Inviting you home is the home owner's prerogative. You can't cry foul if he refuses to allow you into his home. You can't crib and say "You invited the thief next door, why are you refusing me". But precisely this is what Narendra Modi and BJP seem to be doing.
Especially funny is the line of argument, "We are providing visa to the US officials who are involved in human rights violations in Iraq, why should they refuse Visa to Mr. Modi?". It is your(India's) decision to give visa to the visiting US officials, and if you felt so strongly about the human rights violations in Iraq you could have refused to issue visa. The fact of the matter is India needs the visit of, say Ms. Rice, much more than the US needs the visit of Mr. Modi. So stop cribbing and issuing inane statments.
US understands the real politik better. Rajiv Gandhi was as much culpable for the Sikh Genocide in 1984 as Narendra Modi was for the Godhra aftermath. But Rajiv's visit to US was far more important for developing Indo-US ties, so he was feted and asked to deliver a speech in the Joint Session of the US Congress . So, Mr. Modi, if you want to be invited to the US become the Prime Minister of India. However chances of that are very remote, and you can count on me not voting for you.
There is one more interesting twist to this tale. For the left leaning liberals like The Hindu, both Mr. Modi and the US are anathema, devils to be fought against. However, now the US has acted against Mr. Modi, they have to praise the actions of the US Government, which is impossible for them to do. So they have indulged in verbal gymnastics, bashing up Mr. Modi and at the same time refraining from praising the US for a "principled stand". Instead they write that the US action was due to the active protests by human rights activists across America...The denouement came in the form of a resolution in the American House of Representatives, moved recently by John Conyers, Jr., an influential Democrat Congressman from Michigan. So even if it is the Bush Administration that took the decision, The Hindu will not write about it. The Hindu's animosity towards Mr. Modi is clear in the heading of the editorial - A slap in Mr. Modi's face. In the editorial he is condemned of being a man who violated every single norm enshrined in the Indian Constitution. I agree Mr. Modi's errors are huge, but violating every single norm? Will you please explain what this means Mr. Ram?