out of compassion, but wouldn't you ask him to eventually leave and make his own arrangements? My analogy might be dumb,but I cannot get myself to share my country's resources with someone from another country when I know that there are people in my country struggling to make ends meet. Yes the analogy is retarded. And also, its not like the tax payers' money will be feeding them. They will earn their livelihood by doing productive work.
Yoda-esque Posted June 20, 2015 Posted June 20, 2015 At the risk of asking a personal question and offending you, let me ask this - will you be willing to accommodate a person driven out of his place in your house, who will be sharing your resources along with other members of a large family just because he practises your religion? Yes, his life may be in danger if he goes back to where he came from, so you might provide asylum for a couple of days out of compassion, but wouldn't you ask him to eventually leave and make his own arrangements? My analogy might be dumb, but I cannot get myself to share my country's resources with someone from another country when I know that there are people in my country struggling to make ends meet. Would you try and protect an endangered species? Probably yes...
Recommended Posts