« | »

Media Covered Up 2nd NY Times Captive

From the always despicable New York Times:

British reporter for the New York Times Stephen Farrell (L) and Afghan reporter Mohammad Sultan Munadi (R) film and talk to a wounded Afghan man in a hospital in Kunduz in this September 4, 2009 photo.

Seized Times Reporter Is Freed in Afghan Raid That Kills Aide


September 9, 2009

Stephen Farrell, a New York Times reporter held captive by militants in northern Afghanistan, was freed in a military commando raid early Wednesday, but his Afghan interpreter was killed during the rescue effort.

A British commando was also killed in the raid, a senior allied official in Afghanistan said.

Armed gunmen seized Mr. Farrell and his interpreter, Sultan Munadi, on Saturday while they were working in a village south of Kunduz.

An Afghan journalist who spoke to villagers in the area said that civilians were also killed in the firefight to free the journalists. That report could not be independently verified, and details of the operation itself were sketchy.

Mr. Farrell and Mr. Munadi were abducted while they were reporting on the aftermath of NATO airstrikes on Friday that exploded two fuel tankers hijacked by Taliban militants. Afghan officials have said up to 90 people, including many civilians, were killed in the attack, which NATO officials are now investigating

Ms. Chira said Mr. Farrell told her that he had been “extracted” by a commando raid carried out by “a lot of soldiers” in a fierce firefight with his captors…

Until now, the kidnapping had been kept quiet by The Times and most other news media organizations out of concern for the men’s safety.

“We feared that media attention would raise the temperature and increase the risk to the captives,” said Bill Keller, the executive editor of The Times. “We’re overjoyed that Steve is free, but deeply saddened that his freedom came at such a cost. We are doing all we can to learn the details of what happened. Our hearts go out to Sultan’s family and to the family of the British commando who gave his life in the rescue.”

The rescue of Mr. Farrell came about 11 weeks after David Rohde, another reporter for The Times, escaped and made his way to freedom after more than seven months of captivity in the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In that case as well, The Times and other news organizations kept Mr. Rohde’s kidnapping silent out of fear for his safety

Lest we forget, The Times and the rest of our media masters flat out refuse to honor the requests of other military families who request that their the capture of their sons not be reported.

Indeed, the Associated Press would not even refrain from publishing the photograph of a dying Marine, even after being begged by his relatives and the Secretary Of Defense, Mr. Gates himself.

Just as the New York Times delighted in showing in publishing a video and photos of a us soldier dying back in January 2007.

But when it’s one of their own (who are usually only there to hurt our troops and their mission) no effort is spared to suppress the news.

The Times even bragged about their months long collaboration with Wikipedia to keep news of Mr. Rohde’s kidnapping out of Wikipedia’s pages.

But any secret that can hurt our soldiers or our national security in general gets front page above the fold treatment from the Treason Times.

And speaking of gross hypocrisy:

An Afghan journalist who spoke to villagers in the area said that civilians were also killed in the firefight to free the journalists. That report could not be independently verified…

Other media outlets, such as Reuters are reporting "at least one civilian killed" as an established fact. And, you can be sure that if one of its reporters had not been involved, The Times would have put the the death of these innocent civilians at the hands of our bloodthirsty soldiers in their headline and lede.

After all, as the article notes, that’s the only reason the reporter, Mr. Farrell, was in the area in the first place. He was their to milk the reports from the locals that civilians had been killed in the German-order NATO air raid.

Otherwise, the New York Times cannot be bothered to report the war news from Afghanistan or stories of the brave soldiers who are giving their lives to protect our nation.

Meanwhile, here is just one example of how the Associated Press and the shameless hypocrites at the New York Times protect the news about the capture of non New York Times reporters:

U.S. Soldier Captured in Afghanistan

July 2, 2009

KABUL (AP) — An American soldier, who disappeared after walking off his base in eastern Afghanistan with three Afghan counterparts, is believed captured, officials said Thursday.

Spokeswoman Capt. Elizabeth Mathias said the soldier disappeared Tuesday.

”We understand him to be have been captured by militant forces. We have all available resources out there looking for him and hopefully providing for his safe return,” Mathias said.

Mathias did not provide details on the soldier, the location where he was captured or the circumstances

”We are not providing further details to protect the soldier’s well-being,” she said…

The soldier was noticed missing during a routine check of the unit on Tuesday and was first listed as ”duty status whereabouts unknown,” a U.S. defense official said on condition of anonymity.

It wasn’t until Thursday that officials said publicly that he was missing and described him as ”believed captured.” Details of such incidents are routinely held very tightly by the military as it works to retrieve a missing or captured soldier without giving away any information to captors.

Initial reports indicated that the soldier was off duty at the time he went missing, having just completed a shift, the official said on condition of anonymity because details are still sketchy

And in a matter of hours we knew everything there was to know about this captured solider, his name, his hometown. We were even told he may have been drunk.

And never mind that his family had begged the media to keep such details secret.

The public has the right to know, after all.

Unless it puts precious reporters’ lives at risk.

This article was posted by Steve on Wednesday, September 9th, 2009. Comments are currently closed.

2 Responses to “Media Covered Up 2nd NY Times Captive”

  1. ilzito guacamolito says:

    ~ But any secret that can hurt our soldiers or our national security in general gets front page above the fold treatment from the Treason Times. ~
    Amen that. The NYT could not die soon enough.

  2. catie says:

    I am not at all sure the NYT gives a rats behind that a British Commando and the Afghan interpreter were killed. I would venture a guess they really don’t.
    We don’t know the circumstances surrounding the US Soldier who was captured do we? Yet the NYT felt the need to publish the 411 even though his family asked not to. Whatever happened, when he comes home (God willing) he will be dealt with but let’s get him home first. As for the Times the sooner you go away, the better.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »