Bharat Rakshak

And how exactly are you qualified to comment on this 'wannabe' aspect? Has it not been stated clearly enough that speculation on this aspect will not be tolerated? Next instance gets you a warning. Please be mindful of the same - rohitvats

For what it is worth, I am not speculating. I have already looked up and summarized all his previous positions in this thread. None of them are bonafide tenure-track or tenured positions (believe me, I know). These are all "floating", "soft money" positions that come and go.

At the moment Rathore has accumulated 4 such temporary positions and is almost 40. In academia somebody with that kind of record is usually called a "wannabe".

Being a bonafide professor in a reputed institution is not about gallivanting around the world accumulating visiting positions, it is about developing a substantial record at one place first. I am professionally qualified to comment on it. I don't understand why that rankles you.

I have a clear supporting rationale for my conclusion. You can call it incorrect and provide your refutation, but please don't call it a speculation and declare you are going to warn me (!!).

Now if you still think this is "speculation", I will not "speculate" about it again due to your personal prejudice.

Thanks.

negi wrote:Well if this is indeed about justice then India should seek a legal re-course no ? Now question is, is there a provision for this and will the GOI pursue it ?

Of all the inane things I've read this one takes the cake. What do you think all these legal-shegal things happening is all about? What do you think our Amby is discussing with Susan Rice, the weather?

But I do notice after a terrific exhibition of downhill skiing you come back to terra firma. Welcome back!

^ Unfortunateky sir for all these years discussions with Susan Rice and such dhakkans have been floated around as some kind of akshun because I know here even sending dossiers is considered akshun in our country. I am not talking about that and let me tell you the very fact this gup and chai is happening at such level means, nothing will come out of it. It is more like settling for an out of court settlement.

If one really feels cheated then idea is to take it to a platform where fair trial can take place it can be court or to some it could be battlefield, for those who really care about justice and H&D they take it there baki sab hawai batein hain.

Something on the lines of October 20, 2006: Hope Steffey case .

Apologies and other such stuff do not cut it but then all this will only happen if one really feels strongly about it, going by GOI's track record I have already moved on.

As for downhill skiing I don't do that.

Why don't you educate us add to what you think is the best course of action? Maybe we are missing something.

As for our of court settlement that's unlikely to happen. If you had been following the case DK was offered a plea bargain with a $1 fine, admission of guilt but clean record. GoI didn't allow that. I don't know how this is going to end but one thing is for certain and that is Amir Khan is going to think very hard before pulling a similar stunt in future.

^ Why for a country that boasts about freedom and liberty I am sure they will have provisions in their penal code where victim will have a right to sue those who wrongfully framed her.

If Mrs. Devayani's case is really one sided and she did no wrong then there are only 2 possibilities i.e. the US marshalls went overboard with this and hence are liable to be punished and the department will have to cough up money along with a nicely tendered apology however if this is much more big i.e. a case of US looking for an excuse to harass Indian officials and this came from way up the pipeline then even legal proceedings will take time or worst like in our country nothing will come out of it but from Mrs Devyani's perspective at least an attempt would have been made.

Such cases have happened before and guitly charged punished for instance the infamous October 20, 2006: Hope Steffey case.

What is happening now is just hot air bakwaas. High level delegations will rule it out as some misunderstanding and media will be blamed for blowing out of proportion a new person will replace Mrs. DK as DCG and everyone will move on and this is what imho GOI will do.

shiv wrote: India actually did nothing when the great Shah Rukh Khan was pulled aside, and he has influence as well as the money to own a cricket team, let alone an Adarsh flat.

Shiv ji: SRK got his money and fame fair and square through hard work and innate talent. No idea re the veracity of Allegations of graft in Dr DK's obtaining the Adarsh flat. If those allegations turn out to be true then I can understand the anger of the commons.

amit wrote: As for our of court settlement that's unlikely to happen. If you had been following the case DK was offered a plea bargain with a $1 fine, admission of guilt but clean record. GoI didn't allow that.

Well they haven't dropped charges , they have merely allowed her to return so basically morally they are trying to maintain a high ground saying hey look although you were wrong I am letting you off after a warning , however if you return we will press the charges basically, GOI has done the bare minimum . All in all it depends on what you set your expectation from your government.

