• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

I don’t like to spend my time chronicling the lies of the Barack Obama media machine.

But sometimes it is imperative in this ugly age of derivative, copycat, gotcha-style, blame-the-messenger pseudo-journalism – where anyone sitting in the comfort of their easy chair thinks he has license to smear the few who actually take boots-on-the-ground reporting seriously.

This is one of those moments.

It’s no secret to anyone that much of the establishment press in the U.S., and even worldwide, is little more than an amen chorus for the man in the White House.

And there is a concerted effort under way, among some armchair pundits, to defame one of the most courageous young journalists in the world who happens to work for me.

His name is Aaron Klein and he serves as Jerusalem bureau chief for WND. In that role, he has set a new standard of daring and bravery, interviewing in person some of the most dangerous terrorists in the world. He even wrote a book about his experiences over the last several years – “Schmoozing With Terrorists.”

Lately, however, Klein has produced a number of scoops about Wikipedia’s predilection for censoring negative facts about Obama, particularly those dealing with his questionable eligibility status to serve as president.

When Klein’s story about Wikipedia editors quickly deleting any factual contributions about the eligibility issue broke March 8, and began attracting international press attention, the defamation merchants went into high gear.

First, a fulltime anti-WND blogger named Terry Krepel, who also works for George Soros-backed Media Matters, put his spin on Klein’s scoop – claiming falsely that Klein himself was the Wikipedia user dubbed Jerusalem21. In fact, Klein’s Jerusalem bureau research assistant is Jerusalem21.

Oooooooh. Big scandal, right?

To verify allegations that Wikipedia quickly censors anti-Obama edits, Klein had his researcher do test postings – and sure enough, he confirmed the allegations. This is what investigative reporters do all the time. As I said, big scandal, right?

But the Obama media amen chorus pretended it was one.

Soon, the notoriously insidious Huffington Post got into the act – reprinting Krepel’s crap.

Well, what would one expect, right?

Normally no one pays too much attention to Krepel, recognizing him for what he is – an ideological crusader masquerading as a press watchdog, determined to expose the slightest break in the ranks of the Obama media amen chorus.

However, this was to be Krepel’s 15 minutes of infamy. Other low-life bloggers began to pick up the pseudo-scandal – including one previously unknown scribe named Owen Thomas and another obscure scrivener, David Weigel.

Again, no harm no foul. Defamation isn’t really an issue if nobody reads or takes seriously the slanderer.

But the libelous shots at Klein didn’t stop there.

Now the story was going international – with the Sydney Morning Herald joining the fray.

Yet another byline – but all the same false accusations. Now the wrongheaded, ideologically driven speculation of one angry blogger had mushroomed into an international incident – the smearing of a real reporter, perhaps the best and most aggressive Middle East correspondent in the business.

What’s odd about this tempest in a teapot is that even if what Krepel and company had written were true, that Klein himself had made the submissions on Wikipedia and reported on it, what is the big deal? What is the scandal? What would be wrong with doing first-hand research of this kind and reporting on it?

Nothing.

But that’s not what happened.

As I mentioned earlier, Klein’s research assistant made the Wikipedia submissions for one month. Klein observed as criticism on all kinds of issues was scrubbed. This can easily be confirmed by simply going through thousands of attempted edits to Obama’s Wikipedia page and seeing how a large number of critical ones are erased, including edits referencing third-party media sources.

Further, Klein had independent confirmation of others making similar submissions with the same result – deletion by Obama’s Wikipedia palace guard.

WND has been inundated with e-mails from readers with their own stories about how they were barred from entering legitimate information to Obama’s page.

I tell you all this because, in my business, reputation and credibility constitute our lifeblood. And, I know from personal experience that when your reputation and credibility is being gang-raped like this – even by people with no reputation or credibility of their own – it causes real damage.

I’ve seen it before. I’ve been a victim of it.

I’ve seen another fine reporter on my team, Jerome Corsi, targeted by the same breed of Lilliputians.

I don’t want to see it any more. However, it goes with the territory. When you hit the bull’s-eye, as Aaron Klein did with the Wikipedia scoop, you’ve got to expect it – and endure it. And that’s just what Aaron Klein did as always – got the story exactly right.

By the way, hat tip to some members of the media who aren’t afraid to tell the truth – even if it reflects negatively on the most powerful man in the world. The London Telegraph did an excellent report on the Wikipedia scam. Matt Drudge boldly, as always, linked to Klein’s story. And Fox News deserves credit for reporting the facts.

 


  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.