Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wasn’t the photo shoot of AF1 supposed to be of Barack by extension?
Annuit Coeptis ^ | 5/9/09 | Blaine Fallis

Posted on 05/09/2009 3:06:24 AM PDT by TWP guy

Oh yes - there is a report released Friday afternoon to avoid further embarrassment, that misdirects the public by focusing on who knew of the photo shoot and when. Not once does the report explore in the slightest WHY they would be wanting to do a photo shoot of AF1 in the first place. No no, that’s not important, right? But the report does confirm several times over that this was in fact a photo shoot that had been in the planning since early March, or before.

That’s when it dawned on me: this President is the most photographed man in America. Image really is everything not only to him, but to many of his supporters (I’m thinking, for example, Hollywood), and taking an AF1 lookalike up over NYC with an F-16 fighter jet for the purposes of a photo shoot should not surprise anyone. The White House should spare no expense to capture history unfolding, as we witness this monumental period together. We need more photographs! These could’ve been so great for the gallery.

...We now have a celebrity in the Oval Office, backed by many other celebs, and supported by a celeb-loving culture. And in order to capture car scenes that ring true, we have a movie crew in New York crashing into actual citizens by accident last week. In order to capture the AF1 in a fresh new way (it all has to be new now, doesn’t it?) we have 9/11 accidentally re-enacted.

(Excerpt) Read more at news-political.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events; US: New York
KEYWORDS: af1; airforceone; bho44; bhoairforceone; celebrity; flybye; flyover; scareforce1
By the way, I'm now writing under my name Blaine Fallis, and not Typical White Person, and American Sentinel has moved over to news-political.com - Annuit Coeptis.
1 posted on 05/09/2009 3:06:25 AM PDT by TWP guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TWP guy
Obama laughed at the 911 Atrocities, released those
that wrought them.

The AF(not1) plane ride was for laughs, probably
by terrorists over Ground Zero, with great amusement
at the havoc they had created, and were creating.


2 posted on 05/09/2009 3:12:53 AM PDT by Diogenesis (Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy

The photo appears to be real but there’s still something very wrong about the whole thing. That has to be about the lowest quality “PR” photo I’ve ever seen for over $300,000.

We still need to know everything about the mess. Who was on the plane, Who asked for it, where are the rest of the photos?


3 posted on 05/09/2009 3:49:00 AM PDT by cripplecreek (The poor bastards have us surrounded.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy

something stills smells fishy yesterday two more new tidbits made the story more puzzling

one:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30638151/

The announcement was as dramatic as the setting. Speaking live from the crown of the Statue of Liberty, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar announced exclusively Friday morning on the TODAY show that the statue will reopen to the public on Independence Day.

and two:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/05/08/costs_for_that_air_force_one_f.html

The final report on the late April incident came on the same day the Interior Department announced plans to reopen the Statue of Liberty’s crown to visitors for the first time since before the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The Air Force jets appeared to use the statue as a backdrop during the flyover.

The flight was conducted to take publicity photos of Air Force One, flying low over Manhattan’s skyscrapers, for promotional material. Gates said in his letter that the flight also included a training component for pilots to practice instruments approaches and landings at Atlantic City Airport. He said that “with the exception of one combat photographer, a standard crew complement performed the mission...There were no non-duty personnel or passengers on board.”


So we are to believe that the fly over photo op and the re- opening of the Statues crown are un-related and Obama knew nothing about it, and that no one was on board and that it is just coincidence that they landed at the casinos in Atlantic city, and that no one was on board but a photographer to take a picture of the statue FROM INSIDE AIR FORCE ONE? how would this picture be different from any other picture taken of the statue from a plane and how would you even know what plane the picture was taken from?

Something does not add up...


4 posted on 05/09/2009 4:14:39 AM PDT by edzo4 (NoBama 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy
The irony of this photo shoot is that is DOES portray another attack on America, this time by the occupant of AF1. They have been attacking our Country and our way of life since Jan. 20, 09.

I heard once that both AF1s went up together, one as a decoy. Now, we are told that O Boner was not aware of it. BS.

5 posted on 05/09/2009 4:18:08 AM PDT by fishnuts2 (Proud to be a bitter clinger.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
My thinking exactly. No professional photographer takes just one photo.

BTW: Note how the released photo makes Lady Liberty so insignificant in comparison to Obama's chariot.

