India-US Strategic News and Discussion

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 29 May 2011 03:47

^^^
We agree to disagree then....if you take a tour of US-Mexican border within 50-75 miles of Mexico, what you are seeing is Reconquista, not assimilation. government offices (outside of major urban centers) have English only as a token gesture. Spanish is the language for all intents and purposes. in recent years some Mexican politicians are coming to this side of border to persuade Mexicans to come back and vote for them. this has and continues to take place in San Diego suburbs. you have Mexicans going back and forth between the border, while taking interest and participating in Mexican politics from America!!!

Mexicans migrating to Southwest US are bound, eventually, to think of this land as just an extension of Mexico. i mean seriously, the border becomes an artificial line when the language, food, culture, and customs on both sides of the line practically become one and the same......it is basic human sociology. the border, as a line of differentiation, will become meaningless within a few decades, at best, or even sooner.

and don't fall for MSM views on Mexico. business and economy in "conflict zones" like Juarez are booming. manufacturing and trade with US is on the rise. mango mexicans aren't leaving Juarez for some great ray of hope on America!!! that's MSM propaganda. El Paso (a city in Texas) had a trade of $70 Billion with Mexico in 2010. El Paso has decided to send delegations and committees to Mexico to facilitate business and commerce with them, b/c they have become so dependent on the other side of the border....just one city in American Southwest has so much depending on Mexico for its economy. this trend in spreading inland to cities like Houston.

and to top it all off, the Mexican political elite recognizes and acknowledges this feeling. they fight for Mexican rights in America. they encourage settling of Mexicans in the Southwest. they promote communication between these settlers and their families back home. there are Mexican govt supported unofficial transportation networks that facilitate this movement inside Mexico.

this is reconquista, not assimilation.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 29 May 2011 07:28

Krittika deserves an apology: Consul General

Indian Consul General in New York has said the US State Department is wrong in its reading of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and asserted that diplomatic immunity is extended to family members of consular officers. Prabhu Dayal was speaking in the backdrop of the controversy raging about whether Krittika Biswas, the daughter of the Vice Counsel General in New York, had diplomatic immunity that protected her against arrest.

The State Department, however, said yesterday that it is sticking by Toner's earlier remarks.
"We have run into a dead wall," said Dayal. "The issue has to be resolved by the External Affairs Ministry and the State Department. Krittika deserves an apology."

Ravi Batra, Biswas' lawyer, also said his client had diplomatic immunity and the matter needed to be revisited by the State Department for a second legal opinion. Batra, however, added Biswas did not need diplomatic immunity because she is innocent. The teenager claims she was handcuffed and led out of school on February 8. After her arrest and suspension from school, the real culprit was found.

He described the school figures and the police officials who allegedly acted against Biswas without due diligence as "bumbling idiots with malicious intent."
Yesterday, the NYPD did not respond to request for comment.

1) apology - will uncle do it?
2) krittika should win the case and the $1.5 millions. money talks big.
3) wonder GOI can increase the pressure or at least allow the ddm to make it big in India.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 29 May 2011 07:32

they are fighting the case with GOI's blessings, krittika's father took permission from MEA before going the legal route.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 29 May 2011 07:38

Krittika Biswas's case: Does the Indian government do enough for diplomats' families?

Earlier this year, more than 1,000 students from India at the now defunct Tri-Valley University (TVU) in California, were hounded by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), in many cases for no fault of theirs. The two incidents seem to suggest that the US is increasingly becoming a country of officials who act with impunity, with brains outsourced to Capitol Hill.

Biswas has now given up plans to enrol in a premier institute in New York to study math as a major. She plans to instead enrol in a college in India

So how did Toner come to such a conclusion? Did the Barack Obama administration convey the changes in the almost five-decade-old rule to the Indian government prior to the Biswas incident or are they now trying to cover up their mishandling of the case? Who had the authority to force such a change in the first place?

In the US, even retail outlets have managers to resolve customer issues and to provide judicial solutions to disagreements. So why didn't the NYPD know how to behave with a teenager? The city has for long dealt with parking violations by cars bearing diplomatic plates, so why did the administration fail to show a humane approach to an 18-year-old with a diplomatic passport?

