Decoding the Honourable President’s Advice

Is the current holder of the executive power of the Union of India passing under…

Is the current holder of the executive power of the Union of India passing under a spell of divine or its opposite force?

Are the media, the Congress Party, some 30-odd shitakes and some Nehruvian intellectuals colluding with that force?

Is a big helping hand being given to it by the Supreme Court’s, “saving the citizens” verdict which struck down the NJAC Constitution Amendment law even though it was supported unanimously by the elected representatives of the country?

Is it the aim of that force to spread dread and fear across the nation about the “intolerance” of the Modi government?

Is it the objective of this unique alliance to first generate a no-confidence motion against the NDA sarkar in Delhi, leading to fresh Lok Sabha polls in early 2017? Is the ultimate goal that of bringing about the Congress back to 7 Race Course Road?

And, finally, is it all fine-tuned to ensure that even as his current tenure ends on 25th June of 2017, the present incumbent at Raisina Hill becomes the country’s new Prime Minister so as to achieve his remaining political ambition?

The current political climate is apt for a truly professional and neutral journalist to ask the above questions, answers to which, we, the people of India, want to know”.

Regrettably, we the common people of India, are powerless to question the parties concerned to get at the truth. Hence, we are left only with commenting on the issues raised and leave motives to speculation.

Pranab Mukherjee

Let’s start with the Rashtrapatiji’s cascading sermons within one recent fortnight. The first was from Raisina Hill, followed by two quick ones from Birbhum in Bengal, and the last one, once again from Delhi.

In all these four, Sri Pranab Mukherjee seemed obsessed with the nation’s need to “tolerate, to endure, to preserve the core values of our civilization”; in the second sermon, an additional word, “humanness”, was added, and the fear was expressed that “acceptance of dissent was on the wane.”

The mainstream media as a whole lapped up these sermons, excepting at least one pink newspaper that had the wisdom to totally blank it out from the front page and, instead, to publish two business related stories, including the one about Wallmart having paid millions of US dollars as bribe in setting up a dozen or so wholesale stores in our country during the UPA regime.

The second, and first from Birbhum, was hyped by Mumbai’s Free Press Journal, (established in 1928) into the front- paged 7-column headline screaming “India on the brink…does anyone care?”

But the reality, dear FPJ (1928), is that we do care but it’s the media like you who remain blindfolded. Thus, we do care as much about Dari’s Muhammad Akhlaq as much as we care for the constable outside a mosque in Yavatmal who was stabbed by Abdul Malik (20) to protest against the beef ban imposed in  Maharashtra.

We also care for the Army jawan Vedmitra Chaudhury who, last August, was lynched to death near Meerut for saving a girl from molesters. And we also care for the Hindu man who was abducted and murdered in Hajipur of Bihar last March for marrying a Muslim girl. And we also care for the man who, last June, was lynched to death near Eluru in Andhra Pradesh. It’s the media which chooses to wear a blindfold when it suits its agenda.

As for the sahityakars, the leading one, Ashok Vajpeyi, has already been exposed in the social media as a beneficiary of Congressi sycophancy and some others as confirmed leftists becoming turncoats overnight or protesting about “smothering of free speech” even as Rahul Gandhi and the like publicly abused Prime Minister Modi almost daily in the so-called climate of intolerance.

As for “India On The Brink”, dear FPJ (1928) should tell it to the sun and the moon, what with a pink newspaper telling us the other day that Japan has offered to fund our country’s $15-billion Bullet Train Project.

Finally, there’s the Rashtrapatiji’s own seeming obsession with “tolerance”, “endurance’, “acceptance of dissent”, “preservation of our civilization” and “humaneness.” Frankly, he himself seems intolerant of “intolerance.”

However, “intolerance” is not, per se disastrous. Else, the French Revolution, 1789-1799, leading to the formation of the French Republic would not have happened. It was caused because of unpopular taxation schemes, years of hunger and people’s resentment of the privileges enjoyed by the clergy and the aristocracy. It was the time when the story is told of France’s Queen Marie Antoinette saying that if the poor had no bread to eat, they should eat cake. So severe was the intolerance that King Louis XVI was publicly guillotined in January 1793 to finally end more than a thousand years of French monarchy. And where did this humongous combination of “intolerance”, and “dissent” ultimately lead to?  To disaster? Hardly. As French historian, François Aulard, said:

Portrait of Marie Antoinette by Jean-Baptiste Gautier Dagoty.

