Bharat Rakshak

pankajs wrote:Reciprocal response to an Indian diplomat being arrested, handcuffed, strip searched and cavity searched is to arrest, handcuff, strip-search and cavity search an American diplomat in India. No more no less. Lets not bring in other issues into this at this point of time.

Of course the non-reciprocal privileges enjoyed by US diplomats in India should be eliminated.

The US has also been asked to provide the tax returns filed by it with Indian authorities for commercial activities which are afforded through ACSA to non-diplomatic persons, including private American citizens and their families, government sources said.

rahulm wrote:Following on from the latest GOI directives to cease operation of schools and cafes, I hope the GOI is looking into the possibility of US mounting a Tony Mendez type operation for key officers.

g.sarkar wrote:

ramana wrote:I think GOI stance is the arrest is illegal in the first place, so where for the plea bargain?

Ramanaji,
There are a few points I would like to mention:
1. In US to get a speedy trial, plea bargain is done. This is the rule not the exception. If you do not accept, and go for a jury trial, the book is thrown at you. I have seen people accepting a 10 year term because the alternative would have been a life term if convicted by a jury. In the case of Dr K, it is the question of keeping cool. This is easy to say than done. She had trouble with one strip search. If convicted and forced to do time even for a short time, she will go through the process everyday. Believe me, I could not stand being sentenced in prison, when I have spent 22 years there as staff. You can not blame her if she loses her nerve and accepts a guilty plea.
2. Unless very sure of being found innocent, lawyers will often recommend that accused go for plea and avoid the harsh sentence.
3. In BR I am hearing people say that Preet Bharwa is finished. How so? We under estimate him at our peril. He has his admirers. I just heard him speak about the Banks culpability in the ponzi scheme (JP Morgan and the Madof thing) on the NPR. He sounded very up beat.
4. US understands only one type of dand. That is Artha Dand. India should threaten to cancel large billion dollar contracts and see the reaction. On the other hand, I am worried about the loss of the the GE engines for he Tejas if we go that rout.
Gautam

The Bhopal disaster, also referred to as the Bhopal gas tragedy, was a gas leak incident in India, considered the world's worst industrial disaster.[1] It occurred on the night of 2–3 December 1984 at the Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) pesticide plant in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh. Over 500,000 people were exposed to methyl isocyanate gas and other chemicals. The toxic substance made its way in and around the shanty towns located near the plant.[2] Estimates vary on the death toll. The official immediate death toll was 2,259. The government of Madhya Pradesh confirmed a total of 3,787 deaths related to the gas release.[3] Others estimate 8,000 died within two weeks and another 8,000 or more have since died from gas-related diseases.[4][5][6] A government affidavit in 2006 stated the leak caused 558,125 injuries including 38,478 temporary partial injuries and approximately 3,900 severely and permanently disabling injuries.[7]

The petition had been admitted by the apex court three years ago, on December 3, 2010. Not a single hearing has taken place since then.

rahulm wrote:Then what real chips do we have? Demarches, interpol notices and strong protests. Who are we going to arrest to bargain. Use future defence contracts for DK?

You need a snake if you intend to play the flute.

"The police have also been asked to deal strictly with any traffic violation by [American] embassy vehicles," the sources added.

The Manhattan lawyer represented Krittika Biswas, the 18-year-old honour student and daughter of vice consul Debashish Biswas, falsely accused of sending two obscene e-mails when she was not near a computer.

Despite repeatedly stating she was innocent, asserting diplomatic immunity and wanting her father and the Indian Consulate notified, Krittika was handcuffed on February 8, 2011 and taken away from her school to spend 28 hours in a miscarriage of justice that included a dirty, cramped cell.

<snip>

Now with what has happened, Krittika is thinking of going back to India and studying there. “Her dad told me that she asks him: ‘Why did you bring me to New York, so I can be handcuffed?’” says Batra.

SSridhar wrote:From Straits Times

"The police have also been asked to deal strictly with any traffic violation by [American] embassy vehicles," the sources added.