Ambassador Prabhu Dayal, India's consul general in New York, says he made a fervent call to the NYPD to make the case for diplomatic immunity for Biswas to have her released, only to have the NYPD stall him by putting him on a conference call with the State Department, which led to a stalemate.

Where were the bosses who could have used discretionary authority to decide on the spot to release Biswas till the matter of how to interpret the Vienna Convention rules on consular relations was sorted out? Did the NYPD commissioner Ray Kelly and the mayor of New York City Michael Bloomberg know what was going on in the diplomatic capital of the world where they live?

Now it has come to light that the Indian ambassador Meera Shankar and external affairs minister SM Krishna, who was in the US at the time of Biswas' arrest, knew of her predicament, and tried to reason with the State Department through the night of February 8, to have her released, but to no avail.

lot of troubling questions--
If Indian ambassador and EAM cannot help a person with diplomatic immunity then what hope do other Indians have.
why could not the GOI increase the pressure. what prevented them to do so directly or indirectly.
could have bumped up some american official in India in tit for tat.
disgusting.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 29 May 2011 07:47

devesh wrote:the same is the case with Indians or any other "influential" immigrant groups. vote bank politics has only a miniscule contribution to this push. it is the long term trends that are starting to take hold, which is worrying for America.

What do you mean by "influential"?

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 29 May 2011 08:18

Speaking of Ashley Tellis, this is a discussion panel the American Enterprise Institute held 2 months ago on India, with him and two other speakers:

http://www.aei.org/audio/100755

Mr. Tellis delivers remarks first on India-US geopolitics, then the two other fellows talk about business opportunities (this is pre-MMRCA shortlist, so that gets pushed a bit, though briefly) and development in India. Some talk involving demographic dividend and what it means as well as supposed "north vs south&west" divide in Indian development. Gives some info of various American perspectives re India.

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » 29 May 2011 08:55

ManjaM wrote:US throws rule book at India, says no immunity for diplomat family
Family members of the diplomats do carry diplomatic passports, he acknowledged but diplomatic immunity does not apply to them, he noted.
And the State department spokesman Mark Toner is lying. Here is why -
http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instru ... 1_1961.pdf

The relevant sections -
Article 37
1. The members of the family of a diplomatic agent forming part of his household shall, if they are
not nationals of the receiving State, enjoy the privileges and immunities specified in articles 29 to 36
What are articles 29-36
Article 31
1. A diplomatic agent shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State.
He shall also enjoy immunity from its civil and administrative jurisdiction, except in the case of:
(a) A real action relating to private immovable property situated in the territory of the receiving State,
unless he holds it on behalf of the sending State for the purposes of the mission;
(b) An action relating to succession in which the diplomatic agent is involved as executor,
administrator, heir or legatee as a private person and not on behalf of the sending State;
(c) An action relating to any professional or commercial activity exercised by the diplomatic agent in
the receiving State outside his official functions.
2. A diplomatic agent is not obliged to give evidence as a witness.
3. No measures of execution may be taken in respect of a diplomatic agent except in the cases
coming under subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 of this article, and provided that the
measures concerned can be taken without infringing the inviolability of his person or of his residence.
4. The immunity of a diplomatic agent from the jurisdiction of the receiving State does not exempt
him from the jurisdiction of the sending State.
These buggers are either too stupid or just dont care.

Consular staff is covered by the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations:
http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/texts/instru ... 2_1963.pdf

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 29 May 2011 09:11

Well, DDM (the American news paper Indian Express) is saying this:

It is telling that Krittika Biswas, an Indian diplomat’s daughter, who was wrongly detained on charges of sending obscene emails to a teacher, claimed diplomatic immunity as her first defence. As she sues New York City for $1.5 million, Biswas has a strong and straightforward case without having to invoke diplomatic immunity.

Diplomatic immunity is a hyper-extended thing — even democracies where legal processes are respected tend to overuse it. It is called up every time an Important Personage is frisked at an airport or occasionally asked to submit to normal rules. Recently, India was asked to waive immunity or recall a senior envoy from the UK, where he was accused of wife-beating. There is a clear rationale for curbing the use of diplomatic immunity. In essence, though, diplomatic immunity is about safe passage — though it was formally agreed on in the Vienna Conventions in 1961, the practice has a much longer history. As far back as the 13th century, Egyptian Pharaohs granted immunity to envoys from abroad. Taking action against a diplomat’s misdemeanours is the prerogative of the state that sent her. Diplomats (and their families) cannot be detained or tried in the courts of the host country unless, very rarely, the home country waives immunity. It hinges on reciprocity — you are scrupulously well-behaved towards another country’s official representatives, and in return you expect the same treatment for your own envoys.

