Hypocrite Of The Year Award
By Gary Aldrich (01/08/04)
My candidate for “Hypocrite of 2002” has to go to Time magazine for suddenly discovering the dangers and benefits that come from whistleblowing. The cover of a recent issue features their “Persons of the Year” – three women who blew the whistle on corporate and government incompetence or wrongdoing.
I don’t want to discourage whistleblowers or those who choose to ride on their coattails; surfacing the truth about corporate and government wrongdoing is usually considered a good thing.
But I find it difficult to understand how we can turn truth “on” and “off” like a switch.
Not long ago this country went through a wrenching period which ended in a president’s impeachment. Not only was Bill Clinton chasing skirts in the Oval Office, but he and his administration were gutting national security safeguards to the point that we – as a nation – were seriously vulnerable to espionage and terrorist attacks.
Now there were those who tried to blow the whistle on Bill Clinton and his merry band, but they were attacked repeatedly by the media, including Time. After Monica Lewinsky became a worldwide embarrassment to our country, Time dutifully reported that there was a “Vast Right Wing” conspiracy hellbent on Clinton’s destruction. They downplayed numerous abuses and said it was “all about sex.” Somehow, we “Clinton Haters” were only out to get Bill and Hillary.
They actually reported this with a straight face alongside various graphs and photographs showing how the conspiracy worked. In the Time version of events, it was not important that the serious allegations about Clinton were true. What was important was the appearance, or the personality, or the political leaning of the whistleblowers. Thus, truth tellers like Linda Tripp were demonized while the shocking conduct of a president was downplayed as a loveable rogue’s personal preferences.
Lost in the wall of noise about “what is sex” and what is “is” was an obvious pattern of misconduct on the part of the President of the United States, including the dismantling of national security safeguards previously mentioned. Apparently to Time, there is a time when it’s appropriate to talk about national security and a time when it is not appropriate. Could it be that Time is more interested in FBI incompetence during a Republican administration – in other words, when it’s George W. Bush’s FBI and not Bill Clinton’s FBI?
But consider that if the warnings about national security, beginning in 1993, had been taken seriously and not written off as the rants of the Right Wing, it might have been possible to head off the horrific terrorist attacks in 2001. As early as the summer of 1993, national security professionals were sounding warnings about the Clinton administration’s incompetence in protecting this nation. Today, there are few who would argue that, for whatever reason, Bill Clinton dropped the ball on Osama bin Laden big time.
Despite the efforts of many to get the attention of Time and other media, this developing story was ignored. They only seemed interested in joining the White House in the most remarkable smear campaign to ever rain down on those who were simply and courageously trying to warn the nation of a dangerous administration. Regardless of the reasons for Clinton’s incompetence in national security, Time had a duty – at least insofar as they share the same real estate as the rest of us – to play the story straight.
After all, Time can be blown up as easily as the rest of us, can’t they? But instead, they chose to become part of the Clinton “spin” machine. Is it sufficient to conclude they were just unable to connect the dots? I believe the evidence is so overwhelming on this score that not even Inspector Clouseau could have missed the mountain of clues.
But, when my best-selling book, “Unlimited Access: An FBI Agent Inside the Clinton White House” was published, Time had a field day – along with the rest of the national media – destroying my credibility on the say-so of the Clinton White House. My book was 98% about the national security breakdown inside the Clinton White House and 2% about the ill manners of some liberal Democrats. Nevertheless, national media like Time scoffed at the well-documented claims of a senior FBI Agent who had been working in the Clinton White House, full time, for more than two years.
They preferred to believe that somehow I had lost my mind. History unfolded, however, has vindicated me. The lack of “DNA” evidence for Clinton’s reckless womanizing, as described in my book, is hardly ever mentioned these days. What is recalled is that I was a serious whistleblower who tried to surface wrongdoing, abuse, and corruption occurring in the White House right under the nose of the national media.
Back then, Time thought differently about whistleblowing. They went on to ignore or demonize every single whistleblower that bravely stepped forward to describe Clinton’s shameful conduct or Clinton administration corruption. Most of these whistleblowers were women, like RTC investigator Jean Lewis, or Linda Tripp, or Juanita Broaddrick, or Paula Jones, or Kathleen Willey, or Gennifer Flowers. All were attacked and dismissed as bimbos and liars. Time had it wrong: Clinton was the liar.
But these women will never grace the cover of Time magazine, even if the passage of time has proven them to be correct in their claims. You see, media giants like Time are so corrupt that they actually believe they don’t need to admit their mistakes.
Slanting or mis-reporting the news is a serious corruption because it can lead the general public and political leaders on dangerous and time-wasting wild goose chases. The fact that Time is politicized or is a “one-party” magazine is no excuse for lying.
I cannot wait for the first Time magazine whistleblower to step out of the pages and tell the truth about how corrupted Time magazine is. I look forward to that glorious day.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Gary Aldrich
