Liz Wahl quits RT on-air: claims 'whitewash' of Putin: NSA Asset?

[H-KQGE]

The rest of the media will love this.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2574366/American-anchor-Russian-state-funded-news-quits-air-protest-Putins-incursion-Crimea.html#article-2574366

By Ashley Collman and Lizzie Edmonds
00:56 06 Mar 2014, updated 02:47 06 Mar 2014

·Anchor Liz Wahl quit her job on live TV Wednesday to protest Russian President Vladimir Putin's incursion on Ukraine
·Wahl worked for state-funded Russia Today
·She is the second RT anchor to speak out against the invasion of Crimea, a sovereign region of Ukraine, by Russian forces
·On Tuesday anchor Abby Martin said the incursion was 'wrong' but did not quit her job


An American anchor working at state-funded Russia Today quit her job on air to protest President Vladimir Putin sending troops into the Ukraine.

Liz Wahl works at RT's Washington, DC bureau and said in her live resignation that she could no longer work for a network that 'whitewashes the actions of Putin'.

Putin has justified the incursion into Crimea as a way of protecting ethnic-Russians in the region who he says are threatened by 'ultra-nationalistic forces' as the country undergoes revolution.
In her resignation, Wahl spoke about how personal the recent developments in the Ukraine are to her. Wahl's grandparents emigrated to the United States from Hungary during that country's revolution in 1956 because of the threat of Soviet forces.

'I'm proud to be an American and believe in disseminating the truth. And that is why after this news cast I'm resigning,' Wahl signed off.

In an interview the the Daily Beast, Wahl said that the Kremlin's influence over RT wasn't overt but 'in order to succeed there you don't question'.

'It actually makes me feel sick that I worked there,' she said.

Following Wahl's resignation, the network responded with a statement posted on their website.

'When a journalist disagrees with the editorial position of his or her organization, the usual course of action is to address those grievances with the editor, and, if they cannot be resolved, to quit like a professional. But when someone makes a big public show of a personal decision, it is nothing more than a self-promotional stunt. We wish Liz the best of luck on her chosen path,' the statement read.

But Wahl isn't the first American to call out RT.

On Tuesday, anchor Abby Martin also spoke out against the Crimean incursion on the network.

'I can't say enough how strongly I am against any state intervention in a sovereign nation's affairs. What Russia did is wrong,' Martin said.

After that outburst, Martin's bosses told the National Journal that they would be sending her to Crimea 'to give her an opportunity to make up her own mind from the epicenter of the story'.

After the story was published, Martin responded on Twitter, saying she would not be going to Martin, despite RT's statement.

As of Wednesday, Martin is still employed at the network.

And I saw Abbey Martin say something to that effect on Monday/Tuesday to on one of the guests on the show. Hmm. There's a link in the original article & a video of Martin's criticism. The comments section as ever, (right-hand bottom of page, in blue) is interesting.

 

[whitecoast]

Re: American anchor for RT quits on-air over station's 'whitewash' of Putin's action

'I can't say enough how strongly I am against any state intervention in a sovereign nation's affairs. What Russia did is wrong,' Martin said.

How is Russia intervening in Ukraine's affairs? They are protecting their own investments, and have been encouraged by the locals. Ukrane and Russian military have been having lunch and cigarettes together, and Putin has vowed that Russia's military will never be used against the legitimate military of the Ukraine. No blood has been spilled, compare that to the neo-fascist psychopaths in Kiev and other western cities.

How could an educated person living in Russia not be aware that the subversion and unconstitutional usurpation of power by right-wing lunatics has been specifically BACKED by the United States? To me this doesn't seem to be something as simple as ignorance. But maybe I take for granted how much the average citizen knows about the underhanded tactics of the US/EU.

In the comments section I saw a lot of cheering her on. Stuff about Russia's "charm offensive" not working, how she should get a medal and come back to America. It's so sad how incidents like these just get plugged into the facile narratives of most westerners. People like this can be paid off so easily, don't they realize that? They have NO idea how much of a ride they are being taken on by the elites.

 

[Laura]

Re: American anchor for RT quits on-air over station's 'whitewash' of Putin's action


Sorry, but I don't see how she can be "proud to be an American" with all America has done over the past 50 + (and way longer) years.

Abby said: 'I can't say enough how strongly I am against any state intervention in a sovereign nation's affairs. What Russia did is wrong,' Martin said.