But that principle has been stretched and abused all over the world, as a free pass for diplomats and their families. “Certified Diplodocuses” — Captain Haddock’s curse at an embassy car with a CD plate gets at the resentment many feel about the insulated lives of the diplomatic corps. Though the most common misdemeanours involve speeding and evading parking tickets, diplomats have been caught running prostitution rings, smuggling arms, harassing domestic helps, and worse. In 2003 in Delhi, the Senegalese ambassador’s son was accused of having killed his driver, but could not be prosecuted in India. So is there a way we can preserve the delicate balance of bilateral diplomacy without letting the diplo-brats run wild? Can we invoke diplomatic immunity more judiciously? That can happen only if the home country acts sensibly, rather than framing all incidents as deep and deliberate insult, no matter what the breach is and who the people involved are. Sobriety must begin at home.

http://www.indianexpress.com/story-print/796415/

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 29 May 2011 23:56

SwamyG wrote:
devesh wrote:the same is the case with Indians or any other "influential" immigrant groups. vote bank politics has only a miniscule contribution to this push. it is the long term trends that are starting to take hold, which is worrying for America.
What do you mean by "influential"?

influence can be any kind of power. money, religion, culture, profession, and many other parameters factor into "influence." Indians have influence b/c they have strong educational background and play influential roles in American businesses. in pure numbers, Indians in US can't influence anything especially b/c we are late entrants into the American consciousness and belong to the least understood "pagan" cultures. but even with all these constraints, we've made ourselves known in American main street. that is our influence.

American establishment would preferably like this Indian population to loose their roots with India and even more preferably, convert to Christianity and become the typical DIE commentator on India. this way, they don't have to worry about a relatively rich group of committed people working to make US aware of their home culture and fight for that culture's interests...

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 30 May 2011 01:02

^^^
I am yet to see any visible influence by Indian immigrants when it comes to foreign policy. They could not even win the California Text Book case; if there are some influence or wins in the backstage, then I am not aware of those.

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 30 May 2011 01:18

Wrong area, deleted!

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 30 May 2011 09:36

Hinduism and Judaism are the two richest and most educated religious communities in the US.

There are a decent number of Indians in positions of power & influence- some DIE like the two governors (which is a huge number for such a tiny community) but still getting a brown Indian face out there counts for something. Large number among the entrepreneurial class as well.

Definitely punching above their weight given the tiny size and very late arrival on the scene. Not quite at the Jewish level though for fairly obvious reasons.

The main thing in the US is, for political office itself you almost always have to be Christian (rarely- Jewish). All other sorts of power are generally acceptable- but not elected office. Thus you will have Hindu attorney generals, prosecutors, science heads, policymakers and so on, but like Muslims and the like you can expect Hindus to be absent in office.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 30 May 2011 09:47

SwamyG wrote:^^^
I am yet to see any visible influence by Indian immigrants when it comes to foreign policy. They could not even win the California Text Book case; if there are some influence or wins in the backstage, then I am not aware of those.

Absolutely. I mean with the number of Indian immigrants, the amount of education, the prevalence in all walks of life, even the India == TSP has not been erasable. Im contrast, there is nothing anti-semitic in pointing out the sheer clout Jewsh lobby has on US policy. I mean, this is not Israel thread, But the other day, seeing Netanyahoo dictate terms to Obama, I was just wondering who is president of US, Obama or Netanyahoo?

. Can you imagine any formulation by even a 2-bit journo in US who would have the gall to suggest that Israel must make concessions so that Hamas and Hezbollah will be happpy? I am of course refering to the oft repeated insulting formulation that India must make concessions to TSP so that TSP will not have need for LeT.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 30 May 2011 09:51

^^ Jews punch enormously above their weight in US politics. They are very visible and influential in all walks of life, which is a testament to the values of their community. Ironically I know quite a few deracinated Jews as well, there are many in the US.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 30 May 2011 10:06

UBanerjee wrote: Ironically I know quite a few deracinated Jews as well, there are many in the US.

