Helen Thomas rips into Robert Gibbs over US response to flotilla massacre

Source: Fire Dog Lake

At Tuesday’s White House press briefing, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs called on Helen Thomas, who in a very animated fashion, confronted him for refusing to assign responsibility in the raid, which left nine people dead.

Thomas: “The initial reaction to the flotilla massacre, deliberate massacre, an international crime, was pitiful.
What do you mean you regret something that should be so strongly condemned, and if any other nation in the world had done it, we would have been up in arms?
What is this sacrosanct ironclad relationship where a country that deliberately kills people and boycotts every aid.. and abet the boycott?”

Gibbs: Well, Look I think the initial reaction regretted the loss of life as we tried and as we still continue to gather the relevant. ..

Thomas: Regret won’t bring them back.

Gibbs: Nothing can bring them back Helen, because I think if you could that wouldn’t be up for debate. We are.. we believe that a credible and transparent investigation has to look into the facts and we’re open to international participation in that investigation.

Thomas: Why did you think of that so late, why didn’t you initially condemn it?

Gibbs: Why didn’t we think of?

Thomas: Why didn’t you initially condemn it?

Gibbs: Again, I think the statements that we initially released speak directly to that.


http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/52234

and he gave her the usual line of sh*t ... 9/11, 3,000 dead Americans, terror terror terror ...

Oh yeah, don't you know it. Got to keep this oil war going full speed ahead! :mad:

:kick:

.... that was a joke. ;)

when Helen dies, and unfortunately for us, she's not young. Only one in that Press Room who has balls, guts, speaks up, consistently and to the great annoyance of whichever regime/party is in power, points out all the times the current Emperor, his spokespeople and his Administration are without clothes. Someone who was and still is actually a working journalist, not just a nice-looking, paid spokesperson robotically reading corporate propaganda off a teleprompter.

ANSWER HELEN THOMAS' QUESTION WOULD YOU?!

Thomas: Why didn’t you initially condemn it?


:kick: & recommend.

no condemnation that I heard. NONE.

:kick:

.... I dunno .... perhaps the guys on the warships seem likely culprits.

Here is the answer that Gibbs could not possibly give.Helen,we did not condemn it because the Israeli lobbies such as AIPAC have many of our leaders over a barrel and we would have hell to pay if we were even the slightest bit even handed in dealing with the Mideast.Are you happy now? That is the truth but now I will most surely lose my job.Good Bye.

of it all is that 300+ million USA people permit the most powerful lobbying interest of our USA government to lobby, not for our needy US interests, but for the benefit of another nation (Israel), and to keep said lobbies membership influential. This must be one of the most counterproductive and absurd policies that is allowed to exist in the USA.

even the ones that show the majority of Americans sympathize with Israel in general (you may have some with something to say about this incident but it wont change the overall opinion). People here seem to gloss over the years of American flag burning, chants of "death to America" (actually still goes on). You really think the majority of Americans distinguish between the Palestinians and the rest of the Muslim world? Those on this board that are hoping for a change from Washington on this issue are fooling themselves.

I've been looking for something like this.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

lol ... I am NOT kidding ... go find someone ELSE who has the same birthday as him and give them some next time.



... where *I* come from ... if someone gives you cupcakes, and you then YELL at them for the next 300 days ... you get NO MORE cupcakes!

CUT OFF!

her off for a few cupcakes.

.... then I probably am. ;)

I think .... I'm not sure .... that was a lot of double negatives my friend.

Anyway .... Obama could buy me off with a few cupcakes ... but heck, so could Helen Thomas. Hand me some sugar enriched pig lard and I'd be all like, "We need to RISE ON UP out of Afghanistan! You warmonger dude!"

Hmm ... I wonder if they make cupcake drones?

I asked her if she'd go easier on him, now that he had brought her cupcakes for her/their birthday.

Helen, with her usual sharp wit, said, "oh, he'll have to offer me a lot more than that."

You have to be around Washington for a long time to realize that a lot of these people have the ability to
disconnect their political and public lives from their private lives. Ruth Bader-Ginsburg spends a lot of
time with Antonin Scalia privately, but I don't think she has agreed with him on five SCOTUS decisions
since she has been on the bench. Tip O'Neill and Reagan used to get together after hours and down a few.
Even I am friends with Richard Viguerie, and politically I consider him an absolute right wing fruitcake,
just as he considers me to be an extremist left-wing fruitcake.

The only people who never seem to turn off their public personae are the extremists of the right, who apparently
swallowed so much kool aid as children that they never loosen up.

When the guy Huckabee granted clemency to shot and killed a cop, this poster said it was "good news on the political front." Given that, I doubt that she'd flinch at condemning Helen for eating the cupcakes.

One of the most disgusting things I have ever read on DU, I forgot it was that person.

Thomas sternly asked Gibbs: “The initial reaction to the flotilla massacre, deliberate massacre, an international crime, was pitiful. What do you mean you regret something that should be so strongly condemned, and if any other nation in the world had done it, we would have been up in arms? What is this ironclad relationship where a country that deliberately kills people and boycotts every aid and abet… the boycott?”

VIDEO

.... and I am being serious right now .... that's how she sounds EVERY day .... that's her right I suppose .... but if EVERY DAY she's shouting and interrupting ... what are the odds of her getting the answer she wants ... or ANY answer for that matter. Does she WANT an answer? Or does she just want a platform to express her views? ... if so, more power to her ... but lets call it like it is.

I'm not about to argue the strategy of the press corps most senior member but it's, perhaps, not the method *I* would use.

On the other hand ... Jake Tapper sure does get a lot of scoops.

To some extent anyway. As much "fun" as it is to hear someone actually speak truth to power, in some ways she's taking the "easy" way out. She knows the answers to some of these questions, and in fact it is why she asks them, because she knows Gibbs can't answer them directly.

