NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/03/iraq.school.bomb/index.html


I just don't get missions targeting children.

Is this a "Muslim" thing? There was Beslan and now this.

Has there been any instances were other groups have planned attacks solely against children?

I predict this thread will not end well.

And before anyone else mentions them: the Crusades and Abortion clinic bombings. Possibly fred phelps.

There, they are all out of the way.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/03/iraq.school.bomb/index.html


I just don't get missions targeting children.

Is this a "Muslim" thing? There was Beslan and now this.

Has there been any instances were other groups have planned attacks solely against children?
http://www.centcom.mil/sites/uscentcom1/Lists/Press%20Releases/DispForm.aspx?ID=4552

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/01/28/mortar_hits_school_in_iraq/

http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/iraq_38180.html

http://www.boston.com/news/education/k_12/articles/2006/03/25/schools_also_on_the_front_lines_in_iraq/

That would be a huge understatement.

I predict this thread will not end well.

So do I. This one is going to collapse into a flame war, or zero relevence.

Well I hope it doesn't go into flaming as that is not the intent.

Well the subject line was aimed at an individual. ;)

However, the question is genuine. Has there been other groups that planned and carried out attacks against children?

I only knew the 2 I mentioned......

And before anyone else mentions them: the Crusades and Abortion clinic bombings. Possibly fred phelps.

There, they are all out of the way.

But were the intended targets children?

I predict this thread will not end well.

Won't it be fun though, in a horrible way?

Won't it be fun though, in a horrible way?

And so it begins.....

Is this a "Muslim" thing? There was Beslan and now this.
Errr no, this is a batshit-insane thing.

What about the school shooting a few years back in the ROI?

Does that make school shootings a "Christian" thing?

I just don't get missions targeting children.

Is this a "Muslim" thing? There was Beslan and now this.

Your ignorance breeds my contempt, mixed with pity, for you.


Has there been any instances were other groups have planned attacks solely against children?

Columbine? Virginia Tech? The Amish Massacre?

Those were Muslims, they must be. After all, it's a "Muslim" thing, right?

People like you terrify me.

*Dons flame retardant suit, as to lurk while protected*

Let's stop it here then.

A 2007 report from Unesco - it's (http://www.unesco.org/education/attack/educationunderattack.pdf) long but it answers your question

Your ignorance breeds my contempt, mixed with pity, for you.



Columbine? Virginia Tech? The Amish Massacre?

Those were Muslims, they must be. After all, it's a "Muslim" thing, right?

People like you terrify me.

Errr....Columbine...2 people ....hardly a group.

VT - One person....hardly a group.

Amish Massacre - one person....hardly a group.

And you talk about ignorance? And contempt?

Errr....Columbine...2 people ....hardly a group.

VT - One person....hardly a group.

Amish Massacre - one person....hardly a group.

And you talk about ignorance? And contempt?

I think, more importantly, that these examples are disqualified by having no stated aim over and above the single act - I think we're talking about targeting children as part of a larger cause.

I think, more importantly, that these examples are disqualified by having no stated aim over and above the single act - I think we're talking about targeting children as part of a larger cause.

Well quite. That was sorta my point but in much fewer words.

Well quite. That was sorta my point but in much fewer words.

I'm really really really sorry for the pedantry but actually, your post had fewer words than mine :)

I'm really really really sorry for the pedantry but actually, your post had fewer words than mine :)

Um.....yeah...as I said in my post....I was trying to say what you did but i did it in fewer words....and now I can see that my English failed me again! LOL

Damn.

Beslan - the thing with Beslan is that the entire thing could well have been contained had the Russians not gone hell bent for leather and attempt stupidly insane heroics.

That entire operation was a fuck up. Not that the Chechens involved were innocent either. They caused the situation and ultimately the blame lies with those people who made the decision to invade that school.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/03/iraq.school.bomb/index.html


I just don't get missions targeting children.

Is this a "Muslim" thing? There was Beslan and now this.

Has there been any instances were other groups have planned attacks solely against children?

