Operation Swarmer, why wasn't the press invited??

[killerbush]

Something interesting is occuring as our boys and girls risk their lives in an unjust war in Iraq, the media isn't embedded with our troops this time. WHY?? When the invasion was launched in 2003, we had journalists covering this from every angle. Why not now?? Seems to be, the Pentagon is trying to hide something!! Could it be that they don't want to see how inept the Iraqi "army" really is? Could it be that this administration is again trying to censor the truth getting out about the mission?
Whatever the reason, it's quite obvious this administrations disdain, even hatred for the press. This is the most secrative bunch of people in the world, and this is just one more example of it. The press is reduced to the daily lie fest by simple Scotty, and whatever the Pentagon wants you to hear.
Again, Bush and his secret junta are basically censoring the press. It's nothing new since they try to do it all the time. But now, more than ever, we need press reports from the scene. The press must demand they too be part of the action. Our bravest are fighting in Iraq, and all we get are second hand reports, that could be hours after the actual events have happened. If embeds were allowed in 2003, then they should be allowed now. The press knows the risks. The question I have is why won't the Pentagon, and the Bush administration let them do its job??

[TomInTib]

1. Because it is the world's biggest photo-op....

Heli assault in broad daylight?

You can see them coming for miles in the desert.

Also, with that many helicopters and all those confused Iraqi "soldiers" running around, the potential for bad stuff happening is too great to have the nosey press around.

[KennedyGuy]

2. Why wasn't the press invited?

Thats an easy one...Chimpy is afraid that they will actually report that the Iraqi army isn't in fact, an equal partner in the operation. Remember a while back..they had a similar operation and were trumpeting how the Iraqui army took the lead and functioned on its own. The media gleefully played along. A week later, they came out and stated that, in fact, half the Iraqi army ran away and our soldiers did the bulk of the fighting.

[AtomicKitten]

3. The media is reporting that Junior had nothing to do with it.

The acceptance of this hands-off president by the masses is surreal, although considering his track record it's probably not a bad idea.

[Neil Lisst]

4. No, the military will take video, then the admin will hand it out

And that's a wrap!

[grasswire]

5. did you see Madelaine Albright on CNN?

She implied that it was a staged operation with no real strategic purpose. She said something about troops finding no insurgents, and said several times that it was an "interesting" day for the WH, with the timing of the release of the doctrine, the Operation Swarmer, and the Bush speech, all on the same day.

I hope some real reporting happens now over this.

Wolf Blitzer asked Albright if the WH would really send troops into harm's way for political reasons.

[Disturbed]

6. LOL

Would the WH really send troops into harm's way for political reasons?
What was her answer? Did she laugh?

Woof is a RW bafoon.

[grasswire]

16. she wouldn't be pinned down to that

Wolf kept trying to get her to make news. She was cagey.

[Neil Lisst]

7. don't forget the convenient terror scare for the NCAA game

that was predictable as the home backup story to the Iraq War action adventure!

[grasswire]

15. as soon as I heard....

.....that a bomb dog had zeroed in on a hot dog cart, I roared with laughter. Hungry dog!

Buffoons.

[ihelpu2see]

9. I have to agree the AFP wire just announced the same. No insurgents

found and some small weapons caches. I think the idea was to get big headlines out to the American people that the US was making a push WITH Iraqi forces in an attempt to bolster the citizens feelings about the war.

[dogman]

11. How can she say no real strategic purpose?

This is Rove's strategy to influence the '06 election. We have captured a large amount of desert. Just because it has been reported that fighting is limited because this huge area is sparsely populated doesn't mean there is no real purpose.

[grasswire]

14. okay...

...no strategic MILITARY purpose.

Good point.

[formercia]

8. A made for TV

Dog and Pony show.

Still no fighting reported. Must be the wrong town.

[formercia]

20. The Empire Strikes Out

Fearless Leader holds an airborne house party and nobody shows up.

Rule number one in Asymmetrical Warfare is to never engage a superior enemy force unless you have a death wish or God is on your side. Ignorance of this rule tends to be non habit forming.

[DoYouEverWonder]

10. Because they don't want to many pics like this

going out over the wires.

[Blaze Diem]

17. and some MSM reported last night that thankfully there were no

casualties..........
I thought of these little kids..what fear!..their last moments on earth.

Hope the "tenfold" rule applies in hell too.

Bush cabal should know the fear of these little kids..tenfold.

I don't recall the MSM that reported no casualties...sorry I cannot link this..I flipped channels at news time, looking for at least ONE of them who might be less sanitized.

[gratuitous]

12. The ABC coverage was particularly limp

Once again, compelling graphics and footage, and absolutely no substance, nothing that could be verified. A lot of statements along the lines of "military sources say" and "areas rumored to be insurgent strongholds." It reminded me very strongly of ABC's ludicrous coverage, complete with chintzy CGI images, of the "rescue" of Jessica Lynch.

[otohara]

13. What Bombs? I Only Saw Men Jumping From Helicopters

what a load of propaganda they shoved at the public yesterday.

[donsu]

18. because they are using illegal weapons, like phosphorous, nuclear

nt

[MadMaddie]

19. Because they don't want the reporters....reporting civilian casualties.

With that type of bombing....and no warning a lot of innocent Iraqi's were killed!!


May the * cabal rot in hell!!