A worried White House was reportedly huddled Tuesday night to figure out a defense strategy against the searing criticism in a memoir by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates — as one ex-official called the takedown "disappointing."

CNN reported the White House was contacting "allies" to defend against Gates' claims in "Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War," including that President Obama had lost faith in his own Afghanistan policy.

pankajs wrote:Read in full .. The spineless and compromised mohan singh's noball piss prize ambition meant that there was no retaliation in that case and here we are with another case.

Krittika Biswas: The Story You Did Not Know

The Manhattan lawyer represented Krittika Biswas, the 18-year-old honour student and daughter of vice consul Debashish Biswas, falsely accused of sending two obscene e-mails when she was not near a computer.

Despite repeatedly stating she was innocent, asserting diplomatic immunity and wanting her father and the Indian Consulate notified, Krittika was handcuffed on February 8, 2011 and taken away from her school to spend 28 hours in a miscarriage of justice that included a dirty, cramped cell.

<snip>

Now with what has happened, Krittika is thinking of going back to India and studying there. “Her dad told me that she asks him: ‘Why did you bring me to New York, so I can be handcuffed?’” says Batra.

“We gave the IP address of the computer from which the emails were sent from. Using our “key,” the school found the real culprit, Shang Ming, in one day” says Batra.

Ming confessed the day after.
Justice for Krittika?

It took Batra six weeks to prepare and file a Notice of Claim. Usually this is a two-three page document. Theirs is 97 pages. The question was: how much will the jury award to Krittika Biswas? “I set the floor with USD 1.5 million not the ceiling,” clarifies Batra.

“The teacher and principal filed two false reports against Krittika – one was for her arrest and one for her suspension. The principal supported both despite the DA dismissing charges,” says the lawyer. It is a crime in New York to file a false report. DA Brown has jurisdiction to investigate if crimes were committed.

Biswas’ attorney, Ravi Batra, said that following her arrest, she was further mistreated at the police precinct: Her handcuffs were secured so tightly that they caused pain and swelling, and she was not allowed to use the bathroom. In all, Biswas was detained by the police for about 28 hours even though there was “no evidence to support a claim against Krittika Biswas,” according to Batra.

<snip>

Batra, the lawyer, also argued in documents submitted to the city that the police violated Biswas’ diplomatic immunity as the daughter of a vice consul general, and the department failed to notify the consulate about the arrest, according to international norms.

<snip>

According to the 91-page document that Batra filed with the city to notify it of the impending lawsuit, Biswas has been the target of racist and malicious allegations by Principal Howard Kwait and honours calculus teacher Jamie Kim-Ross.

The school took disciplinary action on February 8 by arresting Biswas during her second-period class. She was detained in a police holding cell until 2:30pm the next day. After the consul general interceded with the assistance of Batra, however, the district attorney’s office dropped the charges and expunged the arrest.

But the day following her release, Biswas received word that the school was taking actions to suspend her. A suspension hearing before the New York City Department of Education was held a week later, and as part of the defence she built to fight her suspension, Biswas submitted documentation from a computer forensics expert who showed that the emails had come from a different internet service provider than the one that Biswas used at home. Biswas also provided affidavits from friends who said that she was at the mall when the latest round of offending emails was sent. The school eventually dropped the disciplinary charges against Biswas.

But in yet another turn of events, another student named Shang Ming confessed to the emails in mid-March. He was immediately suspended, but no criminal charges were lodged against him, which has attorney Batra outraged.

“He’s a young fool and young people make mistakes,” Batra said. “But he owned up to it and he didn’t lie and he’s not a threat to society. I agree with the school in what they did with him, but here’s the punchline: If the guilty person is only treated with suspension and no criminal charges, how dare they arrest an actually innocent person, handcuff them, prevent them from going to the bathroom? It’s a wholesale massacre of the Vienna Convention. How dare they do this?”

