US spokesperson loses temper with RT journalist, AP journalist steps in to defend her

[XXL]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-spokesperson-loses-temper-with-rt-journalist-over-syria-bombing-questions-a7423146.html

US spokesperson loses temper with Russia Today journalist over Syria bombings: 'Go ask your own government'

Heated exchange during daily State Department briefing led AP reporter to intervene 

 

 

A US government spokesperson appears to have lost his temper while being questioned about the situation in Syria by a reporter from state-owned outlet Russia Today. Correspondent Gayane Chichakyan asked spokesperson John Kirby to give details on the bombing of “five hospitals and at least one mobile clinic” in Syria which he cited reliable aid organisations had reported as targeted during renewed bombing of rebel areas by the Syrian government and its Russian allies this week.

The bombings have been confirmed by several agencies and monitors as having taken place. Mr Kirby, who said he did not have the specifics in front of him, told the reporter after repeated requests for specific names and locations of the hospitals to direct her questions to the aid organisations themselves, or the Russian Defence Ministry itself.

“You work for Russia Today, right? Isn’t that your agency?” he asked Ms Chichakyan. 

“And so why shouldn’t you ask your government the same kinds of questions that you’re standing here asking me?... Why don’t you question them about their information and where they’re getting it? And why don’t you question your own defence ministry?” he said. Ms Chichakyan repeated that she would need specifics to put any allegations to other sources when the Associated Press’s Matt Lee intervened.

“Please be careful about saying 'your defence ministry and things like that. She's a journalist, she's just like the rest of us are,” he said to Mr Kirby.

“From a state-owned outlet,” Mr Kirby replied. “I'm not going to put Russia Today on the same level with the rest of you who are representing independent media outlets.”

Russia Today later said that a representative from the US State Department had apologised to Ms Chichakyan and provided her with the details she had requested on the alleged hospital bombings which “did not lay blame on any party for the alleged strikes.”

 

 

Question at the 1min mark

Hissy fit at 01:34

AP journalist at 03:22

 

 

[ULIZOS]

omg I LOVE her 

[ULIZOS]

"Ma'am, once again, you're wrong." 

[karbatal]

love it!!!! If we don't protect each other, journalism is ruined. Or more ruined. 

[GOD]

Don't lose heart 

[Raider of the lost Ark]

2 hours ago, karbatal said:

love it!!!! If we don't protect each other, journalism is ruined. Or more ruined. 

I'm sorry, from my perspective it's time for the "mainstream media" to make a stand against this kind of "journalism" RT and other outlets provide. THEY are ruining journalism, they are the reason why people have a huge issue with what is written today. Even in well respected publications. Publications that exist for decades and have been a beacon of journalism for ages in doing groundbreaking work. The AP guy made a mistake when he called that RT reporter "a journalist like the rest of us". I bet many in the room would beg to differ. Being a journalist and taken the job seriously comes with ethics and those ethics can not be found on RT. It is the propaganda channel of the Russian government. Period. It's a quality news organization on the the same level as "Der Stürmer" was. I appreciate what the US government spokesperson did. Finally someone is calling it by name.

[KalamazooJay]

1 hour ago, Raider of the lost Ark said:

I'm sorry, from my perspective it's time for the "mainstream media" to make a stand against this kind of "journalism" RT and other outlets provide. THEY are ruining journalism, they are the reason why people have a huge issue with what is written today. Even in well respected publications. Publications that exist for decades and have been a beacon of journalism for ages in doing groundbreaking work. The AP guy made a mistake when he called that RT reporter "a journalist like the rest of us". I bet many in the room would beg to differ. Being a journalist and taken the job seriously comes with ethics and those ethics can not be found on RT. It is the propaganda channel of the Russian government. Period. It's a quality news organization on the the same level as "Der Stürmer" was. I appreciate what the US government spokesperson did. Finally someone is calling it by name.