Like shooting at schools and children and attacking and beating them?
O no. Theres more than the muslims at that.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/05/23/1085250867067.html?from=storyrhs

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1358173,00.html

http://www.eappi.org/eappiweb.nsf/list/hebron%20attack.html

Like shooting at schools and children and attacking and beating them?
O no. Theres more than the muslims at that.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/05/23/1085250867067.html?from=storyrhs

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1358173,00.html

http://www.eappi.org/eappiweb.nsf/list/hebron%20attack.html

As shocking as the first 2 stories are, especially the 2nd, child suicide bombers have been used by Palestinians. My only point is to say that I'm not sure these qualify as 'against children' specifically. They're instances of protection against a perceived threat, one which happens to involve children.

The third story certainly does qualify

[url]
Is this a "Muslim" thing? There was Beslan and now this.


No, because, if you look at Beslan, it has a lot more to do with wanting independence from Russia and trying to get it in the most stupid and horrible way possible.

As shocking as the first 2 stories are, especially the 2nd, child suicide bombers have been used by Palestinians.

Yeah, because walking away from the scene is a certain way of knowing that they're going to blow things up :rolleyes: It was a child, who was moving away!

Yeah, because walking away from the scene is a certain way of knowing that they're going to blow things up :rolleyes: It was a child, who was moving away!

I think the story is shocking, as previously written, but my point was not concerned with the right or wrongs but whether it fitted into the intended targeting of children as part of a larger cause.

It doesn't.

I think the story is shocking, as previously written, but my point was not concerned with the right or wrongs but whether it fitted into the intended targeting of children as part of a larger cause.

It doesn't.

Did they intentionally shoot the girl?

Was it part of the larger cause of keeping themselves safe from humanity?

No, because, if you look at Beslan, it has a lot more to do with wanting independence from Russia and trying to get it in the most stupid and horrible way possible.

I agree with this 100%. Religion is only relevant in Chechnya to the extent that it is part of the national identity of the contending factions.

Targeting children is not a "muslim" thing, but it is the most extreme example of the idea adopted by all terrorists that the way to retaliate against a perceived threat from the leadership is to attack the civilians, and many of the world's most radical terrorist groups are muslim. If you're willing to kill innocent adults, why should the innocence of children dissuade you?

Did they intentionally shoot the girl?

Was it part of the larger cause of keeping themselves safe from humanity?

Yes and yes.

The point is that they did not shoot her because she was a child, they shot her because...well I don't suppose I can see a justifiable reason for them shooting her but all I can say is that it wasn't specifically because she was a child.

Yes and yes.

The point is that they did not shoot her because she was a child, they shot her because...well I don't suppose I can see a justifiable reason for them shooting her but all I can say is that it wasn't specifically because she was a child.

Okay, I would accept your idea if it had been accidental. It was not. They deliberately shot this girl for no particular reason.

If they had been shooting towards an actual suicide bomber and a stray bullet hit the girl, then the situation would have been different.

They didn't, they intentionally shot her and then promptly executed her.

Okay, I would accept your idea if it had been accidental. It was not. They deliberately shot this girl for no particular reason.

If they had been shooting towards an actual suicide bomber and a stray bullet hit the girl, then the situation would have been different.

They didn't, they intentionally shot her and then promptly executed her.

Yet it still doesn't fit into a group intentionally targeting children to further a cause.

It's an individual act in an individual situation.

"They"?. It was 'he' intentionally shot her etc etc.

Did they intentionally shoot the girl?are you talking about this one?

Israeli officer: I was right to shoot 13-year-old child.
Radio exchange contradicts army version of Gaza killing
Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Wednesday November 24, 2004

An Israeli army officer who repeatedly shot a 13-year-old Palestinian girl in Gaza dismissed a warning from another soldier that she was a child by saying he would have killed her even if she was three years old.

The officer, identified by the army only as Captain R, was charged this week with illegal use of his weapon, conduct unbecoming an officer and other relatively minor infractions after emptying all 10 bullets from his gun's magazine into Iman al-Hams when she walked into a "security area" on the edge of Rafah refugee camp last month.

A tape recording of radio exchanges between soldiers involved in the incident, played on Israeli television, contradicts the army's account of the events and appears to show that the captain shot the girl in cold blood.


or about the other killings?

