India-US Strategic News and Discussion

[shiv]

Fact is the issues of Islamic terrorism in Indian subcontinent doesn't affect USA at all but directly does affect India. That paths of USA and India differ means strategic USA policies are not in interests of India at all and USA doesn't have anything to lose anyway.

We talk so much about "Islamic terrorism" that I must point out that ALL of Pakistan's actions against India (since 1947) have been Islamic terrorism even if people don't choose to define it that way. And that Islamic terrorism has been directly funded and given arms by the US.

The question is, will the US continue to do that? And what would the US hope to achieve by that?

[Shreeman]

Fact is the issues of Islamic terrorism in Indian subcontinent doesn't affect USA at all but directly does affect India. That paths of USA and India differ means strategic USA policies are not in interests of India at all and USA doesn't have anything to lose anyway.

9/11 or 7/11, perhaps? Too soon for we shall never forget? The new building has not even opened yet.

Thinking is not really a strong point of those in power, if this is the case.

UB is correctly upset, but being upset does no good. Things have been this way since time immemorial. Let the cheer haran at least restore the platitudes where politicians are forced to at least pretend about equality, rule of law, reciprocity, etc. If its even that one step back from the precipice instead of more back room deals, you have some result. Otherwise, its all aam aadmi party .

[Amber G.]

People knew Hasan Ismail Zeya, now lives in Florida and lived in Atlanata GA before but some how the impression was that he immigrated from Pak. So they are from Chamapan/Bihar. Wonder why, like most desi's here in US did not proudly mention it in their bio. (The Ammi is Rehana Obeid Zeya, and abbaa Jan, for some reason, was also had Humayu in his name)

This may be all OT, but here is a nice picture..


(OK: L to R: G N Qazi, V-C, Jamia Hamadard, Mahmudur Rahman, ex-AMU V-C, Sirajuddin Qureshi, IICC president, Farah Pandit (Special Representative to Muslim Communities for the United States Department of State.), Uzra Zeya, political affairs head, US Embassy in Delhi)

[chaanakya]

UB ji Permit me to reply to your points about immunity and waiver request of USD

1. DK was appointed as DCG in NYC and had consular Immunity since Oct 2012. US contends that this does not confer immunity from criminal charges of serious nature i.e. felony. and IBDA are covered under local laws and not exempt as some , including I, would argue.
2. DK was seconded to Permanent Mission of India to UN in view of visit of MMS and was accredited as Special Adviser as part of the Mission and had immunity as Diplomat under UN agreement and that status is eqv to that obtained under VCDR, i.e. full immunity. This immunity was from August 2013 and running till 31 December 2013. This immunity is being disputed on untenable and flimsy grounds by USD and hence PB is telling it is concocted by DK.
3. DK was transferred to UN Mission from DCG and her name was entered in the List of Diplomats of ON UN roll she got again the same immunity as referred to in second point. Once that was accepted by USD and they had no choice but to delay it , presumably to allow PB to get Grand Jury Indictment prepared and presented, US had to accept that She got immunity as diplomat and she can not be forced to the Court or face arrest. hence US asked request to waive this immunity which was duly denied and then US asked to remove her. India did a tit for tat and expelled Wayne May and got Alicia as Bonus.

I hope this clarifies factual position with regard to Immunity.

[Vayutuvan]

Chaanakya and other legal eagles. Had PB waited till Jan 2, 2014 to make the arrest, would SD and PB been on firmer ground? If that were to be the case then it is a case of the whole thing was just bumbling unless SD could not wait till her immunity ran out. Also there is this other date in year 2016. Where does that fit into the jigsaw puzzle?

[shiv]

DK said she had immunity
India said she had immunity
The US accepted that
Bray of PiBs says there was no immunity

Someone is lying

[Vayutuvan]

No US SD did not accept going by the Kerr memo PB is waving to the judge.

[UlanBatori]

I hope this clarifies factual position with regard to Immunity.

I have no doubt that this is what the Bray of PiBs is saying. However, it sounds like the last impassioned speech of one of those Capitarist Impeliarists just b4 the Tartar axe falls, by due process of Ulan Bator Law. Here is how it would be duly recorded by Ulan Bator Court Recorder:

Blah blah blah. Hwhat nyaw?