[XXL]

2 hours ago, Raider of the lost Ark said:

I'm sorry, from my perspective it's time for the "mainstream media" to make a stand against this kind of "journalism" RT and other outlets provide. THEY are ruining journalism, they are the reason why people have a huge issue with what is written today. Even in well respected publications. Publications that exist for decades and have been a beacon of journalism for ages in doing groundbreaking work. The AP guy made a mistake when he called that RT reporter "a journalist like the rest of us". I bet many in the room would beg to differ. Being a journalist and taken the job seriously comes with ethics and those ethics can not be found on RT. It is the propaganda channel of the Russian government. Period. It's a quality news organization on the the same level as "Der Stürmer" was. I appreciate what the US government spokesperson did. Finally someone is calling it by name.

I suppose then you take everything the BBC or CNN says at face value. Can you explain to me why Hillary Clinton has praised RT, AlJazeera and China State TV comparing them to the work done by US media? Clinton explicitly said in a Senate committee hearing that US news reporting in particular has become a joke compared to the "thorough and instructive work those multi language channels perform".

Moreover journalists of British and American citizenship that have worked for RT have gone on to work for outlets like the BBC and viceversa. Why would that be if RT is such a threat or an example of poor or biased journalism?

The BBC is a state owned and operated network too but they never get the state media mouthpiece argument levelled at them. They are not automatically the fountain of truth because "it's not Russia".

The US spokesperson displayed an awful attitude regardless of your stance on Russia vs The West, an issue that never ceases to get the oversemplification treatment.

[MeakMaker]

3 hours ago, Raider of the lost Ark said:

I'm sorry, from my perspective it's time for the "mainstream media" to make a stand against this kind of "journalism" RT and other outlets provide. THEY are ruining journalism, they are the reason why people have a huge issue with what is written today. Even in well respected publications. Publications that exist for decades and have been a beacon of journalism for ages in doing groundbreaking work. The AP guy made a mistake when he called that RT reporter "a journalist like the rest of us". I bet many in the room would beg to differ. Being a journalist and taken the job seriously comes with ethics and those ethics can not be found on RT. It is the propaganda channel of the Russian government. Period. It's a quality news organization on the the same level as "Der Stürmer" was. I appreciate what the US government spokesperson did. Finally someone is calling it by name.

This!

Speak the truth Shame the devil, Raider.

[karbatal]

3 hours ago, Raider of the lost Ark said:

I'm sorry, from my perspective it's time for the "mainstream media" to make a stand against this kind of "journalism" RT and other outlets provide. THEY are ruining journalism, they are the reason why people have a huge issue with what is written today. Even in well respected publications. Publications that exist for decades and have been a beacon of journalism for ages in doing groundbreaking work. The AP guy made a mistake when he called that RT reporter "a journalist like the rest of us". I bet many in the room would beg to differ. Being a journalist and taken the job seriously comes with ethics and those ethics can not be found on RT. It is the propaganda channel of the Russian government. Period. It's a quality news organization on the the same level as "Der Stürmer" was. I appreciate what the US government spokesperson did. Finally someone is calling it by name.

There's a place for that and that's not a press conference.  Or should USA journalists be silence now because Trump is a pig? I'm sure that military man answered Fox News. 

[MeakMaker]

24 minutes ago, XXL said:

I suppose then you take everything the BBC or CNN says at face value. Can you explain to me why Hillary Clinton has praised RT, AlJazeera and China State TV comparing them to the work done by US media? Clinton explicitly said in a Senate committee hearing that US news reporting in particular has become a joke compared to the "thorough and instructive work those multi language channels perform".

Moreover journalists of British and American citizenship that have worked for RT have gone on to work for outlets like the BBC and viceversa. Why would that be if RT is such a threat or an example of poor or biased journalism?

The BBC is a state owned and operated network too but they never get the state media mouthpiece argument levelled at them. They are not automatically the fountain of truth because "it's not Russia".

The US spokesperson displayed an awful attitude regardless of your stance on Russia vs The West, an issue that never ceases to get the oversemplification treatment.

I'm sorry but the problem is much bigger than that. The media in our western countries as controversial as it can be is still free to publish whatever they want. In fact as a lot of articles were written to expose Trump during the election campaign we also had many more articles demonising Hillary Clinton. And although BBC is state owned they always give us news that don't necessarily take sides with the UK government.. If anything I always find it to be pretty independent to what's going on despise of who is in charge in the parliament or government. In other words if we are here debating and not agreeing on certain things politically is because we are truly in free countries where freedom of speech is in place. Russia... not so much. In fact by all means correct my ignorance but can you please give me a name of a Russian tv network or news publishing which is currently against Putin regime?