As shocking as the first 2 stories are, especially the 2nd, child suicide bombers have been used by Palestinians. My only point is to say that I'm not sure these qualify as 'against children' specifically. They're instances of protection against a perceived threat, one which happens to involve children.

The third story certainly does qualify

Hmmmm, perhaps my fault for not explaining....hundreds of children have been shot dead by snipers in the occupied territories since 2000 alone. In addition schools have frequently been directly targeted. "settlers" (Israeli colonists) attack Arab children regularily, though not often with deadly force. Its part of a concerted policy to drive the population from certain areas by making life there impossible.


http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/eed216406b50bf6485256ce10072f637/52e082eeb35a757185256f2c0057eb4f!OpenDocument&Click=

http://www.counterpunch.org/butterfly1123.html

I think, more importantly, that these examples are disqualified by having no stated aim over and above the single act - I think we're talking about targeting children as part of a larger cause.

what about using kids as soldiers?

Yes and yes.

The point is that they did not shoot her because she was a child, they shot her because...well I don't suppose I can see a justifiable reason for them shooting her but all I can say is that it wasn't specifically because she was a child.

How about we say that they (the captain and the guy who initially shot her) shot her because they had thrown away what traces of humanity they had and were murderous sons of bitches who should be lined up and shot?

And before anyone else mentions them: the Crusades and Abortion clinic bombings. Possibly fred phelps.

There, they are all out of the way.

Killjoy.

Though I could mention Luis Posada Carriles, George Bush's kind of terrorist.

He fucking meant is it a Muslim thing to just do that specific thing, so grow the fuck up guys.

Obviously, he's either young or a bit confused. The answer is, no not entirely. Blowing up schools to make it seem like the occupier's fault is just a Geurilla Tactic which really hasn't been employed since Chechneya [but that was a massive shooting] or Vietnam. It's nothing new to use children as a way to sway the politics and moral of troops, usually it's just giving a kid an IED-rigged teddy bear to go give to a soldier [in the past] but now it seems that it's more of a way to make it seem we aren't trying to protect the Iraqi people. Also, the Iraq Civil War is just a giant ass gang war in all respects. The Sunnis and the Shias are nothing more than the Cryptz and the Bloodz, it's no different from if LA were to go ape shit like some Iraqis are unfortunately doing. Maybe not a lot of suicide bombs, but targeting the other 'turfs' children and the such.

--

Bottom line, no it isn't just a Muslim thing. There are tragedies that happen around the world, the ones in Iraq just seem to be the most publicised.

And before anyone else mentions them: the Crusades and Abortion clinic bombings. Possibly fred phelps.

There, they are all out of the way.

I am fairly certain that children don't run Abortionclinics, and they don't typically spend hours or days hanging around Abortion clinics so I think we can say with relative certainty that children are not the targets of such attacks.

On the other hand, these attacks are focused on places where children spend a good portion of their day so these are specifically intended to harm children.

I agree with this 100%. Religion is only relevant in Chechnya to the extent that it is part of the national identity of the contending factions.

Targeting children is not a "muslim" thing, but it is the most extreme example of the idea adopted by all terrorists that the way to retaliate against a perceived threat from the leadership is to attack the civilians, and many of the world's most radical terrorist groups are muslim. If you're willing to kill innocent adults, why should the innocence of children dissuade you?

Well said. Attacking children has nothing to do with religion in any way. It all comes down to finding an means to your end, and in the minds of these extremists. attacking children, somehow, helps them achieve their goals.

Personally, such acts only strengthen my resolve to see the situation through to the end, if only to protect the innocent civilians that only what a better life.

I am fairly certain that children don't run Abortionclinics, and they don't typically spend hours or days hanging around Abortion clinics so I think we can say with relative certainty that children are not the targets of such attacks.

On the other hand, these attacks are focused on places where children spend a good portion of their day so these are specifically intended to harm children.

No, but if this thread goes on much longer, all of those things will get mentioned. It is inevitable. Mark my words.

I am just getting them out of the way early in the hope that it will discourage people. (It won't, of course, but one can dream).

He fucking meant is it a Muslim thing to just do that specific thing, so grow the fuck up guys.