Batra suspects that the reason that Ming, who is Chinese-American, wasn’t charged is because Kim-Ross is also of East Asian descent, and she has a preferential bias toward him. “Defendant-Respondent Kim-Ross overtly favoured students of Oriental-Asian ethnic backgrounds, to the detriment of other students, including Krittika Biswas who is Indian,” Batra alleged in case documents.

While the US authorities have called the arrest and strip search of Indian Diplomat Divyani 'an isolated and separate incident,' this is certainly not the first time that the American's have gone overboard against Indians from the diplomat community.

The most embarrassing and condemnable incident was that of the 17 year old high school student - the daughter of the Vice-Consul in the Consulate General of India in New York, Debashish Biswas. Two years ago, Krittika Biwas was not only arrested but also jailed along with convicts for a crime she had never committed.

The US authorities showing an increased high-handedness in the case arrested Krittika on mere suspicion. It was suspected that Krittika had sent "offensive and sexually threatening" emails to her teachers in Queens's John Browne High School.

Krittika, who after her release and suspension from school decided to leave the US and instead pursue her higher studies in India, has filed a million dollar case against the New York authorities.

During her 24-hour ordeal, she was treated as a first rate felon and was not even allowed to meet her parents or a visit by senior Indian diplomats. Later, it was proved that it was a case of mistaken identity. But what was more baffling was that the student, who actually was responsible for sending the emails to the teachers, was neither arrested nor charged criminally.

Altair wrote:There are those in our administration/MEA who want to drag the relationship with US through mud and bring the whole shamiyana down. Same with some in SD. One thing is certain. The cuddle is over. 2014 will be a new era of Indo-US relationship the one which should be dragged through wet concrete.

chaanakya wrote:

Altair wrote:There are those in our administration/MEA who want to drag the relationship with US through mud and bring the whole shamiyana down. Same with some in SD. One thing is certain. The cuddle is over. 2014 will be a new era of Indo-US relationship the one which should be dragged through wet concrete.

I don't understand the basis for this statement. Why would MEA want to rock the boat? It was USD that took the first step and we have not yet reciprocated . So this mud a, wet concrete nd shamiyana thing is for SD to bother and sort out before reciprocation is done. You can't clap with one hand , can you?

SSridhar wrote:Altair, there may or may not be such persons in MEA. But, this issue is US's own making and it keeps on pursuing a wrong road leaving India with increasingly narrower options. In fact, the Indian reaction should have already been much harsher than what it has been so far.

The club has become a kind of a “hub” over the years, importing duty-free food and beverages on behalf of many other embassies and international organizations in New Delhi, the Indian foreign ministry official said. This week, the ministry sent a letter to 40 other embassies and international organizations asking them to import “individually and directly,” rather than through the American club. The letter was also sent to the U.S. embassy.

The US has called for fresh polls in Bangladesh that reflect the will of the people, even as it expressed strong concern over the just concluded general election which it alleged was neither credible nor fair.

"We have been very clear about our strong concerns about the selection and what we think the way forward should be. We believe Bangladesh still has an opportunity to demonstrate its commitment to democracy by organising free and fair elections that are credible in the eyes of the Bangladeshi people," State Department Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf said.

"We did note that we were disappointed by the recent parliamentary elections, especially because so many of the seats were uncontested or only had token opposition. Obviously, we believe going forward things should be done very differently," she said on Monday.

Most observers believe it is remarkable that something so relatively modest has triggered a stand-off that has turned into perhaps the most bitter row between the two countries for several years. Most Indians are furious that someone representing the country could be arrested in public and strip-searched over an allegation relating to an alleged visa fraud. It is almost inconceivable such a thing would happen in India.

India has already taken a number of retaliatory measures and is now stepping up the pressure on Washington ahead of a court appearance by the diplomat due to take place on January 13. Already, the row has started to affect the wider relationship between the two countries. A US delegation was snubbed and the Reuters news agency reported that a visit scheduled for next week by US Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz is now looking doubtful.

