NY Times ‘Report’ on How Taliban Is Doing on the Women’s Rights Front Must Be Seen to Be Believed

AP Photo/Rahmat Gul

Last week, the Biden State Department affirmed that the United States was in agreement with the UN Security Council’s official statement on Afghanistan which, in part, demanded the Taliban respect women’s rights and called on the new government (which they didn’t expressly refer to by name) to be an “inclusive” one where women got a seat at the table.

The statement was issued one day after the Taliban received the endorsement of Hamas, a noted pro-women’s rights terrorist group.

Linda Thomas-Greenfield, who is the United States Ambassador to the UN, also went on record as saying the country stood by the UN’s “strongly worded press statement” urging the Taliban honor the rights of women and to abide by humanitarian law.

As it turns out, “strongly worded” statements don’t appear to have deterred the Taliban from doing some evil things to women since their takeover over the country. We reported on this not-so-shocking news a week ago, but the New York Times provided an update just today on the Taliban/women’s rights front that has to be seen to be believed. Check the framing:

“Early signs have not been promising”? Gee, ya think?

In my humble opinion, this is one of those stories where we actually needed something a little more, ahem, strongly worded that what we got out of the New York Times. The story itself wasn’t much better:

In the days since the Taliban swept back into control, their leaders have insisted that this time will be different. Women, they say, will be allowed to work. Girls will be free to attend school. At least within the confines of their interpretation of Islam.

But early signs have not been promising, and that pattern continued on Tuesday with a statement from a Taliban spokesman that women should stay home, at least for now. Why? Because some of the militants have not yet been trained not to hurt them, he said.

The spokesman, Zabihullah Mujahid, called it a “temporary” policy intended to protect women until the Taliban could ensure their safety.

[…]

His statement echoed comments from Ahmadullah Waseq, the deputy of the Taliban’s cultural affairs committee, who told The New York Times this week that the Taliban had “no problem with working women,” as long as they wore hijabs.

Did you catch the bit about “within the confines of their interpretation of Islam”? I’d like to know what the Times’ interpretation of strict Islam is where it doesn’t involve punishing women for standing up for themselves and dressing and thinking differently.

Also, what type of punishment happens to women who dare to go against the Taliban by not wearing hijabs? Unfortunately, it appears the punishment is death:

While Afghan women are “temporarily” tucked away in their homes as a precautionary measure and stuff, are Taliban terrorists going to be “trained” not to beat or kill them for not wearing a hijab or for wearing clothing “leaders” find go against strict Islamic teachings? Also, how does one go about “training” grown men, most of who are at least 20 or older and have had it drilled into them to punish women who step out of line, to suddenly start respecting women?

I anxiously await the next update from the New York Times, where hopefully they’ll be a little blunter in their assessment beyond stating that things so far “haven’t been promising.” If they’re going to be brutally honest, they’ll inform readers that the Taliban, quite frankly, are full of [word that rhymes with “spit”] and have no intentions of honoring their so-called “word” when it comes to protecting and respecting women.

Related –>> Watch: Fed up Afghan Woman Absolutely Goes off on Joe Biden by Telling It Like It Is