must be one of the most shamelessly written eulogy to the
party that is responsible for all ills that India faces today. Of course, one
couldn’t expect anything better from the dedicated boot-licker of the party
masquerading as an intellectual. That the Court has ruled in favour of Rajiv
Gandhi has reinvigorated this worm’s sympathies and provided an opportunity to
show that Rajiv Gandhi was indeed, Mr. Clean.
He manufactures all kinds of ridiculous reasoning to support his thesis. And
boy! does he go on a full barrage! He seethes, venomously at that, and indulges
in gross mudslinging in the true tradition of Congress party members. His
favourite targets seem to be Arun Shourie and Arun Jaitley because these two men
had pursued the Bofors deal in various capacities and raised pertinent
questions: if you are interested in reading these, you can check out the Indian
Express archives (1980s to 1990s through the present. Sadly, these are not
available online). I would like to ask Aiyar one question: if Rajiv Gandhi was
the Mr. Clean that you purport him to be, why did he resign in the wake of the
Bofors scandal, and why on account of this factor, did V.P. Singh score such a
….the Delhi high court threw out the case against Rajiv Gandhi, saying 16 years of investigation had turned up not a ?scintilla of evidence? against the dead man.
16 years is a very long time. It’s anybody’s guess that the Gandhi
clan and all associated with the Bofors scandal worked systematically to
destroy incriminating evidence. If Rajiv is exonerated now, it’s no surprise.
Given the countless instances of witnesses turning hostile, sudden accidents,
and destruction of evidence in a span of a few months pertaining to a minor case
of say, an MLA-sponsored murder, 16 years is ample enough to do the same deed.
Methinks the enormity of the crime is directly proportional to the time it takes
to wipe out evidence. Secondly, because a court acquits a person, it doesn’t
necessarily mean that he/she is not guilty. How many movies have we seen
that shows the guilty walking away free due to lack of evidence?
…for when Rajiv Gandhi, in his first intervention in Parliament as leader of the opposition, less than a month after he demitted office, demanded that every single piece of paper relating to the Bofors deal be placed on the table of the House. Why would a guilty ex-prime minister want the whole world to know what crookedness he had been up to as PM?
Such nobility! such loftiness! But isn’t this exactly
the language in which every self-righteous politician speaks when his/her
name is besmirched? They all thunder, "show me
one piece of evidence that I committed the crime…" or "I want a
full-scale investigation into this scandal lest my fair name not be
tarnished!" or "I’m accountable to the people!" All these
eminences need look no farther than Caesar, who refused to wear the crown, and
then wore it because the people wanted him to: after all, how could he refuse
his beloved citizens for whom he laboured night and day?
But Mani Shankar Aiyar is not content with slandering
Arun Shourie and Arun Jaitley. He turns his malevolence on some members
belonging to his beloved Congress. And not without reason.
Political advancement being, of course, more important to the BJP than seeking the truth, they got a pusillanimous P.V. Narasimha Rao (who was then, in early 1992, dependent for survival on their collaborative support) to drop external affairs minister Madhavsinh Solanki for transmitting a lawyer?s note to his Swiss counterpart.
Pusillanimous, Aiyar? If anything, PVN was the man who defied the
Dynasty and successfully completed his term in office despite several
major scandals. But this precisely is Aiyar’s ire. How dare anybody other than a
member of the Dynasty occupy the hallowed Chair? Thus is clear Aiyar’s
loyalties: it is not to the Congress, not to India (heaven forbid! India
is Indira, don’t you know?) but to the Dynasty. Aiyar is the perfect jester in
the Court of the (now-dying) Royal Nehru Dynasty.
Laugh at the Court Jester’s verbal antics. He’d be jobless otherwise;
moreover, we all need to be entertained.