In your June 19 article, "Immigration Forum draws diverse voices, contention," you wrote, "Katie Moss, from the McMinnville metro area, volunteered in the Sheridan area last year to ease the transition of immigrant detainees from the southern border and brought in to facilities in Oregon. Most of those men were Sikh, Moss said, and were fleeing the Indian subcontinent to escape religious persecution."
I follow the news closely and am somewhat familiar with present day India, the "world's largest democracy," and this claim puzzled me, as I have seen no reporting on persecution of Sikhs.
Yes, there was a Sikh separatist movement a few years back, and Sikh terrorists, among other violent acts, destroyed an in-flight Air India plane.
I wanted to see what Wikipedia said about "religious persecution of Sikhs," and what I found was this: "The present situation in Punjab is generally regarded as peaceful, and the militant Khalistan movement weakened considerably. The Sikh community maintains its own unique identity and is socially assimilated in cosmopolitan areas. Some organizations claim that social divisions and problems still exist in rural areas, but the present situation remains largely peaceful; support for an independent homeland may remain strong among the separatist Sikh leaders."
Now I wonder where the religious persecution comes in. Or is this a variety of "asylum shopping?" Rather than move to another, more amenable community in your own country, you elect to move somewhere not exactly nearby, say, the USA or Australia, bypassing, of course, other less desirable refuges on your way.
What's the golden key to relocation in the USA? The religious persecution claim is your get-out-of-jail card for fast entry to the USA and sanctuary in Oregon