The Revolution consisted in the suppression of the feudal system, in the emancipation of the individual, in greater division of landed property, the abolition of the privileges of noble birth, the establishment of equality, the simplification of life…. The French Revolution differed from other revolutions in being not merely national, for it aimed at benefiting all humanity.”

Take the American Revolutionary War (1775–1783) or the American War of Independence. The war had its origins in the resistance of many Americans to taxes imposed by the British parliament, which they claimed were unconstitutional. Over the years, the “intolerance” of the local Americans led to a series of wears between one set of allies and the British government. In 1783, the Treaty of Paris recognized the sovereignty of the United States over the territory bounded roughly by what is now Canada to the north, Florida to the south, and the Mississippi River to the west. And we know what the USA is today, despite the frequent bouts of discrimination (and “intolerance”?) against some sections of  the blacks and the browns.

And wasn’t the Indian nation itself “intolerant” of the British Empire for over 150 years?

Laws were broken, protest marches and mutinies made, foreign cloth burnt, hand bombs were made and hurled, and thousands of baton hits from the police were suffered along with solitary confinement in the Andamans. But towards the end, came the streak of “tolerance”. And we tolerated the creation of a religion-based Pakistan because Jinnah’s Muslim League was intolerant of Muslims co-existing with a Hindu India.

Even after our Independence of 1947, our “tolerance” continued.

Pakistan seized a part of our legally-held Jammu & Kashmir State but India was “tolerant” and did not recover it even when our Indian Army wanted just a few days in December 1947 to do that. Instead, we, noble souls, expected the UN to give us justice that never came.

We have “tolerated” Pakistan’s intransigence ever since. And what have we got? Nothing but incalculable manual, mental and economic damage. But we are still expected to “tolerate” its unceasing terrorist attacks and even celebrate the launching of a book by its anti-Indian diplomat on our soil and applaud their gazal singer in our midst even as they bar Lata Mangeshkar from singing there. We even tolerate their denial to give us the “Most Favoured Nation” treatment despite an international trade agreement.

We “tolerated” China taking over Aksai Chin which was originally ours legally. We “tolerated” China taking over Tibet as a part of their territory.

Harry S. Truman

See the contrarian stand of the mighty USA and even the relatively nascent Australian nation. President Truman could not tolerate the humiliation of Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbour and dropped two atom bombs on that country despite having won the World War II with it. The USA did not tolerate 9/11 and, smuggling its secret Seals into Pakistan, shot Osama Bin Laden in the head, loaded his wrapped corpse with tons of weight and unloaded him to the bottom of the seas. End of story.

As for Australia, more than one of its Prime Ministers have asked Muslims to leave their country if they cannot accept the Australian way of life. But even if a minuscule section of our people does that, hell will surely break out. Why? Because we must “tolerate”.

Time seems to have come to accept that, on the external front, our nation’s “tolerance”, touted as the “core value of our civilization”, is only cowardice. On the internal front, “intolerance” exists because it is compounded by the sheer lethargy in our police and judicial systems wherein a violation of law will be punished, if at all, after years of meandering through layers of investigation and more layers of justice delivery. It is on those layers that sermons are essential from Raisina Hill, from Birbhum and elsewhere.

Finally, let’s turn to the Rashjtrapatiji himself,

He was the one who was indicted by the Commission of Inquiry set up by the Morarji Desai government of 1977 under J.C. Shah, a retired chief justice of India.


Below are excerpts on page 82 of the Interim Report, Part I, of the Shah Commission given on March 11, 1978:

Paragraph7.230: “It is thus clear on the basis of evidence that has been brought on record that Mr PRANAB KUMAR MUKHERJEE the then Minister of Revenue and Banking has misused his position and abused his authority in ordering the detention of Smt Gayatri Devi and Colonel Bhavani Singh on wholly insufficient grounds. IT IS A CLEAR CASE OF SUBVERSION OF LAWFUL PROCESSES AND OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES”.

And, on page 57 of the above Interim Report appears the following:

Paragraph 7.49: “Although Shri Pranab Mukherjee assisted the Commission at the preliminary stage of the fact finding inquiry, he did not file any Statement in this case as was required to be done under Rule 5 (2)(a) of the Commission of Inquiry (Central) Rules 1972. He had responded to the Summons u/s 8B of the Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952. But he refused to take oath and tender evidence. However, from the facts on record and the evidence analysed above, it appears that the normal established procedures in regard to the appointment of the Chairman of the State Bank of India (SBI) was not followed in this case and further it was not in accordance with the provisions of the State Bank of India Act, 1955, which made consultation with the Reserve Bank of India a condition precedent to the appointment of the Chairman of the SBI by the Central Government.