Bottom line: Eeph DK had any sort of immunity that immunized her from these acts, then she is immune. If she had not, then there was no call for SD to ask phor immunity to be waived. Since they asked, the case is moot.
Before we get to the facts of the complaint.
Then the case becomes

No SD did not accept

Sorry. SD did not object in August 2013. Objecting NOW is certainly not acceptable. So the presumption is that DK has UN immunity starting August 2013, and continuing until 2016, at least until Dec. 31, 2013.

[Amber G.]

Also: Title says " We will NEVER forgo this (US-India) friendship - Zeya"

[chaanakya]

Chaanakya and other legal eagles. Had PB waited till Jan 2, 2014 to make the arrest, would SD and PB been on firmer ground? If that were to be the case then it is a case of the whole thing was just bumbling unless SD could not wait till her immunity ran out. Also there is this other date in year 2016. Where does that fit into the jigsaw puzzle?

Well there are legal eagles here but I am not. But to answer your question, I would have to know the significance of 2nd Jan 2014. If there is immunity and if a diplomat or consular is expelled ( because (s)he could not be arrested for criminal charges unless waived off) the immunity persist till (s)he leaves the place and residual immunity continues in respect of acts performed for the period of immunity. Regarding past acts which might be covered under criminal laws , it could be said that if US accredits a person, it is accepting the diplomat with due regards to past events and that it has/had no objection and penal provisions can not be invoked even after the departure.Residual immunity would continue even after departure. It is obvious that the official would enter the country only after accreditation and becoming immune.

[chaanakya]

No SD did not accept

Sorry. SD did not object in August 2013. Objecting NOW is certainly not acceptable. So the presumption is that DK has UN immunity starting August 2013, and continuing until 2016, at least until Dec. 31, 2013.

Yes you are right if they did not object then they have no business to object now. I hold that she had immunity running to 31.12.2013 and her arrest was illegal. USD did not ascertain this fact and is tying itself into knots to extricate from this situation. PB is just a pawn. It was on USD advise, right or wrong, PB was acting.

[KLNMurthy]

I think the legal eagals here are perhaps misunderstimating the point that the distinguished bar-ristah KLNMurthy Esq., QC, has raised.
4. SD opines that immunity does not cover acts prior to receiving immunity. This is sheer pakistan - no UN diplomat and no national leader from any nation would agree to set foot in US if that were really the case - a month after arriving, the Sikh Rights Group or the Red Brigade Rights Group or the Lashkar-e-Toiba Rights Group or the Iraqi Rights Group would file under the 1790 law for actions alleged to have occurred 20 years ago, and whammo! the Cavity Search/Virginity Test Brigade arrives.

That part 'immunity does not cover acts prior to receiving immunity' seems to be correct legal position. But during the immunity people may level charges but no case can be filed nor can the person be arrested. Then there is this statute of limitations. AFAIK it stops during the time of immunity and resumes after the end of immunity.

If I understand immunity correctly, its effectiveness only covers the point at which arrest is made for the crime, and has nothing to do with the date at which the crime may be alleged to have taken place--it is immunity from arrest and prosecution, and not immunity from being suspected of a crime resulting from acts committed on a certain date. In other words, "immunity does not cover acts..." is nonsense if the acts refer to actions by the alleged perpetrator; it only makes sense if the acts are those of the authorities pertaining to law enforcement and prosecution, such as arrest, interrogation, etc.

So, and in light of your statement above, how to explain the SD's actions whereby they granted immunity to DK in January (was it? or late Dec?), presumably only for acts that might be committed post-granting, but then nevertheless went ahead and asked India to waive that immunity (which according to SD and you) for an alleged crime committed prior to that time? If DK was not covered by immunity for allegedly enslaving / trafficking / cheating (take your pick) SR, then what exactly were they asking India to waive and why did they and PB let DK leave the US, while being out on bail after arrest for a crime that was alleged to have occurred earlier in 2013.

It seems that the GOI's interpretation was that SD was asking for a waiver of the immunity (from DK's older UN assignment predating the arrest) that was already in existence at the time of DK's arrest, and the newer, post-arrest immunity (about which there is no dispute between India and the US) is just icing on the cake as it were. Whereas the SD's position (as represented in Indian media not all of which has my implicit trust) seems to be--as much as I can parse and try to make sense of it--is, no, it is not the older pre-arrest immunity that we are asking to be waived, it is the newer, post-arrest immunity that we are talking about.