In the case of this Flotilla incident, what you have is the President being "manipulated" by one side of this conflict. I'm not saying that the flotilla organizers WANTED this outcome, but it was this outcome they were willing to risk to force the international community to react. So Gibbs is basically trying to avoid letting them be successful by not doing what the organizers are trying to force him to do.

A more effective question might have been about this very issue. "The organizers were willing to risk this outcome, and to some extent risk to the point of their own lives, to force the international community to react. Why are you avoiding the opportunity to make their sacrifice successful?"

for a real reporter, not the sycophants, to put up with the dribble that comes out of the mouths of the spokes-liars. They only spout rhetoric.

all the other "reporters" who are not shouting and interrupting every day. I guess we're so used to the sad state of affairs that we think we're supposed to be quiet and polite about it. Screw that.

It is the lackeys passing themselves off as journalists who don't ask the same questions every day who are the problem.

to understand how important it is, just imagine if she weren't there. Then all those blow dried assholes would define the entire range of thought. It would just be the assholes asking Gibbs how angry Obama is, and Gibbs cracking stupid jokes.

Thank God for Helen.

she opens the door when she asks these questions. How often has any one of them followed up on her questions? Taken the opportunity to keep the issue alive?

Odd that you would think she might be ineffective for 'acting that way every day'. All of them act the same way every day. All of them refuse to ask pertinent questions and I am so sick of their polite, prepared and approved questions that I never bother watching them anymore.

Helen is like a grandma who can say things to the grand kids that the parents cannot say without getting into a fight, but once said, gives the parents an opportunity to follow up with 'you know, grandma has a point'.

I will never grow tired of someone who refuses to march in lockstep with our impotent 'press corps', more concerned about being invited to the DC parties than about the serious issues facing this country today.

Let's send her a telegram and tell her to be more polite. :sarcasm: She can put it next to the roses we sent her for being so persistent with Bushco.

That sounds pretty stupid.

We've had "this ironclad relationship where a country that deliberately kills people" for years, sweetie pie. Welcome to 1967.

They said the US did condemn the massacre. I'm living in France currently.

oh and unrec for posting a liar dog lake link

She is the only one with guts to ask the questions that need to be asked.

To Helen, "Long may she live and report".

That is interjecting personal opinion in to what should be an impartial reporter's questioning.

I'll give you that.

I agree with Helen in context, but she's pretty pathetic as a "journalist".

especially when the "response" is a non-response answer designed to avoid answering the question.

As to what you consider reporting your opinion is about as useful as the town drunk's. Go find something shiny to be fascinated with and leave the thinking to those who can.

Especially if it triggered the "Mav." It must be extra good.

Keep up the good work. :thumbsup:

I'd say people aboard the ships were well within their rights to repel illegal boarders and pirates.

Helen has had a great career but it's time to give serious thought to retiring.

ETA, I don't think laughter is an appropriate response in this situation.

I'd shoot their ass too.

The question of whether the Israeli's should have boarded the ship at all is a valid question, but they didn't come on board shooting. In fact, I've read reports that they fought with the "activitists" for 40 minutes before getting the order to shoot. So, no, I absolutely do not consider it a massacre and the so-called "activitsts" should get part of the blame.

on them. The Israelis shot first, then illegally bordered. The activists were acting in self-defense. The Israelis cold-blooded murder. ( innocents dead is a massacre.

And it's pretty clear who started beating whom. If you want to stand around with your thumb up your ass while someone whacks you with a metal pipe, good for you.

and you hit them with a baseball bat, would they be justified in shooting you?

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I don't agree with the blockade and I don't agree with Israel's decision to board the ship, BUT that doesn't mean it's okay to beat them with metal pipes.

Those "activists" knew exactly what they were doing. And they got the outcome they wanted.

And private property is private property

or do you normally promote piracy on the high seas?

What a crock, eh?

And it takes some bravery to fight someone with a gun.

So, she asked for it because she wore a mini skirt huh?

soldiers do you know that don't carry guns? Don't bother to respond. I'd prefer talking to a brick wall.

Why guns at all? That's an act of war.

Yes, I'd have to agree... you probably feel more at home talking to a brick wall... we all like keeping to our own level of intelligence, right?

There's nothing you can say- and there's nothing, no matter how appalling that they won't rationalize away.

How exactly is that not a massacre?

:shrug:

I'll put on my telepathy hat for a moment here: I'm guessing if armed commandos from a foreign country shot and killed ~20 Israelis, you'd be more than happy to call it a massacre, right?

The day that she finally retires, will be a sad day indeed for journalism.

:D

are still interested in climbing the corporate ladder of success and they know if they ask any of the wrong questions that might have lead to or have an air of embarrassment for Israel, that they would lose any chance of promotion and possibly lose their job.

Helen only worries about asking pertinent and relevant questions regardless of whom they might embarrass.

That's par for the course for this and previous administrations. None of them like it when the press makes the administration look bad. They'll digress, ignore and give vague answers, that's when they are not outright dissembling.

Politics.......

:eyes:

...Scottie McClellan or Ari Fleischer in "Democratic" drag.
These are not "Press Briefings".
These are platforms the White House uses to "Catapult the Propaganda",
and are insults to anyone with a sliver of intelligence.

"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans."---Paul Wellstone

He is condescending to the press to the point of being disrespectful and insulting. If they don't fight back harder is because they don't want to lose their WH access. Helen has been there too long to give a damn about the B.S. that comes out of any Press Secretary's mouth.

;-)

:thumbsup:

Thank you Helen! :yourock:

when the most powerful of the lobbies of our government is permitted to work for the benefit, not for American interests, but those of another country.