I've added few more reasons to not give nepali citizenship based on discussions with _____. NEW reasons are given in bold.

• Only tax paying Nepali are allowed to raise their voice in Nepal (you don’t have to pay more than sachib’s tax but you can’t be a poor citizen who don’t pay any tax).
• We will have to wait for India to develop. Until then, sorry Nepalese ladies, you can’t have your rights. No citizenship for your kids.
• Those asking for the rights are doing for gaining POPULARITY.
• Asking to provide citizenship to kids based on their NEPALI mother is NOTHING, but a FASHION for nepalese living in western countries.
• Those women are dumb.
• Western agenda
• Threat to Nationality
• Risk to Nepali Economy
• Women like to cheat
• Women are irresponsible
• People from India will flood into Nepal and will evade Nepal
• Demographic dynamics will change.
• People will abuse the law to get citizenship ONLY through WOMEN (NEVER through men).

I never said that we should not give women their right, what I am saying is because of our poor economy, because of our open border, there is possibility of misuse of that provision by easy life seeking people from across the border so in order to minimise (100% avoidance is not possible) such possibility wanted to put some restriction so that it will be difficult for those profit seeking people to misuse our system.

-       I thought I already agreed on requiring additional evidences. But you twisted somewhere to make it look like we’re asking for citizenship based on ‘verbal statement’. How did “VERBAL” come into discussion?

So, economy wise Nepal should be worried if there are 10,000 profit seeking people from the other side of the border.

 And I am sure if we put no restriction there will be more than 10,000 ppl will be legally able to take nepali citizenship which will badly affect our economy.

Actually Nepal has no economy at all, we are run by poor Nepali people working  in middle east and sending money back home. You and me actually don’t help Nepal’s economy.  Those poor Nepalis working hard and sending dollars to Nepal  rupiyah and dollar exchange rate is approx 100, If some how middle eastern countries stop recruiting Neplese, Nepal will run out of dollar in a year and exchange rate will easily be 200 rs per dollar. In such case those 10,000 will cost us a lot.

     - For this 10,000 people, you want to deny half of women in Nepal from their rights. How much of Nepalese economy is affected by giving 2-3 million citizenship to Indians?

-       Do you know the flow of remittance between India and Nepal?

-       How can you assume that I don’t help Nepal’s economy? What has this to do with current discussion?

If US is careful about economic immigrant then why should not we.

जुन गोरु को सिङ छैन उस्को नाम तिखे bhanya jasti bhayena ?

Second, How many Tibetian refugees in Nepal? Approximately 20,000 or even less, China world’s largest economy, largest population is always careful that those people and always ask Nepal to check on them.

Nepals population and economy in comparison to China is peanut, and still we should close our eyes about possible economic downfall? How could that be logical?

Third

-       I thought I already addressed your concern. Why’re you going around? We’re talking about kids who has NEPALI MOTHER and wants to stay their whole life in Nepal. So they want to be citizens who will CONTRIBUTE to economy, not otherwise.

But few misplaced decision will easily destroy a country or a economy.

-       Right, sky will fall. What number are we talking here? Did nepali economy collapse when 2-3 million Indians became nepali citizen?

But reality is different MAJORITY of those like to take Nepali citizenship.

-       Can you guess the number of Indians interested to come to Nepal? First, they’ll have to get married with Nepali ladies and then they’ll have to live for >10 years in Nepal. If they do that, there should not be a problem to give them the citizenship.

Metta I don’t know where you live, but if you live in US, Europe or some other rich country you don’t have right to create a situation where contribution from those people will misused to the welfare of people who has right in different country. अर्का को दुख्ह को कमाइ मा आफ्नो अधिकार खोज्ने होइन आफ्नो अधिकार को लागि आँफैले contribute गर्न पर्छ

-       I beg you now not to deny my rights. LOL. How much can you exaggerate?

-       Have you seen a pie chart of Nepali remittance by countries?

I DON’T WANT some easy life seeking people get Nepali citizenship and enjoy the benefits generated by tax paid by me and other hard working fellow Nepalese.

-       LOL.

How much do you contribute to Nepali budget? Do you pay tax from the money you earn? If not why you are so interested to tell how Nepal should increase mouths instead of increasing working hands. Till date I have paid a lot of tax, much more than a “sachib” of Nepal woild have paid. And I want my tax money to be used for eligible Nepalis only.

These days it has become so fashionable among politician and ppl living in western countries to adopt a popular slogan to gain popularity but they close eyes how the population will be supported economically. Social security to ppl who didn’t had job in their life time, Free school, free health service, free birthing centers cost money you know ? (Although 50% of these will be siphoned by corrupt politicians.)

In India there are little more than 20 million Bangladeshi and Indians always hate those, don’t want them and always complain that those Bangladeshi taking away opportunity from Indians. Why should not Nepali worried about easy life seeking migrants the from other side of the border.

-       What has this got to do with current discussion again? Are you going to give weights based on person’s income and paid tax? What kind of logic is this?

-       How can you assume that person want to be popular by discussing here?

Here I would look the situation in different way. The question is why someone wants to live in Nepal instead of India where he has full right?

-       Why? You answer. I am talking about providing citizenship to those kids living their most of life in Nepal.

If you are not paying tax to Nepal, you don’t have right to increase the burden of other Nepal tax payers.

-       What burden are you talking about?

-       If I say I pay tax, will you AGREE to give women their rights?

It has become a fashion in sajha or in other nepali websites for  ex Nepalis to gain virtual popularity by posting, accepting popular slogan. I would like to request those people stay away from interfering nepals policy. Once you gave up Nepali citizenship you already lost that right.  Positive contributions are always welcome off course.

-       You’re the master on exaggerating, aren’t you?

-       How and who will differentiate between positive and negative contributions?

Once women will start to have property in their name they will also think twice to say someone else is her son/daughter because he/she can legally ask for property from mother too. 

-       Here you go again with your DISTRUST on women.

-       Why do you think that these WOMEN are asking to provide citizenship for someone else’s son?

Here I don’t have to say any thing you compare Nirmala adhikari who had such a tragic time in her life and those women who failed to prepare proper documents for their kids.

-       You showed concern for Nirmala Adhikari’s suffering. I think it has to do with our current law and society’s thinking. Whenever women or minorities protest against discrimination, oppressive society thinks it is threat to religion/culture/economy/nationality and it is western propaganda/agenda.

Tell me which law prevents me to say dumb to dumb people? Western society teaches you to tell truth. I am not saying dumb to all women am I?  I posted this thread because I was impressed by courage Nirmala adhikari and her husband showed. You failed to notice that. What do you think? all women are intelligent or what. I will always say dumb to dumb people be they be a man or women. Intelligent to intelligent people, I don’t discriminate based on gender.

And, I am sorry, who are you to take away my right to say dumb to dumb people.

-       I don’t want to deny anyone of their rights.

-       I got the impression that you’re calling dumb to those women who don’t have citizenship for their kids. I don’t think they’re dumb. Our SOCIETY and EXISTING LAWS want to make them look like dumb.

-       I beg you now not to deny my rights. LOL. How much can you exaggerate?

-       Have you seen a pie chart of Nepali remittance by countries?

