M.I.A. denied visa, endorses MasterCard

AIM and M.I.A. are forever mated in palindrome, but the news site is reporting that Her Highness of Baile Funk has been denied entry into the U.S. (thanks, tipster). Visa officials aren’t hip to terror chic by either Modi or Maya.

Speed bump courtesy of the Tamil Tigers

London rapper M.I.A. has been denied a visa to visit or work in the USA by immigration officials… Sources close to the British Sri-Lankan MC said that her lawyers are frantically trying to resolve the situation… She is hoping to get back to the USA as soon as US immigration will allow for a collaboration with producer Timbaland on her next album. [Link]

… Arulpragasam doesn’t downplay her Tiger connection, she flaunts it, it’s integral to her marketing. She did a mix album using unauthorized samples called Piracy Funds Terrorism. Her song ‘Sunshowers’ refers to suicide bombs (‘And some showers I’ll be aiming at you’), her first album bears her dad’s [LTTE] codename. Jungle guerrillas are all over the ‘Sunshowers’ video, there’s a large running tiger in her excellent concert visuals, she does a soldier step on stage and a shoutout to the P.L.O. [Link]

<

p>Arulpragasam’s blog is littered with misspellings, but her interview video clips have that sexayy, husky voice, a confidence which shows up on screen but not always on stage. Does your starcrush survive? Roll again.

THEY TRY SHUT MY DOOR!

Roger roger do you here me over!!!!
the U.S immigration wont let me in!!!!!
i was mennu work with timber startin this week, but now im doin a Akon “im locked out they wont let me in” im locked out! they wont let me in! Now Im strictly making my album outside the borders!!!! so il see you all one day, for now ill keep reportin from the sidelines
to my people who walk wiv me in the America, dont forget we got the internet! Spread the word! or come get me!!!!!! ill be in my bird flu lab in china! liming and drinkin tiger beer with my pet turtel. I love everyone for the support, now i need it more. ill stay up spread out else where. [Link]

im in india right now, hurding cows, theres some minister staying at my hotel, and his body guard has a a.k 47. me and my brother just caught him knockin on peoples doors askin for money. the police body guard that it. [Link]

The last time U.S. immigration turned back a pop star, they nailed international archvillain Cat Stevens. I sleep so much better at night knowing they foiled the plot to threaten America with music from the ’70s. Playing ‘Where’s Osama?’ pales in comparison.

Related posts: M.I.A.: Step up to blow up, The Modi protest, Modi gets B*slapped, Ain’t no junk in her trunk, Ga-ching-a-ching-a-ching, Wah, po’ Maya, I coulda been a contendah, Hello, this is M.I.A., Grind me down sugar salt, Fire Fire (updated again), Tinted Tilly, Bucky Done Underwhelmed, The transit of Venus in Mercury, New York, quieten down…, Acid-washed genes, M.I.A., fashion victim, M.I.A. now a role model?, Missing in Acton, Monsters of rock

184 thoughts on “M.I.A. denied visa, endorses MasterCard

  1. i do agree to an extent, as i wrote above, “i could kind of understand, the first time around; when she first came out, her reflecting on her own personal experience.” if sri lanka or the political situation there had more attention, like say, the isreal-palestine conflict, maybe i would feel differently. but since it’s not…i don’t know. it just troubles me that people who have never even heard of sri lanka are being shown this one-sided (and frankly, one-dimensional) perspective. also terms like “freedom fighter” and “terrorist” are two different sides of the same coin. it’s all perspective. but M.I.A. chose to use “freedom fighter,” and that shows what her perspective was when she wrote that song.

    honestly, i don’t know what M.I.A.’s deal is. personally, i don’t see her as a sympathizer. i do see her as somewhat irresponsible and uninformed.

  2. CAD

    Check you out! So all of your comments have truth to them and you have a significant amount of knowledge on Indian politics; and if AK has a different opinion or position, then apparently AK doesn’t have “any significant knowledge of Indian polity”. A bit of hubris on your part, don’t you think? ;)

    If you think it is hubris on my part, hubris it is. I stand by what I said and if you don’t have a history of living in India and imbibing the political goings there, you wouldn’t know. Just as I wouldn’t know the history of street and labor union politics in the USA.

    In Italian, there is a saying: “Ognuno ha la sua sapienza”: Transl: “Everybody has his/her own knowledge”.

    Hey, I am a desi, right-wing Hindu guy. All I know in Italian is Peeza and Parmejan. Quote me some Kural or Kabir, I can understand.

    P.S. Your understanding of international law is a bit textbook literal, but I won’t get into that. Presently, I’m not an international lawyer working for the Hague, so evidently I don’t have “any significant knowledge” of international law.

    If you don’t know freaking thing about international law, stop making freaking comments about others opinion. If you think only lawyers practicing international law in Hague should be making opinions about international law, then I guess we also should keep our mouths ‘chup’. I guess free speech only applies to lawyers.

  3. AK,

    I actually don’t at all think that I’m the only one who makes reasoned arguments. There are plenty of folks in these pages who do. I just didn’t think that you did.

    Thanks for letting me know I am a dunce since I asked you something that was relevant to the discussion.

    In any event, I do have “significant knowledge of Indian polity” and don’t excuse or condone any of the abuses that you refer to. But it doesn’t logically follow from anyone’s condemnation of those abuses that people who oppose Modi therefore have any “blood on their hands,” much less that they have more blood on their hands than anyone else. A pox on the houses of all human rights abusers, no matter what their religion or political party. But what Modi and the Parivar have done is exceptionally well-documented, and so they should be held accountable. And contrary to your suggestion, I have spent time in Gujarat talking to people who have worked on documenting what happened and others who have been affected by the violence.
    You might be right about Sonia Gandhi, or I might be (though I don’t purport to know every last detail without further research).