Syed Akbarrudin, a spokesman for the Indian ministry of external affairs, confirmed that the authorities had written to the US embassy. "All we are saying is there has to be reciprocity between the way we treat their diplomats and the way they treat our diplomats," he told The Independent.

There was no immediate response from the US embassy.

India had already curtailed privileges offered to US diplomats to bring them in line with the treatment of Indian envoys to the United States. Since December, the US ambassador in Delhi can be subjected to airport frisking and most consular staff have reduced levels of immunity.

Washington has been told that restaurants and other facilities at the social club in its Delhi embassy will have to close to non-diplomats and that inquiries into the tax affairs of US staff will be pursued aggressively.

<snip>

The American Embassy club is based in a vast compound located on embassy grounds in the centre of Delhi, and boasts a swimming pool, baseball pitch, stores selling imported US products and a number of restaurants. Along with the American Embassy School, it is central to the social life of families of many expatriate employees of US corporations in India.

Indian officials said the latest move was "simply in line with a policy of strict recipricocity". India had already curtailed privileges offered to US diplomats to bring them in line with the treatment of Indian envoys to the US. Since December the US ambassador in Delhi can be subjected to airport frisking and most consular staff have had reduced levels of immunity.

Concrete security barriers were removed from a road near the embassy last month, apparently in retaliation for the loss of a parking spot for the Indian ambassador in Washington.

India is also preparing to take steps against the embassy school, which it suspects may be employ some staff in violation of visa requirements, government sources said.

<snip>

There have been several previous incidents involving senior Indian diplomats in the US and domestic staff brought from India. In 2011 the Indian consul general ambassador, Prabhu Dayal, was accused by his maid of forced labour and sexual harassment, charges he called "complete nonsense" and that were later dropped.

A year earlier a US judge recommended that an Indian diplomat and her husband pay a maid nearly $1.5m in compensation for being forced to work without pay and suffering "barbaric treatment" in their luxury Manhattan apartment.

The outrage in India has been fuelled by politicians' unwillingness to seem out of step with public mood with a general election only months away.

External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid to a question on the latest measures against the US, said: "We're not hostile, this is an arrangement based on reciprocity."

<snip>

"The US has been asked to provide the tax returns filed by it with Indian authorities for the commercial activities which are through ACSA to non-diplomatic persons, including private American citizens and their families," the sources added

chaanakya wrote:Safe Horizons, an Organisation whose Lawyer Dana Sussman is helping SR, has a tip sheet on Human Trafficking

Their Tips are as below:
Trafficking Indicators
http://www.safehorizon.org/images/uploa ... ipcard.pdf

Is the victim in possession of identification and travel documents; if not, who has control of the documents?
She was having official passport and came as IBDA.

Was the victim coached on what to say to law enforcement and immigration officials?
Dk or anyone was not present in the Interview. In fact her FIL was working in Embassy, such coaching seems to be impossibility. Hubby is also with another embassy. She was not satisfied with Hubby's salary in he beginning of her marriage and left home but returned only after she discovered that she was pregnant.

Was the victim recruited for one purpose and forced to engage in some other job?
From all accounts she was engaged for the purpose she was recruited. In fact she asked permission to moonlight and was denied. Could have been a trap.

Is the victim’s salary being garnished to pay off a smuggling fee? (Paying off a smuggling fee alone is not considered trafficking.)
There was no need to pay smuggling fee since she came on Official passport and Visa on Note Verbale.

Was the victim forced to perform sexual acts?
Not even claimed by any account so far.

Does the victim have freedom of movement?
She was moving freely , going to market , beauty parlours and churches etc.

Has the victim or family been threatened with harm if the victim attempts to escape?
No, in fact Indian legal system and US legal system were approached by the family.

Has the victim been threatened with deportation or law enforcement action?
Not till she absconds/disappears and does not return to work.

Has the victim been harmed or deprived of food, water, sleep, medical care or other life necessities?
Answer is no. In fact better facilities were available.