This is completely upto Mrs. Devayani because if I get this right the charges are against her not against Indian consulate or GOI . As I said if this is really one sided I mean she did NO wrong then there is no court in this world where she will not be able to win a case of high handedness and physical and mental trauma against the involved officials.

negi wrote:

UlanBatori wrote: Er.. that's what DK's attorney said too: It is SR who takes 400% responsibility of whatever goes into the form. So exactly what case does GOTUS have against anyone else?

Nice but you do realise that false fact in this case was the wage part (at least that is what the case is about , we don't know if other details like age etc were fudged as well) , if what was stated on VISA form was not being met who as per the law was to be blamed ? SR ? Who filled her I-9 ? Indian consulate ?

negi, it has been made clear more than once on this thread that job agreement for SR was considered a mere formality because it is unrealistic to expect a person to pay her maid more than she herself earns. this was done with full knowledge of US authorities as a quid pro quo offering similar concessions to US diplomats in India in the absence of more realistic laws catering to diplomatic staff.
the status quo got disturbed only because a couple of India hating americans in their embassy wanted to teach the heathens a lesson.

why on earth are you raising this dead issue ? it doesn't matter if, as some allege, DK was a lowlife. even if she did indeed commit visa fraud, it doesn't give US *any* right to treat her the way they did. even for the much more serious charge of espionage the worst they can do is declaring a person PNG.
US diplo-mutts commit much worse on a daily basis in India. would they want India to throw the book at them ?

your infosys reference is frankly asinine, DK was working FOR GOI in US. that is worlds apart from earning their bread from US economy as infy engineers do.

Well if this is indeed about justice then India should seek a legal re-course no ? Now question is, is there a provision for this and will the GOI pursue it ?

you are joking right ?
legal recourse from the US legal system, the very one that has legalized custodial rape at the drop of a hat ?

Since it was asked: I expect my govt to institute cavity search procedures for all American citijuns less those who turned in their oci applications within six months. Ekdum kompulsari hona mangtai. I expect Shri Rathore's Pinto Eggregio to be a big hit and turn the Indian economy around. I expect a case against the Mays, in absentia be it may, and against the tax evading members of the bloated American entourage. And of course I expect Shrimati Devyani ji to be an Adarsh officer, chalo Voh bhi chalega.

Seriously folks, may be this is just a door hitting on the way out for our dear congress, nukelar fud, h1b, solar, pharma, the bojitiv neuj in media...but the DK response, thanks babu moshais, has been a better start than most in recent memory. nancy wants to talk to Namo. I want him to ask her about Paco's diet.

Is there any provision in BR to force trolls in this thread to read last 150 pages before posting any further? May be, there has to be a test to make sure that they understood what they read.

Rahul no one earns their bread from any economy , people just work to earn their bread . I do not wish to go into that line of discussion but I brought up Infy's to show both employer as well as employees are penalised for VISA fraud not for anything beyond it and it is perfectly relevant i.e. both employer and employee are liable to be punished for abusing visa laws former for it's role in pushing for an incorrect one and latter for furbishing incorrect info on DS-160.

To your point about quid pro I will take it for time being for I do not know how different is the process for diplomats but there is one thing I can tell you from personal experience i.e. if this quid pro you talk about was not in a form of some waiver document then I don't see how any legal body would take someone's word for it, Massa is a country where even a father has to produce a certificate for proving that a kid is his child , child's testimony is not considered .

And why are you brining up the part about what US officials do here ? Did I anywhere say that what happened to DK was right or serves her right ? My posts have been targeted towards the GOI they have been always since the day I have posted here. All I said was it only rolled it's head because of who DK was and not because what happened to her.

Where am I raising any issue here ?

Now coming to RIGHT vs WRONG on this topic , from GOI or India's perspective what is the RIGHT thing to do ? Just bring back Mrs Devayani ? Well if GOI indeed thinks that it did no wrong then why not pursue this to end of it ? Let's see how the wheels of justice roll in so called most powerful democracy , na ?

Ye chai pakora with Susan se kya hoga ?

Rahul M wrote:

Well if this is indeed about justice then India should seek a legal re-course no ? Now question is, is there a provision for this and will the GOI pursue it ?

you are joking right ?
legal recourse from the US legal system, the very one that has legalized custodial rape at the drop of a hat ?

First I am serious, the reason is things get out in the open by going down that route , behind the scenes no one comes to know about the truth. It is like this if they don't have a case against her what would happen in worse case ? You cannot just frame someone for VISA fraud without EVIDENCE , she was charged alright but not convicted .

