The introduction of the Citizenship Amendment Bill attracted great criticism from the ‘Secular’ parties. But it’s not just political parties which were opposing the Bill. Their friends in the media were contributing significantly to the hysteria surrounding it as well. Among the many bizarre arguments made against the Bill, the most conspicuous among them, unsurprisingly, came from an NDTV journalist: Sreenivasan Jain.
During the debate in the Parliament on the introduction of the CAB, Union Home Minister CAB said that the Bill wasn’t against minorities at all. Responding to it on Twitter, Sreenivasan Jain argued how could a Bill that specifically “excludes” a “minority community” not be against minorities.
A Bill that excludes a specific minority community is not against minorities? https://t.co/bRmyJ9jGVM
— Sreenivasan Jain (@SreenivasanJain) December 9, 2019
It appears that Jain is arguing that Muslims are minorities in the Islamic States of Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan. The CAB seeks to provide citizenship to the persecuted religious minorities from these three countries. And Muslims, in the countries mentioned, are the majority community. In one stroke, Sreenivasan Jain has far exceeded the most stupid statement Rahul Gandhi has ever made by miles.
Quite obviously, Muslims cannot be considered a persecuted religious minority in an Islamic State. However, Sreenivasan Jain is so blinded by ‘Secularism’ that he cannot see the idiocy of his remark. Furthermore, the CAB has nothing to do with current Indian citizens. It only seeks to provide citizenship to people from neighbouring countries who are being persecuted due to their identity as a religious minority. Therefore, it’s utterly bizarre to argue that the Bill is in any way against the minority communities of India.
Read: Explained: How Citizenship Amendment Bill embraces the history of India
Sreenivasan Jain is known to misrepresent facts in order to peddle a certain narrative. He has done so on several occasions in the past. He has also edited interviews of his guests in order to favour his preordained narrative. He is also known for his false equivalences and equating online speech with actual violence.