But the SD's (reported) position on DK's immunity means any legal proceeding against an essentially random, non-immune foreigner can be invalidated by a foreign government simply declaring the arrestee to be its UN diplomat, applying for, and receiving (automatic) immunity for that person.

They could, for instance arrest a random Lhasawalla on Jan 2nd for pi**ing on Preet Bharara on Jan 1st, put him through the "standard process", release him on bail on Jan 5th, pending arraignment on Jan 10th, but then the Revolutionary Buddhist Government of Free Lhasa could declare said Lhasawalla as their UN diplomatic chaprassi on Jan 6th, get it automatically accepted by the SD on Jan 8th and presto, Lhasawalla will be able to board Pushpak Vimaan on Jan 9th back to a life of luxury surrounded by slaves whom he periodically whips for amusement.

Is this the bygolly real, actual position of America? I am telling, what superpower, I say?

[Shreeman]

DK said she had immunity
India said she had immunity...

IANAL.
The transfer to UN immunity was held up in the SD for an indeterminable amount of time. Its granting was more than likely based on plea negotiations failing, and PNG process as backup. This has played out predictably.

The complaint claims dates prior to granting of PNG/immunity, which has expired upon transfer out of the States. Complaint may proceed in the absence of any current immunity, though nothing brings DK back to face the charges.

Merit of dismissal motion hinges on UN General Assembly immunity. ^^^^^ chanakya is correct, but whether that is accepted remains to be seen.

Jurisprudence should see through the mess eventually, but the process requires appropriate filing of various forms in triplicate with matching signatures, so to speak, and if a jury has been convened, there may be even less logic left.

Its a wait and see game. Facts have little to do with it right now. We are just rehashing them awaiting post 2/7 scenarios.

Third parties have no standing. Even with facts, prosecutors often choose not to file, and there is nothing obvious in the system to discipline incumbants.

Lastly, even with dismissals, non-citizens will be hard pressed to find legal support in civil actions. And that is not even on the horizon for now.

All anyone can do, is to brush instead of grit, and wait.

Find principle based solutions and setups in the future. Dont try for a new status quo based on "understanding" with current incumbant or future ones.
IANAL.

[Vayutuvan]

Chaanakya ok I think I got the gist of it now. Even if they waited till Jan 2 (or any date after dec 31, 2013 which you think is the date on which DK's immunity ran out) they shoul not gave arrested her as whatever misdeed she is being accused of has been done while she was cloaked.

SD bungled big time or there is some shadow war going on.

[KLNMurthy]

So Ombaba's "pivot to Asia" failed and hence the bruising of Indian diplomats by SD?

If you recall, Hillary Clinton visited India on a charm offensive, and tried to get South Block to make enemies of Burma's junta (all the while US was backchanneling Aung san Suu Kyi's rehabilitation, but probably they wanted India as part of the "stick" in that negotiation), Iran, and Sri Lanka. Probably also against Sheikh Hasina in BD. Hillary Clinton put on a huge charm (& whatever other kind) of offensive in Kolkata and Chennai to that end, with Mamta and Jayalalitha.

It seems to me they had some degree of success--coincidentally or not, Mamata did set her face against riparian concession to BD, Jayalalitha set off a competitive anti-GOSL movement in TN, but at the end of the day, the matters were worked out by South Block, with some compromise on SL, taking a bit of hit / delay in deal with BD, and so forth. There was no change afaik on Burma.

Maybe this was not enough for the US to run its "pivot" with any comfort level, and maybe we are seeing the consequence of that feeling on their part.

[Amber G.]

No US SD did not accept going by the Kerr memo PB is waving to the judge.

Kerr's memo is just that, a memo, an OPINION submitted by some ain-gey-fey-khaf legal guy...it is by no means official word by US SD ruling ..(actually if you read the memo, the guy repeats - "in his opinion" type qualifications..and some "generalizations".. some times it does not even mention DK's particular/detail point but just some general understanding of rules...).. It DOES NOT cite any precedence (Eg RAYMOND Davis vs PAK where US SD clearly ruled that Davis would be given back to Paki's)..

