Pathetically transparent? Like believing an occupying force did absolutely zero to hamper the movements of the native population while they were on site? Even without judging them on an absolute scale the statements they made are clearly PR and not based on any type of acceptable military operation.
They occupied this area for weeks. And apparently had no interactions with the public, didnt check any person or home for weapons, didnt monitor or track any movement, didnt take anything of import, found staging grounds, temporary housing, storage yards, vehicle bays, etc without displacing any locals that were still there?
To even pass that on means you put some faith in what are clearly bold faced lies. If you want to appear neutral at least throw ins "take it for what its worth", instead of jumping to its defense as soon as the absurdity gets pointed out.