You see, there are no more excuses.
They said, "the blasts caused the riots": well, that's evident nonsense because the riots happened three months before the blasts.
Then they said, "the blasts could not have been a reaction to the riots because they happened three months later and that's too long for a reaction": well, consider this: had there been no riots, there would have been no blasts.
They said, "the riots were triggered by the burning of a family in Radhabai Chawl": well, that horrible atrocity happened on January 8 1993, in the middle of rioting that stretched from early December 1992 to February 1993. It could hardly have "triggered" rioting that started a whole month earlier.
Faced with that, they said, "no, no, we meant the second phase of the riots, that was triggered by the Radhabai Chawl murders": well, the second phase of the riots started in early January 1993, days before Radhabai. Newspapers of the time are clear: even when they first report the Radhabai killings, they refer to several days of violence. Terrible though it was, Radhabai Chawl is just one more entry in a grisly catalogue of blood and shame.
They said, "asking for the Srikrishna Commission report to be implemented will lead to more tension between Hindus and Muslims": well, even assuming some truth in that far-fetched hypothesis, should punishing murderers depend on some future possibility of tension? Some future threat of tension?
They said, "the blasts were an act of terrorism": well, oh yes indeed they were, and so was the slaughter of hundreds of Indians during the riots.
They said, "don't equate riots to terrorism": well, but what did those victims feel as they faced death? Was it not terror? What else were the riots but terrorism? And if you think not, would you care to explain why not? Without equivocation and to yourself first of all?
They said, "the blasts were an attack against the nation": well, true, but what else is the murder of hundreds of Indians, but an attack against the nation too?
They said, "the blasts were inspired and planned in Pakistan": well, sure, but is India's own homegrown terror less worthy of punishment?
They said many more things. But in the end and always, they would say, "yeah, yeah, but what about punishing the bomb blast criminals?"
Well, now even that fig-leaf has dropped off. Fourteen years after the blasts, sentences ranging from years in prison to death have been handed out. The bomb criminals have been punished as they deserved to be.
But the riots that happened three months before the blasts, that brought this city to its knees as surely as the blasts drove a dagger into our hearts, that killed nearly four times as many people as the blasts? For that massacre of hundreds of your fellow Indians, nobody has been punished. There isn't even an investigation going on that might result in a court case. Not one.
So as you go about your business today, whatever it is, stop a moment and ask yourself about this. Do it quietly. Do it face to face with your own conscience, so you don't have to explain or rationalize to anyone else. Ask yourself why it is apparently not in our Indian national interest to punish the killers of a thousand Indians in 1992-93.
If you believe, as I believe, that justice is something worth fighting for, do this much as a start: go sign this petition.
Justice. Not excuses.