Obviously, he's either young or a bit confused. The answer is, no not entirely. Blowing up schools to make it seem like the occupier's fault is just a Geurilla Tactic which really hasn't been employed since Chechneya [but that was a massive shooting] or Vietnam. It's nothing new to use children as a way to sway the politics and moral of troops, usually it's just giving a kid an IED-rigged teddy bear to go give to a soldier [in the past] but now it seems that it's more of a way to make it seem we aren't trying to protect the Iraqi people. Also, the Iraq Civil War is just a giant ass gang war in all respects. The Sunnis and the Shias are nothing more than the Cryptz and the Bloodz, it's no different from if LA were to go ape shit like some Iraqis are unfortunately doing. Maybe not a lot of suicide bombs, but targeting the other 'turfs' children and the such.

--

Bottom line, no it isn't just a Muslim thing. There are tragedies that happen around the world, the ones in Iraq just seem to be the most publicised.


I am glad someone finally made this so clear. I was looking for the right words, and you stole them from me.

Your ignorance breeds my contempt, mixed with pity, for you.


Wow. I guess you don't understand what "Muslim" means versus "why do all Muslims thinks it's ok to kill children"


Columbine? Virginia Tech? The Amish Massacre?

Those were Muslims, they must be. After all, it's a "Muslim" thing, right?

Rubiconic Crossings and Barringtonia handled this.

People like you terrify me.
Rather misguided to be afraid of people who ask questions vs those who make claims.

Let's stop it here then.

A 2007 report from Unesco - it's (http://www.unesco.org/education/attack/educationunderattack.pdf) long but it answers your question

Thank you!

The General board can be crazy but you can find people with answers! :)

Um.....yeah...as I said in my post....I was trying to say what you did but i did it in fewer words....and now I can see that my English failed me again! LOL

Damn.

Beslan - the thing with Beslan is that the entire thing could well have been contained had the Russians not gone hell bent for leather and attempt stupidly insane heroics.

That entire operation was a fuck up. Not that the Chechens involved were innocent either. They caused the situation and ultimately the blame lies with those people who made the decision to invade that school.

The Russians did screw up but I wonder if it would have ended well anyway when you look at the explosives they had laid and the fact they were shooting kids in the back as they were trying to run away.

Like shooting at schools and children and attacking and beating them?
O no. Theres more than the muslims at that.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/05/23/1085250867067.html?from=storyrhs

http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,1358173,00.html

http://www.eappi.org/eappiweb.nsf/list/hebron%20attack.html

The first 2 stories seem to more about single acts. Unless of course there is a standing order to shoot children.

They have been doing crapy things to each other for awhile. When I was over there on a business trip, I read about 2 Isreali kids who were between 9-16(I don't remember exact ages) who were found in caves with their throats slit. The two of them liked exploring caves.....

The third story does count......

The first 2 stories seem to more about single acts. Unless of course there is a standing order to shoot children.

They have been doing crapy things to each other for awhile. When I was over there on a business trip, I read about 2 Isreali kids who were between 9-16(I don't remember exact ages) who were found in caves with their throats slit. The two of them liked exploring caves.....

The third story does count......I searched the Internet about your story.. but I cant find it.. I guess there is too many variables.. Maybe if you tell us the name of the town you visited.. and the approximative dates.

I searched the Internet about your story.. but I cant find it.. I guess there is too many variables.. Maybe if you tell us the name of the town you visited.. and the approximative dates.

It sounds vaguely familiar. Both sides target each others children lets face it.

what about using kids as soldiers?

I am reading one kids story about that......

Both sides target each others children lets face it.one of my viewpoints is that both sides use terrorism.

I searched the Internet about your story.. but I cant find it.. I guess there is too many variables.. Maybe if you tell us the name of the town you visited.. and the approximative dates.

It was one of the local papers. I was in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and Herzliya.

It was about 5 or so years ago and I believe it was in or near the territories.

I just remember reading the incident. Exact details are sketchy so you can take the story for whatever you want.

I can see some of the more radical Muslim groups killing children to further accomplish their goals.

But, I can say that about a lot of radical religious and terrorist groups. Thusly, I point everyone to a few of the African countries that are well noted for this kind of heartless brutality.