(If some one wants, IMO it will be very easy to get counter point opinion from another guy .. mind you, kerr IS not speaking or ruling as OFFICIAL anything, he is just giving his opinion and understanding of law as he understands it)

Only fun thing will be to watch SD big shots like JK squirm when the reporters (and other US congressmen) ask,

Do you agree with Kerrs' Memo? How will it effect out guys in other places?... Do you really think our (US diplomats) guys immunity is that shallow?

Other fun thing will be, when these memo's are used in Indian courts to as evidence to help courts determine how much immunity the US guy ought to enjoy when he is arrested for driving with tinted glass auto in ND.

[Gus]

Exactly whom are the US police arming themselves against?

The aha moment came when I realized that a lot of gun enthusiast videos from the US show people who genuinely like and value firearms, and a lot of them seem to have what seems to be a schoolboy fantasy where they have a special weapon or weapons cache for some future date when their homeland is under attack and they will pull out their guns and fight.

shiv, there is some of that. but typically most of these 'militia' types preparing for 'doomsday' (from race wars, zombie invasion, furriners taking over, federals coming for their guns etc) - they are in backwood areas where police actually do not bother to counter these. police there don't buy these toys for showdown.

it is the police in rich cities and districts - metro areas etc, that buy up these military vehicles and weapons because the US military is pushing these overstocked and lightly used items for cheap prices.

political people don't touch military spending - so this nonsense goes unchallenged.

first - the politicians give more money to weapons and vehicles makers than even the military asks for - to score points on 'we are tough and support our military', 'we are bringing jobs' and possibly other kickbacks in fundraising etc from contractors who benefit.

second - the military ends up with more than what it needs, so it sells off this to local police

and then the police gets to parade like d1cks with their military toys as though they are policing fallujah.

classic americanism.

[KLNMurthy]

DK said she had immunity
India said she had immunity...

IANAL.
The transfer to UN immunity was held up in the SD for an indeterminable amount of time. Its granting was more than likely based on plea negotiations failing, and PNG process as backup. This has played out predictably.

The complaint claims dates prior to granting of PNG/immunity, which has expired upon transfer out of the States. Complaint may proceed in the absence of any current immunity, though nothing brings DK back to face the charges.

Merit of dismissal motion hinges on UN General Assembly immunity. ^^^^^ chanakya is correct, but whether that is accepted remains to be seen.

Jurisprudence should see through the mess eventually, but the process requires appropriate filing of various forms in triplicate with matching signatures, so to speak, and if a jury has been convened, there may be even less logic left.

Its a wait and see game. Facts have little to do with it right now. We are just rehashing them awaiting post 2/7 scenarios.

Third parties have no standing. Even with facts, prosecutors often choose not to file, and there is nothing obvious in the system to discipline incumbants.

Lastly, even with dismissals, non-citizens will be hard pressed to find legal support in civil actions. And that is not even on the horizon for now.

All anyone can do, is to brush instead of grit, and wait.

Find principle based solutions and setups in the future. Dont try for a new status quo based on "understanding" with current incumbant or future ones.
IANAL.

Yeah, I'd go with, SD probably concocted a backup process that would result in expulsion (recall / reassignment acc to GOI) of DK as a backup since plea bargain didn't work out in a way that would protect their h&d. Because they weren't willing to stick to their original "principled" arrest of DK, and take their chances with the judicial system and Indian babudom's wrath.

However, they didn't really think it through, and carried out, as it were, a disorderly retreat, and left a gaping theoretical hole with the waiving business that will probably be filled by endless blather about slavery-pasand casteist Vegetarian Yindoos, with the charge being led by Indians themselves. That will be the track on which the train will run, unless external energy is applied to reroute the train to a different track.

Just a thought: There are, in fact, third-party US citizens that are affected here--DK's husband and children. They could bring suit if they wish, I'd think.

[chaanakya]

Chaanakya ok I think I got the gist of it now. Even if they waited till Jan 2 (or any date after dec 31, 2013 which you think is the date on which DK's immunity ran out) they shoul not gave arrested her as whatever misdeed she is being accused of has been done while she was cloaked.

SD bungled big time or there is some shadow war going on.

