7/11/2008

17 Responses to “D’oh!!!!!”

1. It seems to me that part of the “news” of this story is that the Iranians apparently Photoshoped out the 25% of their missiles that did not leave the launcher. The LA Times certainly doesn’t pull any punches when it comes to trying to make America look bad.

   tyree (139bd6) — 7/12/2008 @ 12:36 am

   
   

2. Since the altitude and exhaust plume changes every second, how do we know that this not one rocket duplicated three times?

   Perfect Sense (23c691) — 7/12/2008 @ 12:44 am

   
   

3. Mockery of the Iran Missile Launch image:

   LGF: More Iranian Fauxtography Discovered

   Wired.com: Attack of the Photoshopped Missiles (Updated)

   Paul (ae2fbe) — 7/12/2008 @ 3:42 am

   
   

4. West Bank barrier: An article in Monday’s Section A about divisions between Jews and Arabs in Jerusalem said a “massive concrete barrier” separates Israel from much of the West Bank. The barrier is a series of walls, trenches and fences and is not all concrete.

   And the Times is just now figuring that out? Pathetic.

   Pablo (99243e) — 7/12/2008 @ 4:24 am

   
   

5. *apparently was digitally altered*

   Why the ambiguity? “Apparently” means “seems to be but not necessarily so” the way they use it.

   I think it’s because the language takes the accusing finger out of the accusation for the purpose of not offending Iran out of concerns for their access to Iran and their physical health. I suspect that any corrections by other usual suspect media outfits will use similar language.

   j curtis (c84b9e) — 7/12/2008 @ 7:23 am

   
   

6. More old news covered by the LA Times. Most of us were laughing about this days ago.

   Jack (d9cbc5) — 7/12/2008 @ 7:35 am

   
   

7. The fish I’ve recently caught have requested that they not be wrapped in the LA Times.

   Old Coot (cb828a) — 7/12/2008 @ 7:53 am

   
   

8. Wait a minute, where’s the guy in the blue helmet?

   Dmac (416471) — 7/12/2008 @ 8:00 am

   
   

9. Good thing that the wire services and the LAT had all those editors … so that Charles Johnson could catch them publishing a crudely photoshopped photograph supplied by the Iranians …

   SPQR (26be8b) — 7/12/2008 @ 8:29 am

   
   

10. This proves that blubberbluster was right.

    JD Esq. (5f0e11) — 7/12/2008 @ 8:43 am

    
    

11. Apparently altered because it has not yet been ruled upon by the fabled Gang of Four Layers of Editors within the Times. Apparently, they are all out to lunch.

    Patricia (f56a97) — 7/12/2008 @ 9:06 am

    
    

12. This is terrible news: Iran has digital stealth missiles. You can’t even see them coming until you read the newspaper, and by then it’s too late.

    Steverino (1dda08) — 7/12/2008 @ 11:09 am

    
    

13. It’s time for the Iranian people to throw these tyrants out of Iran. Apparently, they are a bunch of bumbling fools as well as tyrants.

    Gina (6261e4) — 7/12/2008 @ 12:35 pm

    
    

14. They run a photo TOP CENTER FRONT PAGE that is FOUR column wide and what was the attribution/credit?

    This is too good, folks.

    Revolutionary Guard.

    Not even a pretense of layering.

    Ed (d17ceb) — 7/12/2008 @ 2:51 pm

    
    

15. It later became clear that the original photo showed only three rockets

    There would seem to be nothing “original” about the three rocket image in relation to the shopped image. They photoshopped a photo that was snapped a split second after the untampered with three rocket photo and then they shopped it. You can tell by the lengths of the missile trails.

    Calling it “original” might a Freudian slip if it was the original one given to the US media and the western media instructed Iran to give them a photo without a dud.

    j curtis (c84b9e) — 7/12/2008 @ 3:26 pm

    
    

16. “As the media editor working the msnbc.com home page yesterday, I was frustrated with the quality of a fuzzy video image we published of the Iranian missile launch,” said Rich Shulman, the network’s associate multimedia editor. “So I was thrilled when the top image crossed the news wires.”

    This was from the NYT article. I think I was right when I guessed that the western msm didn’t like the real image because of the dud and asked for a fake one or created the fake one themselves using ps. Where is the “fuzzy” image of which he speaks? It is probably the three rocket photo. Why would there have been 4 rockets in the earlier fuzzy video image?. There is a flaw ( a semi circle artifact ) on the far right missile in the untampered with photo. That flaw may have even been added later to give them the “fuzzy” excuse.

    Or, the 4 missile image is the real one and they added some unnecessary cloning to it and then released a fake image with a dud just to mess with the people who have been giving the islamocrat media so much grief about fakery.

    j curtis (c84b9e) — 7/12/2008 @ 4:42 pm

    
    

17. The plume of the extra missile is cloned from the plume of the second missile so that last idea in #16 should be discarded. The msnbc guy, Shulman, is claiming that he was happy to receive another image without the artifact on the far right missile and didn’t care that they added another missile and shopped over the dud. So he knew it was a fake but it looked more photogenic.

    j curtis (c84b9e) — 7/12/2008 @ 5:02 pm