Know the truth about India’s Citizenship Amendment Act, why it is a necessity, and why liberals hate it By Radhika Singh
Sunday, March 15, 2020
Jihad Watch : In an era that sees information move at jet speed, news spreads like
wildfire, which is good. The problem arises when news is suppressed in
favor of distorted facts and contorted realities which are then
propagated widely to mislead consumers of “news”.
That is exactly what
has happened with India’s Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), the anti-CAA
riots (rather, the anti-Hindu riots), and the image of the Hindus of
India. The liberal media has been Islamized to the core, and this is a
fact that holds true worldwide. While delivering details about the CAA
and the National Register of Citizens (NRC), and the subsequent
violence, to their readers, news outlets have deliberately concealed
information and presented disinformation, to further their cause of
evoking pro-Muslim sentiments among people.
WHAT IS THE CAA?
The Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2019 provides expedited Indian
citizenship to migrants belonging to persecuted minority groups like the
Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and Christians, who entered India
without a valid visa, from neighboring Islamic countries – Pakistan,
Bangladesh, Afghanistan – before December 2014.
Claims of the CAA being anti-constitutional and anti-humanity are far
from truth; the CAA has been implemented only after following the
constitutional process rigorously. It has been passed with majority
votes in both the houses of the Indian Parliament and then signed by the
sitting President of the Republic of India, Shri Ramnath Kovind.
Claimed to be inhumane, the CAA, on the contrary, is the epitome of
humanity. Ask the Christians, Jains, Buddhists, Hindus and Sikhs who
escaped death at the hands of religious radicals thriving in the Islamic
countries listed above.
WHY IS CAA NEEDED?
The world cheered when Canada welcomed Asia Bibi of Pakistan who was
sentenced to death and was imprisoned for the “sin” of being a
practicing Christian in a constitutionally Islamic country. Then why is
the world turning against India for offering shelter to thousands of
Hundreds of non-Muslim girls are being abducted in Pakistan, forced
into marriages with older Muslim men, and undergoing involuntary
religious conversions. They are raped and violated every day. Hindu
homes in Bangladesh are set ablaze. Enduring abject and unbearable
humiliation has become an accepted way of life – an excruciatingly
miserable one – for the Sikhs of Afghanistan. Would the generous
liberals of the developed western world rather these people die at the
hands of Islamists dominating the squalid societies of Pakistan,
Bangladesh, and Afghanistan than have a home in India?
IS CAA ANTI-MUSLIM?
In one word – NO. Not a single Indian Muslim loses his citizenship
because of the CAA or the NRC, which has yet to be drafted on a national
scale and implemented across India. The CAA gives citizenship to those
who have suffered unspeakable atrocities in Islamic countries. Perhaps
the only “right” that gets affected by the CAA, if any, is the “right”
to brutalize non-Muslims in Islamic countries that Islamists have been
enjoying for decades.
The CAA doesn’t proscribe Muslims from gaining Indian citizenship,
either. However, they would have to follow the standard procedure of
naturalization that necessitates residing in India for a period of
A Muslim is not getting victimized in any of India’s neighboring
countries (which were once a part of undivided India) for his religion,
hence he doesn’t need the Indian government to protect him from
religious radicals. Even in Nepal, a country that was the only Hindu
monarchy till a decade ago, the Muslims lived a protected life. It is a
truth universally observed that Muslims, as minorities, have not faced
discrimination in any country, whereas, minorities in Islamic countries
put up with numerous exploitations routinely.
INDIA’S BLOODY HISTORY JUSTIFIES THE CAA
When the British packed their bags to leave India, Muhammad Ali
Jinnah stirred up the demand of a separate country for the Muslims, that
would function as per Islamic law. In the Noakhali Riots and
Direct-Action Day, thousands of Hindus were massacred by the Muslims,
commanded by Jinnah. The Muslims got their separate country through a
bloodbath. Pakistan (including present day Bangladesh) was an Islamic
country, but India maintained its secular stance.
Hindus didn’t take to
the streets, baying for Muslim blood, calling for a Hindu Rashtra.
Despite largely voting in favor of an “Islamic Pakistan” in the
referendum of July 2, 1947, about 30 million Muslims stayed back. But
Hindus, Sikhs, and members of micro-minority communities started to
migrate from Pakistan that evidently had no place or respect for those
who bowed to a “different God”. Where would these people go?
When European countries opened their doors to massive number of
Muslim refugees, the world was exhilarated. These Muslim refugees were
fleeing their own land, which they shared with people of no other
religious or cultural denomination, and still managed to turn into a
debris. The liberal world stretched their arms out welcoming these
people. Why has the same generous liberal world turned volatile towards
India for promising security to a handful of refugees? Is it because
these refugees are not Muslims?
The pseudo-liberal world needs to be reminded that this planet does
not belong to the Muslims only. The Hindus – who have suffered all kinds
of brutalities at the hands of Islamic barbarians for centuries, the
Sikhs, the Jains, the Buddhists, and the Christians deserve to breathe
in peace also.
And the CAA assures that these destitute people, tortured
in their own land, get a slice of blue sky, under which they can sit,
and breathe sweet air.