[DallasDeb]

Aw, too bad! My heart is bleeding for them. /not!

[San Jacinto]

"I am enormously pessimistic of the chance of decent on-the-spot reporting, as the war occurs,"

I can just imagine the decent, on the spot reporting you would get from this broad.--"Prior to the conlict, the Americans apparently stored 20,000 litres of antrax in this Iraqi baby milk factory."

[Centurion2000]

To journalists: Friendly fire is not.

[SauronOfMordor]

Realisticly speaking, if news satellite reports can give Sadaam information about what's happening, and allow Sadaam's representatives to relay orders to field commanders (disguised as "news interviews" ), then the news service has just become part of Iraq's Command and Control network, and becomes a legitimate target.

And any news reporter relaying real-time info about the actions of our troops becomes an enemy spy in time of war, and may be summarily executed.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

Excellent. The press is 1. Hostile to the Bush Administration; 2. Hostile to the U.S. military; 3. Supportive of anti-U.S. efforts by France et. al. 4. Supportive of U.N. hegemony...

Need I go on?

[angkor]

Why are they whining?

Answer: They're not really "journalists."

They're spies with realtime reconaissance equipment, which they'll use to transmit strategic information to the enemy (via CNN).

As "journalists" they should be the brave and objective heroes they claim to be, and step into the fray regardless of any promise (or not) of their safety.

[EternalHope]

Lemme see if I got this right:
1. We're fighting a war. People are dying. We want the ones doin' the dyin' to be them other guys.
2. We warn people not to do things that might make some of our guys die.
3. Someone does those things anyway, even after we warn 'em not to.

I'd call that suicide.

'Course, if they happened to be French, we wouldn't need to warn 'em either. Enemy combatants, ya know. Might apply to CNN too.

[Mr_Magoo]

Hmmmm, They seem to think that sat. uplink, video cameras, sat. phones, etc. will still work after the EMP bombs go off . . .

[YOMO]

Hey Helen,
Since you already look DEAD, why don't you pop over there and report? You see to have all theanswers.

[William McKinley]

What the heck is Gulufuture anyway?

[Ichneumon]

I'll bet $1000 that this moron "reporter" misunderstood what was actually said.

During war the miltary will go after anything that could be used as Iraq command and control communication links, and obviously that includes any satellite links.

I'm sure what the "Pentagon official" *actually* said was that using a satphone that hasn't been previously registered with the US military could be hazardous because it might be mistaken for an Iraqi unit communicating with headquarters, and we'd understandably take out the transmitter. We can't allow a field commander in charge of WMD to remain in contact with Baghdad -- he might get orders to launch the WMDs over that channel. So don't use equipment that may make you appear that way, or if you do, you do it at your own (high) risk. Thus the "they've been warned" comment.

The brain-dead notion that we would target reporter uplinks *BECAUSE* they were reporters "getting the word out" is this bubble-head's own misunderstanding.

[hgro]

Sounds about right to me. Do what you are told or suffer the consequences.

[LaGrone]

If she wants to go stand by the equipment, that is her decision. Once the bomb heads for that target, she will probably regret that decision.

[Revolting cat!]

It'll be no big loss, really! US journalism schools turn out plenty enough highly trained Communists, some with MS degrees, to step in Ms Adies Addidas sneakers at a moment's notice. Rest assured that the clichés will keep flowing without interruption!

[dennisw]

Good idea. The only way to neutralize the world press which leans commie. The USA can take a good lesson from what Israel did at Jenin to stop the slurs and lies of massacre.

Generally the world press does not respect America so why should we respect them and give them a dream venue to propagandize? To get their rocks off? Screw 'em!

[dennisw]

According to Ms. Adie, who twelve years ago covered the last Gulf War, the Pentagon attitude is: "entirely hostile to the the free spread of information."

Get that BBC burqa babe outta here. We owe her and the BBC NOTHING! They are vile propagandists when it comes to Israel and the lefty slant they take in all their reporting. We owe them bupkas!

[Boundless]

> ...the Pentagon has also threatened they:
> "may find it necessary to bomb areas in which war
> correspondents are attempting to report from the
> Iraqi side."

2+2=4, folks

Running near this thread is another one about possible
Iraqi attempts to jam GPS and sat feeds.

Anything that looks like a hostile emitter will be targetted.
Unless you're 104% sure that yours doesn't,
don't turn it on.

[observer5]

""I am enormously pessimistic of the chance of decent on-the-spot reporting, as the war occurs,"

Good. We need no war whores...

[Jhoffa_]

I can see why the Pentagon can't allow live SAT feeds of their invasion.. That's obviously a no-no.

But making it public like this isn't going to bode well for us in the press.

[b4its2late]

Is Helen Thomas an Independent journalist?