Point is they have made it a legal battle, if there is nothing wrong indeed on our end then why would we shy from that fight ? This is not a pre 1947 era British court where people would give a verdict without any evidence.

negi wrote:Well if this is indeed about justice then India should seek a legal re-course no ? Now question is, is there a provision for this and will the GOI pursue it ?

What do you think the current court case is about?

Come one Negi, you've had your fun, stop pulling our legs will ya!

Have to believe that a otherwise I'd have to question your level of understanding and question your motive for trolling like this.

I am serious what is the current case exactly about ?

This is what I know:

http://www.firstpost.com/world/devyani- ... 80027.html

Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade has sought dismissal of the visa fraud case against her on the ground that the indictment was filed in a court here a day after the US accorded her full diplomatic immunity and the country did not have criminal jurisdiction over her. Khobragade's lawyer Daniel Arshack submitted her reply, in a federal court here, to Manhattan federal prosecutor Preet Bharara's memorandum that had opposed her motion to dismiss the indictment. Devyani Khobragade. AP image Khobragade was present in the US at the time the indictment was returned and "the State Department's recognition of her diplomatic position with the Permanent Mission of India to the United Nations conferred diplomatic immunity upon her requiring that the entire 'proceeding or action' be dismissed," Arshack said in his 17-page motion filed late yesterday. "The instant indictment was returned and filed with the Court prior to Khobragade's departure (from the US) when she was still recognised as a diplomat and still imbued with diplomatic immunity...The prosecution could not then and cannot now proceed further on that invalid instrument," Arshack said.

He, however, acknowledged that the prosecution is not prevented from prosecuting Khobragade in future but insisted that the current case against her be dismissed since she had diplomatic immunity when the indictment was filed.

Amit kindly tell me isn't this about just dropping the charges where as my reference to legal re-course has been articulated very clearly it is about suing and bringing the chaps who wrongly charged her to book. That is what justice is dropping of charges is nothing but giving the other party a dignified route for exit.

negi wrote:First I am serious, the reason is things get out in the open by going down that route , behind the scenes no one comes to know about the truth. It is like this if they don't have a case against her what would happen in worse case ? You cannot just frame someone for VISA fraud without EVIDENCE , she was charged alright but not convicted .

Point is they have made it a legal battle, if there is nothing wrong indeed on our end then why would we shy from that fight ? This is not a pre 1947 era British court where people would give a verdict without any evidence.

I'm sorry to have to say this but you show an incredible lack of understanding on how things work in diplomatic relations. If this had been a legal case that is DK vs SR, supported by various NGOs like Safe Haven etc, then it would have made sense to fight it in US courts. And there's a precedence in that. Just look up the Kirttika Biswas case and the Prabhu Dayal case.

However, the case against DK was a criminal case and it was DK vs US government. Let me ask you slowly if you understand what that means? It means that the US government was going after an Indian Diplomat in NY for official duty. That by proxy means going after GoI. For DK to fight the case GoI would have had to waive diplomatic immunity, now tell me why the frigging reason should they do that?

I don't think it was and enough evidence has some to light to suggest that it was not a concerted SD ploy, rather it was a hatched job done by some low level functionaries which went bad. Now both governments are looking to extricate themselves from this mess with as much face as possible.

I find it strange that just because gora saab has alleged that DK was involved in some hanky panky you believe and yet you don't believe our own diplomat who has maintained all along that no visa fraud was committed and SR was paid above minimum wages.

You are a trenchant critic of GoI. In view of the above consider this: A country or citizens get the government they deserve. Next time keep that in mind before launching a broadside.

negi wrote:Amit kindly tell me isn't this about just dropping the charges where as my reference to legal re-course has been articulated very clearly it is about suing and bringing the chaps who wrongly charged her to book. That is what justice is dropping of charges is nothing but giving the other party a dignified route for exit.

Sigh! This is what happens when Jhonny (I know all, am omniscient) come Lately wades into the discussion low on facts but high on the idea that gora saabs are infallible and so SDRE DK must have committed wrong. If you had, had the patience and understanding to read all the stuff that's been posted by Amber G and others you would have noted that getting this case dismissed is the first step in a series of steps to bring in civil suits against the investigating officers. It's going to be a multi-year process.

Again I refer you to the Kirttika Biswas case, it's been going on for many years now but at the end of it all she will, hopefully, get a fat sum of money as compensation.