Did she forget Central America? Peru? Venezuela? Libya? Syria? Afghanistan? (And more.)

And what about the West's manipulation of Ukraine? The hired snipers? Isn't that "state intervention in a sovereign nation's affairs?"

Well, RT obviously hired ponerized individuals to do their news.

 

[Siberia]

Re: American anchor for RT quits on-air over station's 'whitewash' of Putin's action

The western media are promoting only those opinions which are convinient for them.

Yesterday everyone listened to Jared Leto at the Oscar Ceremony who sincerely thinks that '[Ukraine] struggles to make its dreams happen'. Well, the guy is 30 seconds to Mars, it's probably hard to see from that distance what is really happening here on Earth, in the Ukraine particularily.

While another person, a famous Serbian filmmaker, actor and musician Emir Kusturica, who I believe is never going to get an Oscar because his films show the truth, yesterday said as follows: 'Unfortunately, Ukraine is following the Yugoslav scenario, and I regret it. I see the same kind of catastrophe. I think that Russia should protect ethnic Russians residing in Ukraine'. See at: http://en.itar-tass.com/non-political/721874.

 

[Keit]

Re: American anchor for RT quits on-air over station's 'whitewash' of Putin's action

_http://rt.com/usa/rt-reacts-liz-wahl-042/

RT reacts to anchor Liz Wahl quitting on air

[...]For years, Ms. Martin has been speaking out against US military intervention, only to be ignored by the mainstream news outlets – but with that one comment, branded as an act of defiance, she became an overnight sensation. It is a tempting example to follow.

When a journalist disagrees with the editorial position of his or her organization, the usual course of action is to address those grievances with the editor, and, if they cannot be resolved, to quit like a professional. But when someone makes a big public show of a personal decision, it is nothing more than a self-promotional stunt.

We wish Liz the best of luck on her chosen path.

What will be interesting to see, is where Liz Wahl will be working next.

Here, watch the beginning of Breaking the Set show, where Abby Martin talks about her own critical statement, and how it was quickly picked up by the mainstream media, while her constant criticism of the US policy is completely ignored.

http://<iframe width="560" height="...vZ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Breton]

Re: American anchor for RT quits on-air over station's 'whitewash' of Putin's action

Abby Martin's spoke out "from her heart", that "military intervention is never the answer, and I will not sit here and apologize and defend military aggression."

From what I can see, that as far as her statement goes, she is consistent. She has, as part of her job, spoken out against US overt and covert military intervention well in the past. So if she thinks what Russia is doing is "military aggression" then I thought it stands to reason she would speak this way.

However, what I find interesting, and I cannot quite figure out, is why she thinks this way. She should know well from even their own network, RT, is that the movement of troops announced by Putin does not fall into the definition of "military intervention" or "military aggression" since Russian bases and troops are already in the Crimea. She is crying wolf.

See
http://www.sott.net/article/275066-What-invasion-Russia-has-16000-military-personnel-in-Crimea-even-though-its-1999-agreement-with-Ukraine-permits-it-to-have-up-to-25000

Abby continues to work for RT, and I would like to think the reason she works there is because she believes it is a good network for journalism, at least superior to the main stream.

I am at a loss to understand Abby, because she is not acting objectively sensibly, and seems at odds with quite a bit of her past work. Is there something else going on? Did she see an opportunity for standing out from others, to self-promote perhaps, (has has been suggested in some news articles) that has skewed her thinking? Is someone in the process of co-opting her?

Then we have, Liz Wahl who resigned, as she said, from a network that 'whitewashes the actions of Putin'. Yet I would suppose working at RT, she has access to more objective data about the facts of the Ukrainian situation than most people who are just following Western media propaganda. Presenting this data is hardly "whitewashing". The words that she chose in her resignation speech was very telling, she sounds quite a bit to me like an American who has not been able to shake off her American brainwashing, - "I'm proud to be an American and believe in disseminating the truth" - whoa! Given any understanding of American History, especially recent history, it is jaw dropping to wrap oneself in the flag that way, and somehow connect being American with someone who wants to disseminate the truth.

To me, Liz's act was disappointing, and Abby's position difficult to understand.

 

[Laura]

Re: American anchor for RT quits on-air over station's 'whitewash' of Putin's action

I agree, Breton. Abby is not really dealing with the FACTS ON THE GROUND. She is not dealing with the reality of PSYCHOPATHS IN POWER and the only way to deal with them.

