Visit the Cellar!

The Cellar Image of the Day is just a section of a larger web community: bright folks talking about everything. The Cellar is the original coffeeshop with no coffee and no shop. Founded in 1990, The Cellar is one of the oldest communities on the net. Join us at the table if you like!

 
What's IotD?

The interesting, amazing, or mind-boggling images of our days.

IotD Stuff

ARCHIVES - over 13 years of IotD!
About IotD
RSS2
XML

Permalink Latest Image

Dec 13th, 2017: I Ainít Scared of no Straw

Recent Images

Dec 12th, 2017: Sierra Railway No. 3
Dec 11th, 2017: Halszka
Dec 10th, 2017: Tuturumuri School
Dec 9th, 2017: Stretchers
Dec 8th, 2017: Wounded Warrior
Dec 7th, 2017: Infamy
Dec 6th, 2017: MAREA

The CELLAR Tip Mug
Some folks who have noticed IotD

Neatorama
Worth1000
Mental Floss
Boing Boing
Switched
W3streams
GruntDoc's Blog
No Quarters
Making Light
darrenbarefoot.com
GromBlog
b3ta
Church of the Whale Penis
UniqueDaily.com
Sailor Coruscant
Projectionist

Link to us and we will try to find you after many months!

Common image haunts

Astro Pic of the Day
Earth Sci Pic of the Day
We Make Money Not Art
Spluch
ochevidec.net
Strange New Products
Geisha Asobi Blog
Cute animals blog (in Russian)
20minutos.es
Yahoo Most Emailed

Please avoid copyrighted images (or get permission) when posting!

Advertising

Philadelphia Pawn Shop
The best real estate agent in Montgomery County
The best T.38 Fax provider
Epps Beverages and Beer, Limerick, PA
Sal's Pizza, Elkins Park
Burholme Auto Body, Philadelphia
Coles Tobacco, Pottstown
ERM Auto Service, Glenside
Glenside Collision
Moorehead Catering, Trappe
Salon 153, Bala
Dominicks Auto Body, Phoenixville

   Undertoad  Sunday Aug 6 11:19 AM

8/6/2006: Beirut Photoshop



IotD is not a political blog at all, and that's by design. On the rest of the Cellar, I personally enjoy talking politics all the time. But on IotD, when it comes to politics, what's mind-boggling to me might not be mind-boggling to you and vice-versa. And the mideast, well that's like the abortion of talking politics; everyone harshly, completely on one side or the other, bringing maximum outrage to the topic. Plenty mind-boggling about it, but the arguments weigh down the enjoyable side of mind-boggling very quickly.

So why this political entry about the mideast? I dunno, I guess I think this photo is mind-boggling no matter which side you're on. Let's see what you think.

The above photo is from the Reuters news service, and I found it in Yahoo! Most Popular today at 10:30 am. As of this writing, it's still there. The caption reads:

Quote:
Smoke billows from burning buildings destroyed during an overnight Israeli air raid on Beirut's suburbs August 5, 2006. Many buildings were flattened during the attack. REUTERS/Adnan Hajj
Problem is, it's Photoshopped. The repeating sections of smoke clouds are unmistakeable "clone tool" use.

The blogosphere caught this really fast -- because it's really bad work. The photo was then cancelled by Reuters:



This might be the original:



There are various non-political aspects of this which make it mind-boggling, and I think you can enjoy it no matter whether you love or hate Israel, no matter whether you love or hate Hezbollah, no matter whether your love or hate Lebanon.

Although perhaps "enjoy" is not the right word.

It is a sign of the times. But does it mean that our information today is LESS accurate, or is it MORE accurate? The tools make it easier to fake information... while at the same time, giving the skeptical audience a way to share notes and disseminate corrections.

One other note...



I've heard news service photographers say that when Hezbollah specifically sets up a shot, sometimes it's obvious that the photographers are being "fed" -- and some photographers refuse to shoot such situations. What do you take from the above shot?