*shrug*

timothy mcveigh destroyed the murrah federal building in OKC knowing full well that there would be children in the daycare center located there.

he considered himself as part of a movement

id say that he targeted those children as much as he targeted the adults in that building that day.

*spits on his grave*

*shrug*

timothy mcveigh destroyed the murrah federal building in OKC knowing full well that there would be children in the daycare center located there.

he considered himself as part of a movement

id say that he targeted those children as much as he targeted the adults in that building that day.

*spits on his grave*

But the intended target was still the government. He didn't blow up the building for the purpose of killing the children.

I still remember the Son of a bitch was concerned that he would be remembered as a baby killer....

The first 2 stories seem to more about single acts. Unless of course there is a standing order to shoot children.
Because Beslan and That One Mortar Bombing At A School weren't single acts?
They have been doing crapy things to each other for awhile. When I was over there on a business trip, I read about 2 Isreali kids who were between 9-16(I don't remember exact ages) who were found in caves with their throats slit. The two of them liked exploring caves.....
Right. Well are we going to ignore the whole Israel / Palestine stuff, then?

Because Beslan and That One Mortar Bombing At A School weren't single acts?

Right. Well are we going to ignore the whole Israel / Palestine stuff, then?

NARF!

NARF!
Narf = ?

Narf = ?

Pinky and the Brain reference.

Thusly, I point everyone to a few of the African countries that are well noted for this kind of heartless brutality.
Indeed. See the Lord's Resistance Army.

They don't sound much like a Muslim group to me and they habitually kidnap and kill children.

He fucking meant is it a Muslim thing to just do that specific thing, so grow the fuck up guys.

And it isn't. This isn't about defending muslims, it's about making it clear that race, colour, religion, etc... do not play a factor when people go batshit insane.

All kinds of people go batshit insane. Not everyone does and I'd venture to guess that only a minority really do, but it's dangerous, very dangerous, to think that you are infallible. Why? Because then you will feel all innocent and safe while approaching that Israeli guard post. Sure, the soldiers are waving their guns, but hey! They don't murder children, right? Not a chance! 0% in fact!

Until they shoot you dead, that is.

Sure, might not happen every single time, but it's stupid and naive to think that other people are not equally capable of being total and complete bastards.

And for some optimism, because I am an optimist, it's equally stupid and naive to think that other people are not equally capable of being total and complete angels.

I know that you indeed understand this. I don't think the OP ever did, because he kept trying to further his opinion, despite having been countered multiple times.

Pinky and the Brain reference.
Rightio, then.

Care to explain a little more, seeing as I didn't watch the cartoon very much? (I thought it was meh-tabulous)

But the intended target was still the government. He didn't blow up the building for the purpose of killing the children.

I still remember the Son of a bitch was concerned that he would be remembered as a baby killer....

and perhaps one could say that the islamic terrorists arent targeting the girls so much as they are targeting education for girls.

and perhaps one could say that the islamic terrorists arent targeting the girls so much as they are targeting education for girls.

It's still a planned mission against kids.

If they were after education for girls; why not simply threaten to kill the people offering the education?

It's still a planned mission against kids.

If they were after education for girls; why not simply threaten to kill the people offering the education?

and how is that different from timmy mcveigh bombing a federal building in the day time when it would be full of children and adults going about their business? if he didnt want to murder babies it would have been easy enough to avoid. his was also still a planned mission to kill kids.

It's still a planned mission against kids.

If they were after education for girls; why not simply threaten to kill the people offering the education?

within the limits of my understanding of people who set out to murder school children...

if you bomb a school full of girls, it terrorizes parents into pulling their daughters out of their schools. the aim is to stop the education of girls, not to murder them. murder is just a tactic.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/03/iraq.school.bomb/index.html


I just don't get missions targeting children.

Is this a "Muslim" thing? There was Beslan and now this.

Has there been any instances were other groups have planned attacks solely against children?

HEY WE HAVE NO RIGHT OT TAKE AWAY THE TERRORISTs FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION! Call-in Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, get me Larry King!
\Sorry but you Liberals are sarcastic ALL THE TIME, and now it's my turn! MUA HA-HA!