I would say very few. But by & large, all of them are culturally Jewish, may not be fundamentalist or even devout in their practice of Judaisam. But every one, fundamentalist, devout, or not is committed to the cause of Israel. One tiny bit of suggestion that Israel ought to make some modicum of concessions to Palestinians, and boy, will you see every one of them and their apologits come down like a ton of bricks.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 May 2011 10:08

The Jews are proud or Israel and being Jews, on the other hand Indians are trying hard to bad mouth other Indians for having an accent and what not. The amount of self loathing and distaste for own heritage is amazing.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 30 May 2011 10:17

That is not true. I know of plenty of Jews (personally and in the media) who will tell you all about why Israel is THE problem, and they go out of their way to show this attitude just the same as DIE do over "Hindu communalism" or whatever. Anytime there is a debate or discussion about Israel you will get one of these guys.

There is a huge amount of variety. Keep in mind there are also many Jewish marxists who view the whole world through that lens.

Let's not indulge in a

about Indians for no reason.

Sadler · Post by **Sadler** » 30 May 2011 10:22

UBanerjee wrote:That is not true. I know of plenty of Jews (personally and in the media) who will tell you all about why Israel is THE problem, and they go out of their way to show this attitude just the same as DIE do over "Hindu communalism" or whatever. Anytime there is a debate or discussion about Israel you will get one of these guys.

There is a huge amount of variety. Keep in mind there are also many Jewish marxists who view the whole world through that lens.

I absolutely agree. We have our own idiots. And really, no reason why we are not subject to the same foibles that afflict those of other religions.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 May 2011 10:28

UBanerjee/Sadler wrote:That is not true. I know of plenty of Jews
.....
Let's not indulge in a about Indians for no reason.

When we make generalizations, there is certainly a broad sweep talking of overall patterns, which by definition means that nuances and details will be lost.

The question however is of scale, of the normal distribution of attitudes in the population. I have no hesitation in saying that Indians (In US of A) are not like Jews as a group in terms of self respect and appreciation of their heritage.

Heck even on Bharat Rakash, by nature a nationalistic jingo place, there is no shortage of

about how US is "oh so superior" and Indians are oh so hopeless (including accents) -- I wonder if Sadler found his country men disparaging other countrymen and Jews about how their accents was broken.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 30 May 2011 10:31

Sanku wrote:
UBanerjee/Sadler wrote:That is not true. I know of plenty of Jews
.....
Let's not indulge in a about Indians for no reason.
The question however is of scale, of the normal distribution of attitudes in the population. I have no hesitation in saying that Indians (In US of A) are not like Jews as a group in terms of self respect and appreciation of their heritage.

And you know this.. how?

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 30 May 2011 10:38

kindly drop this issue folks, it can't be resolved.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 30 May 2011 10:41

UBanerjee,

Please, don't argue for the sake of arguing. SankuJi is right on the money, and you know it.

SankuJi,

Ronald Takaki, sociologist at UCB said it best. While Jews have suffered anti-semitism, in today's USA, they are as mainstream as the Mayflower descendents, bceause they are on the right side of racial spectrum. No denying this. Plus, Jewish people themslevs are proud, and for the most part won't hesitate to speak up for Israel.

Thats not the case with Indians and hence the dancing around, from outright self loathing to fearful ambivalence to speak out for India.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 30 May 2011 10:49

Rahul M; dropped.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 30 May 2011 11:27

I just watched Arnab's show on that poor Indian girl, Krithika Biswas, a diplomat's daughter, humilitaed in NYC. I know this was discussed earlier on this thread, but I curious to know, what was the content of the e-mail that she was falsely accused of sending? Whoever sent this e-mail, was it some kind of a terrorist threat? I can't imagine what would trigger such a paranoid reaction from the racist school authorities and jack-booted NYC police thugs to subject an 18 year olf girl to such brutal treatment. Human rights they preach, my f$%^&*ing ass.

Purush · Post by **Purush** » 30 May 2011 11:41

krisna wrote: why could not the GOI increase the pressure. what prevented them to do so directly or indirectly.
could have bumped up some american official in India in tit for tat.
disgusting.