It is the duty of an Ambassador to asses a potential PM candidate in flesh and blood and send an assessment report back to SoS, rather than getting the information from third parties. That also means SD/CIA is still clueless as they are not able to penetrate the coterie around NM. They just clueless how to asses NM. They want to asses how confident hw is, what is his personality, what is his psychometric attributes etc.

It would be wise to keep such low lifes such as NP to keep guessing about him, rather than meet him in person. ThThe reason I say that she is low life is because she completely failed in her duty as Amb. Of US to India in DK's case.

I will ignore the personal barbs for now, man I am getting better with age on that front at least

However, the case against DK was a criminal case and it was DK vs US government. Let me ask you slowly if you understand what that means? It means that the US government was going after an Indian Diplomat in NY for official duty.


That by proxy means going after GoI. For DK to fight the case GoI would have to waive diplomatic immunity, no tell me why the frigging reason should they do that? I don't think and enough evidence has some to light to suggest that it was a concerted SD ploy, rather it was a hatched job done by some low level functionaries which went bad. Now both governments are looking to extricate themselves from this mess with as much face as possible.

Is this your spin on it ? That would have been the case if she was charged for espionage , how is an alleged VISA fraud a case against someone on official duty ?

Also if this was against her on official duty then ideally even the Indian embassy would have been indicted , no ?

By the way as per you and others there is simply no case against her as she is completely clean , so what is there to fear ? That she won't get a fair trial ? Well if that is what you believe then kindly say so and I will too stop my line of questioning.

Both governments trying to control damage is no consolation for a person whose personal integrity has been questioned , no ?

Negiji,

Please look up Amber G's posts for more information. The very questions you ask has been answered there.

>> Rahul no one earns their bread from any economy , people just work to earn their bread

split hairs if you want to but the fact remains that an IT worker is working 'in' US while a diplomat is working for GOI 'in' India(embassy). the difference is considerable. that is why US laws do not apply to him or her in the same way it does to an IT worker.

>> To your point about quid pro I will take it for time being for I do not know how different is the process for diplomats but there is one thing I can tell you from personal experience i.e. if this quid pro you talk about was not in a form of some waiver document then I don't see how any legal body would take someone's word for it, Massa is a country where even a father has to produce a certificate for proving that a kid is his child , child's testimony is not considered .

you are putting far too much faith on the infallibility of US legal system than is warranted. they broke their own regulations in this case itself ! US breaks the laws often enough if it suits its interests. there was no reason for MEA to assume that US SD would disrupt the quid pro quo and out its own staff at risk.
(personally, I think US SD simply assumed that India under MMS won't *dare* move against their staff in any way. in fact GOI has done *much*, *much* less than what it could do. believe me, there exists enough material to put half US govt staff in India behind bars if GOI wants to)

>> Just bring back Mrs Devayani ? Well if GOI indeed thinks that it did no wrong then why not pursue this to end of it ?
err, what ? haven't your friends/parents ever advised you on the lines of "avoid so and so area after dark".
was it because
a) they thought you might indulge in criminal activity
or
b) they were afraid you would come in harms way irrespective of what you did (IOW even if you were a good boy who listened to mummy and parted his hair after applying copious amount of hair oil) ?

GOI is not convinced of the ability of US system to play fair, as it has already demonstrated the propensity to forget its own and international rules in its vindictive run to punish dirty heathens. why risk her again ?
it might have been different if DK was from an euro country, say germany. (whose diplomats are going to get an waiver regarding wages for domestic helps)

>> Let's see how the wheels of justice roll in so called most powerful democracy , na ?
clearly they have a much lower opinion of the quality of justice than you do.

First I am serious, the reason is things get out in the open by going down that route , behind the scenes no one comes to know about the truth. It is like this if they don't have a case against her what would happen in worse case ? You cannot just frame someone for VISA fraud without EVIDENCE , she was charged alright but not convicted .

they can and probably would, given half a chance.
I am sorry, I do not share your opinion of US legal system. a country whose supreme court upholds custodial rape as a legitimate police procedure for virtually all scenarios, however minor, can be expected to adopt any and all unfair means to frame a targeted individual.

Point is they have made it a legal battle, if there is nothing wrong indeed on our end then why would we shy from that fight ? This is not a pre 1947 era British court where people would give a verdict without any evidence.

it may be worse than a pre 1947 era brit court, esp. for a dark skinned heathen diplomat whom all and sundry has already 'convicted' (not in legal sense) for slavery.