How much do you contribute to Nepali budget? Do you pay tax from the money you earn? If not why you are so interested to tell how Nepal should increase mouths instead of increasing working hands. Till date I have paid a lot of tax, much more than a “sachib” of Nepal woild have paid. And I want my tax money to be used for eligible Nepalis only.

These days it has become so fashionable among politician and ppl living in western countries to adopt a popular slogan to gain popularity but they close eyes how the population will be supported economically. Social security to ppl who didn’t had job in their life time, Free school, free health service, free birthing centers cost money you know ? (Although 50% of these will be siphoned by corrupt politicians.)

In India there are little more than 20 million Bangladeshi and Indians always hate those, don’t want them and always complain that those Bangladeshi taking away opportunity from Indians. Why should not Nepali worried about easy life seeking migrants the from other side of the border.

-       What has this got to do with current discussion again? Are you going to give weights based on person’s income and paid tax? What kind of logic is this?

-       How will I become popular?

Here I would look the situation in different way. The question is why someone wants to live in Nepal instead of India where he has full right?

-       Why? You answer. I am talking about providing citizenship to those kids living their most of life in Nepal.

If you are not paying tax to Nepal, you don’t have right to increase the burden of other Nepal tax payers.

-       What burden are you talking about?

-       If I say I pay tax, will you support to give women their rights?

It has become a fashion in sajha or in other nepali websites for  ex Nepalis to gain virtual popularity by posting, accepting popular slogan. I would like to request those people stay away from interfering nepals policy. Once you gave up Nepali citizenship you already lost that right.  Positive contributions are always welcome off course.

-       You’re the master on exaggerating, aren’t you?

-       So all what I’ve been saying are NEGATIVE?

-       How and who will differentiate between positive and negative contributions?

Once women will start to have property in their name they will also think twice to say someone else is her son/daughter because he/she can legally ask for property from mother too. 

-       Here you go again with your DISTRUST on women.

-       Why do you think that these WOMEN are asking to provide citizenship for someone else’s kids?

Here I don’t have to say any thing you compare Nirmala adhikari who had such a tragic time in her life and those women who failed to prepare proper documents for their kids.

-       You showed concern for Nirmala Adhikari’s suffering. I think it has to do with our current law and society’s thinking. Whenever women or minorities protest against discrimination, oppressive society brings religion/culture/economy/nationality/propaganda/western agenda, etc.

Tell me which law prevents me to say dumb to dumb people? Western society teaches you to tell truth. I am not saying dumb to all women am I?  I posted this thread because I was impressed by courage Nirmala adhikari and her husband showed. You failed to notice that. What do you think? all women are intelligent or what. I will always say dumb to dumb people be they be a man or women. Intelligent to intelligent people, I don’t discriminate based on gender.

And, I am sorry, who are you to take away my right to say dumb to dumb people.

-       I don’t want to deny anyone of their rights.

-       I got the impression that you’re calling dumb to those women who don’t have citizenship for their kids. I don’t think they’re dumb. Our SOCIETY and EXISTING LAWS want to make them look like dumb.

lol धर्के सोल्टी ले , कहिले 'your adopted country ' कहिले 'your ex -country ' भन्छ , ....भनेपछि तपाई दुइजनाको पहिले देखिनै राम्रै चिनजान भए जस्तो लाग्यो, ल ठिक छ \

Quite intriguing. How do u guys get time to write all these? I am sure it must have taken significant amount of time to continue with long discussion.

Damn..forgot to mention that it took me almost a minute or two to scroll down and write these words on my smartphone.

धर्के ब्रो : लाहुरे ब्रो ले भने झैँ जुन देशमा छौ नियमानुसार कर तिरेकै छौ | कर सम्बन्धि सम्झौता भएको भए केहि अंश नेपाल पनि पुग्थ्यो होला | अर्ति दिने भन्दा पनि विदेश छिरे पछि सोच समझ मा परिवर्तन आएको हो वा हामि अलिक mature भएका हौ वा देश प्रतिको मोह टाढा भएर बढेको हो :

एउटा कुरा थप्न मन लाग्यो : अर्ति हैन मनमस्तिस्क बाट निस्किएका देश प्रतिका भावना हुन् | पार्टीगत र व्यक्तिगत स्वार्थ बिहिन कुरा लेख्दै छौ सायद तपाइहरुलाइ बस्ने खाने विदेश देखाउने राष्ट्र भक्ति भनि इर्स्या जागेको त हैन कि देशको भलो सोच्न देश भित्रै हुनु पर्छ भन्ने नया नेपाल र नेपालीको नया नियम हुन् ? कि गोर्हो छाला वा विदेशीले भनेको मात्रै सहि र सुन्ने बानि परेकोले नपचेको हो ?

आफ्नै गोजीमा राखे के होला ? साचो त तथ्य कुरा पचाउन गाह्रो हुन्छ अनि तपाइलाइ पनि भै राखेको छ | तपाइका कुरा "चित पनि मेरो पट पनि मेरो भन्ने तिर गै " अन्त्य भयो ? 

नेपाली लाहुरे जी र गोर्खे जी,
मैले माथि आफुले ट्याक्स तिरेको कुरा घमण्ड गरेर भनेको होइन, अब त्यो त जानकारी मात्र दिएको हो. अब जानकारी दिन त पैन्छा नि. जानकारी दिदा घमण्ड गरेको होइन. मैले तिर्या छु भन्दा तैले तिर्या छस भनेको होइन. अब तापैले लेतिरेको पैसा दुरुपयोग भयो भने तपाई लै मन पर्दैन नि होइन.

खास कुरा के भने सिमा परि बाट नागरिकता लिने हरु ले महिना को एक पटक आउछन, बुदेश काल को भत्ता लिंचन जान्चन, उता पनि भत्ता लिन्छन , के गर्नु पापी पेट उनीहरु को पनि जो छ,
अब सजिलो कानुन बनैदिदा उनीहरु को छोरा छोरी ले पनि सजिलै पछि भत्ता पौने बाटो खुल्छ, आनी नेपाली जनता ले तिरेको पैसा को दुरुपयोग भय कि भएन.नेपाल धेरै धनि भइ दया भे ,होस् न त, मानवता नै हो त्यो अलि आली पैसा उताका ले चलाए पनि फरक पर्दैन भन्ने हुन्थ्यो

फेरी नेपालमा नागरिकता नै नदिने भने को छैन , अली समय लग्छ प्रक्रिया पुरा पर्छ, मेट्टा जी कै पत्रिका को पोस्तिंग हेर्नुस न, हो दुखः पाका छन् .तपाई ले भने जस्तै अली पैसा खर्च गरेर स्मार्ट कार्ड बनाउने हो भने तेस्तो समस्या सुवात्तई घट्छ

होइन एक इन्च पनि तल माथि हुन हुन्न ,हामीले भनेकै हुनपर्छ भन्दा सैदान्तिक रुप मा त्यो कुरा ठिकै छ, मैले अर्को थ्रेड मा तेही भनेको छु,
हिजो १९९० भन्दा पहिले नेपाल मा जन्मे का ले नागरिकता पाए.तेस मधे कति त पाउन पर्ने नै थिए. पाउन पर्ने ले पाए तर त्यो मौका मा हामी संग चेक गर्ने सिस्टम नहुदा १०-१५ लाख नपौना पर्ने ले नागरिकता लिए कि ?
भोलि तिनी हरु ६५ वर्ष लाग्छन , पेन्सन लिन नेपाल औछां दिन पर्यो कि परेन ? अहिले सम्म त त्यो गैर कानुनी हो तर प्रमण नाबह्ये सम्म त दिन पर्यो होइन ? १९८० मा जन्मे को रेछ नेपाल मा ,तर भारत को नागरिक ,उ ३० वर्ष पछि भत्ता लिन आउछ १० लाख ले लिदा कति हुन्छ ? वर्षा को १२ अरब रुपिया गयो सित्तै मा. आफुले खुकुलो कानुन बनाउने आनी अरु लाई दोष दिएर अब के हुन्छ.