Liz, on the other hand, appears to me to be a perfect example of what Glenn Greenwald recently exposed as the NSA program to control and disrupt society via media and social network manipulation.

We see here that Abby and Liz have both fallen into that trap whether wittingly or unwittingly, and have become the grist for the NSA mill. All the NSA had to do was activate their vast network of social media drones and the whole issue is covered in veil of black smoke.

And we notice how much raging coverage this gets, while the FACTS ON THE GROUND get almost NO coverage in the MSM.

Thanks Abby and Liz for being Benedict Arnold's and giving aid to the psychopathic enemy.

 

[H-KQGE]

Re: American anchor for RT quits on-air over station's 'whitewash' of Putin's action

Thanks Keit. That episode of "breaking the set" was the one I saw at the beginning of the week. The part that stuck out for me was where she says that "it's a bizarre pretext to use military force to protect an ethnic people" (10:20). As Breton pointed out, she HAS consistently spoken out against US covert & overt military intervention in the past. I know because I've watched her show (most of 'em) from its debut to its end in the latter part of 2013. Which is why it's strange that she's not able to determine what military aggression is, nor is she aware of the facts of the SOTT article.

The thing about her self-promoting seems to be the most obvious avenue to follow. Her audience has grown massively from the RT show & the last I saw, she had an equally large following on Twitter (last year) & it was growing. I think that with her ethics/principles being so strongly stated time & again, she could have entered an area where she fits nicely with whatever controlling entities are at play; she becomes predictable & easy to manipulate, especially if knowledge & awareness are lacking (naivete?) as they seem to be here.



Added: just saw Laura's post.

 

[Laura]

Thought I'd modify the Subject header for the ease of google and searchers.

 

[Cosmos]

The latest from Abby Martin on her Facebook page:

I took the opportunity to call out the corporate media on Piers Morgan last night.

_https://www.facebook.com/JournalistAbbyMartin/posts/10153937335885691

 

[Chad]

In relation to Liz Wahl's 'decision'; i came across this (3 paragraph) article, which i thought was a (strange) attempt as an expose... but now i'm thinking it could be the reverse..

Confessions of a Former RT Employee
A freelancer explains why he went to work for the Kremlin-funded network.

Meet Sam Knight, the Washington-based journalist and acerbic tweeter who, before he turned to freelancing, spent a summer working for the English-language outlet for RT. The network, formerly known as Russia Today, has been the toast of the media this week as events in Ukraine continue to unfold.

First it was lampooned for going soft on Putin, as when it called Russia a "stabilizing force in Ukraine." Later its D.C.-based host, Abby Martin, was praised for denouncing Russia's invasion of Ukraine on air and proclaiming her editorial independence from the network (later still, and this is not totally related, it was revealed that she's an avid 9/11 truther!).

As someone who worked for RT, Knight couldn't read with a straight face RT's statement about letting its journalists freely express themselves. In a conversation with National Journal, he discussed his personal experiences with the network.

So what was it like?

I remember being told that certain topics were out of bounds. Russia wasn't making headlines in the summer of 2012 (when I was there) like it is today. But when we wanted to cover China, for example, we were warned against critical coverage of foreign countries—an affront to journalism for domestic consumption, if you think about it, when Beijing suppressing independent labor unions and gutting environmental regulations has a direct effect on American workers. Yet there was a lot of coverage of the Quebec student protests and anti-austerity protests in Spain and Greece and such. And they were important stories and well worth covering, to be fair, but the implicit message was clear: Foreign affairs from an American perspective were acceptable as long as they weren't offensive to Moscow.

So why did you work for them?

I knew what show I was working for: Alyona Minkovski is honest and was a great boss and host. She had a great team, and when the Huffington Post snapped her up I felt vindicated. All of the stories we did about targeting killing, surveillance, the Trans Pacific Partnership, the crackdown on the Occupy movement, the prison industrial complex, etc. were all well ahead of the curve, if you look at some of the headlines today. I did feel a little weird working for a network with ties to the Kremlin, sure, but the journalism job market is tough these days—particularly if you're an American seeking to cover your own government in a non-superficial manner.

Would you warn people away from working there?