What I find suspicious is the speed at which the tax cases of US diplomats and US school are being handled. There should be a lot more urgency to prosecute. If we are not efficient enough to do this in two months, we are in minor league.

Rahul legal systems have to be tried at least once else all can bring out guns no ?

negi wrote:I will ignore the...

I thank you sincerely. Nothing could have better justified my little cave. A hundred thanks for your spirited effort.

ps - look carefully and you shall find what you are looking for. it is in plain sight.

negi wrote:Rahul legal systems have to be tried at least once else all can bring out guns no ?

Bliss to visit the bojitive neuj thread for unkeel.

Shreeman wrote:

negi wrote:I will ignore the...

I thank you sincerely. Nothing could have better justified my little cave. A hundred thanks for your spirited effort.

ps - look carefully and you shall find what you are looking for. it is in plain sight.

Joo mean I was bosting in the wlong thlead ?

Amber G. wrote:Another thing we discussed here in brf is also a newspaper story (see below). I (and others) made comment about the opinion of the UN Office of Legal Affairs (From UN Assistant Secretary General for Legal Affairs) among all the documents submitted by DK's attorney.

Here is the newspaper article:
UN agency backs India, says Devyani had full immunity

A United Nations agency has endorsed New Delhi’s claim that Indian Foreign Service officer Devyani Khobragade enjoyed full diplomatic immunity when she was arrested by the United States law-enforcement officials in New York on December 12 last.

The opinion of the UN Office of Legal Affairs (OLA) supports New Delhi’s argument that Khobragade enjoyed full immunity at the time of her arrest as she had already been accredited to the international organisation as a representative of India since August last year.

Khobragade’s lawyers have cited the UN OLA’s view in a court in Manhattan to counter the recent move by Preet Bharara, the US district attorney for southern district of New York, to dismiss New Delhi’s claim.


Stephen Mathias, UN Assistant Secretary General for Legal Affairs, on January 27 last wrote to India’s Deputy Permanent Representative to the international organisation conveying the UN OLA’s views on the issue.

He wrote that representatives of all members of the United Nations “to the principal and subsidiary organs of the United Nations and to conferences convened by the United Nations, while exercising their functions and during their journey to and from the place of meeting, enjoy the privileges and immunities set forth in Section 11 of the General Convention”.

The General Convention or the “Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations” was adopted by the international organisation in February 13, 1946.
Khobragade was posted at the Consulate General of India in New York.

But she was also designated as adviser to the Permanent Mission of India to the UN ahead of the United Nations General Assembly last September in view of the additional workload due to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to the international organisation for the annual meet.

She had been accredited by the international organisation as an adviser to the Permanent Mission of India to the UN on August 26 and the accreditation was valid till December 31.

According to the Section 11 A of the Article 4 of the “General Convention”, all representatives of the members of the international organisation enjoy “immunities from personal arrest or detention and from the seizure of their personal baggage”.

The Section 16 of the convention made it clear that the “representatives” of a country should include all delegates, deputy delegates, advisors, technical experts and secretaries of the delegations.

The US claimed that Khobragade, being a consular official, only enjoyed limited immunity, which was not violated by her arrest for committing visa fraud and allegedly underpaying her domestic help. But New Delhi argued that she had full immunity cover as her accreditation to the UN was valid when she was arrested.

Bharara last week urged the US court of the Southern District of New York to deny a motion filed by Khobragade’s lawyer Daniel N Arshack for dismissing the January 9 indictment against her, as the UN accreditation had granted the IFS officer immunity from arrest and prosecution.

Thanks for posting this. It is settled then that US has acted illegally in arrest etc in contravention of Diplomatic immunity and that supports the views I hold with regard to her immunity on the day of arrest. In fact no criminal case could have been registered against her even if assuming that she was doing something criminal. While this was known to members here since the day if incidence it is good that it comes from UN OLA.

negi wrote:Is this your spin on it ? That would have been the case if she was charged for espionage , how is an alleged VISA fraud a case against someone on official duty ?

Can you tell me how an "alleged" (I'm glad you finally used this word) visa fraud and wage dispute becomes a criminal case in which the Public Prosecutor of the Souther District of New York (the second most influential Public Prosecutor job after the DC Prosecutor) gets personally involved?