अब मेत्ता जी भन्नु हुन्छ कति ले लिए अरु एक लाख ले लिए के हुन्छ ? खासै केहि फरक नपर्ला तर भोलि अर्कॉयेर तेती लेलिए अब अर्को १ लाख लै पनि दिउ वनला , तपाई संग नाई भन्ने आधार के, जसले जे भन्यो हुन्छ भन्दै हिड्ने हो भने बनाना रेपुब्लिक भएन नेपाल ?

कुनै पनि देश ले कानुन बनाउदा धेरै कुरा सोचेर बनौछा होइन र ? तेही भन्या अहिले खुकुलो कानुन बनाउदा हामीले भाबिश्ये को पुस्ता लाई आर्थिक भार किन बढाउने ? के हामि लाई त्यो अधिकार छ ,सस्तो नारा को पछाडी हिद्द्दा के हुन्छ

मेरो जबाफ पढ्नुस न , नेपाली बिदेसी जो सुकै होस् जसले जिम्मेबारी बहन गर्नु पर्दैन भबिस्य मा उसले अर्ति दिनु भने को , फेरी तपाइको जति सुकै मिल्ने साथि होस्, तपाइको घर को आर्थिक समस्या त त पैले नै बेहोर्ने हो तपाई को साथि ले त होइन नि, उसले अमेरिका आएपछि वर्षा को एक ताल घुम्न जान पर्छ, स्तोच्क मार्केट मा इन्वेस्ट गर्न पर्छ भन्यो भने पैसा नाबह्ये पनि तेसै गर्नु हुन्छ कि , मा संग पैसा भा भे के के गर्न जान्या थे के के सिकाएर के गर्नु पैसा रुख मा फल्दैन भन्न हुन्छ कि हुदैन ? मैले भन्या नि तेही हो अन्यथा नलिनु होला.

मेरो जबाफ न कसै लाई ब्यङ्ग हो न म बढी जान्न हुने खोज्य हो.
हो तपैले आफु बस्या देश मा ट्याक्स तिर्न हुन्छ , मैले विदेश मा बस्ने लाई ब्यङ्ग हान्या होइन नि, जे लेख्या तेही पद्नुस न.

अब एक नेपाली ले भन्या त फुकेर हेर्ने मान्छे मा बिदेसी भन्या के मान्थे ,मेरो अरु पोस्तिंग पढ्नु भा छैन कि क्या हो

बिदेसी ले सिक्षित को संख्या बढ़ा भन्छ ,नेपाली ले पैसा छैन भन्छ उसले तेसो भए ल येति दिन्छु स्कोल खोल भन्छ नेपाल मा धेरै जसो तेस्तै भकोछ
अब बिदेसी ले पैसा सैसा नदिकन खोल स्कुल, खोल अस्पताल भन्यो भने नेपाल ले कसरि खोल्ने ? चुप लगेर बस्न पर्चाह होइन

तेस्तै हो पारी बस्ने पारी काम गर्ने तर नेपाल मा भत्ता लिन मिल्ने गरि कानुन बनाउदा तेस्बता हुने आर्थिक भार कसले बेहोर्छ भन्न खोज्या मात्रै हो,
सबै कुरा विचार गरेर सोचेर गरेको जबाफ लाई त मान्ने पर्छ नि.
अर्ति नहोला ल ठिकै छ.मन मस्तिस्क बाट निक्ले का भबन पनि राम्रो गर्ने खाल को हुन पर्यो. बजार मा उपलब्ध नारा लाई उचाल्दा देख्नु भएन छबिलाल को हबिगत बराबरी को लागि कुन कानुन बनौन पर्छ तपाई लाई पनि थाहा छ , मलाई पानि थाहा छ , नेपाल मै बस्ने लाई त झन् थाहा छ

अब बजार मा उपलब्ध नारा लाई लागु गर भन्दा परेको कस्ले बेहोर्छा तेती मात्रै भन्न खोजे को .
तेल को भाउ देखि हाल्नु भो घटे को, अब दुइ वर्ष तेल को भाउ उस्तै हुने हो भने अरब मा गका आधा नेपाल फर्केलान, रेमिटान्स आधा घट्ला ,एत्सो भये पछि नेपली पैसा को भाउ पनि घट्ला आनी महंगी कहाँ पुग्ला ?

अब मैले के भन्नु तपाई आफै बुध्हिमान हुनु हुन्छ ,तपाई बसेको देश कै प्रख्यात राष्ट्र पति ले Don't ask what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country
भनेका हुन् क्यारे

तर एउटा कुरा भनि हालुम
मेरो जबाफ न कसै लाई बेंग्ये हो , न कुनै राजनीति हो ,न कुनै बाद बाट प्रेरित हो .तपैले पढ्दा तेस्लाई फेस भ्यालु मा लिन पर्छ, मेरो जबाफ मा कुनै लुके को अर्थ हुदैन र मेरो तेस्तो गर्नी विचार अपनी छैन. (facevalue to accept something because of the way it first looks or seems, without thinking about what else it could mean )

स्कुलसम्म पहुच नभएका करिब २० लाख बच्चा हरु लाई स्कुल पहुच गरौन छ , तेस्को लागि पैसा चाहिन्छ,
सबै लाई आफ्नो भाबना ब्यक्त गर्नी अधिकार छ, तर अधिकार को प्रयोग जिम्मेबारी पुर्बक गर्न पर्छ होइन र ?
नेपाल म १२ कख्य सम्म निसुल्क पढ़ौना सके तेस्ले धेरै समस्या समधान गर्छ. उनीहरुले आफ्नी जिम्मेबारी बोध गर्न सक्छन तेसो गर्दा पेट बोकाएर बाबु भाग्ने समस्या धेरै हद सम्म समाधान हुन्छ
तेस्तो समधान म पैसा खर्छ गर्नी कि , भबिस्य को पुस्ता को लागि अर्ह्तिक भार अप्रनी समाधान खोज्ने

परेबा ले बिरालो देख्यो भने आँखा चिम्लंचा रे, आफुले बिरालो नदेखे पछि बिरालो ले पनि आफुलाई देख्दैन भनेर
आनी बिरालो ले परेवा समाती हाल्छ. अब हामि पढे लेखेको बुह्ज्ने नै नारा को पछाडी लाग्ने हो भने, बिचार गाउ क ति ८- १० कस्ख्य पढे क बिद्यार्थी छबि लाल को पछि लागे भनेर के गाली गर्नी ? ठिकै गरेछन भन्न पर्यो नि