Can the victim freely contact friends or family?
She was in touch with family through modern means of communication. It was provided by the Family of Dk with Ipad and Sim with a facebook account and yahoo email ID.

Is the victim a juvenile engaged in commercial sex?
She is a mature adult and presumably not engaged in commercial sex

Is the victim allowed to socialize or attend religious services?
She was reportedly attending Church.


These are the probable answers , by all accounts in the media, and Safe Horizons Lawyer concludes that SR is a victim of Human trafficking


Now look at the Board of Directors and Companies they are associated with

Steven C. Parrish, Chair
Founder, Steve Parrish Consulting Group, LLC

Pamela N. Hootkin, Vice Chair & Treasurer

Michael C. Slocum, Vice Chair, Audit Committee Chair
President, Commercial Banking, Capital One Bank

Linda Fairstein, Secretary
Former prosecutor and best-selling crime novelist; legal expert on crimes of violence against women and children

Paul Germain
Global Head of Prime Services, Credit Suisse

Stephen McCandless, Investment Committee Chair

Cheryl Abel-Hodges
President, Calvin Klein Underwear

Sil Lai Abrams
Founder, Sepia LLC

Celia Goldwag Barenholtz
Partner, Litigation Department, Cooley LLP

Jeffrey S. Brodsky
Chief Human Resources Officer, Morgan Stanley

Nancy Clark
Senior Vice President, Operational Excellence & Process Transformation, Verizon

Joy Jones
General Counsel, Palm Restaurant Group

Monica A. Keany

Stephanie Kugelman
Founder Chairman A.S.0. A Second Opinion, Serves on Whole Foods Board and HSN Board

Linda Lam
Partner, Professional Practice Quality and Regulatory Matters, Ernst & Young

Joann Lang

Rohit Menezes
Partner, The Bridgespan Group

Martin D. Newman, Esq., Real Estate Committee Chair
Real Estate Investment Advisor and Consultant

Samantha Saperstein
Head of Card Strategy, Consumer and Community Banking, JPMorgan Chase

Mark C. Smith
Financial Advisor/ Account Vice President of Investments,
UBS Financial Services Inc.

Lauren Breitman Tanen
Vice President and Associate General Counsel, Employment, PVH Corp.

Emeriti

Brooke McMurray
Susan Solomon
Most Reverend Joseph M. Sullivan

Now you know whom to catch in India and squeeze their balls without causing diplomatic issues.

chaanakya wrote:

saip wrote:Now the question is if DK asserted her full immunity at the time of her arrest, If she did not, while it will not preclude her from asserting it at a later date, unfortunately, it would absolve the arresting officers from any wrong doing.

Yes , She asserted that She had diplomatic immunity and not liable to arrest.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/dev ... story.html

I am deliberately quoting from WaPo as some believe gora words more. It has been widely reported though in Indian media as well.

I am so grateful for all the outpouring of unequivocal support and backing that has been available to me from the fraternity. I take comfort in the confidence that this invaluable support will also be translated into strong and swift action, to ensure the safety of me and my children, as also to preserve the dignity of our service which is unquestionably under siege.

While I was going through it, although I must admit that I broke down many times as the indignities of repeated handcuffing, stripping and cavity searches, swabbing, hold up with common criminals and drug addicts were all being imposed upon me despite my incessant assertions of immunity, I got the strength to regain composure and remain dignified thinking that I must represent all of my colleagues and my country with confidence and pride. I feel I can continue to do so thanks to this strong and prolific support.

I cannot say more now but will later, I did feel the deep need to thank you all so much.

Devyani

George Orwell, where are you when your country of birth needs you?

Consider two cases of consular officials two years apart. One shoots and kills two locals, the other pays her nanny wages below local minimum but above home rates. The same US president insists on diplomatic immunity for the first but stays silent on the second.

Had host-country law prevailed, the first - Raymond Davis, a CIA contractor in Lahore, Pakistan - could have faced the death sentence. Instead he was brought home without trial. Then senator John Kerry went to Pakistan to appease its anger. The US media managed to contain its outrage on his victims.

