Sibal: Too late for Modi to say he was shaken
- Congress says Togadia spreading venom; EC seeks recording of alleged hate speech
- Akhilesh Yadav tears into Narendra Modi bastion on maiden visit to Gujarat, says third front ready to govern
- Proponents of Article 370 should say how it has helped J&K: Rajnath Singh
- 1984 riots: Akalis protest over Capt Amarinder Singh's clean chit to Jagdish Tytler
- IPL 7: CSK register 93-run victory over hapless DD
Launching an attack on Narendra Modi, Union minister Kapil Sibal has said it was "too late" for the BJP's prime ministerial candidate to be saying that the 2002 riots in Gujarat had shaken him to the core.
"Modi's riots baggage will remain. It is too late for him to express that he was shaken to the core. Had that been so, the core would have reacted in time, not a belated reaction just before the Lok Sabha elections," Sibal wrote on his website.
The minister said the "pain and agony" reflected in Modi's blog is for an audience whose sympathy will be vital in May 2014.
"Pain can never be a belated reaction after 11 years of silence. And a person who suffers
in silence cannot remain silent for 11 years. While I do not want to be cynical in my comments, I do not want to be dishonest either. This act of liberation does not connect us with the real Modi," Sibal said.
Sibal was reacting to a blog post written by the Gujarat Chief Minister in which he said he felt "liberated and at peace" in the wake of the clean chit given to him by a local court in a case related to the 2002 riots and claimed he was "shattered" by the blame laid at his door for the killings.
"Those who plan in solitude never suffer pain in solitude. Those who believe in Newton's Laws of Motion do not wait for 11 years to react," the Union minister said.
Sibal also posed a series of questions. He asked where the "pain was when the State of Gujarat" defended those who now stand convicted.
"Where was the pain when affidavits about their innocence were filed in courts? Where was the pain when lawyers were paid for defending the indefensible? Where was the pain when the state did not reach out to those who were crying for help? Where was the pain of those who were seeking justice but were left in the cold? Where was the pain when the state was collaborating with the accused to settle their affidavits, while they were being prosecuted in court?" Sibal wrote.