NY Times Gives Taliban a Platform

Timothy Birdnow

A senior correspondent for the New York Times in Afghanistan has criticized the rag paper for publishing an op-ed by the Taliban.

From the article:

The New York Times’ senior correspondent in Afghanistan criticized the paper’s editorial branch for publishing an opinion-editorial article Thursday written by Taliban deputy leader Sirajuddin Haqqani and claiming the group’s commitment to peace.

Mujib Mashal, the lead New York Times reporter in Afghanistan, drew distance between the paper’s news operations and its editorial branch in a Thursday tweet.

"Siraj is no Taliban peace-maker as he paints himself,” Mashal wrote. "He’s behind some of most ruthless attacks of this war with many civilian lives lost.”

The piece by Siraj Haqqani in @nytopinion– which’s independent of our news operations & judgment – omits the most fundamental fact: that Siraj is no Taliban peace-maker as he paints himself, that he’s behind some of most ruthless attacks of this war with many civilian lives lost

— Mujib Mashal (@MujMash) February 20, 2020

In his editorial, "What we, the Taliban want,” Haqqani claimed the Taliban was committed to a tentative peace process in the country and denied claims the Taliban would favor a return to harboring radical Islamic extremism.

Haqqani wrote that the Taliban favored a chance to build a government with all Afghan stakeholders and that the Taliban favored an "Islamic system in which all Afghans have equal rights, where the rights of women that are granted by Islam — from the right to education to the right to work — are protected, and where merit is the basis for equal opportunity.”

Haqqani also noted "concerns about the potential of Afghanistan being used by disruptive groups to threaten regional and world security.”

The Taliban’s deputy leader claimed the Taliban was weary of decades of fighting and that the group favors a return to stability. Haqqani’s claims towards peaceful resolution appear subject to doubt, as the pre 9/11 Taliban government had been regarded as a safe-haven for extremism, with the likes of Osama Bin-Laden’s Al-Qaeda terror group.

Really?

Notice the weasel words "Islamic" in front of just and the like. Also notice he says they won't harbor terrorists. Right. Taqqiya, anyone?

But that last is the kicker; if they truly are tired of fighting it means we could win this. Yes, WE are tired of fighting too, but that only means they must be exhausted. We are using a fraction of our resources while they are throwing everything they have into it every day. If what he says is true it means they could be persuaded to eventually surrender.

I'm not saying we should take  any of this at face value. I believe it is a lie from the paper's byline.

The big question is why is the New York Times publishing it?  What kind of treasonous snakes run the Times (well, we know.)

If anything this op-ed should make us more concerned about pulling out than ever, in my opinion.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:02 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 499 words, total size 5 kb.