The second - an Indian female career diplomat, not an intelligence agent - is strip-and-cavity searched. The US media are touched by the plight of the poor maid and the sanctity of the law. No apology from Kerry, now the Secretary of State.
Advertisement

Guess which country they accuse of hypocrisy? Yes indeed, India. And praise which for standing up for the rule of law that must treat everyone equally? Yep, good ol' USA. There are three complex issues but three simple points.

First, there is a history to the status, wages and work conditions of India-based domestic staff employed by Indian diplomats abroad. What constitutes fair wage; can monetary value be put on perks such as free housing, health benefits and annual return passage home; and is this matter to be decided by the home or host country, using whose benchmarks?

Some domestic staff are cruelly treated; some are seduced by job opportunities in rich countries. In the absence of physical mistreatment and given how the maid's family was spirited out beyond the reach of India's legal system, there are suspicions about the motives of a politically ambitious district attorney in search of populist publicity. Second, there are different Vienna conventions dealing with diplomatic and consular relations.

Their distinctions have become increasingly blurred in practice with growing cross-linkages of functions and personnel. The meaning and applicability of relevant clauses to any particular dispute may be interpreted differently. The sniffy US reaction to the explosion of Indian anger, that Devyani Khobragade was treated like anyone else, has a fatal flaw.

She is not just anyone, but the official representative of a sovereign country. Her arrest and treatment was a full-frontal assault on the authority and dignity of India. The whole point of both Vienna conventions, distilling centuries of experience among international political actors, is to prevent local authorities from fabricating false charges against accredited representatives of foreign governments.

But I forget. The US is uniquely virtuous, exceptional and wise. All others are venal and must be stopped from maliciously interfering with resident US officials, even killers. The Vienna Convention must be upheld for US diplomats abroad but may be ignored for foreign diplomats in the US. Washington's interpretations of all clauses are beyond question and it has the might to enforce it. If others don't like it, tough shitsky.

Third, which country's laws and judicial process have primacy? There was a prior case in the Indian courts against Sangeeta Richard that the self-righteous promoters of the rule of law have conveniently ignored. India kept Washington apprised of every legal step. Did the then chief executive of Union Carbide face his day in court for the 1984 Bhopal gas tragedy - the world's worst industrial accident in which between 2259 and 16,000 Indians were killed? Strict adherence to the rule of law for everyone is a bedrock American value - yeah, right.

In a spirited public intervention on December 19 the US prosecuting attorney insisted it was his duty to protect the Richards' civil rights and enforce US law on anyone who breaks it; explained the reason for ''evacuating'' Mr Richard from India two days before Ms Khobragade's arrest was to neutralise efforts to silence the Richards and compel Ms Richard to return to India; and impugned the integrity of India's judicial system. Yet it has a better track record of robust independence from the executive than the US judiciary.

Matching the Bush administration's practice of kidnapping people from anywhere in the world and renditioning them for torture in secret locations, attorney Preet Bharara proclaimed an extraterritorial right to evacuate an Indian citizen from Indian territory, against the directives of the Indian government and in defiance of court orders. He might have left himself open to contempt citations.

All three issues are complicated and open to contrary interpretations. India might be in the wrong (or right) on all three. It certainly has much to be ashamed of on persisting feudal practices. Regardless, as the first simple point, it is unacceptable for one party to resolve an intergovernmental dispute by criminalising the conduct of an individual diplomat caught up in the mess, stripping her, and subjecting her to bodily searches over a labour dispute. Ms Khobragade is not a suspected terrorist, an armed criminal, or a threat to public safety. (Revelations about questionable incidents involving her back in India are irrelevant to this narrative.) In an Orwellian euphemism, state-sanctioned rape (digital penetration without consent or under coercion) is called ''cavity search''. Sorry, I forget. Indian social practice bad, US police practice good. Silly me.