Spend 300 kilobucks and panic half a city just to get Lady Liberty into a shot then choose that shot?

No professional photographer would choose that photo unless it was to convey some sort of message or unless the photo was merely incidental to the mission.

6 posted on 05/09/2009 4:19:23 AM PDT by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Clive

Where’s the pic that was supposed to have been released yesterday?


7 posted on 05/09/2009 4:21:33 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy

Who was on the plane? Find that little piece of info out and it all comes tumbling down.


8 posted on 05/09/2009 4:26:14 AM PDT by mirkwood (Dec. 21, 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy

Hopefully, the flight was to give Al Franken his only brush
with D.C. politics.


9 posted on 05/09/2009 4:28:07 AM PDT by Fireone (Those who voted for change deserve it......the rest of us don't!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf
knarf wrote:
"Where’s the pic that was supposed to have been released yesterday?"

Here it is:

Now, pray tell, where are the rest of the photos?

10 posted on 05/09/2009 4:29:30 AM PDT by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: edzo4
a training component for pilots to practice instruments approaches and landings at Atlantic City Airport.

that excuse is too ridiculous to even comment on.

Also, there is absolutely no way that the White House Chief of staff didn't know about this before it happened

11 posted on 05/09/2009 4:32:47 AM PDT by SirFishalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Clive
Liberty shooting up at the belly of the Beast?

Perfect!

Publish this everywhere!

12 posted on 05/09/2009 4:34:10 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy

What experienced or professional photographer would take a photo with a huge shadow in it?
This photo is terrible.

I’d be interested in a “reconstruction” of the flight path based on witness footage to try and ascertain camera angle(s) and potential photos because this photo is not good at all.


13 posted on 05/09/2009 4:38:41 AM PDT by visualops (portraits.artlife.us or visit my freeper page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive
PHOTO SHOPPERS NEEDED!

LADY LIBERTY FIRES AT HER LATEST ATTACKER

.. (story on D5)

14 posted on 05/09/2009 4:39:18 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood
Who was on the plane and how much did they pay?

Is Obama fund raising already? (That is all he ever did in his political career)

15 posted on 05/09/2009 4:40:10 AM PDT by Mr. K (physically unabel to proofreed (<---oops))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: visualops; Buckhead
I’d be interested in a “reconstruction” of the flight path based on witness footage to try and ascertain camera angle(s) and potential photos because this photo is not good at all."

I believe FreepeRs are already on it.

That was my thought too.

16 posted on 05/09/2009 4:41:21 AM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy
Flyover

This was the best they could do? $300K gets you this amateurish shot? I've seen better sense of composition by the local highschool photography club. Sorry, folks. I'm not buying any of it. I'm still betting "joyride," with members of the Saudi Royal family sipping champagne.
17 posted on 05/09/2009 4:41:32 AM PDT by PowderMonkey (Will Work for Ammo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy

Who are they kidding? That picture is a throw-away at best. It could have been taken by a 10 year old. As others have said professional photogs take hundreds of pics to get the correct lighting, background, perspective, etc. Perhaps Obama fired the old white house photog and replaced him with an affirmative action guy like David Patterson did.


18 posted on 05/09/2009 4:50:58 AM PDT by Conan the Conservative (Crush the liberals, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of the hippies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clive

So what is the copyright stamp on the right edge of the photo? AP/Lehtkuva 2009. Is this the photographer or who it was released to?


19 posted on 05/09/2009 4:50:59 AM PDT by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

It appears to be a Finnish photo agency. Here’s their website...
http://www.lehtikuva.fi/corporateinfo/en/


20 posted on 05/09/2009 4:57:29 AM PDT by PowderMonkey (Will Work for Ammo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Toespi
I just grabbed an image at random. They are all the same but most that I came across were smaller. I did not even notice the stamp in the upper right corner.

I had first tried to see if there was a White House page with the picture but had no luck. Apparently the WH is not sufficiently proud of the shot to put it in its own site.

21 posted on 05/09/2009 5:05:15 AM PDT by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Clive
"Apparently the WH is not sufficiently proud of the shot to put it in its own site."