Yes, more or less so.

There is this question of alleged act committed prior to grant of full immunity as Adviser in UN Mission. If I get the timeline right then SR case was simmering since April 2013 and by August USd was well in the know of the fact that she had allegedly committed felony on two counts for the reason that the preliminary indictment was prepared by Mark Moron Smith special agent of USD (BDS,DSS). So when India seconded Dk to UN Mission USD could very well have objected before accrediting her ( there was no other choice but to accredit or to object) . Having done so USD can not go back on it and that too by concocting flimsy and irrelevant grounds. The paperwork and misinformation or lack of information is all that of USD's making. One can very well say that USD was fabricating papers and suppressing information to hide the diplomatic immunity of DK in order to make her target of forced lessons to india.

There is no judicial remedy to such a situation I don't think Judges would be in a hurry to decide this issue. The issue is between two nations and it can be settled very amicable after taking reciprocal action on some female consular official of DCG rank and subjecting her to SOPs, release on bail and chargesheet. Of course, US has no option to transfer her anywhere in India to any UN office as India does not have agreement, which US has with UN with respect to UNHQ , so USD can't extricate DCG like India and other nations could. Once that is done all things would fall in place.

[chaanakya]

Just a thought: There are, in fact, third-party US citizens that are affected here--DK's husband and children. They could bring suit if they wish, I'd think.

Yes, they can and they should.

[Amber G.]

Chaanakya and other legal eagles. Had PB waited till Jan 2, 2014 to make the arrest, would SD and PB been on firmer ground?

I don't think Jan 2, etc is important.. what is important is... let me just give an example of the firmer ground..

PB was on a firmer ground in Sahzad's case (Time square bomber) because:

1. Shazad was not a diplomat, was not assigned (ever) to UN...
2. He tried to blow up Times Squre and did not caused to make a some one fill a $4500 line in a form.
3. He was not dropping his kids at the school but rather running away to Pak in the plane, when he was arrested.
4. He actually committed a crime.

In case of DK, being on firmer ground, PB might as well be on the outer methane layer of Jupiter...

After all that tamasa, any suggestion of PB having ANY legal justification or firm ground, is just offensive.

Hope this helps.

[Vayutuvan]

Gus: My understanding from general reading is that it is not just backwater areas. Gangs LA area and probably other high crime big cities like Miami, Chi town, NYC, and even DC, Detroit are afflicted with the same problem. Gangs have very high powered arms, automatics and even machine guns so police have to match or lose in firefights.
"Escape from NY" and "Escape from LA" are not that far off scenarios or the situation as depicted in the movie "To Live and Die in LA".

[saip]

That part 'immunity does not cover acts prior to receiving immunity' seems to be correct legal position. But during the immunity people may level charges but no case can be filed nor can the person be arrested. Then there is this statute of limitations. AFAIK it stops during the time of immunity and resumes after the end of immunity.

So, and in light of your statement above, how to explain the SD's actions whereby they granted immunity to DK in January (was it? or late Dec?), presumably only for acts that might be committed post-granting, but then nevertheless went ahead and asked India to waive that immunity (which according to SD and you) for an alleged crime committed prior to that time? If DK was not covered by immunity for allegedly enslaving / trafficking / cheating (take your pick) SR, then what exactly were they asking India to waive and why did they and PB let DK leave the US, while being out on bail after arrest for a crime that was alleged to have occurred earlier in 2013.

As I said, during the immunity no charges can be filed nor can the person be prosecuted. In other words the cases will have to be held in abeyance until either the immunity ends or is voluntarily waived by the person enjoying the immunity. In this case even though the case was filed it can not continue during the period of immunity unless it is waived which GOI refused to do. According to GOI from Aug 13 onwards DK had the immunity and so could not have been arrested nor prosecuted. But SD did not agree and arrested her (there is not much anyone can do about this even if GOI's position is accepted by the court except bring civil action) and filed a case against her. About the case, even if SD's position is accepted it cannot continue because of the immunity and if GOI's position is accepted it should not have been filed and so it should be dismissed. Even if it is dismissed can she be charged if she ever comes into the jurisdiction of the court? According to SD the Visa fraud was committed when DK drafted the second contract and had it signed by SR. So this offence according to them was committed in Nov 2012 much before any one claimed immunity for DK and as far as I can tell it was committed in India. The second offense (of not paying min wages) was also committed prior to DK acquiring immunity and it ended in June when SR left DK's employment.