What do you take, when you find out it was taken by Adnan Hajj, the same Reuters photographer reponsible for the Photoshop?

I, for one, don't know.


MsSparkie  Sunday Aug 6 11:56 AM

Good link at the bottom. Nothing surprising about their tactics, but good to see it being exposed.



Flint  Sunday Aug 6 12:14 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad

This might be the original:


Why would they have bothered photoshopping that? It looks about the same.


Trilby  Sunday Aug 6 12:27 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
Why would they have bothered photoshopping that? It looks about the same.
Because Arabs are way big into drama.

Anyway, those little girls were mere females (no big loss) and dying for your faith is the sure-fire way to Heaven, right? Only...only what do female martyr's get for their sacrifice? Surely not the same 70-some virgins the men are eagerly awaiting? Right? Right?


zippyt  Sunday Aug 6 12:28 PM

got to AMP it up some to make the pic look good .



Griff  Sunday Aug 6 12:45 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
Why would they have bothered photoshopping that? It looks about the same.
The multiple plumes makes it look like the bombing/artillery is more indescriminate than it really was. That lack of precision is something that plays very nicely into the extremists hands. Of course, such an obvious plant could be put out there to create the impression that all complaints of indescriminate bombing are over-blown. confused yet?
edit smelling


MaggieL  Sunday Aug 6 12:51 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
Why would they have bothered photoshopping that? It looks about the same.
For the same reason the sat images "showing the level of destruction in Beruit" was.

"World War III will be a guerilla information war with no division between civilian and military participation." --Marshall McLuhan


lumberjim  Sunday Aug 6 12:54 PM

cock



MsSparkie  Sunday Aug 6 01:23 PM




glatt  Sunday Aug 6 01:33 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaggieL
For the same reason the sat images "showing the level of destruction in Beruit" was.
Are you now claiming those pictures I posted on the other thread were photoshopped? I know you scowled at the caption, but this takes your accusations to another level.


MaggieL  Sunday Aug 6 01:46 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by glatt
Are you now claiming those pictures I posted on the other thread were photoshopped? I know you scowled at the caption, but this takes your accusations to another level.
No, no, I'm not making that accusation at all. Insofar as I could see the WaPo image was the same as what CNN showed...although not at the same resolution.

But the (embedded) caption on the WaPo version itself was pure propaganda.


milkfish  Sunday Aug 6 03:08 PM

The images are best viewed to this soundtrack.



xoxoxoBruce  Sunday Aug 6 04:23 PM

My guess is they brightened and added contrast to give the buildings in the foreground more definition. That resulted in the sky being bright white so they expanded the area of smoke to tone down the sky.

It's disturbing the editor, probably a photo editor, but at least a pro, didn't spot this as a fake immediately. Deadlines be damned, the whole story, and the agency for that matter, lose credibility.

One thing is apparent, though.....Hezbollah has used the media much more effectively than the IDF, from the git-go.



Nothing But Net  Sunday Aug 6 05:08 PM

Layer Style> Big Noisy Border
Window> Show Options
Select> All
Filter> Pixelate> Fragment
Layer> Flatten Image



MaggieL  Sunday Aug 6 05:28 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce
Hezbollah has used the media much more effectively than the IDF, from the git-go.
And when US DoD "uses the media", they get criticized intensely for it. No reason to think IDF is any different; Israel has a left-wing too.

Caption: "They do like to fashion themselves as media savvy."
http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/001226.html


Ibby  Sunday Aug 6 06:49 PM

That coupled with their indiscriminate killing marks Hisballah as a terrorist organization in my book.

Armies win by beating their opponents into submission.
Terrorists win by tricking their opponents into thinking theyve been beaten into submission.



Undertoad  Sunday Aug 6 09:00 PM

From time to time I think the mainstream will unravel.

http://drinkingfromhome.blogspot.com...t-edition.html

The same woman wails after her home is destroyed July 22... and again at another home, August 5.

Same photographer...