कस्तो कानुन बनाउने, कस्तो नियम बनाउने भन्ने कुरा तपाई को आर्थिक अवस्था म़ा भार पर्छ,
२००० सम्म चाइनिज लाई टुरिस्ट भिसा दिन गारो मान्ने अमेरिका अहिले फटाफट दिन्छ किन ?अमेरिका तेही हो चाइना तेही हो ,फरक के पर्यो भने अब चाइनिज धनि भए
धेरै कुरा गरम भने, कुरा गर्यो कुरै को दुखः भन्या जस्तो हुन्छ , घाटी हेरी हाड निल्नु भनेर हाम्रा पुर्खा ले भनेकै छन् क्यारे

अर्का को धन हेरेर घर बनौन सुरु गर्ने होइन आफ्नो धन हेरेर घर किन्ने बनाउने हो. बनाउन धेरै गरो हुन्छ बिगार्न सजिलो

जो मर्जी

किन र कसरी पाए ?
पैसा पाए पछि श्रीमतीको कुरै छोडौ , बहिनि र आमा लाइ पनि लाल्टिन बजार पुर्याउने बानि व्यहोराले हो | तल देखि माथि सबै पैसाको भरमा काम गरेर पाएका हुन् लाखौ लाखले नागरिकता |

धर्के मित्र सामान्यतया त तपाई एकदम जायज कुरा गर्ने मान्छे हो तर येस्मा चै किन हो तपाइलाई सारै औडाहा भए जस्तो छ \ मेरो बिचारमा तपैले रास्त्रियता माथिको खतरा र समान अधिकार दिने कुरा मा trade off हुन्छ भन्ने सोच्नु भा जस्तो छ , तेस्तो त हुदै होइन नि \

तपाई खाली खर्चको कुरा गर्नु हुन्छ, संबिधान./कानुनमा आधारभूत तथा मौलिक अधिकारको प्रत्याभूत गरे पछि त्यो कार्यानवयन गराउदा कसरि खर्च कम गर्ने भन्ने काम चै सरकारको हो , जनताले त मौलिक अधिकार माग्छ माग्छ \

सूचना प्रबिधि को प्रयोग येति सस्तो हुदैछ तपैले भनेजस्तो दुवै देशमा सुबिधा लिने कुरा रोक्न केहि गारो छैन , ५/७ अरब खर्च गरेर detailed biometrics सहित स्थाई database बनायो भने misuse एकदम कम होला (यो सबैलाई पनि गर्न पर्दैन, बाऊ वा आमा कुनै बिदेशी भएको लाइ मात्र गर्न सकिन्छ ) \ संकास्पद मान्छेलाई verify गर्न पर्दा भारतले पनि सहयोग नै गर्ला \ बम्सज खुलेको प्रमाण नभई त कसैले पनि नागरिकता दिन्न , तर सरकारी संयन्त्रको काम गर्ने दयारा अलि बढायो भने तेस्ता काम फर्चौट हुन्छन \

जिन्दगि भर परिवार सहित बसोबास गरेको मान्छेलाई नागरिकता बाट बन्चित गर्दा देशबाट भित्रै शान्ति सुरक्ष्या मा खतरा हुन सक्छ \

I agree with Laure bro, why dharke ji is spending so much his time and energy just to deny equal rights of a Nepali women ? Sometimes I skip paragraphs in your posting, damn its so long and it is so confusing , where is the summary ? I think summary is don't give this right to woman, am I right ?

Dharke ji, rather than denying her rights, let's agree on giving same rights to the women as men but also agree to put all those restrictions and clauses so that nobody can cheat the system. I hope you will use your time and energy and I know you will figure it out with all your intelligence, I will salute you after that ;-)

गोर्केह जी तपाई ले राम्रो उदहारण दिन भो

अब जति गरे पनि केटि बेच्न लागेकै छन्, अब आफ्नै नातेदार ले केटि बेच्न लैजन्चन भने हाम्लाई के को झंचात भनेर केटि बेच्न सजिलो हुने कानुन त बनौन भएन नि , कानुन कडा नै बनौन पर्छ तेसो भए अपराधी ले कहिले न कह्लिले सजाए पौल नै.

बंगाली को के कुरा गर्नु हुन्छ, २००२ साल तिर बम्बै मा नेपाली पस्स्पोर्ट १५००० भा रु मा बेचिन्थ्यो, किन भन्नुहोला भने, नगलंद,मणिपुर तिरका नेपाली जस्तो देखिने, दर्ज्लिंग तिर का एक्ष नेपाली हरुले ब्रिटिश गोर्खा मा भर्ना हुन को लागि, मैले अहिले बिर्से सानो मा अप्त्रिका मा पढ्य थे १९८४ तिर हो कि गोर्खा ले आफ्ना गोरा हाकिम लै पितेछां चार जना हो कि कति लै कोर्ट मार्शल भएछ, पछि ब्रिटिश ले बुझ्दा उनीहरु लै उक्साउने गोर्खा छै दार्जलिंग को रेछ, यो पासपोर्ट को ब्यापार अपरम्पार छ,

अझ धेरै ले सजिलै संग पासपोर्ट बनौन सक्ने कानुन बनाए के होला ?

समस्या छ भन्दै मा सजिलो कानुन कसैले बनाउदैं हेर्नुस न मेक्सिकन आएका आय्कै छन् जति गरे पनि अब जति गरे पनि आएकै छन्.अहिले वर्ष को एक लाख आक छन्, कानुन सजिलो बने दिउ आरु थप ५०,००० औलन भनेर अमेरिका ले भन्ला त ? हो अमेरिका मा बसेका मेक्सिकन ले त तेसै भन्लान, तर तेस्तो कानुन बनाउला त
राम राज्य राजा राम को पल मा पनि थिएन , नत्र तेत्रो लादै किन हुन्थ्यो तेसकारण खराब मान्छे ले जहिलेपनि एउटा न एउटा उपाए निकाल्छन तर राज्य ले कानुन बनाएर कन्ट्रोल गर्छ सकेसम्म.

युरोप मा र्रोमा हरु आएको १००० वर्ष जति भो तर अझै सम्म पनि उनीहरु लाई एउरोपेअन हरु नराम्रो थान्चन, अस्ति फ्रान्स ले त डिपोर्ट नै गर्यो.हामी कहाँ चाही उन्हारू आएर यो गर उ गर भनेर भन्छन. हजार वर्ष सम्म आफु हरु चाहि रोमा को समस्या समाधान गर्दैनन्, उल्टै रोमा लाई दोष दिन्चन फटाहा भन्छन.तिनै हामी कहाँ आएर हामी लाई अर्ति दिन्छन के भन्ने .

समस्या छ तर कानुन खुकुलो पारेर समस्या समधान गर्दा आरु समस्या थुप्रिञ्छन,यो कुरा मा चाही कानुन खुकुलो गर्न हुने, अरु मा किन नहुने भन्यो भने जबाफ देहि को ?

aalukojohol 

Dharke bro, I hope I am not the accuser of that something ;-) and I like the fact that you stand on what you truly believe.