Probably because they can't. It's not theirs. Appears to be copyrighted by Suomen Kuvalehti.fi. A weekly news magazine in Finland.
22 posted on 05/09/2009 5:13:14 AM PDT by PowderMonkey (Will Work for Ammo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Clive

I would assume that the WH has professional official photographers, as does the Air Force. Is there a possibility that this photo was taken by a satellite?


23 posted on 05/09/2009 5:21:28 AM PDT by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: mirkwood
Who was on the plane?

A good chance among those on board were Tax Cheats
Air Force One in Planet of the Apes Pictures, Images and Photos
24 posted on 05/09/2009 5:48:55 AM PDT by Son House (Make A Bad Situation Worse, Raise Taxes, Increase Government Spending, Thanks Øbama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy

Pictures of the president’s jet over New York and the Statue of Liberty are meant to convey these messages:

1) solidarity with the terrorists

2) an implicit threat to America

3) superiority to America’s liberty


25 posted on 05/09/2009 5:49:49 AM PDT by Tax Government (Cult Obama? In 50 years he will be an ugly footnote)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy

I still don’t buy that this was a photo shoot. Aside from the fact that they could have achieved the same thing with photo shop, why did they need the fighter jets? And if ou look at the photo, it’s not like it was done by an expert photographer. They use a wide angle lens, which is shown by the fact that the Statue of Liberty was so small in the photo. This was obviously done by amatuers, which suggests to me that the photo was just something that someone decided to take, or possibly the photo was itself a fake, in order to cover up the real purpose of the mission. What I want to know is what was the real purpose of the mission? In order to know that, you’ve got to know who was on the plane and what were they doing during the flight? So far, no word on that.


26 posted on 05/09/2009 6:37:59 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf

I wonder if you could make anything of the ferries that are in the photo. How many ferries were there at the particular time it flew over?


27 posted on 05/09/2009 6:39:50 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
The pic looks photoshopped to me.

I'm with you on your questions. What time did the plane fly over Lady Liberty? Then, what time were those ferries docked in their particular alignment?

Then, are there any shadows that give a clue as to the time of day? The brightness of the plane and the darkness of the background gives me pause.

The games afoot, Sherlockian sleuths. Carry on.

Leni

28 posted on 05/09/2009 6:59:19 AM PDT by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: PowderMonkey
This was the best they could do? $300K gets you this amateurish shot? I've seen better sense of composition by the local highschool photography club.

Here's where you're wrong. The shot is exactly what Barry intended. He wants to show himself as Air Force One overshadowing, dominating, and making small Lady Liberty--this is the concept of the primacy of his office over the entire nation.
29 posted on 05/09/2009 7:06:48 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal
I'm with you on your questions. What time did the plane fly over Lady Liberty? Then, what time were those ferries docked in their particular alignment?

I saw film of the plane flying from the right to the left toward the Statue of Liberty with the fighter slightly trailing it. It looked as if it could have been shot from Brooklyn. From there (well, from where I lived near 38th St and 5th Ave) you can see the State of Liberty to the left and Manhattan to the right.
30 posted on 05/09/2009 7:10:38 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
That has to be about the lowest quality “PR” photo I’ve ever seen

Exactly.

31 posted on 05/09/2009 7:12:45 AM PDT by FourPeas (I am the pink flamingo on the great lawn of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal

You can see reflection on the window, and a darkening of the bottom of the screen from the fact that the photo was taken out of a window. Not the ideal setup for a “glamour shot.” If you were going to spend $325,000 doing this, you’d use a professional, not a fighter pilot, to take the shot. Most likely, when they realized that they were going to need a photo to support their story, they sent another plane out to photograph the statue, and then photoshopped the plane into the photo.


32 posted on 05/09/2009 7:36:50 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: visualops

why would you take a publicity photo on such a crappy overcast day in the first place?


33 posted on 05/09/2009 7:39:53 AM PDT by Taffini ( Mr. Pippen and Mr. Waffles do not approve)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
OOPS
34 posted on 05/09/2009 7:45:16 AM PDT by odin2008 (EVIL TRIUMPHS WHEN GOOD MEN DO NOTHING)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy
Where's Buckhead when we need him?

Leni

35 posted on 05/09/2009 7:58:12 AM PDT by MinuteGal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy
That’s when it dawned on me: this President is the most photographed man in America.

Okay, it's dawning on me too that, the photoshoot over NYC was not just to photograph the Statue of Liberty or NYC. The photoshoot was for Obama's ego-trip.

