BIDEN AND THE TALIBAN DIPLOMATS

 

                                BY BILL JUNEAU

                                               The incompetent team of President Joe Biden is now declaring that the 20-year war in Afghanistan is finally over and that the drawdown was an "extraordinary success."  Future problems dealing with Afghanistan will now be in the hands of American  and Taliban diplomats sitting at the negotiating table.

                                 Despite the Taliban's recorded track record as a brutal, blood-thirsty regime composed of Islamic terrorists acting in accord with Sharia law, a Taliban spokesman has promised that the tribe is rolling back its unsavory practices and is adopting  a code of civility.  In the future, he has assured the dim, gullible Biden, Afghan citizens' rights will be respected and women will be welcomed in schools; and  Al Qaeda and Isis-K will be proscribed from hatching any new plans inside Afghanistan to attack the United States and kill Americans. 

                                 So who will be at the diplomatic table?  Secretary of State Antony Blinken confirmed that Taliban representatives are terrorists, and the organization  remains designated as a Global Terrorist regime, but he seems to believe that there will even be "inclusivity" in the government, and he says he takes them at their word until he sees differently.  

                                 The principle Taliban negotiator is the head of the Haqqani Network, which is a savage group responsible for the deaths of thousands. Reportedly, Siraj Haqqani, the son of mad dog killer  Jalaluddin Haqqani, is the current leader of the network. Siraj is considered more extreme than his father who died in 2018.  He maintains close ties with Al-Qaeda criminals who orchestrated the 9-11 attack in New York. The FBI has placed a $5 million bounty on the head of Siraj Haqqani who now has the title of Minister of the Interior.  

                                 Other "diplomats" at the Biden talk-table are four members of the so-called "Taliban Five."  They have been identified as Mullah Noorullah Noori, acting minister of borders and tribal affairs;  Abdul Haq Waist, acting director of  intelligence; Mullah Khairullah Khairkhwa, acting minister of information and broadcasting; and  Mullah Mohammad Fazil, deputy defense minister.  The fifth member is Mohammad Nabi Omari, who has been appointed governor of Khost Province in eastern Afghanistan. 

                                 The five terrorists were released from the Guantanamo prison in 2014 in exchange for the Taliban delivering back to the United States Army Sgt. Beau Berdgahl who had deserted his unit in 2009 and surrendered to the Taliban.  Bergdahl was released  after President Obama okayed the exchange and then welcomed home the traitorous soldier in a Rose Garden reception. The "Taliban Five" returned to the battlefields in Afghanistan. 

                               Former, Congressman,  CIA director and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, a high-profile Democrat,  cautions the Biden administration that it is unlikely that that tiger will ever change its spots. The Taliban goal is to kill Americans and Panetta said that it is his guess that Afghanistan will again become a safe haven for Al Qaeda and other terrorists plotting future attacks on  American infidels.  

                           Secretary Blinken, 59, was appointed as the country's principle diplomat by President Biden last January.  Recently, he  appeared on consecutive days as a witness before  the House and the Senate Committees on Foreign Affairs which is looking into America's disastrous Afghanistan pullout.

                                    During the committee hearings,  with each senator and congressman given five minutes to comment and ask questions,  Brinken was excoriated by GOP senators and House representatives, and even by some Democrats for his incompetence and the unplanned exit from Afghanistan. 

                                     Sen. John Barrrasso of Wyoming quoted President Biden as saying that the evacuation was an "extraordinary success."  "That statement was," Barrasso asserted, "the lie of the 21st century.  It was dishonest, and anyone believing it has to be delusional."  He noted that Americans with passports have been left behind, along with thousands of friendly Afghanis who sided with the USA during the war years.  Biden's promise to bring home all Americans has gone up in smoke; it was another of his lies, he said.                                      

                                       Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky noted that $64 million in humanitarian relief funds were being sent to Afghanistan and most likely will be pocketed by the Taliban. Will the money ever reach those that are in need?  Blinken said that he had assurances from the Taliban that it will not interfere, and if double dealing is detected the money will be stopped. The secretary acknowledged that the Taliban remains designated as a global terrorist group by the state department.

                                         It was "unforgivable" that Bagram Air Base was abandoned and that the Taliban was able to help themselves to property worth $83 billion dollars, consisting of thousands of vehicles, helicopters, tanks, guns, and GI clothing. Blinken ignored the observation, from Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson, who then asked Blinken, Didn't anyone  in the Biden camp think that "bugging out" might not be such a good idea.  

                                         At one point, the the subject of Afghanistan was sidestepped by Senator James Risch of Ohio who  demanded that Blinken tell him "who is telling Biden what to do."  Who is behind the curtain telling Biden when he can answer a question?  Who cuts off Biden's mike when he does not want him to speak?  Who speaks for him?

                                         The bureaucratic Blinken fidgeted and said that the President speaks for himself and makes the decisions. No one tells him what to do.  I know, he said, as I have been with him for more than 20 years and dealt with him when he was a Senator and then a vice president.  It was all his decision to pull out--period.

                                              xxx

                                    

                                      

WHO SHOT ASHLI BABBITT--AND WHY?

 

   

                                           By Bill Juneau  

                                                  The Biden Department of Justice and the ineffective and lackadaisical FBI have done their best to keep the fatal shooting of Ashli Babbitt by a Capitol policeman out of the headlines. That has become the Democrats' game plan now that they are in control: disdain or ignore Republican complaints. With the help of the acquiescent media, it has not been all that hard. 

                                                  The shooting simply needed to be hushed up like a nasty rumor. It contradicted the liberal declaration  that when a policeman shoots someone, it is because the officer is a white supremacist and his victim is an innocent Black.

                                           So in order to make sure that the Babbitt shooting did not undo a summer of Black Lives Matter protests, the identity of the quick-draw policeman was withheld. The excuse given was that he needed to be protected from undeserved scorn and ridicule for "just doing his job as he was trained to do." 

                                                     Leading Democrats and the tethered and malleable main street media reporters were fully on board with the riddance and burial of the Ashli Babbitt shooting  on Jan. 6 when protesters pushed their way into the Capitol building complaining of the invalidity of the Joe Biden election as the nation's 46th President.  The way the popular story goes, if anyone was to blame, it was the protester, Ms. Babbitt, a 35-year-old Air Force veteran who was inspired by the evil Republican President, Donald Trump. 

                                                     All the public needed to know, decreed the Justice department and police officials and Democratic members of  Congress, was that Ms. Babbitt was fatally shot by a policeman who was protecting members of Congress---and doing his job. After ordering the protester to back off, and fearing for his safety and the safety of government officials,  the Capitol officer fired a single shot from his Glock-22, taking down the unarmed woman who died shortly thereafter.  

                                                      Last April, The Justice Department said that the unnamed officer wouldn't be criminally charged in connection with Babbitt's death, and the US Capitol Police said later that he wouldn't face any internal discipline. Their rather sketchy conclusion was based upon what they called a full investigation of the incident and review of records and interviews with witnesses. 

                                                     This has been the Washington posture for the last 8 months since the shooting and riots,  but complaints and questions persisted from citizens and organizations dissatisfied with the story of an anonymous shooter. Finally, after the persistent opposition's  demands reached a crescendo, the D.C. shooter stepped forth and identified himself as Lt. Michael Byrd. On Aug. 27, he was interviewed on NBC by  Lester Holt, a veteran newsman who might be considered a loyal friend to the party in control  these days. 

                                                    Viewers finally learned that Lt. Byrd was an African American and Ashli Babbitt was a white woman, and that the face-off contradicted the Democrats' oft-used narrative of how innocent blacks are always the victims of white cops. 

                                                       In the interview, Byrd, 53,  a Capitol policeman for 28 years, said that the woman he shot was attempting to enter a barricaded room through a broken glass partition. Byrd said he did not regret his actions, though he called firing his weapon a “last resort.”

                                                        “I followed my training, and I spent countless years preparing for such a moment,” he said, noting that to him in that moment Babbitt “was posing a threat” to lawmakers in the House Chamber.

                                                      Terry Roberts, an attorney for the Babbitt family, said that the long interval before the shooter was identified was pure politics.   In an interview, he condemned the US Capitol Police for never publicly naming Byrd, which he said was because Lt. Byrd is black and Ms. Babbitt was white--and unarmed.   

                                                        Byrd had a record of being careless with handling guns and should not have been allowed to carry a pistol, said Roberts.  In February of 2019, Byrd had left his loaded weapon on a counter in a visitor center washroom in the capitol.  The Glock-22 had  no manual safety to prevent unintended firing.  The gun had been found by another policeman, and Lt. Byrd apologized for his absentminded conduct,  but reportedly was never disciplined for the infraction since no one was hurt.   

                                                      Roberts said that Byrd was not justified in killing Babbitt,  because he had no reason to believe the unarmed woman  posed a threat to himself or others. Byrd fired the only shot at the Capitol on January 6, and Babbitt was the only person there killed by gunfire that day.

                                                     "You know, we don’t shoot protesters in this country unless they’re an immediate threat to somebody,” Roberts said

                                                 The lawyer has said that he intends to file a multi-million dollar wrongful death lawsuit against Byrd and the Capitol police.  A lawsuit, with depositions and discovery, could well open up the behind-the-scenes maneuvering to shield the full story of the Babbitt shooting.  

                                                XXX