In the same way, I truly believe that we have to work on giving equal rights to women also.and like you said above, its best to work on establishing some kind of verification system before going backwards on law denying this right to women . I hope we are on same page now, if we are then I will take our understanding to the sambidhan Sava to ratify this bill, how about that ;-) ?

नेपाली लाहुरे जी ,
पाउन पर्ने ले पाएमा त तेस्को खर्छ सरकार ले गर्ने पर्छ ,पुरा सहमत छु ,कर बढाएर पनि अधिकार दिन पछि पर्न हुन्न, तर कानुन मा प्वाल बन्द गर्न पर्छ मात्र भनेको, सर्त राख्नु पनि पर्दैन भनेर मैले नै किन किन अवस्था मा सर्त तखना अप्र्दैना भनेर तपैले यहाँ क़्क़ुओते गर्न भएको थ्रेअद मा पनि लेखेकै छु , तर तपाईहरु लै मैले अधिकार दिन हुन्न भनेर भनेको भन परेको हुनाले मा जबाफ दिन बाध्य छु, स्शिबा लिङ्ग जी ले ज्वाई लै नागरिकता दिने कि नदिने बन्ह्हे मा मैले प्रस्ट नै राखेको छु.यहाँ पनि अधिकार नदिने होइन तर सर्त हरु लागु हुन्छन मात्र भनेको, ५-७ अरब खर्च गरेर एलेच्त्रोनिच वेरिफिचशन सिस्टम बनाए सर्त राख्न पनि जरुरि छैन तर ,जबर जस्ती नभने को कुरा लै भन्यो भने पछि मैले जबाफ दिने पर्छ, नत्र मैले त्यो आरोप स्वीकारे को हुन्छ , भोलि कसैले यो थ्रेड लै कोट गरेर आरु ले आरोप लगाउदा त चुप लाग्य थिस नि भनेर वन्यो भने मैले होइन भन्न मिल्छ. तेसकारण

मैले मेरो जबाफ मा के पनि भने को छु भने भारत को जिबन स्तर धेरै माथि गयो भने पनि सर्त चाहिदैन भने को छु किन भने त्यो बेला दुरुपयोग हुने सम्भाबन हुदैन बरु हाम्रा ले उताको सुबिधा दुरुपयोग गर्लान
तर मैले अधिकार दिन हुन्न भनेर कहिँ भने को छैन केहि सर्त राख्ने कुरा मा मेट्टा जी पनि सहमत हुनु हुन्छ

मेरो कुरा मा सहमत पनि हुने अनी मलाई आरोप पनि लगाई रहने हुदा मैले जबाफ दिन परेको हो.

l

I rest my case here with the following summary again as the reasons for not giving women their rights in Nepal.

• Only tax paying Nepali are allowed to raise their voice in Nepal (you don’t have to pay more than sachib’s tax but you can’t be a poor citizen who don’t pay any tax).
• We will have to wait for India to develop. Until then, sorry Nepalese ladies, you can’t have your rights. No citizenship for your kids.
• Those asking for the rights are doing for gaining POPULARITY.
• Asking to provide citizenship to kids based on their NEPALI mother is NOTHING, but a FASHION for nepalese living in western countries.
• Those women are dumb.
• Western agenda
• Threat to Nationality
• Risk to Nepali Economy
• Women like to cheat
• Women are irresponsible
• People from India will flood into Nepal and will evade Nepal
• Demographic dynamics will change.
• People will abuse the law to get citizenship ONLY through WOMEN (NEVER through men).

Unanswered questions from my last post:

you twisted somewhere to make it look like we’re asking for citizenship based on ‘verbal statement’. How did “VERBAL” come into discussion?

For this 10,000 people, you want to deny half of women in Nepal from their rights. How much of Nepalese economy is affected by giving 2-3 million citizenship to Indians?

Do you know the flow of remittance between India and Nepal?

How can you assume that I don’t help Nepal’s economy? What has this to do with current discussion?

I thought I already addressed your concern. Why’re you going around? We’re talking about kids who has NEPALI MOTHER and wants to stay their whole life in Nepal. So they want to be citizens who will CONTRIBUTE to economy, not otherwise.

Have you seen a pie chart of Nepali remittance by countries?

What has this got to do with current discussion again? Are you going to give weights based on person’s income and paid tax? What kind of logic is this?

How will I become popular?

If I say I pay tax, will you support to give women their rights

Why do you think that these WOMEN are asking to provide citizenship for someone else’s kids?

Here are my responses.

I started this thread so that people will  learn from courageous people like Nirmala and her husband. I dont see you writing anyhting ,even a word to praise them but instead used this thread to your advocacy.

-       I'm addressing one of the root causes of these discrimination against women (did that exclude Nirmala)?

-       Anything women and minority ask are western agenda/fashionable slogan/drive to be popular/foreign money/threat to nationality

-       Until you provide women with their rights, discrimination will continue.

-       What is the lesson from Nirmala and her husband? I want to hear from you.

-       Praising Nirmala, rather than discussing about the root causes of problem, will be the SOLUTION. I agree with you here.

-       What is my advocacy? I’m lost here. Am I trying to win/gain something here?

 You could have shown some decency for their action you know.To do this you dont need to pick some popular slogan. Instaed you started bashing nepals law  about citizenship.

-       Now, I’m not decent. I don't pay tax; Nepal is not my home; I'm arguing for the sake of arguing; I want to dictate Nepal; I want to write rules for Nepal; this is fashion for me; I want to be popular. What are you trying to do here?

-       How is providing WOMEN their right is POPULAR SLOGAN or FASHIONABLE or DRIVE TO BECOME POPULAR.

-       Nepal’s citizenship and many other laws discriminate against women. I think this is the first step to end the plights of women like Nirmala in Nepal. You don’t want to address the problem, do you?

 

Mentioning my tax amount was just a information but you immidiately jumped to the conclusion that it meant people who contribute  less has no right. Because it suited your point. 

-       Yes, it suited my point because TAX is RELATED with the change of our laws. That’s why I want to BOAST how much I pay in taxes to prove my point.

-       Disclosing my tax amount will help to build my case.

-       I (Not you) jumped into conclusion that I don’t CONTRIBUTE to Nepali Economy.

-       Please do some research to find the contribution of Nepalese living in western countries to total amount of remittance in Nepal

 Slogan is not yours, if somehting goes wrong you dont have to take responsibility, you dont have to face consequences,  you dont have to bear financial burden.  still you prefer to dictate your ex country which rule they should make and which they should not .LOL

-       Yes, it is my ex country. You know my status well; Can I send you my “china”? I’m impressed by your astrology skills.

-       Thanks for showing that I don’t care about Nepal. All I want to do is to make negative contribution.

-       I am working for someone’s slogan. I already wrote that I got check for writing here.

-       LOL. I want to dictate Nepal, don’t I? Thanks for the entertainment.

-       Would you like to read my 1000 page rules about what Nepal should make or not make in New Nepali Constitution?

-       Yes, LOL.

 

You dont have the right to dictate how other should run their house you know. 

If you are so much interested in womens plight why dont you start in your own adopted country?

-       Again, I’m impressed by your astrology skills.

-       Now, you want to kick me out of Nepal?

-       What is my adopted country?