There's going to continue to be a steady supply of people ready to both work for and watch RT. The corporate media is staffed with fleshy bags of walking sycophancy—pathetic excuses for journalists, really—and a lot of these stories about RT reek of projection and insecurity. These "Neo-nazis in Kiev are overstated," or "Putin is just doing this because he can" stories are childish and absurd, boiling the entire conflict down to black and white "democracy vs. authoritarianism" or a cartoonish pantomime portrait of a guy, who, in reality, has support that can't be easily dismissed—both at home and in Crimea. This doesn't excuse RT's coverage of the conflict. But it's state-owned. What are these jingoistic American hacks' excuses?

_http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/confessions-of-a-former-rt-employee-20140305

So it seems, the US has only itself to blame.

I'm not sure who the nationaljournal are, or their 'politics', but they say they are a Washington based news outlet.

Either way, it looks like Liz Wahl will have a hard time finding any PAYING job that isn't a front for state propaganda.

 

[Breton]

More about Abby Martin remarks

Leaving aside for the moment the fact that in this particular case, given the facts on the ground, Abby Martin made an ignorant, uninformed, warrantless, criticism of Russia, she herself made a good point about the subsequent reaction in the mainstream about her remark.

Here's the problem though: I speak out against military intervention every single day on this show and I have been speaking out against the Us's involvement in the Ukraine since the beginning. And none of those comments have ever made waves in mainstream. So in a way it is kind of a sad commentary, I guess, that my only criticism of Russia's actions would get picked up when it fits the proper narrative.

When she referred to the "proper narrative", she meant the narrative fabricated by the mainstream about the Ukraine situation that refuses to acknowledge US and EU intervention, and paints Putin as the bad guy. The mainstream stands revealed in their agenda when they do not give attention to her criticism of US and EU interventions in the Ukraine, but instead they only give attention to remarks that they like.

Here's another thing, you'll barely see criticism about corporations or the US empire on corporate funded television. In fact you won't even find criticism of the corporatocracy on many alternative media sites. That's why I do my job. That's why I do this, and that's why I work here at RT.

For that last quote, I say good for you Abby! However, I still find her ignorant accusation of Russia using "military aggression" so at odds with her past fairly accurate work that it leaves me watching her warily for other "corruption" (for lack of a better word) coming from her in the future.

So in the future, we may see that if she is being corrupted, or if she just unwittingly continues to miss the facts on the ground and how psychopaths in power really work and then she happens to say something the mainstream likes, she will be used as Laura said, as "grist for the NSA mill" in its vast network of social media.

 

[HiThere]

There's an article about the right-wing leanings of many of the protesters leading up to the situation today in Norwegian paper Aftenposten (google translate):

Right extremist insurgency

Ever since the Ukrainian uprising began in November last year, fascist and extreme right-wing symbols have been visible among the protesters .
Bjorn Nilstad , doctor of Russian history

Nationalism has been a peripheral element in the revolt against Viktor Yanukovych regime in Ukraine , claiming Sergii Leschenko in the features " Extremists are not behind the rebellion " ( March 4 ) . This claim can greatly discussed. Fascist symbolsEver since the Ukrainian uprising began last November , the black - red - flag Bandera and other fascist and extreme right-wing symbols have been visible among the protesters .

The fact that Western politicians who came to Kiev and urged people to overthrow a legitimate elected president and government , pretended to not notice these signs , does not mean they were not there.One of the organizers of the uprising against Yanukovych , leader of the extreme right-wing party Svoboda , Oleh Tjanybok , has publicly called for a struggle against the " Muscovite - Jewish mafia" he believes controls the Ukraine.

The other leaders of the Ukrainian opposition never made any attempt to distance themselves from Tjanybok and other extremists. On the contrary, appeared supposedly more moderate opposition leaders Vitaly Klitschko and Arsenij Jatsenjuk with Tjanybok , including through a number of times to sing the national anthem in the community rather than tens of thousands of people on the Maidan in Kiev.

The first thing the rebels did after the coup to power , in a situation in which Ukraine was about to disintegrate , was to enact a law which deprived the Russian position as regional languages ​​allowed in official contexts . Who but nationalist extremists acting this way ?

Anything other than Democrats Today reminds Kiev and large parts of Ukraine on Germany after Hitler and the Nazi seizure of power in 1933.

"Who but nationalist extremists acting this way? Politicians who previously supported Yanukovych, threatened to vote with the coup makers in the Rada ( parliament ) . Region Party and the Communist Party has been banned in Western Ukraine .

