Has the American Media
Gone Mad?
Frank A. Jones
6/6/05
After all these years, the identity of Deep Throat was revealed by W. Mark Felt in Vanity Fair--after all he is that man labeled Deep Throat--and the American media went mad when they sought out robbers, thieves, liars, criminals, etc., for their opinions of W. Mark Felt's ethics.
What sense does this make? People like Gordon Liddy, James Colson, etc., whom the media went to, were adjudicated by a court of law as liars, criminals, burglars, etc. These men, were they black, would not have a voice, but would probably still be in prison for burglary and an assortment of other crimes. Yet instead of treating them as they are, outcasts from society who have violated the stated standards of decency and acceptable behavior in this society, the American media sought them out as if they were men of the cloth--men with scruples that a society should respect. And not failing to rise to the occasion, these crocks and criminals stepped up to the microphone as if they had a word from God to a needy America, making the most audacious and unbelievable declarations on W. Mark Felt's ethics.
Maybe
something is wrong with my way of seeing the world, but why would you go
to a podiatrist about the condition of a person's mind? In other words,
why would the media seek the opinion of liars about someone who
tells the difficult truth? Gordon Liddy is no one's ethicist or moralist;
Chuck Colson is a confessed liar who has, assuming his word is now true, turned to
Christ and is now a believer in truth. But his word on Felt was
anything but Christ-like. His words were not a strong endorsement of the
one man who was telling the truth, when all about him were lying,
including Colson. And his words should have been respectful of a
truth-teller, as a now believer in Christ, who
is the truth. What his words did was to make a case for calling into question
his commitment to Christianity.
But the other gang of criminals, thugs, and thieves the media dished up
for the American people lived up to their billing: they were duplicitous,
hypocritical, and deceptive, playing the part of men
of worth and knowledge on national TV. And the media was doing its
part as well: It presented to the American people a worthless gang
of liars and represented them as though they were models of behavior.
This is not new for the media; it is just another unabashed vulgarity of what it has always done. We should never forget, these were the same type of men that now inhabit the White House and the Pentagon. They make lying pronouncements, yet because the media is embedded (how ironic) that media will never say: "These are lie!" in the face of open lies.
And we should not forget that these are the same types of people who brought us Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq, Iraq's connection to terrorists and Osama Bin Laden, Abu Graih, there are no atrocities of war by American soldiers, and now, the news that the Iraqi insurgents are slowing down! Lie after lie; Vietnam, sliced and diced all over again--people we should trust?
This mad media put forth these liars of the Nixon era speaking as experts and ethicists on the behavior of W. Mark Felt--the only man so repulsed by the abuses of power that he could not hold his peace.
Why would the media call
out these hatchet men and assassins to do what they have done in the past?
They were adjudicated criminals, and in calling them to the national
stage, the media showed themselves complicit in carrying on this fraud of
their ethics and worth as men of opinions that anyone should regard.