-       If I say Nepal is my adopted country, will you ALLOW me to talk about women’s plight in Nepal? Can I chose Nepal as my adopted country please?

 

कर तिर्न पनि नपर्ने, सम्स्या आएमा जिम्मेबारी पनि लिन नपर्ने, तर पपुलर स्लोगन ( tyo pani afno hoina ) लिएर आफुले छोडेको  देश लाई अर्ती दिने यो गर्न पर्छ,त्यो गर्न पर्छ भनेर   

 त्यो त जस्ले पनि गर्छ नि, नेपालको सम्स्या नै धेरै अर्ती दिने बेक्ती भएर हो

-       How do you know whether I pay tax or not?

-       How much can you exaggerate? First you exaggerated about the sky falling in Nepal if we change our citizenship law. Now, you think I’m running after POPULAR slogan.

-       I didn’t know until you wrote here that it is a POPULAR slogan. If it is gaining POPULARITY, I’m glad. I’ve hope now that the law will be changed.

-       Can you please tell me what are you doing till now?

and you even dare to tell that nothing happend by giving citizenship to 2.3 million  forigners without following law. Adding people in a poor country wont effect economy, where you learned that?

 today you say Nepal already added 2.3million ppl so giving citizesnhip to another million wont have any negative effect, tomorrow another person will advocate giving citizenship to son in laws. Is there any stop in this downfall? 

  Yeah my friend when I present different possibility it is exaggregation and when you pick up others prepared slogan for your ex country it is intelligence right.

-       Can you please drop your accusation about it being my ex-country? How much can exaggerate/lie?

-       You like to exaggerate. You gave another example here by saying that next people’re going to ask the citizenship for their son-in-law. If it is not called exaggeration, I’m sorry I don't know the meaning of this word.

-       Did I say nothing happened? I think I asked what happened to Nepali economy with the new citizens of 2-3 million?

 It is interesting to observe that people who dont have to bear responsibility are interested to impose their slogans on Nepal.and nepalhas to followblindly lol,

-       You’re right here again. All the responsibilities are going to be on your shoulder. I am writing here to be popular. I’ve not heard claps yet.

-       What is my slogan? Why do I want to Nepal to follow me? We're talking about opening our eyes here, and being AWARE of our BIASES. I think this thread is an example of these unconscious biases.

 You already agreed to put restriction,actually this discussion was not necessary at all, I dont know what you want to proove. 

-       I already wrote that. I was the one who wrote first about adding restrictions. But your imaginative mind keeps on adding the twists and you wrote to make it look like I’m asking to give citizenship based on verbal statements. Who asked about verbal statement?

And above all you posted the news,  You know courts follow constitution. They didnt have papers,so it was not easy for her to get citizesnship.That is true everywhere,  if you dont have paper you have to follow some extra procedures.They did and got citizenship thats all.

-       What paper are you talking about? Don’t you get it?

-       A woman goes to get citizenship for her son with the documents of her citizenship, her marriage certificate, her son’s birth certificate, evidence of their permanent residence from municipality, her son’s entire schooling in Nepal, but she doesn’t include her husband’s citizenship. What will happen here?

-       So you expect these women to gather support of WHOLE COMMUNITY, spend significant amount of time to go to court dates, SPEND large amount of money for hiring lawyers.

-       They got citizenship very easily, didn’t they? In fact, it is very difficult to get citizenship through father, isn’t it? I’m done with this discussion now (after this post). Thank you.

 This PROVES that even if father doesnt have CITIZENSHP card kids will get citizenship if there is enough evidence. There are some restriction which were in place because of Nepals location thats all.

-       Yes this PROVES very well. Except she has to get the SUPPORT of her ENTIRE COMMUNITY, SPENT days/months/years on court dates, SPENT thousands of rupees for lawyers.

-       What is that RESTRICTION? That RESTRICTION is you need FATHER (Mother doesn’t count).

 There is no society without problem, every society has its pros and cons. Nepali society also has problems BUT  I already told in my first reply you can not chnage peoples mentality with law. there will always be some bad apple. 

-       What is your point here?

-       Shouldn’t we try to solve problems because others have problems too?

-       IMO, changing law can be the first step to SECURE the rights.

-       What is your point about bad apple?

 Yes I showed the concern about Nirmala but at the same time I also see people like herself and her husband  very corregeous people in our society. I told in my first reply that we need to encourage positive thoughts, corregaous people who will move our society forward. 

-       Please tell me how do we encourage that? By denying women from their basic rights? Blaming women? Saying they’re likely to cheat? Saying women’re dumb and not responsible? Telling men to be careful from women?

 Society will not change overnight. Discussing for the sake of discussion does not bring any fruit to the society. 

-       I think you’re discussing for the sake of discussion, not me. That’s why I’m ending my responses here.

-       I didn’t talk about changing society overnight, did I? I talked about providing citizenship through women.

 पैसा पनि दिन नपर्ने, अपजस पनि लिन नपर्ने, खाली अर्ती मात्र दिन त जस्ले पनि दिन्छ नि,  आफ्नो अर्ती आँफै सँग राखे कसो होल ?

-       I’m not giving advice. I’m asking for CHANGE in our DISCRIMINATORY LAWS.

-       Please stop your assumption of me not contributing to economy. That is irrelevant here. You’re exaggerating too much.

अरुलाई यसो र उसो भन्नेले आफुले अहिले सम्म माथि के गरि राखेको र एनामा एक पटक हेरि माथिको सुझाब आफै बाट लागू गरे कसो होला

Thanks ___ for your replies. Let's see what the constitution will write in this topic. 

Have a nice day ___!

कर तिर्न पनि नपर्ने, सम्स्या आएमा जिम्मेबारी पनि लिन नपर्ने, तर पपुलर स्लोगन ( tyo pani afno hoina ) लिएर आफुले छोडेको  देश लाई अर्ती दिने यो गर्न पर्छ,त्यो गर्न पर्छ भनेर   

 त्यो त जस्ले पनि गर्छ नि, नेपालको सम्स्या नै धेरै अर्ती दिने बेक्ती भएर हो

-       How do you know whether I pay tax or not?

-       How much can you exaggerate? First you exaggerate about the sky falling in Nepal if we change our citizenship law. Now, you think I’m running after POPULAR slogan.

-       I didn’t know until you wrote here that it is a POPULAR slogan. If it is gaining POPULARITY, I’m glad. I’ve hope now that the law will be changed.

-       Can you please tell me what are you doing till now?

and you even dare to tell that nothing happend by giving citizenship to 2.3 million  forigners without following law. Adding people in a poor country wont effect economy, where you learned that?

 today you say Nepal already added 2.3million ppl so giving citizesnhip to another million wont have any negative effect, tomorrow another person will advocate giving citizenship to son in laws. Is there any stop in this downfall? 

  Yeah my friend when I present different possibility it is exaggregation and when you pick up others prepared slogan for your ex country it is intelligence right.

-       Can you please drop your accusation about ex-country?

-       You like to exaggerate. You gave another example here by saying that next people’re going to ask the citizenship for their son-in-law. If it is not called exaggeration, I’m sorry I forgot the meaning of this word.

-       Did I say nothing happened? I think I asked what happened to Nepali economy with the new citizens of 2-3 million?