    Since you don’t even know this, why do you claim that you have significant knowledge of Indian politics. I have a question for you – did you grow up in India and were or close to political particpants in the 70s, 80s and 90s? Or are you on of the ABD’s who got a law degree from a US university and parachuted into Gujarat and hopped out? There is a big difference.

    I have family friends who were hunted during Emergency, have close knowledge of police getting killed by Muslim fundamentalists in broad daylight and then protected by the so-called psecular politicians. Modi was just a reaction and outlet for failure to prosecute and punish goons because of political patronage and the street justice was carried out because people didn’t have faith that the Godhra pepetrators will be protected.

    Most folks who would have grwon up in India would have known this ‘(Now, why you think opponents to Modi have “blood on their hands” in a “worse” way — worse than whom? — not sure I understand that one.)’ and I made a reference to the fact in ‘Well I made a comment which has a lot of truth to it and that is why I asked if you had any significant knowledge of Indian polity. The Emergency, the killings in Assam in the 80′, the various riots that took place under the Congress govts were all the ones I referred to.’

    Either you never lived in India for a significant time or you are being disingenous.

    As for the issue of universal jurisdiction, you are simply mistaken about this. The issue is not whether the India has submitted to the jurisdiction of the ICJ or the ICC with respect to genocide, but whether international law permits states to exercise universal jurisdiction to prosecute certain offenses, and for a limited number of very serious offenses — war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and torture — I think international law is pretty clear that universal jurisdiction is available. You may regard that as an infringement upon sovereignty, but sovereignty under international law in this era doesn’t protect states’ right to engage in those offenses or to leave those offenses unpunished. It is not the case that the ICJ “has the sole authority to try genocide” — to the contrary, states are encouraged to exercise universal jurisdiction and to recognize the “prosecute or extradite” principle. And a number of states have conducted proceedings based on this principle.

    Well I don’t know how to explain this to you. A sovereign nation like India can’t be forced to participate where it has not agreed to. For ex, CTBT was enacted with a provision that it won’t come into force until some 44 named countries sign it and basically it was done that way to force India into complying. India refused and the international community could do diddly about it. Well if you think, you can make India comply with your theories now, wait until a few years when India is one of the top 5 economies. You can force your universal jurisdiction on countries that are dependent on foreign aid or vulnerable, but countries like US, China, Russia, India will be immune. Power Baby!!! And sovereignity is protected by a strong military.

    The Alien Tort Statute issue is distinct from the issue of universal criminal jurisdiction, since it involves a civil lawsuit rather than a criminal prosecution. But similarly, here we are talking about violations of international law so egregious that they carry no sovereign protection at all — individuals cannot claim sovereign immmunity for these violations, and so a private, civil tort action by individuals who have been harmed by their conduct really doesn’t implicate any sovereign concern. (MoorNam raises a different and highly relevant question about whether an ATS suit would be effective in any meaningful way, but that is a different issue.) You disagree that these violations took place, but that’s a different issue — one that can be resolved in the adjudication of the ATS lawsuit itself. (If, on the other hand, you mean to say that private, civil, transnational disputes don’t belong in US court at all, simply because one of the parties is Indian and that therefore implicates Indian sovereignty, I don’t think there’s much support for that position either. Any time a commercial dispute between two corporations from different countries gets resolved in the courts of one country the sovereignty of the other country would be infringed on that logic. But those kinds of disputes go to court all the time.)

    Again I don’t know why you are comparing apples and oranges. Modi’s case is not as you say ‘you mean to say that private, civil, transnational disputes don’t belong in US court at all’ which both parties have an agreement that they have violated and the court has jurisdiction. The case against Modi is that he failed to use the state machinery to stop the riots and killings. This comes under the jurisdiction of governmental powers. If you think, the US court taking up this doesn’t infringe on state sovereignity, tell me why. And Modi has not voilated any international law I know of.

    Despite your suggestion, sovereignty is a constrained concept in an era in which certain international human rights norms have been reached the point of being jus cogens norms, or at minimum, part of customary international law. As a matter of international law, sovereign states cannot simply do whatever they want to their own citizens — that may have been true in a different era, but in this era some things do cross the line and become subjects of international concern. This is actually not a particularly controversial point.

    I addressed this already earlier. Simply put, Power Baby!!!

    Your main beef seems to be a different one — you don’t seem to think that Modi did anything that reaches the point of crossing that line. I disagree with you — and there is quite a bit of evidence on my side of that disagreement — but that is a different issue.

    What Modi did is irrelevant to the sovereignity issue. Modi’s omission and commission has to do with Indian politics and others outside India don’t need to interfere. You want to get the satisfaction of denying Modi’s visa, go ahead.

  4. please can we try to resist too many ex-ter-heemely long quotes that result in ex-ter-heemly long postings, she asked pathetically.