Also if this was against her on official duty then ideally even the Indian embassy would have been indicted , no ?

Again you show your lack of reading on this case (mind you that's not a personal barb!). The initial moves was to slap a human trafficking case on DK - note how SR's family was given T2 and T3 visa (please look up as to who/which type of people get such visas) - and then the Indian Embassy would most certainly been involved as the plane tickets of SR were brought by the GoI and that would have made the GoI an accessory to trafficking. That also explains why PB personally got involved. I dunno what happened but someone chickened out from the trafficking angle which is why you have this rather ridiculous situation in which an alleged visa fraud and payment dispute case has become the central point in US-India relations.

By the way as per you and others there is simply no case against her as she is completely clean , so what is there to fear ?

Can you tell me why you think that the great US of A is the right and propar place to decide on a dispute between two Indians on GoI duty? Why should US of A have any jurisdictional oversight? Just because some underlings acted like jerks means that GoI should waive diplomatic immunity on its diplomat to seek justice? Your belief on the infallibility and admiration for the US of A, especially its justice system is admirable but unfortunately not many folks are impressed.

I will too stop my line of questioning.

Oh please don't do that your honor we are all being well educated by your line of questioning.

What have we had till now, let's see. The DK case being compared to alleged callousness towards accident victims, the poor guys in Infy who got shafted because the company tried to game the rules, the government's attitude to soldiers who were beheaded by the Pakis. I'm sure if you persist with your line of questioning more such err interesting stuff will come to light.

amit wrote: Can you tell me how an "alleged" (I'm glad you finally used this word) visa fraud and wage dispute becomes a criminal case in which the Public Prosecutor of the Souther District of New York (the second most influential Public Prosecutor job after the DC Prosecutor) gets personally involved?

Are you asking me to speculate here ? I mean why are you asking me that ?

Can you tell me why you think that the great US of A is the right and propar place to decide on a dispute between two Indians on GoI duty? Why should US of A have any jurisdictional oversight? Just because some underlings acted like jerks means that GoI should waive diplomatic immunity on its diplomat to seek justice? Your belief on the infallibility and admiration for the US of A, especially its justice system is admirable but unfortunately not many folks are impressed.

Where does admiration part come here ? I do not know about others but well personally if I think I am clean I think I will not have anything to fear in any court. After all you yourself have been saying hey look at Krittika Biswas's case , no ? YOu cannot argue both ways . That is why I asked that question i.e. if you do not believe that justice will be done then why even bother with this discussion ?

What have we had till now, let's see. The DK case being compared to alleged callousness towards accident victims, the poor guys in Infy who got shafted because the company tried to game the rules, the government's attitude to soldiers who were beheaded by the Pakis. I'm sure if you persist with your line of questioning more such err interesting stuff will come to light.

It is all related you did not read my original post carefully enough and even if you did you did not get it's jist.

negi wrote:......snip......

Where does admiration part come here ? I do not know about others but well personally if I think I am clean I think I will not have anything to fear in any court. After all you yourself have been saying hey look at Krittika Biswas's case , no ? YOu cannot argue both ways . That is why I asked that question i.e. if you do not believe that justice will be done then why even bother with this discussion ?

....snip.....

I dont usually troll, but when I do I do it like this::

^ Sir you haven't seen me troll , trust me you haven't.

negi wrote:Where does admiration part come here ? I do not know about others but well personally if I think I am clean I think I will not have anything to fear in any court. After all you yourself have been saying hey look at Krittika Biswas's case , no ? YOu cannot argue both ways . That is why I asked that question i.e. if you do not believe that justice will be done then why even bother with this discussion ?

Sigh! I'll take one last chance and then I quit.

Do you know the difference between a civil case and a criminal case? I'd wager you a dollar if DK had faced a civil case the GoI would not have become involved. But this was a criminal case with an arrest (in front of the children's school), handcuffing, strip and cavity search and lock up with drug addicts and prostitutes. Plus a $250K bail.

I'm assuming you don't understand the gravity of all the above. But then you don't as you compared this with Infy employees getting stamps on their passports.

negi wrote:^ Sir you haven't seen me trolling , trust me you haven't.

If you haven't even got started then this is indeed a dhoti shivering moment. Time to find the short, narrow dark places to hide.

^ Whether a case is criminal or civil has nothing to do with fairness or does it ? I am not sure what are you trying to say ?

