Bharat Rakshak

venug wrote:We can discuss Sangeetha the instant she surrenders. She absconded, she parted with a foreign government.

Explain to me how a grown up adult absconds? Was she a bonded labor?

some other angle from Indian POV-

The Delhi HC on sept 20 had restrained the maid and her husband Mr/s Sangeeta Richard not to go to any court including outside India. This was very sepcific.
Now the usa has spirited away the family - both are out of the country.

If the wheels of justice move in smooth fashion with no GOI interefrence and the judges have some spine-- expect usa to be named as conspiraotr to this. The american ambassador may have to depose before Indian court.

I sincerely hope that this will happen and usa is taken to task.
The time by this will happen will be around the new govt hopefully.

LokeshC wrote:Maybe you should read the past few pages of the thread before trolling?

Trolling me ?

You seriously want me to go and read the last many pages on this thread and then come up with my views ?

I have a view I put it or do you not like views divergent from yours.

Dont bother replying

Why dont you ask her? Or go back read the pages, seems like you havent been doing the reading. Start 20 pages back. She was missing when The diplomat filed missing complaint. What do you term it? An excursion party? Or a stroll ?

The minimum wage doesn't seem to be $9.00 as of now. Looks like it is $7.25 as of now.

Wiki says 7.25 as of now. It becomes $8.00 as of December 31, 2013. and becomes $9 only at the end of Dec 31, 2015.

Even the site linked below indicates the same.

http://www.labor.ny.gov/workerprotectio ... nwage.shtm

Minimum Wage Increase .

Beginning December 31, 2013, New York State’s minimum wage will increase in a series of three annual changes as follows: .

$8.00 on 12/31/13 .
$8.75 on 12/31/14 .
$9.00 on 12/31/15

Why is the $9.00 figure being peddled by US administration? How is " Original agreement of $9.75/hour would be in line with the minimum wage rates required by US law" as Mr. Bharara mentions in his defence.

Why are MUTUs in BR parroting a figure of $9.00.

If I am wrong, can some one give me a source for the minimum wage in NY now.

hulaku wrote:

Karan M wrote:Pray, elaborate the differences. Also please tell us how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

Is that a serious question ?

Were you serious when you made that statement to begin with?

@krisna

Thats a good point. I wasnt aware of that.

But then we do know how babudom protects its own. And the judiciary also likes to play along sometimes.

And a general question what does MUTU mean ?

ManjaM wrote:Theirs is a weird dichotomy, one one hand lots of Repubs talk of doing away with minimum wage and on the other hand, most FoxNewsish boards are wailing about how DK exploited her help by not paying minimum wage.

Check Free Repulic website and you will see mixed response. However they end up blaming Obama as it is he who they care. Then you will seem some TFTA Americans too. Cow, curry and caste is what both dems and repubs discuss. Some rational and sensible people do accept the gravity of mistake. As always the voice of sane gets drowned.

venug wrote:We can discuss Sangeetha the instant she surrenders. She absconded, she parted with a foreign government.

After attempting to coerce an Indian official into giving her an illegal visa and extra money.

also the Indian govt thru its agencies have intimated the same to us counterparts beofre this preet bharara moved in long time back in sept-oct period.

usa is now acting uppity and high and moral etc etc.

also some gungadins in twitter and fb and some other forums.


many well meaning Indians have forgotton that it an Indian outside being affected by a foreign power disregarding Indian laws.
They have started blaming the lady itself a saying she deserved it for adarsh scam. scumbags only.

They dont realise that she neeeds to taken to task in India but do not allow interference by a forreign power.

Me thinks this is all due to Indianness not inculcated duirng formative years in schools and by parents to some extent.

hulaku wrote:@krisna

Thats a good point. I wasnt aware of that.

If you were to read the previous pages of discussion, there will be many other points that you might learn.

But then we do know how babudom protects its own. And the judiciary also likes to play along sometimes.

Irrelevant.

hulaku wrote:

Dipanker wrote:And Sangeeta Richard is not our own?

This. Nailed it.

No such thing can be conceded.

Sangeeta Richards has flouted an explicit Court Order of an Indian Court, namely the Delhi High Court, on this particular issue. She is thus less deserving of our protection in this issue. By our, I mean Indian nationals resident in India and exclude those with possibly divided loyalties by virtue of living elsewhere.