The Commission is of the view that considerations other than strictly professional and totally extraneous have unfortunately been allowed to operate in arriving at the decision to appoint Shri Varadachari as Chairman of the SBI. Shri Pranab Mukherjee has violated established Administrative Conventions and Procedures and misused his position in the appointment of Shri Varadachari.”

Now, if not the young generation of post Emergency (1975) period, at least some of the older ones know of the above findings. It is true that after Indira Gandhi came to power once again in 1980, those findings were dubbed as “beyond the jurisdiction of the Commission” and all copies of its Report were sought to be destroyed, so as to be totally removed from our country’s history records. That effort failed because at least one copy survived and a Member of Parliament, Era Sezhiyan, republished with the heading shown in the picture alongside.

We know that Ram Jethmalani, the doyen of lawyers, even chose the above contents of the Shah Commission Report to launch a campaign against the Rashtrapatiji’s election to the Raisina Hill in 2012. But no one protested publicly; no one gheraoed the Rashtrapati; nobody went before TV cameras with a black gag on the mouth, and no media dared to hype it.  Why? Because, Rashtrapatiji, we are, in fact, a tolerant nation. We are tolerant despite what the media, the sahityakars, the political Opposition, the Supreme Court and you yourself might say in your sermons.

But please remember just one thought. While your Emergency was the limit of “intolerance’, “tolerance” too must have a limit, especially if it is always one-sided.


Arvind Lavakere has been a freelance writer since 1957. He has written and spoken on sports on radio and TV. He currently writes on political issues regularly. His writings include a book on Article 370 of the Indian Constitution.
  • jyotikothari

    We must answer the pseudo-secularists to establish secularism with true values. The pseudo-secularists are dancing like fishes without water because they cannot live without power.

  • Rajalakshmi J

    Let Pranab Mukherjee prove his love for “tolerance” & “secularism” by insisting on having ONLY muslims as his bodyguards.

    How many appeasers of India have muslims as their bodyguards ? It is time one come up with religious profiling of black cat commandoes / security personnel of laloo yadav , mufti md sayeed , his daughter mehbooba , omar abdullah , rahul gandhi , sonia gandhi , dmk ministers , mamata banerjee , digvijay singh , p.chidambaram etc etc . This is one way of ensuring “employment” for muslims as they require no training. No need for “reservations” for them.

    How many bollywood actors & actresses have muslims as their personal bodyguards ? Does aishwarya rai have one to guard her diamonds ? What about salman khan , shah rukh khan etc etc ? They should hire ONLY muslims as their drivers , cooks , bodyguards etc.

    • IMO Indian army dont allow muslims at any highly influential and authorative position. It is reserved mostly only for Hindus-Sikhs.(and Parsi Sam Manekshaw)
      The muslims in Indian army are barred from reading quran.
      religious profiling would actually be very harmful for National Security because bills of muslim appeasement will ask for inclusion of more muslims in Armed Forces.

  • Rajalakshmi J

    Pranab Mukherjee has fallen in love with his own speech. As soon as he became the President came up with trite platitudes bemoaning the loss of “moral compass” which was predictably applauded by Indian media. Now comes this “intolerance” which ironically is being used by muslim salman rushdies & gulzars also.

    It is Kaanchi Paramacharya who calls Hindus Vedic Religion as ” Sanatana Dharmam “. It is a Synonym.

    Whereas fence sitters like tavleen singhs are attempting to divide Hinduism itself as ” Sanatan Dharma which is magnificent versus Hindutva that is ugly”. She called herself an atheist earlier. How can an atheist with a Pakistani husband ( now deceased ..I guess he was killed by muslims in Pakistan) talk like an authority on Hinduism??

    One important clarification about Bread -Cake remark made by France’s Queen Marie Antoinette. Bread is something very sacred & precious for French. Not cakes. Hence Marie Antoinette is being unfairly maligned by lot of us giving the wrong interpretation to the remark made by her. This was told by some French themselves.


    13 commenters , all of whom think alike.