Second simple truth: diplomatic relations are governed as much by tacit understandings as formal rules. Few US consular families would not be in breach of some Indian law. If the strict letter of the law was applied worldwide, diplomatic intercourse would come to a shuddering halt.

Finally, Diplomacy 101. India is one of the very few countries where, against decades of instinctive hostility, public approval ratings of the US have stayed positive. The episode risks setting back bilateral relations by validating many negative perceptions of the US. The entire Indian foreign service bureaucracy - the permanent custodian of India's permanent interests - has been antagonised by a colleague's traumatic experience. As US relative power wanes, is it worth breaking trust with a growing number of friends and allies?

The Foreign Minister has said the world has changed and so has India. Delhi has demanded a formal US apology and unconditional release of Ms Khobragade. If Washington insists on saving face and not admitting its mistake, a soured India will likely withdraw all extra courtesies to US officials beyond legal requirements, to the detriment of their ability to function most effectively.

Ramesh Thakur, professor in the Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, is co-editor of The Oxford Handbook of Modern Diplomacy.

chaanakya wrote:[..]Now look at the Board of Directors and Companies they are associated with

Michael C. Slocum, Vice Chair, Audit Committee Chair
President, Commercial Banking, Capital One Bank

Paul Germain
Global Head of Prime Services, Credit Suisse

Stephen McCandless, Investment Committee Chair

Sil Lai Abrams
Founder, Sepia LLC

Jeffrey S. Brodsky
Chief Human Resources Officer, Morgan Stanley

Linda Lam
Partner, Professional Practice Quality and Regulatory Matters, Ernst & Young

Rohit Menezes
Partner, The Bridgespan Group

Samantha Saperstein
Head of Card Strategy, Consumer and Community Banking, JPMorgan Chase

Mark C. Smith
Financial Advisor/ Account Vice President of Investments,
UBS Financial Services Inc.

[..]

FRONTLINE: To Catch a Trader

http://video.pbs.org/video/2365150175/

Aired: 01/07/2014

FRONTLINE correspondent Martin Smith goes inside the government’s ongoing, seven-year crackdown on insider trading, drawing on exclusively obtained video of hedge fund titan Steven A. Cohen, incriminating FBI wiretaps of other traders, and interviews with both Wall Street and Justice Department insiders.

qz.com/163961/the-real-wall-street-problem-us-prosecutor-preet-bharara-is-trying-to-solve/#/h/39125,1/

The real Wall Street problem US prosecutor Preet Bharara is trying to solve
by Tim Fernholz, qz.com
January 7th 2014

US Attorney Preet Bharara—the man with effective jurisdiction over white-collar crime on Wall Street—is about to announce yet another settlement with JP Morgan. The bank is expected to pay some $2 billion for failing to notice that one of its clients, Bernard Madoff, was running a Ponzi scheme.

While much of the money will be going to the victims of Madoff’s fraud, the win for Bharara is the deferred prosecution agreement, a tool rarely deployed against US banks. It will allow prosecutors to monitor an overhaul of the controls the bank uses keep an eye out for illicit activity. The government can criminally indict the institution if it is not up to snuff within two years.

These controls are already required under the Bank Secrecy Act, but that didn’t stop JP Morgan from failing to report some extremely blatant signs of trouble, including a decision by the bank’s own investors to pull out of Madoff’s funds. Nor did they stop HSBC from laundering money for drug cartels, terrorists and other criminals before it, too, was caught and fined.

But compliance controls did lead to one of the biggest coups of Bharara’s career so far—the insider trading investigations that put Steven Cohen’s hedge fund, SAC, out of business. Tonight, the US television magazine Frontline will present a report tracking this case from its origins to the present today, and it underscores that the case began when UBS reported that a small hedge fund called Sendant was intermingling its own money with that of its clients, giving them the losing trades, and making suspiciously well-timed bets.

