New York Times publishes Taliban propaganda

It used to be that a murderous regime needed a pliable Western journalist to get its propaganda printed in the New York Times. Not anymore! It can submit directly to the Times opinion section, as the Taliban proved this week. “What We, the Taliban, Want,” reads the actual headline to an article published Thursday by an actual American newsroom.

The op-ed, authored by Taliban deputy leader and suspected terrorist Sirajuddin Haqqani, opens with a series of sentences that attempt to “both sides” the conflict between the Taliban and the United States and present the Americans as unreliable and untrustworthy negotiators. “When our representatives started negotiating with the United States in 2018, our confidence that the talks would yield results was close to zero,” he writes. “We did not trust American intentions after 18 years of war and several previous attempts at negotiation that had proved futile.” Haqqani adds, “Nevertheless, we decided to try once more. The long war has exacted a terrible cost from everyone. We thought it unwise to dismiss any potential opportunity for peace no matter how meager the prospects of its success.”

Peace is good, I will give him that. No sense in criticizing the Times for publishing a call for peace, even if it comes from a man who is wanted in connection to deadly terrorist assaults on civilians, assassination plots, and multiple attacks on U.S. and coalition forces. But then Haqqani writes, “We did not choose our war with the foreign coalition led by the United States. We were forced to defend ourselves.”

This is a damnable lie. The Taliban 100% chose this conflict with the U.S. No one forced the Taliban to invite al Qaeda to establish its base of operations in Afghanistan in exchange for Saudi money. No one forced the Taliban to deny the U.S. lawful entry into Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. No one forced the Taliban to fight alongside al Qaeda. This fight was of the Taliban’s own choosing and now, having suffered dearly for its choices, it is using an American newspaper to rewrite history and present itself as a victim.

The remainder of Haqqani’s op-ed is much of the same, seeking to present the Taliban as a stoic and proud organization that wants only to make peace with a country whose negotiators keep “flip-flopping” and “moving goal posts.” “Even when President Trump called off the talks, we kept the door to peace open because we Afghans suffer the most from the continuation of the war," he wrote. "No peace agreement, following on the heels of such intensive talks, comes without mutual compromises.” He adds, “That we stuck with such turbulent talks with the enemy we have fought bitterly for two decades, even as death rained from the sky, testifies to our commitment to ending the hostilities and bringing peace to our country." What faultless martyrs you are. “The new Afghanistan will be a responsible member of the international community,” Haqqani writes. “We will remain committed to all international conventions as long as they are compatible with Islamic principles.”

His motivations make sense. Any good officer understands the necessity of propaganda and its broad dissemination in media. But what is the Times's excuse for printing his lies? Is this not the same U.S. newspaper that has been sounding the alarm nonstop since the 2016 presidential election about the dangers of disinformation online? The ghost of the old Soviet Union must be kicking itself for having wasted so much time dealing with that idiot Walter Duranty. As it turns out, Stalin’s politburo could have just submitted op-eds downplaying and obfuscating its crimes directly to the Times’s opinion section.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/new-york-times-publishes-taliban-propaganda

https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorinfo/sirajuddin-haqqani

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/20/opinion/taliban-afghanistan-war-haqqani.html

The New York Times' man in Cuba: Playing the role of a dictator's pawn

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/the-new-york-times-man-in-cuba-playing-the-role-of-a-dictators-pawn

The New York Times' man in North Korea: Playing the role of dictator's pawn

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-new-york-times-man-in-north-korea-playing-the-role-of-dictators-pawn

Roger Stone sentenced to 40 months as possible retrial or pardon looms

Judge Amy Berman Jackson sentenced Roger Stone to 40 months in prison Thursday after the Justice Department recommended a nearly decade long sentence last week before Attorney General William Barr controversially intervened and walked it back. But two big questions remained unresolved: the Republican operative’s pending request for a retrial as well as speculation about a pardon from President Trump, who tweeted a segment from Tucker Carlson's show on Fox News calling for a Stone pardon early Thursday morning.

Stone's lawyers filed a motion for a retrial last week following revelations that the jury forewoman during his trial had a social media history of anti-Trump posts, and the judge hasn't ruled on that yet. If Stone’s long shot challenge is successful, his sentence would be tossed, and the DOJ would have to try him again. The judge shot down a similar previous request. The DOJ’s D.C. office told the court last Monday it recommended Stone receive up to nine years behind bars, but Trump tweeted late that night that he “cannot allow this miscarriage of justice!” The DOJ reversed itself Tuesday, and the four line prosecutors on the case withdrew. The DOJ said its decision was made before Barr was aware of Trump’s position, and Trump denied placing pressure on the agency. The department walked back the “unduly high” sentence recommendation, suggesting three to four years instead but leaving it up to the judge.

In response, more than a thousand ex-DOJ prosecutors from Republican and Democratic administrations, including Democratic donors, officials named in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act abuse report, CNN and MSNBC analysts, and a lawyer for Fusion GPS, signed a petition calling on Barr to resign because of the “damage” he’d done to the DOJ’s reputation. “Congratulations to Attorney General Bill Barr for taking charge of a case that was totally out of control and perhaps should not have even been brought,” Trump tweeted about Stone last week. The message prompted Barr to push back against Trump publicly last Thursday. “I have a problem with some of, some of the tweets,” he said, adding that Trump's public commentary about the DOJ's ongoing cases “make it impossible for me to do my job.” “The Stone case was prosecuted while I was attorney general — and I supported it,” Barr added. “I thought that was a righteous prosecution. And I was happy that he was convicted.”

Stone, a self-described “dirty trickster” and longtime confidant to Trump, was swept up in special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation and arrested last January. He was found guilty in November on five separate counts of lying to the House Intelligence Committee during its investigation into Russian interference about his alleged outreach to WikiLeaks, in addition to one count that he “corruptly influenced, obstructed, and impeded” the congressional investigation and another for attempting to “corruptly persuade” a witness’s congressional testimony.

The controversy surrounding Stone juror Tomeka Hart, a former Democratic congressional candidate, kicked into high gear when it was revealed she shared anti-Trump posts on social media, and Stone’s lawyers filed a motion for a retrial last week. Hart tweeted about Trump dozens of times and was critical of the president and his supporters, with some comments regarding the targets of Mueller’s investigation. Hart’s tweets include a few about Russian interference and allegations of Trump-Russia collusion. “Ignoring the numerous indictments, guilty pleas, and convictions of people in 45’s inner-circle, some Republicans are asserting that the Mueller investigation was a waste of time because he hasn’t found evidence of…” Hart wrote in a March 2019 tweet. A transcript of the under-oath examination of the jury pool in November shows Hart promised to make her judgment based on the facts. Stone’s lawyers did not move to strike Hart from the pool at the time.

Jackson said she’d rule on the retrial motion after sentencing. She previously presided over a number of other spinoff cases from Mueller’s two-year investigation, including against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, former Trump campaign deputy turned government witness Rick Gates, and former Obama White House counsel Greg Craig.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/roger-stone-sentenced-to-40-months-as-possible-retrial-or-pardon-looms

Roger Stone jury selection transcript, Nov. 5, 2019

https://www.scribd.com/document/446913716/Roger-Stone-jury-selection-transcript-Nov-5-2019

>>8196177

Well if that doesn't speak volumes, I don't know what does, Hilarious!