Let us say you beat up a person A, and offense for which statute of limitation is let us say 3 years, and then after an year, you get elected as the President of India who enjoys total immunity for ALL acts during his term of office and then you go and beat up another person B. You continue to be POI for five years.
Person A & B may accuse you of assault while your are the POI, but you can not be arrested nor prosecuted in any court. Once you demit your office then person A's case can proceed but not of person B as his case happened while you are the PoI. The statute of limitation generally runs around the period of limitation.

[Yogi_G]

Can we from BR put a legal case requesting for extradition of PB for the illegal "extradition" of SR from India? Some contempt of court charges will also hold good.

I think it is important not to "misunderestimate" any judicial system and imagine that justice will be done, especially if we are fighting the system or powerful entities in the US. In the Bositive news thread I posted a link about a PhD student who tried to fight Johns Hopkins after his work was plagiarized. As far as I know the case got nowhere and the student punished in various unrelated ways despite everything being open and known
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 8#p1588448

saar idea is to cause maximum takleef to PB chaps and others in SD. PB should never be able to set foot in India again, poooof, gone is his punya bhoomi karma bhoomi access rights, he will remain a pretatma for eternity.

It will set a precedent and other nations will also follow.

[Vayutuvan]

After all that tamasa, any suggestion of PB having ANY legal justification or firm ground, is just offensive.
Hope this helps.

AmberG ji: I am in no way supporting or opposing PB, but trying to understand the situation and who should take the blame first and who is next in line. Is it SD more to blame or PB?

[Amber G.]

Just a thought: There are, in fact, third-party US citizens that are affected here--DK's husband and children. They could bring suit if they wish, I'd think.

Yes, they can and they should.

Actually thanks to google chacha (and it's scanning of people' emais) even I am swamped with ads from:
places like (No all these places are real - I checked )
http://www.falsearrestlawsuit.com
http://www.falsearrestnewyork.com/
http://www.expertatlaw.com/you_can_sue_ ... rrest_how/
http://www.agulnicklaw.com/false_arrest ... y_new_York

I am being informed - One can sue a city (suing state of feds is harder, they say) - not only for the conduct of their employees but even for "hiring wrong doers"

(Seriously, civil suits go (propelled by lawyers who make their living from this) where there are deep pockets, expect massive law suits - and plentiful plaintiffs will be found)

[Vayutuvan]

What I heard is that if somebody slips and gets disabled on a sidewalk in front of ones house, lawyers would advice the peson to sue everybody in sight - home owner who has homeowner insurance, local govt. who should have had laws to force the home owners to clear the side walks, county etc. and even individual officials in charge.

[saip]

If you hit a pothole and get a flat tire, you can sue the city (atleast write them a letter claiming damage). My nephew got a check from the city for exactly this reason.

[Gus]

Gus: My understanding from general reading is that it is not just backwater areas. Gangs LA area and probably other high crime big cities like Miami, Chi town, NYC, and even DC, Detroit are afflicted with the same problem. Gangs have very high powered arms, automatics and even machine guns so police have to match or lose in firefights.
"Escape from NY" and "Escape from LA" are not that far off scenarios or the situation as depicted in the movie "To Live and Die in LA".

what gangs are there in new hampshire?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/1 ... 79983.html

"We're going to have our own tank."

That's what Keene, N.H., Mayor Kendall Lane whispered to Councilman Mitch Greenwald during a December city council meeting.

It's not quite a tank. But the quaint town of 23,000 -- scene of just two murders since 1999 -- had just accepted a $285,933 grant from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to purchase a Bearcat, an eight-ton armored personnel vehicle made by Lenco Industries Inc.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/1 ... 55508.html

Departments in places like Indianapolis and some Chicago suburbs also began acquiring machine guns from the military in the name of fighting terror. Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick actually suspended the Pentagon program in his state after the Boston Globe reported that more than 80 police departments across the state had obtained more than 1,000 pieces of military equipment. "Police in Wellfleet, a community known for stunning beaches and succulent oysters, scored three military assault rifles," the Globe reported. "At Salem State College, where recent police calls have included false fire alarms and a goat roaming the campus, school police got two M-16s. In West Springfield, police acquired even more powerful weaponry: two military-issue M-79 grenade launchers."

