Posted on 08/06/2006 4:35:24 AM PDT by Crazieman
Edited on 08/06/2006 5:09:15 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Yes, you can: according to the media, the media DOES NOT, NEVER, EVER manipulate the news in any way, because repeat after me 10,000,000 times "the media is unbiased". Get it? "Unbiased". "The media is unbiased".
That means that ANY manipulation of events, be it in text, video or still photography, blatantly breaks the ethical standards the mass media is so inordinately proud of bragging about.
Making the smoke thicker in this photograph is earthshaking?
I can't see the importance of it all.
Does anybody realize that this makes al-reuters more accountable than dan rather?
"Al Reuters ping!"
LOL! It's tough being show-prep for Rush, but someone has to do it! ;)
Good post backhoe.
Thank God for the educated wise eyes of the Pajama People all around the Net for their dedication to ferret out the truth from the lies fed to us by the Evil MSM.
I truly hate the MSM, like the Devil, they mix a little truth with a lot of lies to confuse us.
I would suggest that that al Reuters, whose collective mind set was biased in favor of the Islamofascist terrorists, figured that hiring Arab photographers was good for the cause in general. An Affirmative Action hiring policy for Arabs, you might say.
It is perhaps worth noting that Satan's first recorded words were "Hath not the Lord said..."
Looks like Fox is going to cover the reuters story. They just did a tease mentioning, "We got the picture to prove it."
Only 7 hours behind FR. Not bad. Not bad at all...
Why would Hajj alter the photo? For what purpose?
If that kill hour is correct, Reuters is saying they killed the photo at 4am PST on Saturday, well before bloggers began raising questions about it. Did they get the wrong date on the kill time, or have we spent an inordinate amount of energy chasing something they caught on their own somewhere before dawn on Saturday?
'cuz he's a Joooooooooo?
Come on! Waddaya think????
Can someone do a closeup of the gloved hand in photo #2?
I guess things got hot for Yahoo.
"Sorry, the page you requested was not found.
The story or page you were trying to access may have expired.
If you are having trouble locating a destination on Yahoo! News, try visiting the Yahoo! News home page or browse through the News site index. Also, you may find what you're looking for if you try searching below.
"
BUT they did have the photo up hours after the "picture kill" edict went out. I only went to Yahoo after I saw the thread.
Answering my own question....
Their language is a bit convoluted. The actual kill time is at the bottom of the photo's caption, and is around 3am today. The GMT reference in the caption reproduced in this thread is the time the faked photo was first transmitted, not the kill time.
The head post on this thread omits the actual kill time, but you can see it on the caption of the actual photo on Yahoo.
No, I'm serious. Surely a professional photographer would know that it looked like crap. And the original had just as much smoke. I don't get it.
I think that time was an identifier of the photo, not a timestamp on the kill notification.
See al Taqiyya...
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.