Should get hold of some amirkhani diplomat's teenage progeny residing in India, for violation of some obscure Indian law and throw him/her in Tihar for a couple of days. No diplomatic immunity, no consular access, no nothing.

Then suggest that they can sue in an Indian court of law if they wish (...and wait for 30 years while the law takes its own course and a verdict is reached).

These clowns understand only tit for tat.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 30 May 2011 11:53

Purushji,

Instead of that why not have a strong calibrated response : We are surprised to note that the US does not respect the Geneva Convention. Are we to understand that the same Geneva Convention has been used to persecute war criminals selectively? And let others suspected of war and crimes of terror get away scot free or be assasinated without a trial?

The money hungry noose agencies will pick it up and make them look stupid.

Purush · Post by **Purush** » 30 May 2011 12:01

I don't think the US cares about such bad press. They keep getting worse press everyday and don't bat an eyelid.

Often, direct action is the best. An eye for an eye. A tooth for a tooth. A testimonial for a testimonial.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 30 May 2011 12:10

No Purushji,

I beg to disagree.

If we go that route it should be both eyes, all teeth and whatever else you can think of. Put an end to it once and for all.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 30 May 2011 12:15

Waht were the contents of that e-mail?

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 30 May 2011 12:25

I was surfing yawn and found an interesting as on the home page it points to the link below:

http://www.usinpac.com/

USINPAC's mission is to impact policy on issues of concern to the Indian American community in the United States.
USINPAC provides bipartisan support to candidates for federal, state and local office who support the issues that are important to the Indian American community. These issues include:
US - India Relations: Strengthen US-India bilateral relations in defense, trade, and business.
Immigration: Promote a fair and balanced policy on immigration.
Indian American Candidates: Provide financial and political support to deserving Indian American candidates.
Anti Hate-Crime Measures: Ensure protection from hate-crimes.
Equal Opportunity: Advocacy for appointments of Indian Americans in the Executive and Judicial branches of Government.
Civil Rights: Ensure equal protection under the law.
Entrepreneurship and Business: Advocacy for issues that impact the Indian American community such as small business issues.

Any of you gone through this?

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 30 May 2011 12:28

Purush wrote:I don't think the US cares about such bad press. They keep getting worse press everyday and don't bat an eyelid.

Often, direct action is the best. An eye for an eye. A tooth for a tooth. A testimonial for a testimonial.

Even ant attempted direct action is worthless. Because any direct action will invite the full wrath of US press and eventually US military. And on US press, do you think they will entertain any contrarian viewpoint especially if it exposes US wrong doing? Why do you think Indian govt is silent on Krithika Biswas? Because rather than make a fool of themsleves challenging US outright, better to work behind the scenes and achieve the best outcome possible. US is simply too powerful to describe in words. Only thing one can rely on to correct US wrongdoing is the goodness of many Amercians themselves. But most often when it comes to US interests, they can get outgunned and out maneuvered.

I mean many Amercians were arguing against Guantanamo bay or other torture camps US runs for suspected Muslim terrorits. Do they stand a chance? Many Amercians knew the WMD fraud, but did they get a voice? Even in this season of pompous self congrajulatory events like the arrest of ex Serb general Radko Mladic for the massacre of Bosnian Muslims, many are asking who will arrest and bring to justice the war criminals who were reponsibe for the invasion of Iraq causing wanton destruction and death. Any chance of that happening? The war criminals are living kushy retired lives collecting millions of $s on talk circuits

.

Might is right, and Amercia is always right

. Thats the law of nature.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 30 May 2011 12:33

Why are we so keen on giving statements rather than action...Bad press my foot !!

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 30 May 2011 13:10

Quoting myself and Purush

RajeshA wrote:We should simply start giving American diplomats and their families a somewhat hard time. How about throwing the brat of some American diplomat behind bars for eve-teasing or something!

The Americans will come to appreciate diplomatic immunity in no time!

Purush wrote:
krisna wrote: why could not the GOI increase the pressure. what prevented them to do so directly or indirectly.
could have bumped up some american official in India in tit for tat.
disgusting.
Should get hold of some amirkhani diplomat's teenage progeny residing in India, for violation of some obscure Indian law and throw him/her in Tihar for a couple of days. No diplomatic immunity, no consular access, no nothing.