 It is interesting to observe that people who dont have to bear responsibility are interested to impose their slogans on Nepal.and nepalhas to followblindly lol,

-       You’re right here again. All the responsibilities are going to be on your shoulder. I am writing here to be popular. I’ve not heard claps yet.

-       What is my slogan?

 You already agreed to put restriction,actually this discussion was not necessary at all, I dont know what you want to proove. 

-       I already wrote that. I was the one who wrote first about adding restrictions. But your imaginative mind keeps on adding the twists and you wrote to make it look like I’m asking to give citizenship based on verbal statements.

 And above all you posted the news,  You know courts follow constitution. They didnt have papers,so it was not easy for her to get citizesnship.That is true everywhere,  if you dont have paper you have to follow some extra procedures.They did and got citizenship thats all.

-       What paper are you talking about? Don’t you get it?

-       I make it simple here. A woman goes to get citizenship for her son with the documents of her citizenship, her marriage certificate, her son’s birth certificate, evidence of their permanent residence from municipality, her son’s entire schooling in Nepal, but she doesn’t include her husband’s citizenship. What will happen here?

-       So you expect these women to gather support of WHOLE COMMUNITY, spend significant amount of time to go to court dates, SPEND large amount of money for hiring lawyers.

 This PROVES that even if father doesnt have CITIZENSHP card kids will get citizenship if there is enough evidence. There are some restriction which were in place because of Nepals location thats all.

-       Yes this PROVES very well. Except she has to get the SUPPORT of her ENTIRE COMMUNITY, SPENT days/months/years on court dates, SPENT thousands of rupees for lawyers.

-       What is that RESTRICTION? That RESTRICTION is you need FATHER (Mother doesn’t count).

 There is no society without problem, every society has its pros and cons. Nepali society also has problems BUT  I already told in my first reply you can not chnage peoples mentality with law. there will always be some bad apple. 

-       What is your point here?

-       Shouldn’t we try to solve problems because others have problems?

-       IMO, changing law can be the first step to SECURE the rights.

-       What is your point about bad apple?

 Yes I showed the concern about Nirmala but at the same time I also see people like herself and her husband  very corregeous people in our society. I told in my first reply that we need to encourage positive thoughts, corregaous people who will move our society forward. 

-       Please tell me how do we encourage that? By denying women from their basic rights? Blaming women? Saying they’re likely to cheat? Saying women’re dumb and not responsible? Telling men to be careful from women?

 Society will not change overnight. Discussing for the sake of discussion does not bring any fruit to the society. 

-       I think you’re discussing for the sake of discussion, not me. That’s why I’m ending my responses here.

-       I didn’t talk about changing society overnight, did I? I talked about providing citizenship through women.

 पैसा पनि दिन नपर्ने, अपजस पनि लिन नपर्ने, खाली अर्ती मात्र दिन त जस्ले पनि दिन्छ नि,  आफ्नो अर्ती आँफै सँग राखे कसो होल ?

-       I’m not giving advice. I’m asking for CHANGE in our DISCRIMINATORY LAWS.

-       Please stop your assumption of me not contributing to economy. That is irrelevant here. You’re exaggerating too much.

अरुलाई यसो र उसो भन्नेले आफुले अहिले सम्म माथि के गरि राखेको र एनामा एक पटक हेरि माथिको सुझाब आफै बाट लागू गरे कसो होला

Thanks ____ for your replies.

Have a nice day ___ !

Society will not change overnight. Discussing for the sake of discussion does not bring any fruit to the society. 

-       I think you’re discussing for the sake of discussion, not me. That’s why I’m ending my responses here.

-       I didn’t talk about changing society overnight, did I? I talked about providing citizenship through women.

 पैसा पनि दिन नपर्ने, अपजस पनि लिन नपर्ने, खाली अर्ती मात्र दिन त जस्ले पनि दिन्छ नि,  आफ्नो अर्ती आँफै सँग राखे कसो होल ?

-       I’m not giving advice. I’m asking for CHANGE in our DISCRIMINATORY LAWS.

-       Please stop your assumption of me not contributing to economy. That is irrelevant here. You’re exaggerating too much.

अरुलाई यसो र उसो भन्नेले आफुले अहिले सम्म माथि के गरि राखेको र एनामा एक पटक हेरि माथिको सुझाब आफै बाट लागू गरे कसो होला

Thanks ____ for your replies!

Have a nice day ___!

हुनत यो थ्रेड पुरै सिर्सक को बिसय बाट एकदम टाडा गएको थियो , तैपनि अर्को थ्रेड खोल्नु भन्दा येही 'क्लोज' भै सकेको थ्रेडमा केहि थप्ने ध्रिस्टता गर्दै छु |

सेतोपाटीमा अमित ढकालको एउटा लेख रैछ | तुलनात्मक रुपले तेतिको परिपक्क्वा पत्रकारले तथ्य चै सहि नै राखे होलना -खोजबिन गरेर | लेख लामो छ तेसैले केहि भाग कपि गरेर राखेको छु :

"...... नागरिकताको विषय यो मुलुकमा धेरै अघिदेखि जटिल बनाइएको छ। राष्ट्रियताका 'ठेकेदार'हरुले यो बहसलाई कहिल्यै स्वस्थ र तथ्यपरक बन्न दिएनन्। 'व्यावसायिक' राजनीतिज्ञहरूले पनि नागरिकताको समस्या समाधान गर्न होइन, त्यसमाथि राजनीति गर्न मात्र आफ्नो समय खर्चिए।

धेरै टाढा जानु पर्दैन, २०६२/६३ पछिको नागरिकता राजनीतिलाई नै हेरे पुग्छ।

.............................. टोली गाउँ-गाउँ गएर नागरिकता वितरण गर्‍यो।

कति नागरिकता वितरण भए, कसैले तथ्य हेर्ने दु:ख गरेन। मधेसी नेताहरुले चुनावमा भाषण गरे, 'नागरिकताको हकबाट बन्चित दसौं लाख मधेसीले हाम्रा कारण नागरिकता पाए।'

'राष्ट्रवादी' हरूले टाउको समाए, '४० लाख भारतीयले नागरिकता पाए।'

सिमापारिबाट आएर ४० लाख भारतीयले नागरिकता लिएको कारण संविधानसभा-१ मा मधेसी पार्टीहरुले त्यति धेरै सिट ल्याएको उनीहरुले ठोकुवा गरे।

तथ्य के हो भने, गाउँ-गाउँ खटिएको टोलीमार्फत देशभर जम्मा २६ लाख ७० हजार नागरिकता वितरण गरिएको थियो। त्योमध्ये २५ लाख नागरिकता वंशजका आधारमा वितरण गरिएको थियो, पहाडमा १३ लाख र तराईमा १२ लाख। बाबुको नागरिकता भएका कारण यी २५ लाखले जहिले पनि नागरिकता लिन सक्थे। गाउँमै टोली आएकोले सुगम भयो, त्यति बेला नै लिए।

जम्मा एक लाख ७० हजारले मात्रै १५ वर्ष नेपालमै बसेको प्रमाण र तीन नेपाली नागरिकको सिफारिस जुटाएर नागरिकता लिएका थिए।

......................................... भारतीय पुरूष वा भारतमा घरजम गरेका नेपाली चेलीका सन्तान उदयमान भारतमा अवसर छोडेर किन नेपाल आउँछन्? चीनबाट किन आउँछन्? अरू मुलुकबाट किन आउँछन्?