    For a forum which prides itself on critical thinking ( I assume this based on the name of the website , though I may be wrong ) , commonality of thinking should be a no-no , and dissenting thoughts should be welcomed. That does not seem to be the case.

    I await the inevitable abuse which will follow this comment.

    • AAN

      where was tolerance when Kashmiri Pandits were killed and looted? where was tolerance when WB villages were looted? where was tolerance when 20% of Hindus in Pakistan just disappeared in 30 years? sickular morons

      the opinions are imilar because everyone thinks like that, we all are fed up of these fake intellectuals and their fakery.. india is still colonized by these traitors and they need to be removed from India entirely

      • Krispy K

        It’s like asking why all people do the same things by walking in a straight line on the pavement, rather than being “independent” by lurching around at random in the middle of the road. Because people aren’t stupid enough to not realise that walking in the road is liable to result in being squashed by a truck, just like most non-self-hating Hindus have enough sense and enough countless years of direct experience to see and understand what’s plainly obvious in front of their faces.

        What Congress scum like this simpleton want is for people to ignore their eyes, ears, common sense and every instinct in their body, and walk out in front of a truck and get crushed to death. Because it would make Madam happy. Hence the litany of concentrated bullshit desperately trying to convince people that trucks don’t actually use the road, and in fact there have never been any traffic accidents throughout history, and in fact the pavement is far worse than the “right-wing” media are saying, and go ahead just do it and don’t argue, otherwise you’re some kind of freedom-crushing pedestrian-supremacist who wants to destroy everything in the universe that has four wheels instead of two legs.


        And that is your original contribution ?

        • Krispy K

          Translation: I have nothing of value to say. But my immediate superior at work demands I fill my quota of online bullshit before the end of Friday, otherwise my whiskey subsidy will be forfeited. So I’ll produce another throwaway comment with 100% rhetoric and 0% substance. Hope that satisfies him.

    • Krispy K

      Translation: Commonality of thinking must be declared a clear indication of absence of critical thinking, unless that thinking follows the line clearly specified by the propaganda department of the Congress Party, in which case it must be highlighted as a marvellous example of independence and freedom of thought. Anyone who questions or dares to reject the latter, rather than embrace it wholeheartedly, is to be found guilty of suppressing “dissenting thoughts”. Furthermore, anyone who has the temerity to expose, resist or otherwise complain about this blatant example of double-standards and intellectual dishonesty is to be categorically branded as “abusive”. This diktat, as issued by Nehruvian Politburo policymakers, is to be strictly followed by all loyal Gandhi slaves on pain of death. Hail Rahul.

    • K T Thomas

      The 13 comments are similar because the 13 people think alike on this issue, which is not a crime. I am sure you would not have found fault with them if their thinking was anti-Hindu. In which case. you would have lauded their ‘commonality of thinking.’ That’s the distinctive feature of Nehruism whose stench pervades the unfortunate holy land of India.

  • The author has rightly pointed out that anti-India forces have joined hands in their battle against Modi and what he represents – a self-confident self-reliant Ascendant Dharmic society. He is the only man who makes them piss in their pants.

    In my opinion these 3 anti-India anti-Hindu forces are:
    a. SAUDI

    b. LEFT
    c. CHURCH

    SAUDI promotes HARD TERRORISM – jihadi terrorism on the one hand through petro-dollars via Pakistan, Bangladesh and middle-east. They promote SOFT TERRORISM via anti-Hindu pro-Pakistan Muslim-friendly movies of BOLLYWOOD and part of English media like Barkhas and Rajdeeps..

    LEFT is typified by JNU-DU academicians, Sahitya Academics, NDTV, beef-eaters, white dressed communists etc who many allege used to get money from China and Russia to do anti-national activities.

    CHURCH is obviously JOSHUA Project and the likes, ever eager to harvest souls, operating from Texas and Scandinavian countries i.e., WHITE CHRISTIANS through fronts like Greenpeace, Ford Foundation, NGOs etc

    Earlier under Congress they were working independently because that is what congress wanted, Hindus should remain “tolerant” while the enemies would do their dastardly deeds – to divide and rule India.

    Now suddenly TERRIFIC TRIO of MODI – DOVAL – PARRIKAR has ALARMED these forces and

    – the SAUDIS are SCARED
    – the LEFT is FRIGHTENED

    NO wonder they have joined hands, and their cabal is hell-bent on defaming India and Hindu and criticizing Hindu civilization. Their very existence depends on the low self-esteem and low self-worth on Hindus. An ASCENDANT Dharmic society is their very antithesis.