    Also, I’m not sure how useful it is to question people’s arguments or try to shut them up using the “You have no right to speak but I have cos I am authentic (i.e. Indian brought up in India)” fallacy

  5. Its clear that US administration doesnt care about Democracy, but cares more about hegemony. Thats why “Hamas” getting democratically elected in a free and fair election spurred by Washington under supervision from the world, doesnt mean anything to Washington.

    or perahps it’s because: 1. Hamas’ sucude bombings 2. They want to establish an Islamic republic in Palestine, which unlike the Jewish republic, will have no respect for human rights. 3. They want to destroy Israel 4. They are anti-Semites

    Democracy is only a means to an end: freedom. So we should be careful to not put “democracy” up on a pedestal beyond other virtues. I agree, consististency is very diffucult in the real world as there are compteing values…but that is realpolick. I think on this one, the Bush admin got it right.

  6. You want to get the satisfaction of denying Modi’s visa, go ahead.

    Do you read and try to understand posts before responding to them? One of the very first things I said in this thread was that I didn’t agree with denying Modi’s visa last year…. Enjoy your day, it’s been nice chatting with you.

  7. Re # 106

    The US/Israeli governments have done a brilliant media job in terms of playing up the ‘evil Palestinian suicide bombers’ and utterly ignoring the collateral killings of hundreds of Palestinian people during Israeli attacks on Palestinian ‘terrorists.’ THe Israeli-Palestinian struggle has very much had an eye-for-an-eye logic especially in recent decades but we rarely hear the Palestinan side of things because of the powerful pro-Israel lobby in the US.

    As for human rights — to the Israeli government, the Israeli government has been indulging in the most blatent abuses of human rights for decades now. I am constantly amazed at how successful the Israeli lobby has been in making the words Jewish and Israeli synonymous! Of course they aren’t…that would be the equivalent of making the words Hindutva and Indian synonymous.

    I am no anti-semite, and it really bothers me when fair thinking Jewish people are labelled “self-hating” and there is the attempt to make Zionism=Jewish=supporter of Israel.

  8. Very much like anyone who raised a voice against the Iraq war was shut up as ‘unpatriotic,’ unfortunately, anyone who raises very valid criticism of the shenagans of the Israeli government is promptly labelled ‘anti semetic.’

  9. Sorry for a fourth post in a line :) . Its just that I grew up in India reading Anne Frank etc and with an absolute sense of the horror of the Holocaust etc. However, after I came to the US, while I still feel utter horror at the Holocaust and the persecution of the Jews by the Nazis, I cannot help but notice that, much as 9/11 often gets co-opted and used to justify all manner of unfair practices, the holocaust gets used in many ways that justify the terrible treatment of that relatively liberal and democratic Islamic people, the Palestinians.

  10. ARG! for the love of god, please tell us who’s saying the things you’re blockquoting!

    also: if someone says shenanigans one more time… :D

  11. AK # 107

    Do you read and try to understand posts before responding to them? One of the very first things I said in this thread was that I didn’t agree with denying Modi’s visa last year…. Enjoy your day, it’s been nice chatting with you.

    It is easy not to answer the issues I raised with your arguments by asserting “you don’ make reasoned arguments” and “Do you read and try to understand posts before responding to them?” as you do. And you have selectively quoted my various statements in your various responses, so that the whole context gets lost.

    And you never answered the question of living in India and now I am concluding you are an ABD. I know it is your prerogative, but in the context of the discussions, the backgrounds, experiences you have dealt with and where you come from colors points of view.

    I don’t expect you to respond, so have a nice day.

  12. anyone who raised a voice against the Iraq war was shut up as ‘unpatriotic,’

    I would actually love to see examples of this if you have any. I’m really curious b/c it is a common charge. The only person I know who did this was ann coulter. But i could be wrong so I’m open to examples…the more promenant the person, the better.

  13. anyone who raises very valid criticism of the shenagans of the Israeli government is promptly labelled ‘anti semetic.’

    I agree 100%, in fact I made the same point in another thread. But apparently you were reply to me labelling Hamas as anti-semtic, which is like calling the KKK racist. and hamas, like the KKK, did not emerge from a vacuum…but rather a highly bigoted society that oprresses virtually all minorites including women and gays. And palestinian victimhood does not explain this bigotry, as it extends deeply into other islamic societies.

    We must acknowledge that this is what Israel is facing.

  14. Hindutvavadi — You’re right, the comment about “reasoned arguments” wasn’t a constructive, temperate, or particularly nice thing to say, and I do apologize for it.

    I am still confused about some of the things you have been saying, and what you might have been responding to. But we can just let it drop.

    As for this business about whether I grew up/lived in India or not, CAD #86 and Ms Fink Nottle #105 have spoken to this issue — it really seems beneath this space to argue at that level. You and I both can find people who live/grew up in India AND people who live in other parts of the world who agree with me — just as we could both find people who live/grew up in India AND people who live outside of India who agree with you. If you disagree with someone on the merits, then why not just make an argument and disagree with them on the merits?

    Anyway, there probably is no purpose in discussing this further and putting everyone (including us) through the heartache. It’s looking like a nice day in California, so I hope you’re able to enjoy the good weather before the day ends.

  15. Hindutvavadi in Ca:

    If you don’t know freaking thing about international law, stop making freaking comments about others opinion. If you think only lawyers practicing international law in Hague should be making opinions about international law, then I guess we also should keep our mouths ‘chup’. I guess free speech only applies to lawyers.

    All of your responses on this thread and others contain insults and are progressively getting snappier and snappier by the comment.

    What makes you think I don’t know anything about international law, and what makes you an expert, therefore giving you the license to gratuitously put others down?

    The more you try to vociferously justify why your opinions, and only yours, are valid, the loonier you seem and the more you illustrate that you have nothing else to back up your opinions except that you grew up in India and you are miracously an expert on every topic.

    Stop being such a jackass and assuming that you, and only you, are making sound and logical arguments.