Then suggest that they can sue in an Indian court of law if they wish (...and wait for 30 years while the law takes its own course and a verdict is reached).

These clowns understand only tit for tat.

As far as diplomacy is concerned, one should always try to keep the war symmetric - tit for tat. In USA Krithika Biswas has recourse to a well-oiled judicial system, whereas our judicial system takes its own good time. Any diplobrat we throw in into jail for some offense would have a hard time in our system. His father would put pressure on the American Ambassador, the Ambassador would first try his luck with the Indians, and the Indians would tell him to resolve the case of Krithika Biswas to her satisfaction. He will call up State Dept. and they will do the rest. As a solution is worked out, Indian cooks will provide the diplobrat with peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, but he will stay put in jail.

At the diplomatic level, best is not to make a big deal of the issue but always pay in kind.

amit · Post by **amit** » 30 May 2011 13:25

CRamS wrote:Might is right, and Amercia is always right . Thats the law of nature.

I can't help but notice that the above statement ties in very nicely with this earlier statement:

Thats not the case with Indians and hence the dancing around, from outright self loathing to fearful ambivalence to speak out for India.

amit · Post by **amit** » 30 May 2011 13:30

RajeshA wrote:As far as diplomacy is concerned, one should always try to keep the war symmetric - tit for tat. In USA Krithika Biswas has recourse to a well-oiled judicial system, whereas our judicial system takes its own good time. Any diplobrat we throw in into jail for some offense would have a hard time in our system. His father would put pressure on the American Ambassador, the Ambassador would first try his luck with the Indians, and the Indians would tell him to resolve the case of Krithika Biswas to her satisfaction. He will call up State Dept. and they will do the rest. As a solution is worked out, Indian cooks will provide the diplobrat with peanut butter and jelly sandwiches, but he will stay put in jail.

At the diplomatic level, best is not to make a big deal of the issue but always pay in kind.

With the issue in court, I think the best course is to wait to see how the hearing goes in court before taking any unilateral action on this bizarre interpretation of diplomatic status.

However, rather than tit for tat, the question to ask is why are all these statements about the Vienna Convention, Krishna and the Indian Amby taking up the case with the State Department etc coming to light now, 3 months after the incident and only after the girl took it to court?

Just so that my statement is not misunderstood, please note that the girl could take legal action only after getting sanction from the Indian Embassy.

I would think that the past three months a lot of discussion has been going on behind the scenes and due to some reason the Indian side is terribly p**sed off and hence the legal action green signal. The whole issue is bound to come in the spotlight once the hearing starts.

JMT

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 30 May 2011 13:47

@Amit

Bang on.

Hoist them with their own petard. The power of 1.5M American dollars. "Slurp"

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 30 May 2011 13:57

amit boss, legal recourse is a separate issue but the state dept monkey needs to apologise for lying on the issue of immunity. I mean it's available on friggin wikipedia, does this worthy want us to believe that he didn't know it ?

amit · Post by **amit** » 30 May 2011 14:08

Rahul M wrote:amit boss, legal recourse is a separate issue but the state dept monkey needs to apologise for lying on the issue of immunity. I mean it's available on friggin wikipedia, does this worthy want us to believe that he didn't know it ?

Guru,

Your bang on. And the only way to get the state dept babus to apologise is to embarrass them sufficiently so that Hillary Madam is forced to tickle a few ribs. There's very good likelihood that once the hearings start the Indian media as well as international media will pick this up and sensationalise it. Arnab babu has already started the ball rolling, I hear.

It has all the elements for a classic media story. Bright, good looking young girl takes on the might of the NYC machinery. It shouldn't be about money, though it would be great if the kid gets the $$. Handled properly this can be an embarrassment for Sher Khan, both ways. If the judge throws away the case then and if the girl wins then also. The central point has been established: She didn't do it.

I think that's the stakes of this game. Tit of tat or some such response are for the Bakis.

Again take my post for what it's worth.

amit · Post by **amit** » 30 May 2011 14:10

rajanb wrote:@Amit

Bang on.

Hoist them with their own petard. The power of 1.5M American dollars. "Slurp"

That's the spirit, even within all the self-loathing that CRS loves to moan about.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 30 May 2011 14:15

maybe in parallel go to some human Rights organisation. Lot of intellectuals out there to recruit for the cause.