दोहोरो नागरिकता लिन्छन् भन्ने तर्क हो भने त्यसको उपचार गर्न सकिन्छ। विवाह गरेर आउँदा विदेशको नागरिकता छोडेर आउने व्यवस्थाले दोहाेरो नागरिकताको समस्या झन् हल गर्छ। उताको नागरिकता छोड्नु नपर्दा बरु घुस ख्वाएर विगतमा कतिले नागरिकता निकाले होलान्। वैधानिक रूपले नेपाली महिलाका पतिलाई नागरिकताको हक दिएपछि त्यो विकृति पनि हट्छ।

विशेषगरी तराईमा राजनीति गर्ने कांग्रेस, एमाले र मधेसीदलका नेताहरुको समान चिन्ता छ- 'पारि'का ज्वाईंले नागरिकता पाए भने यता आएर पैसा खर्च गरेर राजनीति गर्छन्, हामी पछि पर्छौ।

कस्तो निकम्मा तर्क हो यो!
.............................................
त्यो त राजनीतिक पार्टी र नेताको समस्या हो। उनीहरुको चारित्रिक कमजोरीको प्रश्न हो। त्यसो त नेपालमै जन्मेर राजनीति गरेका, मन्त्री भएकामध्ये केही सदाबहार विदेशी गुप्तचर संस्थाको हितमा काम गर्छन्, उनीहरुकहाँ सूचना पुर्‍याउँछन्।

विकृति हाम्रा नेता र पार्टीमा छ, अनि त्यसको शिकार महिला किन हुनुपर्ने? महिलाका सन्तान किन हुनु पर्ने? जीवनको सारा सम्भावना र सपना बोकेका युवा, युवती किन हुनुपर्ने? ..........................."

http://setopati.com/bichar/24117/

लाहुरे जी

ढकाल सर को लेख मैले नि पढे. केहि तथ्य पारक , केहि सेन्तिमेंटल र केहि आफ्नो कुरा आफैले काटेको हो कि जस्तो पनि लाग्यो

अब तथ्य प्रक बाट सुरु गरम

४० लाख ले नागरिकता पाएको छै होइन , यो कुरा मैले पहिले पनि भनि सकेको छु तराई मा पर्ने कतिपय पाउनु पर्ने ले पाएका हुन् तेस्मा अतीनु पर्ने छैन . मेरो विचार मा १० -१५ लाख ले लिएको भन्ने थ्यो ,ढकाल सर को लेख पढ्दा
त्यो पनि होइन जस्तो छ.तर केहि ले छै पक्कै लेक छन्

ढकाल सर ले भन्नु भएको जस्तो तेस्ले राजनीतिक निणयेक राजनीतिक असर पर्ला जस्तो छै मलाई पनि लाग्दैन

तर नेपाल गरिब देश ,अर्थतन्त्र कम्जोर भएकोहुनाले तेस्ले आर्थिक र्य्प मा हामीलाई पक्कै असर पर्छ भन्ने मेरो विचार छ तेस्करण राजनीतिक भन्दा पनि आर्थिक असर तिर ध्यान दिन पर्छ

अब उदैमान भारत छोडेर किन नेपाल औलन भनेर प्रस्न गर्नु भएको छ त्यो चाही नमिले को जस्तो देखिन्छ, तेही लेख मा उहाले डेढ लाख ले १५ वर्ष नेपाल बसेको प्रमाण पुराएर नेपाल को नागरिकता लिएका छन् भन्नु भएको छ ,
तिनीहरु उदैमान भारत छोडेर आएका नै हुन् नि होइन र ?

उदैमान भारत मा सबै धनि छैनन, नेपाल संग जोडिएको राज्य हरुको गरिब जनसंख्या मात्र लिने हो भने पनि झन्डै नेपाल को जनसंख्या जति हुन पुग्छ होला.

फेरी भारत मा भारतीय मात्र छैनन्, गैरकानुनी बंगाली हरु पनि छन् ,बंग्ल्देश बाट पाकिस्तान जना हिडेका तर पाकिस्तान ले नलिएको उर्दु भाषा बोल्ने पाकिस्तानी पनि छन्, उत्तर पुर्बी भारत मा नेपाली जस्ता देखिने भारतीय पनि छन् , तिनी हरु नेपाल आउछन, नेपाल संग को सक्कली भारतीय को नक्कली भारतीय हुन् भनेर छुत्त्युना सक्ने सिस्टम छैन

तेस्तै तिब्बती किन औछां भन्नु भएको छ ,नेपाल लेनेपल आउने तिब्बती हरु लै चिन मै फिर्ता पठाउने बेब्स्तः नाभैन्जेल तिब्बत बाट बर्सेनि १-२ हजार तिब्बती आउने , समुकता राष्ट्र स्नाघा को सरनार्थी आयोग ले देखौछा, तिनी हरुले ले नेपाल लै अप्ठ्यारो मा पर्न सक्छन.

१९७० तिर तिब्बती हरु नेपाल आएर , चिन बिरुध्हा बिद्रोह गरेको खम्पा बिद्रोह को नाम ले प्रख्यात छ, त्यो बेला चिन कम्जोर थियो अहिले तेस्तो छैन.

ढकाल सर ले भारतीय किन आउछन, तिब्बती कियन आउछन भन्ने कुरा बास्तबिकता संग मेल खादैन, १९९० देखि उदैमान भारत बाट डेढ लाख नेपाल आएर नेपाल को नागरिकता लिन चाहनु लै के भन्ने ?

ढकाल सर ले एक पटक ति डेढ लाख किन उदैमान भारत छोडेर नेपाल आए भनेर सोच्नु भएको भए आफ्नो प्रस्न को जबाफ आफै पाउनु हुन्थ्यो भन्ने लग्छ
भारत को लागि ढेड लाख आए गएको पत्तै हुदैन, नेपाल तेस्तो छैन

नेपाल संसार को गरिब देश मध्हे एक हो, तै पनि त्यो देश मा बिदेशी हरु नागरिकता लिन न आउन पर्ने हो ढकाल सर का अनुसार ,त्यो कुरा म पनि मान्छु र सोद्छु किन आउन पर्ने ? कारण के छ ?
नआउन पर्ने मात्र नभई तेसरी आएका ज्वाई हरु लै सजिलै नागरिकता दिन पर्छ भनेर जोरदार अवाज किन उठाउने जबकि यो कुनै समस्या नै होइन भने
होलान एक दुइ जना परिबन्द मा परेर आउने हरु, तर तेस्ता को लागि पुरा कानुन नै खुकुलो बनौन पर्छ भनेर किन ठुला ठुला बहस हुन्छन ? ढकाल सर ले पनि लेख्न भयो, एक दुइ जना को मात्र समस्या भएको भए केस बाई केस गए भै हाल्छ, धेरै जना भए गरिब देश को नागरिकता लिन किन आए भनेर सोच्ने पर्ने हुन्छ
ढकाल सर ले तेता तिर ध्यान पुरौना भएन जस्तो छ