  16. Jai:

    Politics aside—

    I’m 32 years old, so unless you are in your 40s or older, it may be worthwhile to reconsider the propriety of referring to me as “beta”, especially on a serious discussion thread such as this one ;)

    Phew! That was a close one– good thing you actually are younger than me. I am in my 90′s. So if you want to even things out, please do feel free to call me “CAD Dadi”.

  17. Hindutvavadi in CA

    Stop being such a jackass and assuming that you, and only you, are making sound and logical arguments.

    I apologize for using the word “jackass”. It was unnecessary and wrong of me to use such a word.

  18. I’m 32 years old, so unless you are in your 40s or older, it may be worthwhile to reconsider the propriety of referring to me as “beta”, especially on a serious discussion thread such as this one ;)

    … popped out a kid when 8!

    Phew! That was a close one– good thing you actually are younger than me. I am in my 90′s. So if you want to even things out, please do feel free to call me “CAD Dadi”.

    …kanjus gandu desi dadi or kanjus gandwali desi dadi

  19. Ms. Fink Nottle:

    As for human rights — to the Israeli government, the Israeli government has been indulging in the most blatent abuses of human rights for decades now. I am constantly amazed at how successful the Israeli lobby has been in making the words Jewish and Israeli synonymous! Of course they aren’t…that would be the equivalent of making the words Hindutva and Indian synonymous.
    I am no anti-semite, and it really bothers me when fair thinking Jewish people are labelled “self-hating” and there is the attempt to make Zionism=Jewish=supporter of Israel

    .

    After having spent years researching and studying the question of Palestine, I used to marvel at the underlined phrase above. Not all Jews support Israel, and not all supporters of Israel are Jewish, correct?. However, just yesterday I finished reading the “The Zionist Idea”, compiled by Arthur Hertzberg, and it all makes sense, this collapse between “Jewish” and “Israeli”. If you ever get a chance to read it, you should because it contains all of the Zionist writers. Hertzberg does a good job of contextualizing the Zionist movement historically (but alas, he does not mention Palestinians). Off of the top of my head, here are other books and/or authors regarding Palestine: Rashid Khalidi: The Palestinian Identity Edward Said: The End of the Peace Process; The Question of Palestine Ilan Pappe: all of his books. He is an Israeli professor at Hebrew Univ (I think) Uri Averny: Israeli journalist Amira Haas: Israeli journalist Robert Fisk: Pity the Nation, Lebanon at War Noam Chomsky: The Fateful Triangle: the US, Israel, and Palestine (Fisk and Chomsky’s books dwelve into the details of the Lebanese civil war, which I think had a fundamental impact on Palestinian politics) Norman Finkelstein: The politics of Anti-semiticism

    There are many, many other books which don’t come to mind at the moment. Also, in all of these books, check out the bibliography and you will find more writers. You probably know of these books already.

    Manju:

    or perahps it’s because: 1. Hamas’ sucude bombings 2. They want to establish an Islamic republic in Palestine, which unlike the Jewish republic, will have no respect for human rights. 3. They want to destroy Israel 4. They are anti-Semites

    This list is so bigoted and uninformed that it is remarkable.

    But apparently you were reply to me labelling Hamas as anti-semtic, which is like calling the KKK racist.and hamas, like the KKK, did not emerge from a vacuum…but rather a highly bigoted society that oprresses virtually all minorites including women and gays. And palestinian victimhood does not explain this bigotry, as it extends deeply into other islamic societies.

    Really, the logic in these two sentences and the analogy between Hamas and the KKK is so deeply flawed that I am starting to wonder whether you write these comments just to get a kick out of how others may respond to you. Do you seriously believe the things that you have written on SM? Or are you playing games?

  20. Manju, I’m not going to get into whether I think Hamas is anti-semetic or not. The problem with labelling people/groups with labels like ‘semetic’ or ‘anti-semetic’ esp. when those labels are so loaded is not really helpful, I think, and is often used to obscure issues. It is so easy to label a group ‘evil’ but that rarely helps to solve any problems…what might help solve problems is examining why that group is acting so ‘evil.’ I agree that the suicide bombing of groups like Hamas is INEXCUSABLE but in a sense understandable — when your people have been left with no options at all and you see no future for your children, when all the power is in the hands of a certain group that is bent upon reducing you to a second-class status and creating a really apartheid sort of society, well, some people begin to feel that the only kind of ‘power’ they can exert is unfortunately things like suicide bombing (and you’re right about the fundamentalist Islamist element that helps make such things worse).

    Again, NOT to excuse suicide bombing…but the killing/maiming of so many Palestinians that happens during each and every Israeli air raid is no better just because it is carried out by ‘police’ and uses the hunting-down-terrorists mantra — especially since it is the Israeli police that has just about all the military technology. I guess ultimately I’m saying that while many things that Hamas does might be inexcusable, the things that the Israeli government has been doing are even more so.

    Also, while Hamas mainly gets beaten on for its suicide bombing activities, one needs to remember that the main reason they came to power was because they are also a very important social-work organization for the Palestinian people, offering health, schooling etc services that are desperately needed. I think it is a real pity the US and European governments are marginalizing the elected Hamas govt at this point…the one hope for peace in that region would be to acknowledge and work with them for a better life for both Palestinian and Israelis.

  21. CAD,

    Thanks for that great list of books: I am familiar with some of the books but not all. I am forgetting the name of a two-author book that recently came out (about the US-Israel nexus) that it seems that many academics are apparently afraid to support ‘cos of political pressure from deans etc…there was a piece in the LA times about in the last few days.