So, okay, we've had enough photos of him, from all angles and from many different situations. But, has anybody seen a statue of "The One".

"The One" believes that he's larger than life and larger than anyone that came before him. So, he believes that, a larger than life statue that captures his essence would be the most appropriate tribute to himself. So, he's looking over the possibility of replacing the statue of liberty with one of himself. But, instead of him holding up a torch, he'll be holding up a hammer and sickle.
36 posted on 05/09/2009 8:18:51 AM PDT by adorno (Where is Branch 4?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: adorno
So, he's looking over the possibility of replacing the statue of liberty with one of himself. But, instead of him holding up a torch, he'll be holding up a hammer and sickle.

Which reminds me...

I wonder if anyone can do a photoshop of Obama as a replacement of the statue of liberty and Air Force One flying above the statue.
37 posted on 05/09/2009 8:24:06 AM PDT by adorno (Where is Branch 4?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Taffini

None of it makes any sense. Especially releasing only one (lousy) photo. Given the hue and cry, why not release a bunch so people feel like they at least made it worthwhile? The whole thing stinks. Like they say ‘what’s wrong with this picture’?


38 posted on 05/09/2009 11:52:19 AM PDT by visualops (portraits.artlife.us or visit my freeper page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

I was just about to post the same thing when I saw your comment. The public is being hoodwinked. That flight was not for a photo op. If it was, they likely would have taken a lot of video in addition to stills.
What was the weather like the day of the flyover? Was it perfectly sunny like this photo?


39 posted on 05/09/2009 8:16:48 PM PDT by visualops (portraits.artlife.us or visit my freeper page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy

For comparison- real file photos of AF1, without window sills and window glare.
http://www.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/021126-O-9999G-024.jpg
http://www.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/021126-O-9999G-023.jpg


40 posted on 05/09/2009 8:25:13 PM PDT by visualops (portraits.artlife.us or visit my freeper page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edzo4

Fits the pattern. This whole obama world is fishy.


41 posted on 05/09/2009 8:25:36 PM PDT by Texas resident (Older but smarter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Clive
Here is a link to the photo actually released by the White House.

It's important to use the actual file if you want to look for metadata.

In that file you will find the EXIF header has been removed, so we don't know what type of camera was used. My guess is it was the pilot's personal $150 point-and shoot and he took this picture as a souvenir. There was no professional photographer on the F-16, as the intention was to film the two planes together from a thrid platform.

Also, you can tell the file as been photoshopped (maybe just to remove the EXIF data) by the distinctive presence of tags "JFIF", "Ducky", and "Adobe" in the header. Google those tags to see why that is a signature of Photoshop.

42 posted on 05/09/2009 8:27:33 PM PDT by Royal Wulff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal

The original White House photo, as released, was run through Photoshop for some reason. See my post above.


43 posted on 05/09/2009 8:30:23 PM PDT by Royal Wulff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: visualops

Very telling. Those shots reveal something the WH released photo lacks: visual distortion/bluring caused by exhaust heat in the visual field immediately aft of the engines.


44 posted on 05/10/2009 5:30:27 AM PDT by PowderMonkey (Will Work for Ammo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Royal Wulff
This deserves a thread of its own to explicitly discuss evidence that this was a photoshopped picture.
45 posted on 05/10/2009 6:16:30 AM PDT by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Royal Wulff; PowderMonkey
It doesn't really matter if it was run through photoshop. The EXIF data however was purposefully removed. As you can see, the other AF1 stock photos have EXIF data albeit limited. What it says though is that the photo was either run through a filter or just the EXIF data removed. It doesn't look like it was run through a filter or enhanced which is actually odd because it is a lousy shot. Now the photo up at the defense link somebody did enhance that copy.
About the exhaust it's hard to tell because they are over water but I do not see any noticeable distortion or blurring of the water surface wave pattern.

The big problem with this image is that it is terrible!! You don't take AF1 glamour shots through a window! This is an amateur photo!!
The flight was so obviously not for the stated purpose and they think we are all idiots!
46 posted on 05/10/2009 3:55:10 PM PDT by visualops (portraits.artlife.us or visit my freeper page)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: TWP guy

47 posted on 05/10/2009 8:58:23 PM PDT by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric cartman voice* 'I love you guys')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson