True: Slaughtering 56 innocent citizens is nothing less than the "rarest of rare".
Allow me to take this opportunity (too) to remind you of a few other atrocities that each killed many multiples of 56 innocent people, and of how long it has been since those respective massacres happened.
* The slaughter of many hundred innocent citizens in Delhi in 1984. That's 25 years ago.
* The slaughter of many hundred innocent citizens in Bombay in 1992-93. That's 16 years ago.
* The slaughter of many hundred innocent citizens in Gujarat in 2002. That's seven years ago.
Nobody responsible for any of these slaughters has been brought to trial, let alone punished.
Why do you think this is? Could it be because these don't really qualify as "rarest of rare"? That is, could it be that slaughtering people by the several dozen is a rare occurence that needs punishment, but slaughtering people by the several hundred is just the usual that needs no attention from any of us?
On another note, there's justified outrage that Pakistan is refusing to take action against a man called Hafiz Mohammed Saeed, whom India believes planned and orchestrated last November's attacks in Bombay.
Why is there no similar outrage that India is refusing to take action against the men who planned and orchestrated the three attacks listed above (from 1984, 1992-93 and 2002)?
Also because of some perceived lack of rarity?