Skip to comments.DUmmie FUnnies 08-07-08 ("Reuters admits altering Beirut photo")
Posted on 08/07/2006 7:43:42 AM PDT by PJ-Comix
click here to read article
And now Reuters has withdrawn ALL of his photos (so we cannot investigate them further online, guess the pajama people will have to go to the library, pull out copies of Time, Newsweak, the NYet Times, etc... and look for bylines.
Wonder if a Nexis search would point to the photocredits.
I'd bet this isn't the first time and Rueters pulled them all when they found a 3rd, 4th, and 5th doctored photo.
If they hadn't pulled them all, this controversy would just keep building.
I am surprised at how much play this is getting despite the lack of drive-by media coverage.
Uh huh,...I can't think of a single country that has been able to do things like build schools, hospitals and homes without the help of terrorist groups.
I am willing to say they were right there to dig out the people.
Oh, I bet you're right. In fact, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if they were there much earlier than that.
I do not think this is a group that is just into terrorism.
If they were ever posted then they will be cached in Google, Yahoo, etc.
The Internet is forever. You can't delete anything completely.
Wow, talk about being out of touch! Where has he been for the last 30 years, living in a cave somewhere? The MSM has been anti-Israel, pro-Arab for as long as I can remember, and I'll turn 69 this week unless I croak before Thursday.
"If you fax a copy of the Constitution to someone, the content of the fax is accurate, but the fax paper is obviously altered from the original parchment. But the facts are the same."
The key element of course would be that the contents if this fax would be verifiable by several independent sources. The Rather memo could not be verified by ANY other source.....That is why it had to be faked!
Can't wait to hear the stunning conclusion. BTW, you have a sexy voice!
Thanx. BTW, I just flicked on MSNBC to see "The Most" with Alison Stewart. I'm curious to see if she will cover the Reuters fake story scandal since that show is about what is going on in the Web. Come on, Vulcan Ears, don't fail me now!
Fortunately for the new nation Jefferson was still in France when the Constitution was being written and ratified. Quite likely he would have opposed it and may have had enough power to prevent it being ratified. There is no evidence that he ever understood it anyway.
If only there was some way to prevent poor fake pictures and information from getting into the MSM. The media should hire people to prevent this. We can even call them, well I don't know, perhaps "editors". I realize this is a radical concept.
I love how these dorks say the photoshop was SO obvious, yet it took a right winger and none of them to expose it.
LOL. The man was "suspended" and the news organization has recalled all of his photographs and I am wondering if they took back his cash reward from last week too.
And the DUers still believe the photo was real... lol... are the DUpes really real?
BEHOLD, the POWER of CHEESE... I mean the Alternative Media
LOL... sort of like Benjamin Franklin seemed to understand everything except economics
Dieux Dieux LeSoir (10 posts) Sun Aug-06-06 04:16 PM Response to Reply #13 16. Reuters shouldn't have backed down Whether or not the photo was enhanced isn't whats most important. Reuters is with us. They shouldn't give the dark side any credit ever. It's war.
This lets the rightists crow about how the media "lies". This is their "proof" of "leftist media agenda " journalism they're always whining about.
Give them nothing. All's fair in war.
But the facts are the same. Very slick sleight of hand by the GOP. Confuse and distort. They are masters of it.
Like the "forged document" that documented Duhbya's AWOL escapades, the document's veracity was called into question, but the facts it contained never were.
WoW! The DUmmies were saying just the opposite about the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth! Just reread the previous quotes and imagine that the quotes were from Freepers and the topic was Swift Boat. It's a good fit.
I can't help wonder if the DUmmies are more guilty of hypocrisy or double standard! LOL!.
and the DNC Noise Machine can cry "foul!" over and over and over.Meanwhile; the facts remain.
But the facts are the same. Very slick sleight of hand by the Dems. Confuse and distort. They are masters of it.
Like the "blatant lies" that documented Kerry's phony medal escapades, the Veteran's veracity was called into question, but the facts it contained never were.
There, that's better.
Incredible. They will accept an obvious fake only because conservatives had a hand in revealing it. I really need to market some junk for these morons to buy. I could sell them the Brooklyn Bridge if I painted "Bush Sucks" on it.
Cameras could come with a checksum to indicate any editing.
A reputable news agency would then ask to see the full unaltered file after determining that there have been alterations.
In case you haven't been watching--I thought the issue was dead and buried, but alas no--the madwoman is at it again.
She admits to extortion, and calls a judge in the case "a boob."
Link on my next comment.
Compared to Hamilton Franklin's understanding was limited. Most of his life there was little economic theory even available and I have seen nothing to indicate that he studied it much. Compared to an ordinary guy I am sure he was highly knowledgable.
He never advocated the economic follies that Jefferson did that is for sure. America's enemies could not have designed a more limiting and reactionary course for it to follow than Jeffersonian political/economy. It's disastrous mis-prescription was clearly shown by the course which led to the Civil War defeat of the Confederacy.
Jefferson's concept of the Constitution was that there was not one but dozens. His argument against the National Bank demonstrates that he did not understand the instrument or the Bank.
Why go to all the trouble? Just open a paypal account and start a "I'm only $10 away from painting 'Bush Sucks' on every bridge in the nation!" thread at DU. Photoshop a few samples of your work in progress, keep the thread bumped, retire a millionaire.
ConsAreLiars (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-06-06 04:07 PM Response to Reply #135
137. Do you now admit that the heading of your post was false? Or are you still standing by your assertion that "Reuters admits altering Beirut photo," even though there is not one bit of evidence of any such a statement by Reuters? Blurting out childish insults does not constitute evidence.
Hey ConsAreLiars, how insulated are you not to realize that Reuters has ADMITTED to doctoring the photo? Dumbass.
Prob b/c your avatar is a Star of David. Moonbats hate Jews.
Fun to watch that trainwreck happening.
This exchange says it all:
"What sort of man needs a restraining order against a woman?"
Dja ever see "Fatal Attraction?"
Ever hear of "Squeaky" Fromme?
Unstable women can be plenty dangerous.
"Well-behaved women rarely make history.
it's not just a bumper sticker - it's a philosophy of life!"
This is in one of her comment sections.
Oh, great. I just gave up popcorn. Back on the ol' diet again. Now I won't have anything to snack on while reading her garbage.
Well, here goes....
Because rather than going to a local real-life attorney, she searched the internet for legal advice. This is a real basket-case here, and bears watching, at least for entertainment.
"After consulting with Mr. Paul Davis, a lawyer affiliated with the denver firm moet/white, Count Cockula decided it was cost-effective to pursue legal action against me."
Apparently she did consult with an attorney, at one point, to pursue Jeff Goldstein. Her "...it was not cost effective" statement makes it clear he didn't think she had a case. What she hasn't done is acquire an attorney in her defense. That is a major mistake.
Her train is about at the end of track and the wreck is about to happen. She has no clue as to what constitutes libel or veiled threats. Her continued rants are fodder for the plaintiff's attorneys. She is clueless. She's enjoying the notoriety this has brought, but the fallout hasn't sunk in. WOW!
If you check, though, you'll find out she consulted this attorney via the internet, not in real life.
And you are absolutely correct; she is being sued, and she does need an attorney.
Not only does she have a restraining order against her, she freely admits online to seeking money from the plaintiff. But she doesn't see how this can be considered extortion? Give me a break.
LOL! These people are certified whack jobs. Certified, I tell you!~
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.