Karan Mji, exactly. Suddenly we have some Indians who are champions of American justice system, they believe USMS than their own

Dipanker wrote:

venug wrote:We can discuss Sangeetha the instant she surrenders. She absconded, she parted with a foreign government.

Explain to me how a grown up adult absconds? Was she a bonded labor?

Violating her visa provisions, being an Indian citizen and overlooking the summons of the Delhi HC.

abscond
əbˈskɒnd,ab-/
verb
verb: abscond; 3rd person present: absconds; past tense: absconded; past participle: absconded; gerund or present participle: absconding

1.
leave hurriedly and secretly, typically to escape from custody or avoid arrest.
"the barman absconded with a week's takings"
synonyms: run away, escape, bolt, clear out, flee, make off, take flight, take off,

And yes, a SIM card and additional takings as well.

You question the integrity of an Indian babu and your "Indianess" gets questioned.

*Claps and walks away from this thread*

Karan M wrote:I find Ms Nirupama Sub.'s comments in this case to lack any clear sense of outrage or anger.

I think you are mistaking Nirupama Rao (Indian Amb to US till last month) with NS (Journalist). NR was an official of GoI and cannot express outrage beyond a limit in public. Don't blame her for acting resposibly in public. If IFS officers didn't push for this in private pols would have done nothing.

nachiket wrote: US must have warned their diplomutts. All of them will be extra careful now not to let us get any excuse to arrest them.

There's enough already. Just needs cojones, coordination and closure for the exchange which, interestingly will redound to the advantage of both parties. It takes it out of the Justice Department's hands.

It's a different level of chess.

Think about it

hulaku other members got warned for thr track you are ta king. The issue at hand is an Indian diplomat was arrested and subject to custodial rape.
Her bei n g rich in India is irrelevant here.
If uou persist I will have to warn snd ban you.

venug wrote:Karan Mji, exactly. Suddenly we have some Indians who are champions of American justice system, they believe USMS than their own

I cannot understand how people can defend this:

A married woman and mother of two is forced into having physically intrusive searches, which violate her dignity, leave her distraught, even while she is a diplomat of the Indian republic...which aforesaid right is violated, all on the basis of dubious claims which are under judicial debate.

hulaku,
If you were on a different thread and in a different context. That question would be totally appropriate and would be received rather warmly.

If you cannot resolve these two distinct issues being in different contexts and then conclude that such a question as you asked is not the right question and a massive self goal, then sir you gotta get some post-colonial education.

sivab wrote:

Karan M wrote:I find Ms Nirupama Sub.'s comments in this case to lack any clear sense of outrage or anger.

I think you are mistaking Nirupama Rao (Indian Amb to US till last month) with NS (Journalist). NR was an official of GoI and cannot express outrage beyond a limit in public. Don't blame her for acting resposibly in public. If IFS officers didn't push for this in private pols would have done nothing.

Sorry, you may be right. However, behaving responsibly in public does not mean not showing anger (IMHO) at such incidents or justifying somewhat weird policies (OT for thsi thread though).

venug wrote:Why dont you ask her? Or go back read the pages, seems like you havent been doing the reading. Start 20 pages back. She was missing when The diplomat filed missing complaint. What do you term it? An excursion party? Or a stroll ?

I am aware of the issue. My point is that Sangeeta Richard is an adult. If she does not want to work for DK, it is her prerogative. Can you deny that?

Reading this letter gives rise to a host of emotions--DK is a good human being, a dedicated professional and family woman, an Indian success story, and as a Dalit she is a living testament that civilizationally we do get very important things right, and have nothing to apologize for, to civilizations whose record at moral growth is very spotty at best.

The degree of treachery by Sangeeta is quite appalling, it must be a struggle right now for DK to keep her faith in humanity at all, hats off to her for staying on her feet. It is horrifying to think of what she has been put through, and troubling to think of what awaits her, as she plays out her role as a pawn in what now appears to be a high-stakes, ruthless, US imperialist move.

I hope against hope that the UPA-led GOI doesn't lose its nerve, and is clear-eyed about the kind of adversary India is facing.