September 11 also brought a new source of funding for military-grade equipment in the Department of Homeland Security. In recent years, the agency has given anti-terrorism grants to police agencies across the country to purchase armored personnel carriers, including such unlikely terrorism targets as Winnebago County, Wisconsin; Longview, Texas; Tuscaloosa County, Alabama; Canyon County, Idaho; Santa Fe, New Mexico; Adrian, Michigan; and Chattanooga, Tennessee. When the Memphis suburb of Germantown, Tennessee -- which claims to be one of the safest cities in the country -- got its APC in 2006, its sheriff told the local paper that the acquisition would put the town at the "forefront" of homeland security preparedness.

In Eau Clare County, Wisconsin, government officials told the Leader Telegram that the county's new APC would mitigate "the threat of weapons or explosive devices." County board member Sue Miller added, "It’s nice, but I hope we never have to use it." But later in the same article, Police Chief Jerry Matysik says he planned to use the vehicle for other purposes, including "drug searches." It may not be necessary, Matysik said, "But because it’s available, we’ll probably use it just to be cautious."

The DHS grants are typically used to purchase the Lenco Bearcat, a modified armored personnel carrier that sells for $200,000 to $300,000. The vehicle has become something of a status symbol in some police departments, who often put out press releases with photos of the purchase, along with posing police officers clad in camouflage or battle dress uniforms.

[Vayutuvan]

Gus: New Hampshire no idea. So it is a mixture of what I have been reading and what you posted here.

[UlanBatori]

Why not a PIL demanding that tax laws be enforced on AES? Also arrest of AES ppl using others' IDs for depositing their pay. This is deliberate, wanton fraud in filling out guvrmand forms, most definitely not covered by official consular duties and immunity.

I am surprised that the usual entities have not conducted demonstrations and filed PILs already demanding arrests (and standard procedures..).

[saip]

By combining their income with their spouses they broke even the US tax laws. While you can claim exemption for foreign earned income from payment of US taxes, the income is NOT exempt from Social security and medicare taxes. This is a deliberate tax fraud under IRS rules. Let us see if they will be prosecuted.

[Amber G.]

what gangs are there in new hampshire?

Most notorious is Robert Giuda and gang who formed ARK (Americans for Resolution of Kashmir) and made NH a laughing stock. ...

[UlanBatori]

This is a deliberate tax fraud under IRS rules. Let us see if they will be prosecuted.

It looks like Eye Eph Ess is fighting lone battle, with GOI pulling mat out from under as usual.
OK, they need to get the 14 time-bums out from the US (WHAT THE *** IS THE DELAY THERE?)
A citjen petishun to EmEmEss and/or Prejident-oph-desh from desh demanding law enforcement? Allo Pee Arefi Batriots?

[Vayutuvan]

AmberG ji: Good one. Given a chance they might even propose exporting these armored vehicles to PO Cashmere to be used against 7000000000000000 IA stationed there.

[Amber G.]

If you hit a pothole and get a flat tire, you can sue the city (a tleast write them a letter claiming damage). My nephew got a check from the city for exactly this reason.

Back in 80's I knew one law firm specializing in pot-holes in NYC.. NYC was paying about $12 Million dollars per year for pot-hole related negligence cases (sprain ankles were more profitable than flat tires BTW).

This law firm hired a survey company and mapped all the pot holes in the 5 boroughs and reported them to NYC. (IIRC, this law firm filed reports of about 300,000 pot holes on the roads and side walks). You see now if a client comes to them, and says his ankle was sprained on a pot hole x, and if x happened to be the one already reported .. they will collect much more money, because the city is more negligent .. (It knew, there was a pot hole, still it did not repair it, and it caused a great harm.. negligence is doubled/tripled because now city can't even claim that it did not know of the danger)

***
In another case, a relative of mine was sued by some one who was represented by a notorious lawyer who actually won a settlement ( in a previous case which was reported in many newspapers) from a home-owner. His client slipped on a toy in the home owned by this home-owner. Now what was he (the plaintiff) doing in the home (of the defendant)? He was not a guest but actually a thief, stealing stuff from the home.. (and was convicted for break-in and burglary)!! The thief, believe it or not, did win money, from the home owner!

