Travel: Malaysia explains lack of Visa on Arrival for Indians
It's a wonderful irony: one group of Indians planned to sue the UK for bringing their forebears to Malaysia and then, as they claim, leaving them to end up in poverty; another hides out in Malaysia having overstayed their visas.
Most Recent - This Section
Travel: No, you cannot go to Cuba, US tells citizensTravel: USA's TSA's list of outrages goes on
Travel: Bahrain hopes new airport will improve image
Travel: TSA unrepentant over groping passengers
Travel: USA's TSA bans toner cartridges
Most Recent - Whole Site
Taxation: US Treasury notice re FACTAInternet: "buy this domain or lose business"
The Risk Professional: US Treasury Statement re Iran banking sanctions
Automotive: Clint Eastwood's misty eyes playing for Detroit
Aviation: Kingfisher's finances cause concern
Most Recent - BankingInsuranceSecurities.Com
FI Fraud: Phishing - Santander UKSanctions: OFAC update 20120207
Phishing Alert: Quickbooks / Intuit
Sanctions: OFAC UPDATE 20120206
Sanctions HM Treasury - Iraq
The Malaysian Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, says that a total of 39,046 Indian passport holders arrived in Malaysia and then fell off the map. For some reason, those claiming residence in Chennai are particularly prominent, he said.
And that is why the visa on arrival service introduced in 2006 was revoked after just two years, and the government is reluctant to re-introduce it. Even so, Najib told reporters yesterday, consideration was being given to the provision of the service for those coming from places other than Chennai.
Indians in Malaysia have been demanding the reinstatement of the service, claiming it to be racially motivated. At the forefront of that has been a political party known as HindRAF, which two years ago announced its intention to sue the British government for USD2,000 million on behalf of Indians which it claimed were taken to Malaysia and then effectively dumped with the result that they are poor. But the campaign has lost all credibility with untrue statements about the size of rallies, false claims of deaths at those rallies and lies about the willingness of the UK High Commission to accept a petition; followed by the leader of that campaign running to the UK and failing to give account of the money raised for the action.