    Yes, of course not all Jews are Israel supporters etc. However, I think the reason I got interested in this issue and researched it in the first place was because in the past few years I seem to be moving in a lot of Jewish circles — wonderful, educated, fair-thinking people in so many ways…BUT when it comes to Israel there seems to be some sort of wilful refusal to see what is going on and some sort of almost cult-like brainwashing (kids being sent to pro-Israel camps constantly, being taught Hebrew — their parents or grand parents don’t speak it — and generally being brought up to totally identify with Israel). It is quite scary. The only way I can explain all this is some sort of brillian Israeli media strategy — as Said and others have pointed out.

  22. The problem with labelling people/groups with labels like ‘semetic’ or ‘anti-semetic’ esp. when those labels are so loaded is not really helpful

    I disagree, but lets go w/ your point. should we extend this courtesy out to the KKK, or Nazis? I mean, they also represented poor, disenfranchised people. Its going to be very hard to be consistent w/ this one as we risk selectively calling certain “hate groups” bigots, but others we let slide b/c we sympathize w/ their position. but if you can maintain consistency I’m impressed. Even CAD (#121) is having a hard time as she maintains my position is bigoted. We’ve been having an ongoing debate about this and it gets quite circular: “Its wrong to label, but if you do label then I’m labelling you” At this rate we’re all about to have a Pogo moment: “we have met the enemy and it is us”

    Please also notice that these anti-semetic groups, excuse the label, exist outside of the context of Isreal. One only has to look at how the Islamic world, icluding the palestinians, treat thier own to be concerned that “Palestine” will be just another repressive islamic republic. There is obviously something deeper going on here than just a response to Israeli airraids. Which is why I’m making analogies to other totalitarian mindsets, outside the Islamic context.

  23. Ms Fink:

    in the past few years I seem to be moving in a lot of Jewish circles — wonderful, educated, fair-thinking people in so many ways…BUT when it comes to Israel there seems to be some sort of wilful refusal to see what is going on and some sort of almost cult-like brainwashing

    Yes, there are people of Jewish background who refuse to see what is going on. However, I have met and known a lot of non-Jewish “liberals” who also stop short of criticizing Israel and refuse to see what is going on; in some ways, it has become “right wing” to criticize Israel and “liberal” to support it.

    Thanks for that great list of books: I am familiar with some of the books but not all. I am forgetting the name of a two-author book that recently came out (about the US-Israel nexus) that it seems that many academics are apparently afraid to support ‘cos of political pressure from deans etc…there was a piece in the LA times about in the last few days.

    Might you be thinking of John Mearsheimer and Stephen Waltz? You can download the article in both PDF and Html format from Mearsheimer’s website.

  24. Hindutvavadi in CA:

    I stand by what I said and if you don’t have a history of living in India and imbibing the political goings there, you wouldn’t know. Just as I wouldn’t know the history of street and labor union politics in the USA.
    1. How do you know that I don’t have a history of living in India? How in the world can you tell? And are you claiming that the only arguments and opinions re: India that have merit must come from an Indian who has been raised and born in India?
    2. It’s a shame you don’t know the “history of street and labor union politics in the USA”, because guess what, I know some Indians, born and raised in India, who do know about US labor union politics. So maybe you should step out of your box and look beyond– people of all backgrounds, experiences, and childhoods can amass information relevent to all topics.
    And you never answered the question of living in India and now I am concluding you are an ABD. I know it is your prerogative, but in the context of the discussions, the backgrounds, experiences you have dealt with and where you come from colors points of view.

    How the hell are you concluding someone’s birth and childhood based on their comments? And excuse me, but how does an ABD think and what kind of opinions does he/she have? (I do thank you for dropping the “C” part of it, though). What a flimsy conclusion, based on flimsy pretenses. If your only back up to support your views is that you “have a history of living in India and imbibing the political goings there”, then I am sorry, but that is a faulty foundation to rest your justifications on as to why 1) you know more than others and 2)other’s opinions, knowledge, and experiences are invalid. This is a convenient way to discount what others are saying.

    Since you don’t even know this, why do you claim that you have significant knowledge of Indian politics. I have a question for you – did you grow up in India and were or close to political particpants in the 70s, 80s and 90s? Or are you on of the ABD’s who got a law degree from a US university and parachuted into Gujarat and hopped out? There is a big difference.

    Again, how are you going about concluding that AK– or anybody else who doesn’t hold your opinion, for that matter– might be an ABD who got a law degree from a US university? Furthermore, you are insulting somebody based on your own presuppositions and assumptions about who they are, and you don’t know whether your assumptions are accurate and true.

    Since you like to “break some things down for me” (as you have in your posts in the other forum, “Brutha on Brutha”), let me break things down for you, real nice and slow:

    1. In the US, I have met Indians from India who share my views.
    2. In the US, I have met Indians from India who do not share my views.
    3. In the US, I have met Indians from India who share the same politics and opinions as their US counterparts.
    4. In the US, I have met Indians from India who do not share the same politics and opinions as their US counterparts.
    5. In India, I have met Indians who share my views.
    6. In India, I have met Indians who do not share my views.
    7. In India, I have met Indians who share the same politics and opinions as their counterparts in the US
    8. In India, I have met Indians who do not share the same politics and opinions as their counterparts in the US.

    Moral of the whole list? You can’t easily categorize and box people and their politics and assume too much about them. People are too messy and unruly for that.