(BTW, the person in the second case (suing my relative), represented by this notorious lawyer did not know that the other side (my relative) actually worked in the court as the judge's secretary the case was disposed off appropriately..to put it succinctly)

[Amber G.]

Singapore's Dean Mahbubani says... (From his Lecture: "Can India be Cunning"

Devyani’s return shows India’s clout, Kishore Mahbubani says

India is heading for a "geo-political sweet spot" and even the Devyani Kobragade episode reflects India's rising clout as not too long ago, the US would have brushed aside entreaties to let the Indian diplomat return home.

Delivering the IDSA K Subrahmanyam memorial lecture here on Monday, noted commentator Kishore Mahbubani said Devyani would have not have come back if the US did not attach a high strategic value to ties with India.

"The fact that Devyani returned is a signal that India has arrived. US had to face the question: Can we afford to lose India?" said Mahbubani, who is dean of the Lee Kuan Yew school of public policy in Singapore.

Mahbubani spoke of India's success in drawing a red line - the diplomat was arrested for maltreating her maid and false declarations about her salary - to argue that India needs to utilize its geo-political advantage for maximum gain.

....

The former career diplomat said India needs a "hard-headed and tough minded" approach to foreign policy in the Lee Kuan Yew-Goh Chok Tong tradition with New Delhi seeing itself as a pivot in balance of power equations.

Pointing out that the US was a lot less accommodative of France over the Dominique Strauss-Kahn incident, Mahbubani said though Devyani's arrest was a setback, India's standing rose after she was allowed to return.
<snip>

.

[Amber G.]

Another interesting question in this saga ...
PB called SR the "victim" in this criminal case ...(as in protecting victim and his family) in press conference, and the reason for their application to be valid for T visa etc..)...

But in Visa fraud case, (even if you believe all the charges), "victim" is US government.. because GOTUS is being defrauded. SR can be accomplice but certainly not the victim

What gives?? (PB is supposed to be very smart and known to use his words very carefully)

[member_28380]

Singapore's Dean Mahbubani says... (From his Lecture: "Can India be Cunning"

Devyani’s return shows India’s clout, Kishore Mahbubani says

India is heading for a "geo-political sweet spot" and even the Devyani Kobragade episode reflects India's rising clout as not too long ago, the US would have brushed aside entreaties to let the Indian diplomat return home.

Delivering the IDSA K Subrahmanyam memorial lecture here on Monday, noted commentator Kishore Mahbubani said Devyani would have not have come back if the US did not attach a high strategic value to ties with India.

"The fact that Devyani returned is a signal that India has arrived. US had to face the question: Can we afford to lose India?" said Mahbubani, who is dean of the Lee Kuan Yew school of public policy in Singapore.

Mahbubani spoke of India's success in drawing a red line - the diplomat was arrested for maltreating her maid and false declarations about her salary - to argue that India needs to utilize its geo-political advantage for maximum gain.

....

The former career diplomat said India needs a "hard-headed and tough minded" approach to foreign policy in the Lee Kuan Yew-Goh Chok Tong tradition with New Delhi seeing itself as a pivot in balance of power equations.

Pointing out that the US was a lot less accommodative of France over the Dominique Strauss-Kahn incident, Mahbubani said though Devyani's arrest was a setback, India's standing rose after she was allowed to return.
<snip>

.

Very insightful comments from prof Mahbubani as always.. esp the comments about India needing to adopt unsentimental foreign policy approach and improving relations with China and use that as a leverage with US.

We know the reality is we are very sentimental people and Khans are the extreme opposite. This is a huge cultural chasm.
About improving relations with China, this is not due to lack of India trying..

[UlanBatori]

So other nations are watching all right. How is GOI explaining people who are facing charges in Indian courts being taken out on T visas, with tax-free tickets, through New Delhi airport? How is GOI going to explain allowing wholesale tax fraud, people sitting across from the HQ of the Income Tax dept and the MEA and putting out memos to their employees to cheat on taxes to the tune of millions of dollars a year?? The Singapore Dean is sending a not-too-subtle message that people are at the GOI.