http://tinyurl.com/nfqcl6

and 6 of these subhuman Wahhabis were culled in Orokzai and another 24 in 
Bara:

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\09\09\story_9-9-2009_pg1_2

A CNN "travelogue" about popular resistance against the Taliban in NWFP:

http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/09/10/pakistan.militia/index.html

Not surprisingly, the Western mass media are ignoring this atrocity by the 
Pak Taliban. So here's an editorial from Pakistan:

[Dawn] TUESDAY’S tragedy in Orakzai offered further proof, as if any were 
needed, of the inherent barbarity that defines the Taliban. They do not 
subscribe to the norms of civilised people and view Pakistani culture in its 
myriad forms with contempt and loathing.
Four boys, all of them reportedly under the age of 16, were on their way to 
school on Tuesday when they were shot dead by the Taliban. Six other 
children were wounded in the attack. What was their crime, how could the 
Taliban possibly view them as a threat? Were the children gunned down simply 
because they were going to school? The Taliban, who thrive on illiteracy and 
ignorance, have long sought to destroy the mainstream schooling system in 
the tribal areas and parts of the Frontier. Or did the killings have 
something to do with the fact that the victims were Shia Muslims? Everyone 
knows that members of the Taliban, as well as some other hard-line 
organisations in Pakistan, have been brainwashed into believing the lie that 
Shias are not true Muslims.
Then there is another theory doing the rounds. Such gruesome acts involving 
the targeting of civilians, it is said, may be replicated if the Taliban 
continue to be pounded in their hideouts and on the battlefield. Forced on 
to the back foot in the theatre of war, the militants could try to blur the 
focus of the state by creating new law and order situations. Terrorising the 
people of Pakistan, who are now thoroughly behind the military operation, 
may be another objective. The biggest fear though is that the Taliban could 
try to stoke sectarian unrest to open a new front and take the pressure off 
themselves.
These fears are not unfounded given that we live in an intolerant society, 
thanks to what transpired in the 1980s under the Zia-US-Saudi combine. 
Seeking ‘strategic depth’ in Afghanistan and Kashmir, the state promoted 
groups that could act as proxies in its own and the CIA’s foreign agendas. 
What was ignored in this misguided campaign was that the people who were 
being indoctrinated to hate Indians or Russians or communist Afghans were at 
the same time being taught by local clerics to detest fellow Pakistanis. 
Shias have been targeted in recent years all over the country, in Kurram 
Agency, Hangu, Dera Ismail Khan, Quetta and elsewhere. Christians have been 
killed and their homes burned down. Naturally there can be no reasoning with 
the extremists. What the state must instead ask, if not plead, is that the 
communities on the receiving end show patience in the face of barbarity and 
let the law take its course.

"Larry Hammick"  wrote ...

> Not surprisingly, the Western mass media are ignoring this atrocity by the
> Pak Taliban.

I don't think the western media can be taken to task for ignoring this
particular atrocity as there are so many atrocities, and of much larger
scale, they ignore also. To draw attention to the atrocities of one side is
to risk exposing atrocities of the other. In the terrible wars which wage in
which the west is involved, men, women and children are being regularly
killed by each side. That our child killing is somehow better than their
child killing is a hard sell so perhaps, from western a media perspective,
best if all atrocities are swept under the carpet except where political
point scoring can be had. Best not to invite comparisons which could
ultimately be damaging otherwise.

> So here's an editorial from Pakistan:
:
> These fears are not unfounded given that we live in an intolerant society,
> thanks to what transpired in the 1980s under the Zia-US-Saudi combine.
> Seeking 'strategic depth' in Afghanistan and Kashmir, the state promoted
> groups that could act as proxies in its own and the CIA's foreign agendas.
> What was ignored in this misguided campaign was that the people who were
> being indoctrinated to hate Indians or Russians or communist Afghans were
at
> the same time being taught by local clerics to detest fellow Pakistanis.

Seems these Editorial writers are pretty clear where the root of their
problems lie.

The notion of Shia or Sunni not being true Muslims is little different to
those who would argue Protestants or Catholics weren't true Christians, or
that Islam, Judaism, Christianity were not the true religion of God.

Detesting everyone but themselves, even wanting the others to be wiped out,
isn't a characteristic solely of Sunni Muslim creation. We have Christians
calling for the death and destruction of all Islam, and who can forget -
given the atrocity of child murder this thread relates to - the, now closed,
Tampa web site calling for the killing of all Muslim children.

Oddly, while drawing our attention to this atrocity of four dead, you seemed
to have a beam in your eye when it came to calling for the deaths of
millions of children. I'm sure that was oversight, or is it that you would
approve of such a thing ?

It seems to me that you make post after post celebrating the deaths of those
you choose to hate. You might not be pulling the trigger yourself but you
appear delighted in seeing their demise, men, women and children. So how are
you any different, any better, than those you accuse of atrocious behaviour
?

If one wanted to be purely objective, the killing of four children and the
wounding of six others, pales into insignificance against other killings
which you seemingly approve of. Though you always seem to try and diminish
the deaths of innocent children in such cases by categorising the event with
a wide brush of "the enemy".

Isn't that just the morally relativistic stance that deaths of what you
consider 'good guy's children' are to be held up and condemned while the
deaths of what you call 'bad guy's children' are to be dismissed as
unimportant, considered acceptable ? One man's murderous atrocity is
another's casually accepted and excusable collateral damage ?

Isn't that morally corrupt and offensive ? It is to me.