Government officials have been thrown out of their offices by armed members of the opposition. Right extremists march in Ukrainian cities with symbols , most believed ended up on history's scrap heap at the Third Reich's collapse in 1945. Hooligans humble ordinary people , for example by forcing them to sing nationalistic songs.
Does not this tell that it was anything but Democrats who organized the nightmare Ukraine has now been thrown into ? The paradox. The great paradox is that the new rulers of Kiev, which is run by a rabid hatred of everything Russian, acting in an aggressive manner that they will be able to enforce a Russian military intervention to rescue the Russian friendly population in eastern Ukraine . What shall it be again of Ukraine?

_http://www.aftenposten.no/meninger/debatt/Hoyreekstremistisk-oppror-7491084.html#.UxhwHtx9Faw

 

[Cosmos]

I have wondered how much of Abby's own stuff is really on her show "Breaking the Set", ever since I watched the whole show being done by another host named Manuel Rapalo a couple of weeks ago:

http://<iframe width="560" height="...DM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Everything he said just sounded like Abby would have said it, and it is kind of obvious that he was reading from the teleprompter.

So the question that came to my mind is: Who is writing the script and teleprompter material? Is it really Abbys stuff? Or at least part of it?

I dunno... But her obvious disregard to the facts and propaganda at hand in this case, just comes across as a bit off to me (actually that is an understatement), especially considering "her" coverage of other things in the past. But then again, if some or much of the stuff that is being done in the show is actually coming from another editor/writer, then this would not be too suprising I guess...

So there are a few options that come to my mind:

Either she really has lost the plot in this Ukraine/Russia case (why exactly, I don't know) or somebody else has "lost it" (for whatever reason) since she is just doing her job of telling the people out there what somebody else has written.

Or she has lost it because she is ponerized in that respect, for whatever reason and can't see the wood for the trees.

 

[gdpetti]

Ms Martin is a little emotional at times, which feeds her investigative reporting, but as she said, she doesn't really know the facts in this case, but speaking from her heart, she is against military intervention... the problem with expressing one's heart without running it through the mind first, is it makes irrational statements at times. I think this is an excellent opportunity for her to share her education on the subject, if she cares to proceed, with her viewers, most of whom probably know no more than herself on this subject. Perhaps Professor Sutton's work is a good place for her to start? Sott had a nice Youtube piece on that which should lead her in the right direction.

As for Mrs. Wahl, remember she comes from a military family, father and husband, and don't you think that might weigh into this issue? ;) IMO, she always seemed too vulnerable compared to the usually strong feminine types working there. Her heart might be in the 'right' place, but her mind or her 'metal' hasn't been honed enough to 'toughen her up'... how's that line go? Separating the wheat from the chaff?

Either way, a good reason to do a documentary, shows etc on the history of Western intervention in Russia and the world, for most Americans know next to nothing about it, not that many watch this little RT station on satellite, but for those asking the questions, the producers at RT should help supply some answers using as much independent analysis as possible. Heck, even Stephen Cohen spoke the truth the other day on PBS.... I think it was, and he isn't known for being a friend of Russia, in the past he's always seemed the think tank type with his views, but then I only saw a 4min clip. This is a good opportunity for the truth to ooze out on many issues, which will no doubt be the excuse to dump the markets.. which by the way, was reported in one Latin media, as having China warn Obama on change your tune on Ukraine or trade our USdebt for gold... could be a rumor, but China is still in empire mode and would have to do the power play sooner or later, whereas Putin has to work with all of these characters. Not a fun job. If Abby continues with her studies, she will learn rather quickly that military intervention is already in action, which is what the Maiden group was composed of... and why both the cops and well-meaning but ignorant protesters in the square were targeted by the snipers now running the Kiev regime. So reminiscient of the Sandanistas in Nicaragua.... same infiltration and take over of the group.... ponerization process... same thing every time. I'm not surprised at Wahl, but I did think Martin was a wee bit better educated. This could offer her the chance to take her pov to a higher level, if she's ready for that.

Oh well, here's to her continued studies... should she accept the offer, as it isn't exactly a case of "mission impossible'.
As for the show using a script, that's always the case as the producers setup the show and write it, usually in this case, I would presume with the host's knowledge and input. You can't do it alone, it takes too much work, hours in a day, especially if you're attempting to do a daily show..... same in comedy, they hire writers for the jokes, comedians can't come up with a new routine every day. So, anyone else hosting, would just read the script as written, usually one of the producers or writers or reporters of the show already.