BigV  Sunday Aug 6 09:21 PM

It happens way too much. Calling it anything but poor editorial judgement reveals too much tinfoil cap for my taste.


Quote:
DURHAM, NC (March 9, 2005) – The National Press Photographers Association, the society of professional photojournalism, today said that Newsweek magazine’s use of an altered photograph of Martha Stewart on its cover last week was “a major ethical breach.” Stewart’s head was superimposed upon the body of a model who was photographed separately in a Los Angeles studio, and the composite image was published on Newsweek’s cover.



tippy  Monday Aug 7 05:58 AM

No doubt that is photoshopped.

and for sure, journos want to make their money and everyone wants to have shot the iconic shot. every photographer woudl like their vietnam moment, the photo that once seen cannot be forgotten.
www.vietnamwar.com/vietcongofficershootsman.jpg
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpsrv/...y/gallery2.htm

But as for all the green helmet/white t-shirt stuff...yup, maybe they are going for the photo op, they won't be the 1st they won't be the last, but what you can't change about those images is: a dead kid is a dead kid.

chances of those kids being members of Hezbollah or any other terrorist organisation?



Undertoad  Monday Aug 7 07:05 AM



Journalists are shown by a Hizbollah guerrilla group the damage caused by Israeli attacks on a Hizbollah stronghold in southern Beirut, July 24 2006. (Adnan Hajj/Reuters)



A Lebanese woman looks at the sky as she walks past a building flattened during an overnight Israeli air raid on Beirut's suburbs August 5, 2006. (Adnan Hajj/Reuters)

"Overnight". Same building, two weeks apart.

But yeah Tippy it's not like they don't have other destruction to photograph. But the wire services should be better than this. The world depends on it.



MaggieL  Monday Aug 7 09:21 AM




Elspode  Monday Aug 7 09:28 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad[I
A Lebanese woman looks at the sky as she walks past a building flattened during an overnight Israeli air raid on Beirut's suburbs August 5, 2006. (Adnan Hajj/Reuters)[/i]
I'm sure that what they meant was that the building was flattened during an overnight raid on some other night, and that the woman was walking past it on August 5. Just some bad caption writing.


MaggieL  Monday Aug 7 10:44 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspode
Just some bad caption writing.
Again.


Dypok  Monday Aug 7 09:27 PM

That photoshoppery has got to be the worst I've ever seen. And they fired the guy...Reuters should be fired. It is so bad, it might even be on purpose. Maybe its a political statement by the shopper. The Media will print nearly anything these days, and this is another fine example.



MaggieL  Tuesday Aug 8 06:40 AM

Analysis of another Reutersgate/Hajj image discovered to be doctored. (This is the one of the IDF F-16 "dropping bombs and launching rockets")



chrisinhouston  Tuesday Aug 8 10:12 AM

Yea and I remember when this ran!



Flint  Tuesday Aug 8 10:26 AM

They have now removed from their database all photos ever submitted by this guy.



MaggieL  Tuesday Aug 8 11:03 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
They have now removed from their database all photos ever submitted by this guy.
The claim being that it's because they can no longer vouch for their veracity. I kind of suspect it's also to inhibit independant analysis to forstall any further embarassment.

Somehow I doubt that will be enough to inhibit the Pajamahedeen, who have proven Rather resourceful in the past. ;-) The Democrat Underground crowd is already floating the theory that Hajj is a plant. They must be rattled; last time it took a few weeks before they blamed Rathergate on Rove.


xoxoxoBruce  Tuesday Aug 8 03:01 PM

Christ Maggie, give it a rest. This has nothing to do with republicans or Democrats, right or left.

It's about a major media source being hoodwinked by an unscrupulous correspondent.



chrisinhouston  Tuesday Aug 8 03:28 PM

The cellar covered this issue back at the beginning of the war with Iraq, http://www.cellar.org/showthread.php...doctored+image



MaggieL  Tuesday Aug 8 03:43 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce
Christ Maggie, give it a rest. This has nothing to do with republicans or Democrats, right or left.
It's about a major media source being hoodwinked by an unscrupulous correspondent.
You mean *another* major media source being hoodwinked by *another* unscrupulous correspondant. As to "no right/leftness", you've got to be kidding.


