of demagogues and US visas

On March 18, 2005 - the United States of America, rejected Mr. Narendra Modi's visa application while simultaneously revoking his tourist/business visa under Section 212(a)(2)(g) of the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act. It is another matter that Mr. Modi's application for a diplomatic visa was denied under Section 214(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the U.S. Government has clarified that Mr. Modi was visiting the United States for a purpose that did not "qualify for a diplomatic visa" - this purpose as the media has reported -" was ostensibly to address the Asian-American Hotel Owners' Association and meet business leaders." While hundreds of visas are evidently refused by the US consulate, this event is being used as a medium of building political sympathy for Mr. Modi by the NDA - while the more important question of the US consular's jurisprudence has been neglected. At least Mr. Modi knows why his visa application was refused. But nobody has raised the question of the august US office (almost revered by most software engineers and others alike), giving no reason to other applicants for refusing their applications. If Mr. Modi has been branded by the US as "... foreign government official who was responsible or had directly carried out, at any time, particular severe violations of religious freedom". Why cant the embassy provide such a comprehensive statement to the other applicants? Though this is not the main focus of the issue that this event has germinated. This incident is being touted by the Indian demagogues as an "attack on national sovereignity", I dont recall such a fast and immediate response to the incidents at Godhra by the NDA. Interestingly enough though the UPA whence in opposition branded Mr. Modi as a destroyer of comity - the External Affairs Department has put forth a polite request to the US consular for reconsidering this decision. Mr. Modi is indeed an elected representative of the people of Gujarat, though he was elected in a situation that was already anathematized by the communal riots. I do not question his credibility, at least he has worked hard to gain his office. It is quite understandable that he would cry foul when the fruits of his labour will be denied from him, and it is also understandable that the remaining indian politico fraternity would support him in his time of need - after all more than half of these have criminal cases registered against them - what if tommorow none of them are able to see the Big Apple? In my viewpoint, this is a correct denial. Will India provide a visa to Mr. Saddam Hussein (I wish no disrespect to Mr. Modi) - who is also an elected leader, of course he no longer holds the cherished post quite unlike Mr. Modi. In Mr. Hussein's case too, his people will squarely support him and justify his visit to a large democracy like India. But will we give him an Indian visa?