NYT outs real CIA operative. Nobody seems to care.

In this article, the NYT outed an active CIA agent after they requested that he not be. www.nytimes.com...

It was 18 months after the 9/11 attacks, and the invasion of Iraq was giving Muslim extremists new motives for havoc. If anyone knew about the next plot, it was Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. The interrogator, Deuce Martinez, a soft-spoken analyst who spoke no Arabic

In an editor's note, they said that they didn't believe they were doing anything wrong. I just note the irony, that when journalists want to do something, they can rationalize it anyway and get away with it. After all, they do control the flow of information. nytimes.com...

Editors’ Note Article Tools Sponsored By By THE NEW YORK TIMES Published: June 22, 2008 The Central Intelligence Agency asked The New York Times not to publish the name of Deuce Martinez, an interrogator who questioned Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and other high-level Al Qaeda prisoners, saying that to identify Mr. Martinez would invade his privacy and put him at risk of retaliation from terrorists or harassment from critics of the agency.

The newspaper seriously considered the requests from Mr. Martinez and the agency. But in view of the experience of other government employees who have been named publicly in books and published articles or who have themselves chosen to go public, the newspaper made the decision to print the name.

I really don't see how everyone can be up in arms over a woman who had pictures of herself fin Vanity fair as a "secret agent", yet nobody cares about this man and his now ruined life. Hes got to live in fear everyday because he was actually a secret agent. Now AQ knows exactly who he is. Good job NYT!

I think it just goes to show that what we saw during the Plame "scandal" was nothing more than political theater. Its yet another example of how democrats and the media don't seem to mind when its their own perpetrating.

[edit on 17-7-2008 by Dronetek]

Just another prime example of the hypocrisy of the left. Bet this thread gets buried by the majority of Socialists on this board.

reply to post by Dronetek



The New York Times is the media arm of terrorists in America, imo.

So many here whined and cried about Cheney, Rove, and others over the Valerie Plame incident. Those same apologists will now appear and praise the NYT as "patriotic whistleblowers".

The double standard is staggering.

Gen. Michael V. Hayden, director of the C.I.A., and a lawyer representing Mr. Martinez asked that he not be named in this article, saying that the former interrogator believed that the use of his name would invade his privacy and might jeopardize his safety. The New York Times, noting that Mr. Martinez had never worked undercover and that others involved in the campaign against Al Qaeda have been named in news articles and books, declined the request.

Hrumph. Actions that jeopardize the safety of anyone are of course questionable. The Times has a good point here about the fact that he's never worked undercover; that makes a distinction between this and the Plame incident.

If there were truly an issue of illegality in disclosure here, WHY didn't Hayden do more than 'request' the Times' cooperation?

Also, IMO, please everyone read the article! There's lots of startling stuff contained therein, perhaps worthy of a separate ATS thread. While the issue of this thread is important, it shouldn't distract from the main point of the article itself.


Edit to add: Ah, there is a separate ATS thread. Didn't get much attention, though:

Inside a 9/11 Mastermind's Interrogation


[edit on 17-7-2008 by Ian McLean]

You know, the silence on this is pretty deafening. The next time you see a story about Plame, realize its nothing more than political theater.

Originally posted by Dronetek
nothing more than political theater.

I, too, am surprised there's not more opinion expressed on this subject....

Has this been discussed in the media, beyond the NYT? Any new angles?