Funny how when their own guy's at risk, the NYT's presses go quiet.

Yes, it’s good to know that NY Times reporter Stephen Farrell was rescued from Afghani militants who had kidnapped him and a translator.

But, funny how when it’s their guy that’s at risk, the presses go quiet.  The rules change.

Until now, the kidnapping had been kept quiet by The Times and most other news organizations out of concern for the men’s safety. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/world/asia/10rescue.html?_r=1&hp

Remember last year when the NYT refused requests by CIA Director Michael Hayden and an attorney representing the operative who interrogated the man who masterminded America’s 9/11 tradgedy?

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.”  http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mick-wright/2008/06/22/new-york-times-outs-cia-operative

Farrell’s translator and a British commando lost their lives in the raid.