I plan to send a card to Dr. Khobragade c/o Indian Consulate NYC to say I am proud of her, and telling her to keep her spirits up.

Dipanker wrote:

venug wrote:Why dont you ask her? Or go back read the pages, seems like you havent been doing the reading. Start 20 pages back. She was missing when The diplomat filed missing complaint. What do you term it? An excursion party? Or a stroll ?

I am aware of the issue. My point is that Sangeeta Richard is an adult. If she does not want to work for DK, it is her prerogative. Can you deny that?

If you are working in the US on an Indian passport, she needs a valid visa to do so. She always has the choice of returning to India and seeking a normal US work visa. That would have been the legal thing which any sane person would do. This was a clear case of wanting to immigrate by hook or by crook.

On the Visa she had, it was a Visa that bonded her into an employment contract with DK. If she did not like it, she should not have entered into it in the first place.

hulaku wrote:You question the integrity of an Indian babu and your "Indianess" gets questioned.

*Claps and walks away from this thread*

The babu's integrity claim is irrelevant. That's for India to decide, not for any other country which arbitrarily subjects a diplomat to "strip searches", without even having guilt been proven. Despite the diplomat and Indian state following the letter of the law and alerting host country of a potential issue.

By the same standards you are employing, any Indian can summarily be assumed to be honest/dishonest and forces external to India can assault them.

Also, please do read through the thread, see what strip search means, and what it would mean to an Indian woman, to be subjected to something like this against her will.

The lota carriers for the "US justice system" a few pages ago:

Everyone's orfices are searched. Justice is equal. If you object to her being searched, that just shows you are high caste racist who like to rape wimmins in his spare time.

Now it is:

Her orfices weren't searched. People who say that are lying.

Kweshun: what happened to everyone being searched? If she wasn't searched, why the special treatment? Isn't justice equal?

Dipanker wrote:

venug wrote:Why dont you ask her? Or go back read the pages, seems like you havent been doing the reading. Start 20 pages back. She was missing when The diplomat filed missing complaint. What do you term it? An excursion party? Or a stroll ?

I am aware of the issue. My point is that Sangeeta Richard is an adult. If she does not want to work for DK, it is her prerogative. Can you deny that?

Evading the issue that she is jumping her visa provisos and also absconding from Indian courts. All this may be her prerogative, as you put it. But it does make her an absconder.

Actually the repeated attempts to file a missing persons report to NYPD show that DK was concerned and valued Richard's services as a maid. It only turned ugly when the Richard's shady lawyer called for an out of court settlement (i.e. a bribe to keep quiet).

Dipanker wrote:

chaanakya wrote: Many esteemed brfites thought it is a modern slavery issue, perks for ifs or that they deserved, that she lied , visa fraud, perjury blah blah. But surely when facts emerged slowly they have become quietened. If they posted in support I could have understood their learning process. But I am sure they are waiting for storm to pass as it shall inevitably.

I don't count myself among one of esteemed brfites, and let us for a moment assume that DK has been "framed" and there are wheels within wheels in this case but at the end of the day whatever she did, there is documentary proof of that.

The only way she can get out of it is by proving in the court that she was forced to sign the papers that she would pay $9+ /hr instead of the $3 /hr (which of course reeks of exploitation and modern day slavery ) she intended to pay.

For a moment, instead of just reciting the law (which is widely thought to be an ass) let us use our human judgment of what is right and wrong.

It is true that many people, including Indians treat their domestic staff in an exploitative and inhumane way. This includes lots of people who technically pay minimum wage. In the present case, (a) it is not at all clear that indian citizen and diplomatic employee Sangeeta richard comes under US civil laws and regulations, but to me, more importantly, (b) it is very clear to me that there was nothing exploitative or underhanded about the way DK treated Sangeeta.

Rudradev
The US covert action was to fix Indian diplomat s eith the charge of human trafficking.
Hence the long elaborate cover and a groomef maid was sent to DK and at right time she was sprung.
Bharara is the patsy.
Plan misfired when DK was subject USMS goons.
Whole world Is watching the Indian outrage. Useful idiots are trolling media.
Its now out of diplomats hands.


Unvle is learning what women's honor means.

