that just stupid...first of all Kazakhstan is not Russia anymore. Second of all what the **ck are Hindu doing in Kazakhstan
there are no such thing...that just stupid. And I am sure the real reason these people are escorted out of this house is because they have not payed for taxes, tax evasion practice is common.
well thats certainly very cosmopolitan of you
and as for the surety of the real reason .....
Kazakhstan Government states: “The Inter-Agency Commission considers this dispute to be a civil case and not a religious one”
ISKCON:
* 07/09/ 2006: The commission was established in the capital by Religious Committee of Ministry of Justice to deal with the “land issues” of ISKCON in Kazakhstan.
* Commission originated from Department of Ministry; the Commission had no power to change court rulings and the conflict in general.
* Muslim and Russian Orthodox Church were invited by government to be members of the Commission despite the objections of Human Rights observers and ISKCON.
* The chairman of the Commission refused ISKCON’s lawyers permission to participate in the work of the Commission. Only after long and heated discussions were the lawyers allowed to participate.
* 01/10/2006: The Commission arrived at the ISKCON Community.
* Among appointed members only the Chairman and General Prosecutor’s officer were present.
* The local Hakimat brought 4 Kazakh television channels and bussed in unrelated villagers to scream in front of the cameras. The area of the entire farm was surrounded by a police division. The chairman of the Commission said this was done with his approval.
* 02/10/2006: A concluding meeting of the Commission took place in Karasai District Hakimat. The final statement of the chairman of the Commission read: “There has been an investigation and there is no sign of religious discrimination.”
* There has never been a dialogue established between members of the Commission and ISKCON.
* Members of the Commission appointed in Astana were not present at the sessions in Karasai District.
* Consequently the final decision was made without members of the Commission developing their case. It was done singlehandedly by the chairman of the Commission and the plaintiffs, which was not fair at all.
* The Commission didn’t take into consideration the opinion of the Human Rights observers, who considered the case to be one of religious discrimination.
* Observing the work of the Commission from the time it was established, the Human Rights observers considered the Commission itself to be an obvious demonstration of the religious discrimination.