[ULIZOS]

On 12/22/2016 at 9:27 AM, MeakMaker said:

I'm sorry but the problem is much bigger than that. The media in our western countries as controversial as it can be is still free to publish whatever they want. In fact as a lot of articles were written to expose Trump during the election campaign we also had many more articles demonising Hillary Clinton. And although BBC is state owned they always give us news that don't necessarily take sides with the UK government.. If anything I always find it to be pretty independent to what's going on despise of who is in charge in the parliament or government. In other words if we are here debating and not agreeing on certain things politically is because we are truly in free countries where freedom of speech is in place. Russia... not so much. In fact by all means correct my ignorance but can you please give me a name of a Russian tv network or news publishing which is currently against Putin regime?

Like, do you realize that two of us in this thread actually work for the western media?  

I'm absolutely NOT free to publish whatever I want. And if I ever get a little "too controversial" (aka just share cold, hard facts) I will get a call from someone anonymous within the organization asking me to take my article down ASAP.

[spazz]

Fucking crude that spokesman I want to punch him in the face like the bunch of resident evils Obama hired in office

[spazz]

On 22/12/2016 at 11:09 AM, karbatal said:

love it!!!! If we don't protect each other, journalism is ruined. Or more ruined. 

So true 

he defended his career colleagues 

[spazz]

 

[Guest Pud Whacker]

On 12/21/2016 at 4:30 PM, XXL said:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-spokesperson-loses-temper-with-rt-journalist-over-syria-bombing-questions-a7423146.html

US spokesperson loses temper with Russia Today journalist over Syria bombings: 'Go ask your own government'

Heated exchange during daily State Department briefing led AP reporter to intervene 

 

 

A US government spokesperson appears to have lost his temper while being questioned about the situation in Syria by a reporter from state-owned outlet Russia Today. Correspondent Gayane Chichakyan asked spokesperson John Kirby to give details on the bombing of “five hospitals and at least one mobile clinic” in Syria which he cited reliable aid organisations had reported as targeted during renewed bombing of rebel areas by the Syrian government and its Russian allies this week.

The bombings have been confirmed by several agencies and monitors as having taken place. Mr Kirby, who said he did not have the specifics in front of him, told the reporter after repeated requests for specific names and locations of the hospitals to direct her questions to the aid organisations themselves, or the Russian Defence Ministry itself.

“You work for Russia Today, right? Isn’t that your agency?” he asked Ms Chichakyan. 

“And so why shouldn’t you ask your government the same kinds of questions that you’re standing here asking me?... Why don’t you question them about their information and where they’re getting it? And why don’t you question your own defence ministry?” he said. Ms Chichakyan repeated that she would need specifics to put any allegations to other sources when the Associated Press’s Matt Lee intervened.

“Please be careful about saying 'your defence ministry and things like that. She's a journalist, she's just like the rest of us are,” he said to Mr Kirby.

“From a state-owned outlet,” Mr Kirby replied. “I'm not going to put Russia Today on the same level with the rest of you who are representing independent media outlets.”

Russia Today later said that a representative from the US State Department had apologised to Ms Chichakyan and provided her with the details she had requested on the alleged hospital bombings which “did not lay blame on any party for the alleged strikes.”

 

 

Question at the 1min mark

Hissy fit at 01:34

AP journalist at 03:22

 

 

shes fabulous.  shes the pud whacker of journalists.  she CLIPPED HIS LYING ROTTEN TONGUE. 

i bet shes a libra! @Sloane

[ULIZOS]

4 hours ago, spazz said:

 

This is what I mean when I say that this is all about Sunni dominance. I'm not saying "sunnis" are bad people, but if Saudi Arabia (Sunnis) manages to put into power a sunni government in Syria then they will be able to control basically the entire flow of oil in the whole region.

[MeakMaker]

4 hours ago, spazz said:

 

Man... at some point I thought he was going to start mentioning the Illuminati. Besides that doesn't justify the genocide of his people. But when these leaders lose respect for human life who cares in the end? 