    SOLUTION: Break the nexus – academically, financially and politically. Supporters of Dharma should use all their resources to bear upon this activity. Combined they are somewhat powerful. Individually the Saudi, Left and Church are weaklings. who can be easily

    • southernwonder

      great post Subhodeep ji. i wonder you would consider adding the role of the media as a separate 4th bullet point to your post above, and explore it more depth. i suspect there is a lot of corruption going on there, and money from the axis you talk about keeps flowing in there as well. the english media is the biggest reason, in my view, for india getting misled. Lavkare ji talks about the media in the above amazingly sweeping article for which i congratulate him. it is time to blow whistle on the english media.

  • Balakrishnan Hariharan

    We also know from The Indian Express expose of the early 1980s, that the then FM and now the President, lent a large helping hand to Dhirubhai Ambani to the disadvantage of Nusli Wadia in the manufacture of Polyster Filament Yarn (PFY).
    The FM had then reduced the customs duty/excise duty on the raw material used by Reliance (LAB) and increased the customs duty/excise duty on DMT used by Bombay Dying.. And, the President pontificates tolerance – where was his conscience when he undid Nusli Wadia ? Congress and Double Speak go hand-in-glove.

  • Dheeraj Aggarwal

    Congress is deep rooted in our system and if the country has to progress especially socially, the land must be exhumed and congress cancer removed once and for all…

  • suru

    Very well analyzed and is an important article..Thanks for sharing so much of information..I think not many people know about Shah commission findings. Kudos to you.

  • K T Thomas

    I am sure all patriotic people will dismiss the comments of the Congi pimp in Rashtrapati Bhavan with the contempt that they deserve.

  • Shubhangi Raykar

    What is on the increase is according to me, the Hindus shading the sense of shame in being called Hindus.Now if that amounts to intolerance so be it. Hindus are not intolerant but are fed up of the cowardice of some of them wearing the sheep skin of secularism. The Dadri act was unfortunate and so were the killings of the ‘rationalists like Kalburgi, Pansare and Dabholkar. In the case of Pansare one suspect has been arrested in case of the other two the govts were Congress ruled. Why was not their a hue and cry about the state govts? There seems to be some incredulous plotting going on to malign the govt for wrong reasons and stupid BJP members, I am sorry to say, re misusing freedom of speech by publicly targeting their own govt. The Sinhas and Shouries should have presented this on the party platform. The leaders who cannot follow the party discipline are worse than enemies. Is this the meaning of ‘freedom of speech and democracy?’

    • Vijayalakhmi Menon

      The disgruntled Shourie, as Jethmalani before him, walked into the trap set by the pseudo-secular brigade of commies and congies to denigrate the Modi Govt.!

  • Prasad

    In my language there is a word called as “nethiyadi” meaning a “hit on the forehead”. A hit on the forehead will leave the opponent stunned and incapable of responding or retaliating. I have just that one word for this article – Its a Nethiydi to all Commie, Congi, pseudo secularists and their (anti national) media poodles.

    Brilliant Mr. Lakare !!

  • Krispy K

    I’m glad this article referred to the French Revolution. We need our own revolution. One where Congress, their chamchas in the media, the current class of fake “intellectuals”, the perverted institutions that breed them, and all other Commie bastards in this country disappear overnight. Then we can start India on the path towards regaining our true civilisational ethos, one of genuine tolerance and acceptance, for all communities with universal reciprocation, rather than the cynical, perverted, fake version espoused by the above scumbags which is nothing more than an exploitation of minorities to practice tyranny against the majority.

    • AAN

      agreed tolerance is only for hindus till they become minority in their own country, then killings and rapes will follow… see Kashmir, See Assam and NE and WB. Durga Pujo is banned in WB because islamists attacked and rioted in WB

  • Lalitaditya Muktapida

    If someone slapped the President, I would be very tolerant of that slapping.

  • JagatguruDas

    The so-called-intolerance is nothing but the reaction of the society to the tolerance of the intolerable activities of the anti-bharat/Hindu intellectuals and groups by the sickular state government. Whenever MSM cries foul be confident that Bharat is going in right direction

  • subodh1945

    if the honble president ‘ tolerance,tolerance chant ” advise is heeded , reading facts of article , bharat will be xtinct