Hacker News Reader

Comment by 0xFFFE | Hacker News Reader

It is appalling how despite the availability of information online, people still choose not to verify what they hear on the MSM. Here is the link to the Citizenship Amendment Act of 2019 on GOI website. It's only a 2 page document.

http://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2019/214646.pdf

It was amended to accommodate persecuted minorities from *neighboring countries" of India. It has nothing to do with the Citizens of India.

View on HN

This is blatant disinformation by omitting context. The CAA itself is discriminatory, since it does not apply to muslims, but in the context of the National Register of Citizens (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Register_of_Citizens) it becomes even more sinister. The NRC requires people to prove their citizenship through documentation, which is very difficult for large parts of India's population, who might be straight up illiterate or lack any kind of documentation whatsoever. The CAA makes it easier for non-Muslims to claim citizenship while Muslims slip through the cracks; that is the point of contention.

> The CAA makes it easier for non-Muslims to claim citizenship while Muslims slip through the cracks; that is the point of contention.

No it doesn't. Here's the relevant part of CAA(http://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2019/214646.pdf) that mentions non-Muslims

> Provided that any person belonging to Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain, Parsi or Christian community from Afghanistan, Bangladesh or Pakistan, who entered into India on or before the 31st day of December, 2014

If you are a non-Muslim who wants to get Indian citizenship under CAA, you must prove (1) you are a citizen of one of these neighboring countries and (2) you entered India before 2014. It is just not enough to not have papers to "slip through the cracks".

Dude, you literally are spreading false information and you're literally quoting one thing on one line and contradicting it on the second line.

CAA makes it easier for non Muslims. you say 'no it doesn't' and then you literaly cite this:

Yeah, it specifically mentions Hindu, SIkh Buddhist Jain Parsi Christian. It leaves out MUSLIMS.

Let's go over. the law specifically excludes Muslims.

What does it mean? it fast tracks citizenship of ALL except MUSLIMS. meaning? it excludes Muslims

now comes the NRC, in this exercise, in Assam, they asked everyone to prove their citizenship by showing their grandfather's documents or ancesteral land documents. grandmother or parents document is not valid because what if your grandparents are illegal immigrants.

your documents like voter ID was NOT A VALID DOCUMENT FOR CITIZENSHIP because you have to prove that your GRANDFATHER WAS NOT AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT.

Assam NRC took thousands of crores of money to undertake. Just imagine what'll happen when everyone in India is asked to prove their grandfather's citizenship.

Nationwide NRC is different from NRC for Assam.

Nationwide NRC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Register_of_Citizens) is mandated by 2003 Amendment of Citizenship act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship_(Amendment)_Act,_2...). Look at the definition of illegal migrants there. It doesn't mention anything about your grandfather's papers.

Assam NRC is an entirely different beast (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Register_of_Citizens_...). This was conducted as part of 2013 Supreme Court order. The entire process and the rules was prescribed and monitored by the Supreme court of India. The definition of illegal migrant is a far more stringent here since it hinges on 1971 Bangladeshi refugee crisis and subsequent bloody protests by the Assamese people.

The protest in Assam was/is not to include muslims. But, to exclude all illegal Bangladeshi immigrants. It seems, from Assam, CAA was brought to give citizenship to the hindu Bangladeshis that were left out of the NRC conducted in Assam.

> It leaves out MUSLIMS.

All those three countries in the context have Islam as their state religion. I would always welcome Muslim refugees in India but what was the point of partition if Muslims are suffering religious oppression in countries that were created as safe heavens for Muslims? Should we undo it?

And even recent searches show that minorities (the religions covered under the CAA) are not exactly doing better in those countries.

https://www.wionews.com/afghanistan/sikh-abducted-in-afghani...

https://theprint.in/opinion/letter-from-pakistan/pakistanis-...

This is post-facto legitimization of the logic of partition.

Why shouldn't we undo partition (if possible)?

Partition doesn't need legitimization. It has been legitimate since the day both nations recognized each other.

How does citing the official source of the truth become blatant disinformation? Did you read the Act? Your comment reads more like a rhetoric than a real argument based on logic and facts.

The guidelines for a nation wide NRC have not been formulated. What you're pedaling is nothing more than a conspiracy theory

I never said guidelines have been formulated but the Modi govt has said so in SC that a country wide NRC is necessary

"Centre Tells Supreme Court NRC Necessary, Contradicts Shah's 'No NRC' Declaration"

link: https://thewire.in/government/caa-counter-affidavit-centre

I had the same mindset initially. The CAA in itself is benign. Simply reading the Act will not give you the perspective on how it is going to be implemented. The statements given by the Home Minister of India - who is also a senior member of the ruling party - will give you a better idea of the situation. The backlash due to the passing of the CAB led the Prime Minister to make multiple statements that directly contradict ones made by the Home Minister just a few months before[1]. This, along with the general attitude of senior party ministers[2] is leading the people to be (IMO rightly) concerned about the motives of the government.

[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEfaRmQIDU4 [2]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCyBL8dBOEo

Reply on news.ycombinator.com