@Keyplus - I am still puzzled. In response to comments critical about your earlier post, you just offer a link to an article - Is this article supposed to support your earlier post, or expand it, or explain it? Because, as best I can tell, it does none of those things.
In fact, from the article, it actually says this;
"The Taliban don’t claim that Malala was involved in drone usage. They targeted her because she believed in her right to education and vocalised that belief. They said so themselves. To ascribe ulterior motives here is disingenuous. They attacked Malala because the Taliban believe that women are chattel, with no rights to access the tools for self-development. This isn’t a theory. This is based on the rules they imposed on Swat when they occupied it, Afghanistan when they ruled it and every statement they make justifying the bombs thrown at schools. Linking it to drone attacks makes no sense here. The drone attacks may also be something they dislike. It’s quite likely, given that the drones are supposed to be targeting them (even if they somehow manage to kill more families of innocent people than actual members of the Taliban). But this attack was a separate issue entirely. It was born of their fanatical subscription to a religious system of belief that they think informs their actions. In other words, they think this is what their religion tells them to do (please note that I was very careful in my word usage here and am in no way saying the religion actually says that, just that they think it does)"
That seems to support the assertion in the OP, and subsequent postings supportive of that position, to me.
So - what are you trying to tell us when you just post the link?