  25. desi di asino poco costoso (blame Google if you don’t like the translation) –

    In Italian, there is a saying: “Ognuno ha la sua sapienza”: Transl: “Everybody has his/her own knowledge”.

    Very impressive command of Italian. And very impressive breaking down of things. Might even bookmark the comment link, to incorporate by reference in the future. ;)

  26. Actually, Manju, I agree that labels can sometimes be useful. Its just that the label ‘anti-semetic’ gets thrown around so easily these days that I did not think it useful to call Hamas that for purposes of this discussion because to do so would be to imply that they do what they do ONLY because they hate Jews.

    Also, yes, Islamic societies are often more repressive etc but what I was saying was that WITHIN Islamic societies Palestinian society is much more democratic. Also, whether or not Palestine is the most repressive society there is does not justify Israeli actions.

  27. And, furthermore, Manju, there are so many differences between the KKK/Nazis and Hamas that I am not going to even begin to elaborate on that….it would be at the same level as arguing that the Israeli govt is like the KKK/Nazis :) . In all cases, there might be some things in common but to make these parallels is to evoke an emotional response that obscures real issues and important differences.

  28. HIndutvavadi:

    Last comment, I swear. (See how your comments get me so worked up?!)

    Fist:

    So maybe you should step out of your box and look beyond– people of all backgrounds, experiences, and childhoods can amass information relevent to all topics.

    My comment above, I realized, can be misinterpreted to imply that you should step out of our box to inform yourself of issues in the US. This is not what I meant; rather, what I mean is “So maybe you should step out of your box — ie, only Indians born and raised in India can authoritatively speak about Indian issues, and only Americans born and raised in the US can authoritatively speak about American issues– and look beyond, for people of all backgrounds, experiences, and childhoods can amass information relevent to all topics”.

    Second:

    I stand by what I said and if you don’t have a history of living in India and imbibing the political goings there, you wouldn’t know. Just as I wouldn’t know the history of street and labor union politics in the USA.

    Okay, fair enough. But by the same logic, if I EVER catch a comment of yours hereonafter about US politics or any US issues (I won’t go to the Brutha on Brutha forum and cut and paste your assertions about US politics and foreign policies since it is irrelevent here), I will be entitled to say to you, modelled on your comments:

    Either you never lived in India for a significant time or you are being disingenous.

    (your comment)

    My future reply: Hindutvavadi, either you have never lived in the US for a significant time or you are being disingenuous; because judging from your comments,

    …I am concluding you are an ABD. I know it is your prerogative, but in the context of the discussions, the backgrounds, experiences you have dealt with and where you come from colors points of view.

    My future reply: I am concluding that you are an Indian immigrant from India. I know it is your prerogative, but in the context of the discussions, the backgrounds, experiences you have dealt with and where you come from colors points of view.

    If you reply back to me, Hindutvavadi, then I will reply in the same manner that you have responded to AK:

    Since you don’t even know this, why do you claim that you have significant knowledge of Indian politics. I have a question for you – did you grow up in India and were or close to political particpants in the 70s, 80s and 90s? Or are you on of the ABD’s who got a law degree from a US university and parachuted into Gujarat and hopped out? There is a big difference.

    My future reply:

    Since you don’t even know this, why do you claim that you have a significant knowledge of US politics. I have a question for you– did you grow up in America and were or close to political participants in the 70′s, 80′s, and 90′s? Or are you another one of those Indian software engineers who got an engineering degree from a US university as a foreign student and parachuted into California?…There is a big difference.

    In a nutshell, I will follow your logic:

    If we are speaking of US politics and US issues, And if I have been born and raised in the US, Then my opinions, regardless of whether they converge or diverge from yours, are valid. Your opinions, in contrast, will not be because you were not born and raised here. Therefore, you have no authority to speak on US issues.

    I will be vigilantly and aggressively monitoring your comments from now on.

    And SM Mutineers, I encourage you to do the same!

  29. Last comment, and then I’ll go.

    Manju:

    Even CAD (#121) is having a hard time as she maintains my position is bigoted.

    Hmmm… you do raise a good question. Now that I think about it, maybe “bigoted” is not the right word. Perhaps “simpleminded”? Yes. That’s it. “Simpleminded”. So, regarding your assertion:

    or perahps it’s because: 1. Hamas’ sucude bombings 2. They want to establish an Islamic republic in Palestine, which unlike the Jewish republic, will have no respect for human rights. 3. They want to destroy Israel 4. They are anti-Semites

    My revised response is:

    This list is so bigoted simpleminded and uninformed that it is remarkable.

  30. Last, last, ultimately last comment unless a meteorite is about to hit my room and in hopes of leaving a significant trace of my personhood for future generations, I feel the urge to write one last comment:

    AK:

    desi di asino poco costoso (blame Google if you don’t like the translation) –

    A much smoother and accurate translation in Italian: “Non fare l’indiano”. Transl: Don’t be a cheap ass like Indians are. (I am not making this up, Italians really do say this. Apparently, Indians are the embodiment of cheapness. I have had this accusation flung at me, and at anyone else who’s a Cheap Ass, one too many times.)

    And very impressive breaking down of things. Might even bookmark the comment link, to incorporate by reference in the future. ;)

    Glad to know that my list might come in handy one day. However, if you do decide to refer to my list, I hope you will never forget to cite that it was me, not you, who had made this list. And just to ensure that you have taken the appropriate measures regarding my list– ie you have faithfully cited me instead of parading the list under your name– I am going to now periodically do a google search on “AK, Hindutvavadi in California”. If I find out that you have been bandying this list around with your name stamped all over it, I am going to sue you for intellectual property rights infringement.

