Watched the interview of Nirmala Sitharaman in one of the tamil channels defending the CAA/NRC. Her key views
1) This is amendment is primarily targeted for those who came to India during the India Pakistan wars and are staying for 60-70 years without any benefit
2) As this is primarily targeted for those affected during the wars we are not looking at others - be it Sri Lankan tamils etc.
3) NRC is not discussed yet so why are we talking about it
4) Protest you can but opposition is stoking violence and the Congress President by stating she stands with the protesters is only supporting violence
My views
1) If the amendment is targeted only at those affected by the wars and who came at that time, what is Afghanistan doing in that list? Secondly the cut off date is 2014 and not 1971 war?
2) The HM was clearly stating that the NRC is part of the whole process and that NRC will follow CAA. He was categorical in asking all of us to understand the chronological order of these
3) Congress President stating that she supports those protesting doesn't mean she supports violence. Does it mean those who are just condoning the violence (like the PM) don't want anyone to protest peacefully? What stupid logic is this?
Really surprised that a senior journalist like Karthigaichelvan didn't bother to raise follow up questions to the minister.