His voice is scarily similar to George Bushs 

[XXL]

On ‎22‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 4:27 PM, MeakMaker said:

I'm sorry but the problem is much bigger than that. The media in our western countries as controversial as it can be is still free to publish whatever they want. In fact as a lot of articles were written to expose Trump during the election campaign we also had many more articles demonising Hillary Clinton. And although BBC is state owned they always give us news that don't necessarily take sides with the UK government.. If anything I always find it to be pretty independent to what's going on despise of who is in charge in the parliament or government. In other words if we are here debating and not agreeing on certain things politically is because we are truly in free countries where freedom of speech is in place. Russia... not so much. In fact by all means correct my ignorance but can you please give me a name of a Russian tv network or news publishing which is currently against Putin regime?

The media in the West are free to publish whatever they want? Not really. Unless it upholds what the mainstream establishment wants. Do not mention Trump or Brexit as an example of the contrary because somehow they will find a way to utilize both to fit the establishment purposes. Not that a multi billionaire citizen could ever be "birthed" and allowed to exist OUTSIDE of that establishment to begin with.

I never said that Russia isn't an oligarchic unjust political entity but to juxtapose "the West" as an example of TRULY inclusive and representative democracy is sheer delusion and not at all a snapshot of the reality of the situation. We live in countries that on a superficial level give the illusion of CHOICE but they are in fact a mimicry of it by having a two or three party systems where all contenders are controlled and sponsored by the same mega wealthy private interests and puppetteers from financial institutions, NGOs and so called think tanks who only invest in their own virtual economy not in everyday people's real, mainstreet economy

I find it highly hypocritical and clearly manipulative from Western leaders to be outraged at Russia's lack of fairness to its people (while not once denouncing the real ruler of that country and its abusive, corrupt practices, the Russian Orthodox Church which Putin responds to) when they allow money from really questionable Russian individuals to flood European capitals and push the prices up for the citizens that are paying those Western leader salaries to do what they need not what some Russian pimp wants.

See what's happened in London, the Abramovich types (people championed by the Murdoch media machinery) and how ridiculous it is to complain about corrupt Brussels policies when you force on your own people and allow the worst type of goons to roam around the country completely undisturbed, buying lock, stock and barrell

Former RT journalists work at the BBC by the way. And as for BBC's impartial stances that's a whole other chapter. People have yet to grasp and acknowledge that political entities of all colours work synergetically with the media, academia and corporate interests to achieve shared purposes. And that is only in appearance more democratic than a blatantly undemocratic system such as Russia.

In any case, back to the original video I posted and the frank, honest words from that AP journalist, quite uncharacteristic of AP, anyone who claims the US is interested in removing Assad as a favour to the Syrian people but do not find the endorsement of Gulf countries creepy as fuck are not any less deluded or at the very least superficially informed than anyone who bought the Iraq's weapons of mass destruction little fable whose messy consequences nobody has paid for yet or those who believe the official version of events about 9/11 without a shred of a doubt.

You mentioned in another thread right-wingers and internal terrorism or false flag terrorism, very on point observation, let me extend it, it's entire governments that have the power and interest to do it to serve any specific pre-set agenda.

How can you wade into Libya after the already catastrophic and deceitful enough Iraq debacle, and forcefully remove its leader, however a tyrant he was, when you invited him "to the West", dined and wined him all over Europe and have him sign him oil deals, closing the chapter on the Lockerbie bombing in a very ambiguous "suddenly all is forgiven" way, a mere six months before you then proceed to take him down? There is a problem of Western accountability here.

That attitude and modus operandi in itself IS creating terrorism even before you look at banking transactions level, because it creates vacuums which are going to be filled by even more tyrannical forces, and when our leaders act this way they do so consciously because it is further fuel and justification for their long planned "democracy exportations", coup, Arab springs, Ukraine "uprising" (financed by George Soros, a scumbag who made a billion pounds in a single day betting against British people and their currency some 25 years ago).

[XXL]

3 hours ago, MeakMaker said:

Man... at some point I thought he was going to start mentioning the Illuminati. Besides that doesn't justify the genocide of his people. But when these leaders lose respect for human life who cares in the end? 