    Have a lovely evening, wherever you are (probably in the US, because judging from your comments, I’m assuming you are an ABD)

  31. Oy, Cheap Ass Desi, I giggled much at the typo “fist” that begins your responses to our Hindutvavadi friend.

    Freudian slips an’ all.

  32. CAD:

    Hmmm… you do raise a good question.

    Your concession destroys my thoery that you are actually Ann Coulter, I mean your writng styles were exactly the same and you both clearly dig indian guys…a lot.

    I guess that leaves us with Kaavya Viswanathan.

  33. 136

    Oh dear, more personal insinuations by way of demolishing arguments :( . Kya yaar.

  34. Manju:

    Your concession destroys my thoery that you are actually Ann Coulter, I mean your writng styles were exactly the same and you both clearly dig indian guys…a lot. I guess that leaves us with Kaavya Viswanathan.

    Your snarky comments don’t faze me, I remain as calm as Bambi grazing peacefully in the Black Forest.

    How do you know that I “clearly dig Indian guys…. a lot?” For all you know, maybe I have a thing for burly Arab men(preferably not Muslim terrorists, since in your book, Muslims come from an Islamic society=bigoted, oppressive and anti-semitic= terrorists…. Hmmm… looking at your logic above, I now realize that sometimes, following such simplistic and thoughtless logic makes things so much easier. Ignorance is bliss, say the wise old men. No wonder you do it so often!).

  35. Manju,

    Please read the definition of reductio ad absurdum. I usually throw cool words around like that when I see a lovely bird, but it had to be done.

  36. To AK

    Hindutvavadi — You’re right, the comment about “reasoned arguments” wasn’t a constructive, temperate, or particularly nice thing to say, and I do apologize for it.

    Apologies accepted and I understand that it was not said in the manner it was written.

    I am still confused about some of the things you have been saying, and what you might have been responding to. But we can just let it drop. As for this business about whether I grew up/lived in India or not, CAD #86 and Ms Fink Nottle #105 have spoken to this issue — it really seems beneath this space to argue at that level. You and I both can find people who live/grew up in India AND people who live in other parts of the world who agree with me — just as we could both find people who live/grew up in India AND people who live outside of India who agree with you. If you disagree with someone on the merits, then why not just make an argument and disagree with them on the merits?

    Let me explain the context on why I raised the issue of whether you grew up in India. The whole context started from this

    Well, she may have not participated directly as it was her husband who was involved and she was not part of the power structure then. But she was definitely part of the coverup and the whitewash that is going on now. And a few more years from now all the evidence and witnesses (whatever exists after so many years) will be be gone and you (not you as AK but in a generic jolwallahs) will be asking to show evidence that the things that happened in 1984 really happened. That is why I said be consistent. The blood on the hands of the opposition to Modi is worse. I am not making excuses or saying two wrongs make it right. Actually two wrongs are two wrongs and should be dealt with the same gusto.

    And you came back with this:

    (Now, why you think opponents to Modi have “blood on their hands” in a “worse” way — worse than whom? — not sure I understand that one.)

    Now if you were had grown up in the 70s and 80s and were even mildly politically aware, you would have known the context of the remarks. And in another comment that followed this, I had given some examples.

    People will not be upset if you prosecute the sins of people who are opposite to Modi’s persuasion in the same manner as Modi. This is the point I raised. You can’t be pursuing selective justice, and expect people on the receiving end to come out strong. And Congress will never seriously prosecute Modi, because lot of senior congress leaders in Gujarat also were involved in the mob activities. So was Modi responsible for their sins too.

    And as I mentioned in another comment – “in the context of the discussions, the backgrounds, experiences you have dealt with and where you come from colors points of view.” I have seen the other side of the coin and it doesn’t look good. Western newspapers don’t cover the dirty side of the Indian politics (except in a few cases like Modi with colored coverage) and even mainline english newspapers don’t cover these in the front pages. You have to go thru’ back pages and be a continuous reader to gain the true picture or you have to be involved in a political party in India. For ex, you would never know from reading a western source, that they buried the son of a MLA in India as a muslim, because they didn’t want to show Hindus were killed in the riots a couple of months ago in UP.

    Anyway, it will take too long to explain the whole indian political scenario.

    Anyway, there probably is no purpose in discussing this further and putting everyone (including us) through the heartache. It’s looking like a nice day in California, so I hope you’re able to enjoy the good weather before the day ends.

    It was a little bit hot in the Bay area this noon, but ended up being a nice day. Thanks and I enjoyed it.

  37. Hindutvavadi

    People will not be upset if you prosecute the sins of people who are opposite to Modi’s persuasion in the same manner as Modi. This is the point I raised. You can’t be pursuing selective justice….
    Western newspapers don’t cover the dirty side of the Indian politics (except in a few cases like Modi with colored coverage) and even mainline english newspapers don’t cover these in the front pages.

    I do still fear that you are making assumptions that you really have no basis to make here — about me, but also about many others who might want to hold Modi accountable but don’t share the views you are attributing to them. There are plenty of people who oppose Modi and who are equally outraged with what the Congress leadership did, say, in 1984 and during the Emergency. I don’t think that I said anything to suggest that I believe in “selective justice.” To the contrary, I said explicitly that human rights violators of any religion or political party should be held accountable, and that I agreed with you that many of the abuses of the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s that you discussed were precisely that.

