Exploitation of employee or blackmail of employer? (Khobragade case) - Page 16

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

I am not sure about the "time and again" part unless we start considering movie stars and their experiences. Other than what is currently under discussion, the one I am aware of is Kalam's frisking. In that particular episode, US did promise to take corrective measures to prevent recurrence of such incidents.

As RTH pointed out earlier, perhaps it would help to look at this act as not one against India but against one particular individual from India?

Originally posted by: charminggenie

Dual contracts are a universal unsaid agreement for many countries like India, China , Brazil etc, it's fairness can be debated. There are more high ranking Indian Diplomats who US State office is aware to have same running contracts. This has been going for eons , India is no exception. Hence the irk in diplomatic channels that by going after this US has breached the silent discretion practiced. If they wanted this to stop , a High level talk with MEA would have done the job. I think Bharara completely blind-sided the White House in this if we go by the feedback taken by DC.

@Hades I said we have no idea about the history of Ms Richards. She has many litigation going even before she was employed with devyani. I would rather let the prosecutor real ease the full copy of their statement and argument before we discuss the objective and the allegations.

I'm not surprised the White House and State Dept were blindsided. If a legal jurisdiction wants to charge a diplomat, they don't call the State Department for permission. They will usually see if there is any loophole in the Vienna Convention or other loopholes that allows them to prosecute. Once that is done they will approach a judge for an arrest warrant. Usually they hand pick a judge who is sympathetic to such causes because judges too value their political tenure and do not wish to irk higher officials. The state department may have suggested declare her non grata, demand a compensatory fine and deport.

I think this maybe another US - India difference we overlook. The judiciary and legislature in India tend to be more aligned. They tend to conflict more in USA. It is hard to fathom a lawyer who may make a decision unpopular with his govt.

(Although Preet and the White House perceptions are speculations based on statements)

Originally posted by: souro

I'm talking about strip search of George Fernandes who was defence minister at that time,

It wasn't a strip search per se, more a removal of coat, shoes and socks according to Fernandes himself. And, according to US emabassy, even that was not completely accurate, it was just a security wand placed over his body due to a metal detector getting set off. In any case, US has apologized over this matter.

Meera Shankar the Indian ambassador to US who was detained and body searched,

She was patted down at the security check. I don't see anything terribly wrong here.

Hardeep Puri India's representative to UN who was asked to remove his turban

Puri told the screening officials that he is allowed to check his own turban and later the officials could check his hands for traces of explosives. The guard didn't know but later complied. No harm, no foul.


, frisking of Abdul Kalam ex-President of India,

We already discussed this in brief. US promised corrective steps against recurrence. If it happens again to a visiting president, then a furor is justified.


detaining of Praful Patel the civil aviation minister.

His name and DOB matched with that of someone else on US' watch list. They are bound by laws to detain suspects.


Sorry, any aggression/ insult of a representative of a country is considered as an aggression/ insult against that country as well.

Agree on general principle. Would form an opinion and conclude on a case-by-case basis.

Originally posted by: souro

No, I'm not talking about SRK, John Abraham or Aamir Khan. They are Indian nationals but not representatives of India.

I'm talking about strip search of George Fernandes who was defence minister at that time, Meera Shankar the Indian ambassador to US who was detained and body searched, Hardeep Puri India's representative to UN who was asked to remove his turban, frisking of Abdul Kalam ex-President of India, detaining of Praful Patel the civil aviation minister. One more name just got added to that list.

Sorry, any aggression/ insult of a representative of a country is considered as an aggression/ insult against that country as well.

Can you state with certainty that no citizens and high ranking officials from other countries have been detained or frisked?

I'm against the TSA. I've always felt the additional security measures like pat downs, X-rays, measures like removing shoes are intrusive and against fourth amendment rights. I find detention without proper cause, problematic. I think strip search and cavity searches without legitimate reason and warrants at airports is going too far. The TSA does tend to discriminate against colored, Arabic or Muslim appearing people. But I do feel the discrimination is not against "India" but people who appear a certain way to TSA and rises out of "ignorance" rather than "hostility".

Personally, I have seen US politicians themselves remove their shoes/coats and get pulled aside for pat downs. Don't think this bit is as bad.

However, I've always felt the TSA needs an overhaul and better procedural setup and training.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

Can you state with certainty that no citizens and high ranking officials from other countries have been detained or frisked?

I'm against the TSA. I've always felt the additional security measures like pat downs, X-rays, measures like removing shoes are intrusive and against fourth amendment rights. I find detention without proper cause, problematic. I think strip search and cavity searches without legitimate reason and warrants at airports is going too far. The TSA does tend to discriminate against colored, Arabic or Muslim appearing people. But I do feel the discrimination is not against "India" but people who appear a certain way to TSA and rises out of "ignorance" rather than "hostility".

Personally, I have seen US politicians themselves remove their shoes/coats and get pulled aside for pat downs. Don't think this bit is as bad.

However, I've always felt the TSA needs an overhaul and better procedural setup and training.

But you are claiming US actions amounting to hostility towards India. If everyone is getting the same treatment, then it isn't hostility towards any nation but a simple US law - equal for all. The hostility argument holds only if Indians were the willfully intended target.

So what you are expecting is preferential treatment for Indians representatives rather than equal treatment?

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

I'm not surprised the White House and State Dept were blindsided. If a legal jurisdiction wants to charge a diplomat, they don't call the State Department for permission. They will usually see if there is any loophole in the Vienna Convention or other loopholes that allows them to prosecute. Once that is done they will approach a judge for an arrest warrant. Usually they hand pick a judge who is sympathetic to such causes because judges too value their political tenure and do not wish to irk higher officials. The state department may have suggested declare her non grata, demand a compensatory fine and deport.

Nope actually most are surprised because during all these months both State department and the GOI were in contact discussing this matter. Hence the complacency of MEA.Since 2008 , around 5 such cases have come out all solved through diplomatic channel and all the concerned diplomats either were bummed with complete immunity or transferred. So many agencies were in the know how-It has been revealed that Devyani had tried to file a missing persons complaint regarding Sangeeta's disappearance but New York Police Department had maintained that only a member of the immediate family can file such a complaint. (not sure how true is this).

See the truth is this event, is just a precursor of the building tensions between India and US especially since Headley and Kerry's appointment. But from what I have gathered Preet did go all solo on this. Now the international coverage has backfired on both nations , hence they will bid time and work on her transfer ( only part feasible for negotiation).

I think this maybe another US - India difference we overlook. The judiciary and legislature in India tend to be more aligned. They tend to conflict more in USA. It is hard to fathom a lawyer who may make a decision unpopular with his govt.

Preet did it recently when he went against Russian Diplomats. State Office and WH were not pleased and had to work hard in holding of the Moscow temper.

(Although Preet and the White House perceptions are speculations based on statements)

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

@Souro

But you are claiming US actions amounting to hostility towards India. If everyone is getting the same treatment, then it isn't hostility towards any nation but a simple US law - equal for all. The hostility argument holds only if Indians were the willfully intended target.

So what you are expecting is preferential treatment for Indians representatives rather than equal treatment?