You are here: IE »   Story

Vajpayee a ‘pseudo moderate’? A canard

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Discount UK Shopping

    The Liberhan Commission has indicted 68 persons in the demolition of the disputed Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid structure on December 6, 1992. Some of them, notably Atal Bihari Vajpayee and L.K. Advani, do not deserve to be in that list. However, after reading the report, I am constrained to add a 69th name: the commission itself.

    The commission is guilty of self-indictment on many counts. First, it has discredited itself by taking 17 long years, and seeking as many as 48 extensions, to submit its report. The honourable retired judge of the Supreme Court could have easily completed his mandate in less than half the time. Sadly, the lure of enjoying post-retirement perks in Lutyens’ Delhi is a spreading malady among members of the higher bureaucracy and judiciary.

    Second, seventeen years is sufficient time for any judge to prepare a cogent report, informed by clarity of thought and free of factual and grammatical howlers. Sadly, the Liberhan report takes a trophy for shoddy writing. One of many examples: India’s former President is referred to as “Dr Abdul Kalam Azad” on page 878.

    Ads by Google

    Third, the report is riddled with self-contradiction. A glaring instance is this: the learned judge is simply unable to cast a clear judgment on the role played by Advani, who was by far the most important ideologue and leader of the BJP’s Ayodhya movement. Many crucial references to Advani are, in fact, such that they project him in a positive light, as one who never wanted the disputed structure to be demolished but was insisting on its peaceful and dignified relocation, who never uttered a single word to demonise Islam or the Muslim community throughout his rath yatra, who had no prior knowledge of the demolition plan, who actively tried to dissuade an unruly section of karsevaks from climbing onto the structure, and who was extremely sad and dejected at the vandalism that took place on December 6. Indeed, Liberhan’s discomfiture in indicting Advani is so obvious as to give rise to a strong suspicion that the commission’s report might have been significantly different had the UPA not returned to office in May 2009.

    ... contd.

    Next1234
    Reply to the double-faced article by Mr.Sudheen KulkarniBy: Sujai Mahadevan | 13-Dec-2009 Reply | Forward If you are a head of the school/institution/corporate body or the national party, isnt your responsibillity to take moral responsibility of your wards/employees for any act which is unconstitutional & illegal. The speeches by Mr.Advani to garner votes by using the temple plank motivated your kar sevaks to turn violent & disruptive. Is he not responsible for controlling his ignorant maniacs caled "kar sevaks".You clearly mention that vote bank politics which divides the nation along religious lines is constructive, then why is your party losing support from the people of india? just beacause the gates of Ayodha structure was opened by Rajiv Gandhi's government(as claimed by you)...does it mean that demolition was inevitable. Mr.Vajpayee, according to you is the greatest statesman - When Vajpayee goes to heaven he is bound to be questioned about his responsibility in Babri & Gujarat. BJP/RSS/VHP need to understand that people need a corrupt free governance.
    Liberan and Sudheendra KulkarniBy: s ramji | 01-Dec-2009 Reply | Forward Mr Kulkarni -it was nice of you to admit that it was wrong to demolish the Masjid. I am also a devout Hindu and would like to see Ram temple in Ayodhya but i never wanted an existing structure to be demolished especially when My Ram was in that premises. Mr Kulkarni you pretend to speak that none of you in BJP new of the plan for demolition. I have been to temple many times all these 50 years - i have only seen Kar sevaks take flowers, milk and water i have never seen kar sevaks carry sickels, crowbars and other iron bars. Did they all suddenly surface at the site on their own as Swayambu - Please stop telling lies - it was clearly a planned move and you have achieved your motive - Take it from me - Maryadha pursh Ram will not like to live in that temple you people are trying to build out of blood stains.
    NOTHING NEW IN LIBERHAN COMMISSION REPORTBy: DR.SHEKHAR VASHISHTHA | 01-Dec-2009 Reply | Forward I SECOND THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY MR. SUDHEENDRA KULKARNI AND ADDING A WORD THAT THERE IS NO NEW RESEARCH / COMMENTS IN THIS LIBERHAN COMMISSION REPORT EXCEPT MAKING IT A POLITICAL DOCUMENT ! THIS REPORT SHOULD NOT BE ACCEPTED BY PARLIAMENT IN THE LARGER INTEREST OF THE PEOPLE OF INDIA !!
    historical wound reopenedBy: srinivasan | 01-Dec-2009 Reply | Forward the libherhan report submitted after 17 long years has done little justice to the whole saga. the report appears for a common man that one sided match is being played. the demalisation of babri itself has become history and has no meaning to the younger generation.
    Atlast some one has spoken for Mr.VajpayeeBy: Anil Kohli | 01-Dec-2009 Reply | Forward Dear Mr. Kulkarni, Thank you for taking the stand on this slander that Liberhan Commission has indulged in regarding Shri.Vajpayee.The commission definitely stands indicted for its motivated report. Another question that this report has by default raised is the inability and complete incompetence of our Journalist fraternity, which despite all the interview that they have conducted over a period of 40 to 45years of shri.Vajpayee's innings have utterly failed to notice the "pseudo-moderate" image that Liberhan report is mentioning. This justice Liberhan is an extremely perceptive individual or our journalists are absolutely worthless, who could not unmask this so called "pseudo-moderate" mask.I have posed this question to Editors of NDTV, IE, Outlook, Timesnow, IBNLive so far none have responded probably they all are extremely shy of acknowledging the correctness of Liberhan report or do not wish to refute this allegation lest it disturbs their advertisement revenues.
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.