I think I made my point very clear the issue is just because I do not share same kind of sensitivities or at least the level to which they are being expressed on this thread does not mean I am taking sides here. I have no where said that what Unkil did to Mrs DK was RIGHT or did I ?

All I said was that Indians abroad get shafted and no one in the GOI cares the bruhahah is because someone of the GOI got shafted. Nothing more nothing less, case being civil or criminal has little to do with it.

Negi,

I have no intent in getting into a slug-fest here, so this is my last post on this. But seriously dude, if you are so interested and passionate about this issue then please please please read up from around page 150. The start is around the time that the esteemed poster TSJ accurately predicted that DK will be charged with trafficking and slavery even before the charges were actually formally announced by the one and only PB.

BTW, I hope you were celebrating the attack on the parliament. The politicians never really gave a $hit about India, so why should we care when they were attacked huh (just playing devils advocate).

^ You call a poster a troll and then say you do not have an intention to indulge in a slug-fest ?

Nah... I really dont. But I know trolling when I see it.

LokeshC wrote: The start is around the time that the esteemed poster TSJ accurately predicted that DK will be charged with trafficking and slavery even before the charges were actually formally announced by the one and only PB.

Well he was utterly wrong and what he argued was The Solid Junk. DK was charged with Visa fraud and false statement. In fact the original preliminary charge made by DSS apecial Agent Mark Moron Smith sworn to uphold Amirkhan Shit had these charges and not trafficking or slavery. Those were psyops by vested interests resulting in T-3 Visa and evacuation or inverse trafficking by US SD.

Anyway, India has comeout better in this and US has gained a lot of ill feelings in India. I have suspicion that US wants low key adversarial relations post UPA India headed by NaMo.

chaanakya, point was he was peddling the same terms "slavery, trafficking" precisely ended up being the stick used by vested interests to try and beat up India. For them, their bad luck was that they lost the information war the moment they ended up doing the cavity search and justifying it as SOP and then charging her in a criminal court, they climbed a few rungs the ladder of escalation in the first step itself.

matrimc wrote:

shiv wrote: India actually did nothing when the great Shah Rukh Khan was pulled aside, and he has influence as well as the money to own a cricket team, let alone an Adarsh flat.

Shiv ji: SRK got his money and fame fair and square through hard work and innate talent. No idea re the veracity of Allegations of graft in Dr DK's obtaining the Adarsh flat. If those allegations turn out to be true then I can understand the anger of the commons.

Dead right. This underscores my point that it was not merely wealth, fame and influence that made GoI rescue Devyani khobragade.

Why did they do it then?

Was Khobragade protected because she might have been involved in the Adarsh scam? That sounds too far fetched to me. I assume that you would agree with my assessment. In fact I will just go back a few posts and indicate how the topic of Adarsh scam was brought up in this context.

This was a classic case of changing the subject from cow to coconut tree by first saying that "The cow is tied to the coconut tree". The intention is to talk about the coconut tree by making a tenuous connection between cow and tree. Let me explain that. You see, it is the UPA government that rescued Devyani Khobragade. The UPA government is involved in the Adarsh scam. Devyani Khobragade is alleged to to have a flat in Adarsh. That makes a neat circle linking Khobragade to UPA. And when it is necessary to restart the old subject of bashing the UPA in every thread and every topic, inane rhetoric comes in useful to connect up Khobragade's alleged involvement in a US visa scam; her alleged acquisition of an Adarsh flat, and the corruption of the UPA government all neatly rolled up together like dry snot from both nostrils in one comfortable ball to be smeared into this thread.

The Adarsh reference was unnecessary and off topic and my reference to Shah Rukh Khan was merely to show that mere fame and influence have not been enough for the GoI to rescue someone in the US. The Adarsh scam too is a bogey and really should not be mentioned any more in the context of the custodial rape of Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade.

LokeshC wrote:

negi wrote:......snip......

Where does admiration part come here ? I do not know about others but well personally if I think I am clean I think I will not have anything to fear in any court. After all you yourself have been saying hey look at Krittika Biswas's case , no ? YOu cannot argue both ways . That is why I asked that question i.e. if you do not believe that justice will be done then why even bother with this discussion ?

....snip.....

I dont usually troll, but when I do I do it like this::

Here is a list of convicts who were simply let out of jail after they had been justly and fairly convicted by the US court system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mi ... th_century