Modilemma

Ever since I heard about US refusing visa to Mr. Modi, my opinion on the subject has been pretty osciallatory; oscillating between a confused sense of national pride and a not-so-confused sense of morality.

Adolf Hilter, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevic, Idi Amin, Narendra Modi --- this line reads without hurting my sentiments.

Germany, Cambodia, Iraq, Bosnia, Uganda, India --- this line suddenly throws me into an emotional turbulence.

There is little doubt that Narendra Modi was the chief architect of the biggest Indian genocide. Is defending Narendra Modi's case for a US visa, a matter of national pride or national shame ? Isn't it time to rise above national pride (read prejudice ) and condemn a mass murderer ? That he is a free man today should be a matter of shame for every Indian. That Advani had the balls to make a comparison between the current case and the Mahatma's salt march, is reason enough to not let that pair hanging there.

Returning to the original question: Should US have granted Modi a visa? I think it should have. Why? Rejection has made a martyr out of him. He got the much needed publicity. Now that US did what it did, Should Indian Govt. have made an official protest? The answer is NO. It should have ignored the rejection because Modi was not going on an official visit. Indian Govt's protest only served to give Modi the attention he seeks.

The bottomline is that I would be very happy if he is legally hanged to death. But if that doesn't happen, I would pray that he is NOT assasinated. That would make a martyr out of a mass murderer.