Posted on 06/22/2008 8:49:33 AM PDT by TexasCajun
In an astonishing stroke of irony, the New York Times has outed the name of the CIA operative who interrogated 9/11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, over the objections of CIA Director Michael V. Hayden and a lawyer representing the operative.
Agency officials and legal counsel told the Times that publishing the agent's name would "invade his privacy and put him at risk of retaliation from terrorists or harassment from critics of the agency."
In an Editor's Note linked from the story on KSM's interrogation, the Times defended its decision by stating that "other government employees" had been "named publicly in books and published articles" or had chosen to go public themselves, by explaining that its policy "is to withhold the name of a news subject only very rarely," and by arguing the operative's name "was necessary for the credibility and completeness of the article."
Times reporter Scott Shane describes his scoop as "the closest look to date beneath the blanket of secrecy that hides the program from terrorists and from critics who accuse the agency of torture."
The CIA apparently believes that by publishing the operative's name, the Times put the agent at risk for retaliatory strikes from such "critics" and terrorists, despite his here-described lack of participation in the agency's "harsh interrogation methods."
Of course, this is just the latest in a long string of Times articles that have leaked classified and guarded information critical to America's security and that of its people and public servants. Alert readers have long since stopped expecting any level of consistency from the same liberal media that was obsessed with the naming of Valerie Plame (though they've been considerably less obsessed with the actual source of Robert Novak's column, Richard Armitage).
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
It wouldn't be the first time they took out their allies.
It’s Cheney’s fault.
When are the owners of the NY Slimes going to be taken away in handcuffs and charged with aiding and abetting terrorists? I’m sick of these traitors.
Hey Pinch'... there's a gallows in your future!
Seriously....what is the current status of sedition laws? Why the Bush Admn doesnt enforce some kind of sedition law is beyond me...if they showed a pair and fought back, his approval ratings might go up to... what, like...25%!
So it’s not about right or wrong, it’s about ‘my’ side and ‘your’ side?
I’m shocked I tell ya, shocked!
I would like to see some jail time for this reporter and others for this treasonous act.
Seriously....what is the current status of sedition laws? Why the Bush Admn doesnt enforce some kind of sedition law is beyond me...if they showed a pair and fought back, his approval ratings might go up to... what, like...25%!
**********************************
As silent as Bush and the Republican party has been lately, I’m convinced they are partying their way out of the White House and could give a rip anymore.
Just wait and see!
They are part of the shadow government. They serve to take down this and any administration of the wrong Party.
Any outrage they ever express is manufactured. Their hate starts with the election. They just look for an excuse to vent.
When the party of preference engages in the same or worse activites, the outrage over such actions are muted.
It isn’t hypocrisy. The outrage was not genuine to begin with. It is merely propaganda.
I am curious as to what convinces you of this. President Bush may be the most focused president ever. A look at the "Day In the Life" thread plus his daily briefing with his security team, etc., adds up to a very full work day spent in the best interest of our country. Of course the MSM gives these activities no publicity, unless there is some phrase that they think mockable, which seldom happens.
President Bush has spent very little time partying while he has been in the White House, much to the dismay of the liberal elite who spent so much time there 93-2001 with a president constantly claiming that he was "going back to work for the American people".
Yes, the story is indeed interesting but to give a real name to the interrogator was totally unnecessary.
Maybe there’s a republican at the New York Times Fitzpatrick could pin this on. Where’s the outrage, as Dole would say? This shows the Plame affair was just a Cheney hunt.
What a stupid title pretending to be 'news'. When does the New York TImes NOT out US operatives?
The New York Times? The rag whose stock has fallen 65% in the past five years? LOL!
Well my dogs, cats and parakeets still favor it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.