His voice is scarily similar to George Bushs 

See what I mean

It's exactly this mocking dismissive per se attitude that prevents an actual discussion and conversation from taking place. Is that all you got out of that video? The George Bush voice and the Illuminati undertone? "That doesn't explain the genocide of his people", well that's exactly the point, isn't it. What is called a genocide of his people becomes some sort of dogmatic pronouncement from the same Western media you assume to be cleaner and unbiased, uninterested than any other version questioning the main shared narrative.

Could it be that those "anti Asssad civil forces" are in fact also terrorists entrusted with a mission to contrast him and eventually cause him to get toppled? There is a blood bath taking place for sure and civilians have been killed for five years but you think Assad is the only one involved with blood on their hands?

Why the EU, NATO and the US are not interested in toppling the barbaric regime in Saudi Arabia and halting the genocide going on in Yemen with Italian, British and American produced weapons being used to slaughter children and innocent civilians in general right now? To mention just one country ...

Because the US is running a decades long multi trillion dollar deficit and their currency is deeply tied to oil resources. The same way we have an energy issue in Europe and the reason why there hasn't been a more cohesive strategy on Syria between the US and the EU is because Europe gets most of its gas from Russia

Incidentally, Syria's fate is deeply tied to that of, oops so coincidentally, another Shiite country like Iran which is the ultimate endgame jackpot in the region. I find it for instance extremely interesting the contradiction of a Trump being accomodating to Russia while at the same time expressing disdain over the Iranian deal and being all over Netanyauh's butthole. We are in the preliminary phases of a third global conflict and anyone still talking about democracy exportation needs to seriously start documenting themselves on the issues at hand and not always give a literal, simplistic reading of events while mocking alternative viewpoints per se

[XXL]

4 hours ago, Pud Whacker said:

shes fabulous.  shes the pud whacker of journalists.  she CLIPPED HIS LYING ROTTEN TONGUE. 

i bet shes a libra! @Sloane

 

[MeakMaker]

4 hours ago, XXL said:

The media in the West are free to publish whatever they want? Not really. Unless it upholds what the mainstream establishment wants. Do not mention Trump or Brexit as an example of the contrary because somehow they will find a way to utilize both to fit the establishment purposes. Not that a multi billionaire citizen could ever be "birthed" and allowed to exist OUTSIDE of that establishment to begin with.

I never said that Russia isn't an oligarchic unjust political entity but to juxtapose "the West" as an example of TRULY inclusive and representative democracy is sheer delusion and not at all a snapshot of the reality of the situation. We live in countries that on a superficial level give the illusion of CHOICE but they are in fact a mimicry of it by having a two or three party systems where all contenders are controlled and sponsored by the same mega wealthy private interests and puppetteers from financial institutions, NGOs and so called think tanks who only invest in their own virtual economy not in everyday people's real, mainstreet economy

I find it highly hypocritical and clearly manipulative from Western leaders to be outraged at Russia's lack of fairness to its people (while not once denouncing the real ruler of that country and its abusive, corrupt practices, the Russian Orthodox Church which Putin responds to) when they allow money from really questionable Russian individuals to flood European capitals and push the prices up for the citizens that are paying those Western leader salaries to do what they need not what some Russian pimp wants.

See what's happened in London, the Abramovich types (people championed by the Murdoch media machinery) and how ridiculous it is to complain about corrupt Brussels policies when you force on your own people and allow the worst type of goons to roam around the country completely undisturbed, buying lock, stock and barrell

Former RT journalists work at the BBC by the way. And as for BBC's impartial stances that's a whole other chapter. People have yet to grasp and acknowledge that political entities of all colours work synergetically with the media, academia and corporate interests to achieve shared purposes. And that is only in appearance more democratic than a blatantly undemocratic system such as Russia.

In any case, back to the original video I posted and the frank, honest words from that AP journalist, quite uncharacteristic of AP, anyone who claims the US is interested in removing Assad as a favour to the Syrian people but do not find the endorsement of Gulf countries creepy as fuck are not any less deluded or at the very least superficially informed than anyone who bought the Iraq's weapons of mass destruction little fable whose messy consequences nobody has paid for yet or those who believe the official version of events about 9/11 without a shred of a doubt.