HEY WE HAVE NO RIGHT OT TAKE AWAY THE TERRORISTs FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION! Call-in Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, get me Larry King!
\Sorry but you Liberals are sarcastic ALL THE TIME, and now it's my turn! MUA HA-HA!

Oh yeah, you really showed those liberals. Must all be in solid retreat as a result of your incredible wit. :rolleyes:

But were the intended targets children? It's an all girls school, the whole building was wired. Basicly everyone inside would die.

Radical Muslims hate it when females are smart.

Oh yeah, you really showed those liberals. Must all be in solid retreat as a result of your incredible wit. :rolleyes:

I admit it isn't itelligence prompted post, but if you look at other threads you'll see plenty made by Libs.

I admit it isn't itelligence prompted post, but if you look at other threads you'll see plenty made by Libs.

When conservatives have Bush & Co, Fox News pundits, etc., etc. it is kind of hard for liberals not to do any kind of mocking. Especially when most conservatives respond with attacking people like Rosie O'Donnell which many liberals roll their eyes at just as much at those on the political right. If anyone wants liberals to stop looking smug than perhaps conservatives shouldn't keep looking so ridiculous.

It feels quite hot in this thread, so I'll just add my two cents before I become an overcooked Pancake.

*deep breath* This is hardly the first attack agaisnt children-- Though I cannot name any right now, I'm sure this isn't hte first one in history.

And bombing/shooting/killing children/teens isn't just a "Muslim thing". I'm pretty sure that the Amish Massacre, Columbine, Virginia Tech, putting young children in death camps in Nazi Germany, those had nothing to do with Islam whatsoever.

*flees*

noting the details that was put in. the explosive filled tank buried in the floor... det cord sealed in the walls... shells in the walls and ceiling...

I would suspect the whole construction company.

and since no one mentioned it.

Thank God someone there notice the detonating wires and followed them. :cool:

When conservatives have Bush & Co, Fox News pundits, etc., etc. it is kind of hard for liberals not to do any kind of mocking. Especially when most conservatives respond with attacking people like Rosie O'Donnell which many liberals roll their eyes at just as much at those on the political right. If anyone wants liberals to stop looking smug than perhaps conservatives shouldn't keep looking so ridiculous.
Well said...

And it's also something about the balance of power. The republicans (conservatives) have been in power for quite some time and made many mistakes. The democrats (liberals) have just retaken a lot of that power - why shouldn't they feel smug now?

Give it time, and they'll rightly be mocked for the mistakes they make while in power too.

Fuck, I forgot that timothy mcveigh dude.

Well said...

And it's also something about the balance of power. The republicans (conservatives) have been in power for quite some time and made many mistakes. The democrats (liberals) have just retaken a lot of that power - why shouldn't they feel smug now?

Give it time, and they'll rightly be mocked for the mistakes they make while in power too.

Liberals need to act like a total ass on the air like conservatives like O'Reilly and Hannity manage. That would go a long way towards balancing out the doucheness of the two sides. Though it would be hard to match them in that category...

Time to bring this one to a close.

Barringtonia aptly answered the questions by posting the UNESCO report.

It's dishearting that our "evolved" species views violence against young children at their schools as a method to force change.

Muslims are not the only ones that practice this but they seem to be the ones that use it more. Most likely because the countries doing this tend to have high poverty levels and or Taliban like forces.

Overall, I am somewhat impressed this topic did not flame out and end of being locked.

Maybe I caught people when the majority were in a good mood. ;)

TTFN!

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/03/iraq.school.bomb/index.html


I just don't get missions targeting children.

Is this a "Muslim" thing? There was Beslan and now this.

Has there been any instances were other groups have planned attacks solely against children?

Attacks against the innocents are strictly forbidden by God. How could people attack the innocents that just causes outrage among the entire world community? They are lucky that it was prevented otherwise there would be mass outrage and a ton of support would have disappeared.

Attacks against the innocents are strictly forbidden by God. How could people attack the innocents that just causes outrage among the entire world community? They are lucky that it was prevented otherwise there would be mass outrage and a ton of support would have disappeared.

it depends also on the rational of those doing the deed. if, for instance, they deem that the children's deaths were better than a "lifetime of living in sin" then it's not an attack but saving their souls.

that is if those particular people think that educating girls is a sin...