LokeshC wrote:
If you are working in the US on an Indian passport, she needs a valid visa to do so. She always has the choice of returning to India and seeking a normal US work visa. That would have been the legal thing which any sane person would do. This was a clear case of wanting to immigrate by hook or by crook.

On the Visa she had, it was a Visa that bonded her into an employment contract with DK. If she did not like it, she should not have entered into it in the first place.

The point here is that as a grown up adult if Sangeeta decides to quit her job and walk off, even though that makes her an illegal immigrant in US, it is still her prerogative.

She is not a bonded laborer.

Mrs DKs relationship with the maid apart, there is the fundamental issue that an Indian diplomat, in violation of convention, has been subjected to physical humiliation, against her will. Multiple times. That is not defensible.

Dipanker wrote:The point here is that as a grown up adult if Sangeeta decides to quit her job and walk off, even though that makes her an illegal immigrant in US, it is still her prerogative.

She is not a bonded laborer.

You claimed she was not absconding. By the definition of the term, she is.
Further, irrespective of what Sangeeta did or not, what Mrs DK was subjected to was unconscionable. Or would you wish to split hairs on that as well.

Dipanker wrote:

The point here is that as a grown up adult if Sangeeta decides to quit her job and walk off, even though that makes her an illegal immigrant in US, it is still her prerogative.

She is not a bonded laborer.

Well said. Because if she were a non-grown up child, she would have been bonded labor and would not have had that prerogative.

Dipanker wrote: The point here is that as a grown up adult if Sangeeta decides to quit her job and walk off, even though that makes her an illegal immigrant in US, it is still her prerogative.

She is not a bonded laborer.

Then where's the question of DK being involved in human trafficking as alleged by the DA?

I hope they counter sue in a civil case for the back rent that she had to pay, the food she ate for each day she was there, and also for the stress and tension caused by her unannounced disappearance, in return for full minimum wages provided for the time she was serving DK.

Dipanker wrote:

LokeshC wrote:
If you are working in the US on an Indian passport, she needs a valid visa to do so. She always has the choice of returning to India and seeking a normal US work visa. That would have been the legal thing which any sane person would do. This was a clear case of wanting to immigrate by hook or by crook.

On the Visa she had, it was a Visa that bonded her into an employment contract with DK. If she did not like it, she should not have entered into it in the first place.

The point here is that as a grown up adult if Sangeeta decides to quit her job and walk off, even though that makes her an illegal immigrant in US, it is still her prerogative.

She is not a bonded laborer.

She did walk away and became an illegal immigrant did she not? So where was the bonded part of the labor? She was free to leave anytime she wanted.

During the Kargil War, Indians in US led an effective media campain against Paki perfidity. Why am I not seeing that kind of push here? I mean, the following could be highlighted for starters:

1. The timeline of the ongoing legal case in India
2. The history of Sangeetha Richards and her family, esp. regarding service with diplomats
3. The fact that DK had approached the US authorities regarding the missing maid multiple times
4. The legality of US spiriting away the maid's family and the timing of that event, forget the fact that this very act stinks.
5. The double standards of the prosecutors office when dealin with similar cases involving Kuwaitis/Peruvians and the Russian diplomats thingie
6. Does the SD/USMS/Prosecutor's Office understand what it really means if you start to "qualify" immunity and courtesy given to Indian diplomats? Especially given the scope of US involvement in India.

IMO, if an Indian diplomat can be roughed like this, an NRI/PIO can expect even worse - it's in their interests to take a stand on this issue.

LokeshC wrote:Actually the repeated attempts to file a missing persons report to NYPD show that DK was concerned and valued Richard's services as a maid. It only turned ugly when the Richard's shady lawyer called for an out of court settlement (i.e. a bribe to keep quiet).

I seriously doubt this version of the story. Sangeeta case was taken up by an NGO, her lawyer belongs to this NGO.

Oh.... one more thing, if the Indian NRI/PIO associations do not stand by the Indian Govt and it's diplomatic corps, how do you think they will treat US NRIs/PIOs in the future. Babu apathy and laziness is one thing.... but I don't think you want to be on their sh1t-list. Baksheesh and dinner parties ityadi can take you only so far....