    GujuDude

    Let me be more specific. Do they use this (a disapproval of the visa) to get an answer, then approve the visa once they have a more clear answer on record from the response.

    Sorry, let this one slip through without seeing it. I’m not 100 percent sure since I’ve never represented anyone seeking initial entry from abroad. I do know that consular officials have tremendous discretion in how and why they make their decisions, and that there aren’t opportunities to appeal their decisions (in the sense of getting independent administrative or judicial review).

    Good night, all.

  38. CAD on # 127 and # 131

    I guess you are an expert in taking things way out of context. There was a specific reason (which I have explained in a previous comment to AK) for raising the issue of whether AK was born in India. The question wouldn’t have been asked the person had knowledge modern political history of India.

    people of all backgrounds, experiences, and childhoods can amass information relevent to all topics

    Now I know where to get half assed information from a Cheap desi if I need to know about how various dimensions affect string theory and how postulates of various scientists regarding the multiple dimensions impact the future of string theory research.

    There is a saying in Tamil which goes ‘Katrathu Kai alavu , kallathathu ulagalavu’. I believe in this.

    And I guess you have a gang in this board who we call the ‘jalra’ gang.

    Enough about you.

  39. Ok, I have a confession: I have never heard a single one of M.I.A.’s songs. And I’m trying to follow the first half of this discussion, but it seems to depend on a knowledge of her lyrics and I don’t have this. Would someone PLEASE show me lyrics where she supports the LTTE?

    Madurai Vivekan, there’s a really good post up on chapati mystery from last year which takes a look at M.I.A.’s sympathies for LTTE and related issues without slipping into the “OMG JALI THE TERRORSZTS!” argument. It should answer some of your questions and provoke more :)

  40. AK

    about me, but also about many others who might want to hold Modi accountable but don’t share the views you are attributing to them.

    Attributing views and calling into question the lack of knowledge of issues are two different things. I was only implying the latter within the context of Indian political history. I never attributed motives or views to you or to most reasoned participants in this discussion.

    There are plenty of people who oppose Modi and who are equally outraged with what the Congress leadership did, say, in 1984 and during the Emergency. I don’t think that I said anything to suggest that I believe in “selective justice.” To the contrary, I said explicitly that human rights violators of any religion or political party should be held accountable, and that I agreed with you that many of the abuses of the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s that you discussed were precisely that.

    Regarding the last sentence, as it is said in America ‘Where is the Beef?’. That is the issue I raised.

  41. I guess you are an expert in taking things way out of context. There was a specific reason (which I have explained in a previous comment to AK) for raising the issue of whether AK was born in India. The question wouldn’t have been asked the person had knowledge modern political history of India.

    Actually, H., I think she’s right on the money about this one. These are precisely the kinds of assertions on your part that are not particularly helpful in any productive discussion of these issues. Rather than ridiculing someone as “not having knowledge” if you disagree with them, along with dismissive (and questionable) assertions about where they did or didn’t grow up, I think it’s better if just lay out what you think the facts are, what supports your perspective, and then listen to what others might have to say in response. Otherwise, the level of discourse in this board will sink to the point where it proves Number Six correct.

  42. AK,

    Let me break what you said separately

    These are precisely the kinds of assertions on your part that are not particularly helpful in any productive discussion of these issues.

    I am not asserting anything. If the person doesn’t have knowledge of the modern political history of India, what do you bring to the table on the discussion of politics in India.

    Rather than ridiculing someone as “not having knowledge” if you disagree with them, along with dismissive (and questionable) assertions about where they did or didn’t grow up,

    Can you point out where I ridiculed you. I would know where the accusation comes from? Questioning lack of knowledge is different from ridiculing. The reason where the person grew up was brought up in a specific context to the comment you made. If you go again and again in a circle I can’t help it as I already commented on this with an explanation.

    I think it’s better if just lay out what you think the facts are, what supports your perspective, and then listen to what others might have to say in response.

    I have laid out facts, but obviously people are not interested in addressing the facts but in just dancing around it and changing the topic. Let us take comment # 104. I gave a lot of facts and examples. But you never addressed any of them expect the last sentence which I threw in as an aside in your comment # 107. I could have used the same reply to you which you made on # 107.

  43. Hindutvavadi in Cali

    There is a saying in Tamil which goes ‘Katrathu Kai alavu , kallathathu ulagalavu’. I believe in this.

    There is a saying in Italian which goes “La mamma degli imbecili e sempre in cinta”. I believe in this.

    Now, let’s call it a night. You go have yourself some Mango Lassi and relax, while I pour myself a glass of red wine (no champagne– I’m no champagne socialist!!) and have my last cigarette of the day.

  44. A sovereign nation like India can’t be forced to participate where it has not agreed to.

    The man is unrelenting!

    Let me break it down for you,

    (1) Modi is a private citizen now and not a sovereign. The FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITIES ACT does not apply to Modi.

    (2) Modi is not being subject to criminal liablities. ATS only covers tort (civil liabilities)

    (3) Modi does not have to come to the US. The ATS only gives jurisdiction when the tort-feasor is actually served process in the US. When he comes to the US on an unofficial visit of a private citizen, he has taken the risk of being hauled to Court for a civil action.

    (4) Committing pogroms, which is a crime against humanity is a bad thing. When something is such a bad thing, it becomes Customary International Law and all courts have jurisdiction to hear cases based on Customary International Law.

    (5) Ariel Sharon from Israel was indicted on a Court in Belgium and Kissinger does not go to Europe for the same reason. Committing crimes against humanity is a bad thing.