Sendant was managed by a man named Rengan Rajaratnam. He soon closed it to go work for his brother, Raj Rajaratnam, at another hedge fund, Galleon. Investigations into the brothers’ activities (which wound up with Raj in jail and Rengan facing indictment) eventually led to the SAC case.

So why did UBS decide to comply with the rules and alert regulators about the doings of a small hedge fund? No doubt UBS is a very upstanding and law-abiding institution—but the decision was probably made easier by the fact that UBS wasn’t a big player in the prime brokerage business (i.e., handling trades for hedge funds) and that Sendant was only a small part of that business.

But Madoff paid hundreds of millions in fees to JP Morgan. And SAC paid huge fees to its brokers on Wall Street—Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Credit Suisse and Barclay —as it provided as much as 2% of daily equities trading. Those extra-high commissions helped SAC’s traders get access to the “first call” from salesmen at these banks, but also made for a pretty clear conflict of interest. The decision to pass along a warning to regulators about potential crime is complicated when you’re also benefitting from it.

Today’s settlement, like HSBC’s before it, is a message to the biggest banks that they’ll pay a price if they don’t turn in criminals whose activities help the bank’s bottom line. Whether that price will be enough to change behavior—much less change the management—remains to be seen, but Bharara clearly understands the benefits of making banks comply.

WASHINGTON — The former defense boss has dropped a bombshell.

Robert Gates, President Obama’s ex-secretary of defense, contends in a new book that Obama backed our soldiers in Afghanistan but lost faith in their mission despite having ordered an infusion of new troops.

Gates came to the conclusion that Obama "doesn't believe in his own strategy, and doesn't consider the war to be his. For him, it's all about getting out," according to his new memoir, "Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War," to be published next week.

The book is the first major insider tale of the administration. Gates, a Republican and the only cabinet holdover Obama kept from the George W. Bush administration, served two years and was replaced in 2011 by Leon Panetta, who was later succeeded by Chuck Hagel.

In the book, Gates amply praises Obama, calling him intellectually rigorous and willing to overrule the advice of top aides and other Democrats.
In one of the most intense months of President Obama's presidency, Defense Secretary Robert Gates (right) sitting among the administration's top foreign policy officials during May 1, 2011 mission to kill or capture Osama bin Laden — the nation's most wanted terrorist..

But he is very critical over Afghanistan — even though he believes the President made the right decisions about the war there.
The President ordered a surge of 30,000 troops into Afghanistan in 2009, but by 2011 he apparently thought it was a mistake, the book says.
Army soldiers talk to local Afghans while on a mission near a command outpost in Kandahar province.
Andrew Burton/Reuters

Gates recalls a meeting at which Obama vented about Gen. David Petraeus, his commander, and Afghan President Hamad Karzai.

"The President doesn't trust his commander, can't stand Karzai, doesn't believe in his own strategy and doesn't consider the war to be his," Gates writes. "For him, it's all about getting out," according to reports about the book in the Washington Post and The New York Times.

He does commend Obama’s decision to raid the house where Osama bin Laden was hiding, calling it “one of the most courageous decisions I had ever witnessed in the White House.”

In the book, Gates slams Vice President Biden with very faint praise. He calls him a man of integrity but says, "I think he has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades."

He praises Hillary Clinton, then secretary of state, but claims she told Obama that her 2007 opposition as a senator to Bush's surge in Iraq was rooted in political calculation — she knew she would face Obama, an opponent of the war, in the 2008 Iowa presidential caucuses.
Robert Gates praised Obama as an intelligent and courageous leader but questioned his faith in the war in Afghanistan.
RELATED: AMERICAN HELD HOSTAGE BY AL QAEDA BEGS U.S. FOR HELP

Gates claims Obama similarly "conceded vaguely " that his own opposition to the surge was political.

"To hear the two of them making these admissions, and in front of me, was as surprising as it was dismaying," he said.

Gates also criticizes the Bush administration, saying the former President failed to capitalize on early victories in Iraq and Afghanistan and would not listen when Gates and then Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice pushed for a shutdown of the Guantanamo detention center.