You mentioned in another thread right-wingers and internal terrorism or false flag terrorism, very on point observation, let me extend it, it's entire governments that have the power and interest to do it to serve any specific pre-set agenda.

How can you wade into Libya after the already catastrophic and deceitful enough Iraq debacle, and forcefully remove its leader, however a tyrant he was, when you invited him "to the West", dined and wined him all over Europe and have him sign him oil deals, closing the chapter on the Lockerbie bombing in a very ambiguous "suddenly all is forgiven" way, a mere six months before you then proceed to take him down? There is a problem of Western accountability here.

That attitude and modus operandi in itself IS creating terrorism even before you look at banking transactions level, because it creates vacuums which are going to be filled by even more tyrannical forces, and when our leaders act this way they do so consciously because it is further fuel and justification for their long planned "democracy exportations", coup, Arab springs, Ukraine "uprising" (financed by George Soros, a scumbag who made a billion pounds in a single day betting against British people and their currency some 25 years ago).

Very good points but still failing into giving the names of Russian tv networks or news agencies that don't support Putin regime..

i rest my case.

[MeakMaker]

8 hours ago, XXL said:

See what I mean

It's exactly this mocking dismissive per se attitude that prevents an actual discussion and conversation from taking place. Is that all you got out of that video? The George Bush voice and the Illuminati undertone? "That doesn't explain the genocide of his people", well that's exactly the point, isn't it. What is called a genocide of his people becomes some sort of dogmatic pronouncement from the same Western media you assume to be cleaner and unbiased, uninterested than any other version questioning the main shared narrative.

Could it be that those "anti Asssad civil forces" are in fact also terrorists entrusted with a mission to contrast him and eventually cause him to get toppled? There is a blood bath taking place for sure and civilians have been killed for five years but you think Assad is the only one involved with blood on their hands?

Why the EU, NATO and the US are not interested in toppling the barbaric regime in Saudi Arabia and halting the genocide going on in Yemen with Italian, British and American produced weapons being used to slaughter children and innocent civilians in general right now? To mention just one country ...

Because the US is running a decades long multi trillion dollar deficit and their currency is deeply tied to oil resources. The same way we have an energy issue in Europe and the reason why there hasn't been a more cohesive strategy on Syria between the US and the EU is because Europe gets most of its gas from Russia

Incidentally, Syria's fate is deeply tied to that of, oops so coincidentally, another Shiite country like Iran which is the ultimate endgame jackpot in the region. I find it for instance extremely interesting the contradiction of a Trump being accomodating to Russia while at the same time expressing disdain over the Iranian deal and being all over Netanyauh's butthole. We are in the preliminary phases of a third global conflict and anyone still talking about democracy exportation needs to seriously start documenting themselves on the issues at hand and not always give a literal, simplistic reading of events while mocking alternative viewpoints per se

Not all people killed by Assad were terrorists. FACT. Were those children terrorists too? I'm sick of this terrorist rethoric. "See we have the enemy and it's Islamic extremism..." Who's the real terrorist in the end? Isn't a president making more and more nukes a terrorist, too? Leaders manipulating the minds of simple people into believing who or what the enemy is are the biggest terrorists! Yes terrorism is winning! Trump, Brexit is a big win for terrorism! Terrorism is the people making weapons, distributing weapons, selling weapons and trust me on this: East and West are both responsible. But no one wants to talk about that... and that is because of the vast amount of money involved. All these wealthy people owning shares or stocks in the weapon industry are the real terrorists. Greed is the biggest form of terrorism. And as you mentioned yourself the focus shouldn't be only in Syria and I agree on that. Many more people are suffering because they live in tyranny governed countries. 

Trust me I accept all the wrongs the West/USA leaders have been doing and how they did take advantage of the Middle East situation to fit their own interests both politically  and economically  but don't give me the BS Putin and Assad want to help the world.. they're just as bad. That's why I dismiss anything you might come up with to make them look like as if they're the saviours of humanity. They're not. 

[karbatal]

Al Asad is no angel,  the same that allies weren't angels when they killed children bombing Germany.  

This is a WAR.  There are no good people in wars.  Defenders become killers too.