Flint  Tuesday Aug 8 03:48 PM

If they've got you looking for "right/leftness" in everything you see, then you're a slave to the ping-pong game, destined forever to vote "against" rather than "for" in every election, destined forever to be a willing participant in the contrived, superficial competition between "them" and "them" . . .



Undertoad  Tuesday Aug 8 03:51 PM

The lefty-rightyness of it comes from the MSM being 90% lefty*. So they didn't remove smoke from the photo. They didn't put the soldier in a less menacing position. They didn't find a memo that said Bush fulfilled his National Guard duty. And it's the righty blogs that fact-checked their ass.


*as a centrist i am the final arbiter on this factoid



Flint  Tuesday Aug 8 04:04 PM

Like this: New study detects media's liberal tilt which supposedly "scientifically proves" this idea that the "MSM" is "90% lefty" . . . "...the authors start by examining the ratings of members of Congress, according to Americans for Democratic Action (ADA)..." I tried to keep reading after that...and I don't really know who ADA is, or have any reason to think they swing one way or the other . . . but this isn't science. This subject isn't something that can be scientifically studied. It's like "scientifically" debating whether God exists without establishing a definition of what God even means. You can't base science on the shifting sands of perception . . . what does "liberal" mean exactly? Putting alot of gravy, a "liberal" amount on your mashed potatoes? that debate would be based on source data from Americans For Tasty Side Dishes (ATSD) - but the catch is the source data isn't scientific data!



MaggieL  Tuesday Aug 8 04:08 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
...destined forever to be a willing participant in the contrived, superficial competition between "them" and "them" . . .
And it's our old relativist friend "moral equivalance" again...

I don't have to "look for right-leftness in everything" when it comes to the MSM: it's honestly and clearly already there. It's being blind to it that's your problem, which causes you to think there's nothing to it.

You really beleive Reuters is politically neutral? You need to broaden your news sources beyond BBC, CNN and NPR.


Flint  Tuesday Aug 8 04:10 PM

No, I just opt out of the "left versus right" mudslinging because I find it counter-productive to any meaningful dialogue.



MaggieL  Tuesday Aug 8 04:10 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
...and I don't really know who ADA is, or have any reason to think they swing one way or the other . . .
That's quite a confession of ignorance for someone who wants to argue about right vs. left.


Flint  Tuesday Aug 8 04:13 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaggieL
someone who wants to argue about right vs. left
My entire point is that I don't want to argue about left versus right.

How could you have missed that?


Undertoad  Tuesday Aug 8 04:18 PM

I too want to escape the usual he-said-she-said of what is considered mainstream politics, because the bogus debate is hurting America (ref Jon Stewart re Crossfire) and is tedious.

But I can't help but notice that everyone has a bias, a narrative on what happened, everyone is in schools of thought which influence their point of view.

I would like them to admit the bias so that I can sort of triangulate on the truth. But they don't admit it, so I am left to work it out myself. What a pain in the ass!



Flint  Tuesday Aug 8 04:26 PM

I don't think that you can declare allegience to an unspecified category, if that makes sense. The problem here is the fallacy of impartiality: we are all biased, as human beings. But trying to lump us into two clean groups is just plain silly.



Flint  Tuesday Aug 8 04:51 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
So they didn't remove smoke from the photo.
I honestly don't think anyone who had actually seen this photo (IE did their job) could have possibly published it on purpose, or expected nobody to notice that it looks like it was doctored with Microsoft Paint.


MaggieL  Tuesday Aug 8 05:01 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
My entire point is that I don't want to argue about left versus right.
Your argument is that right vs. left is irrelevant. You can't do that intelligently without knowing what it is you're dismissing.


Flint  Tuesday Aug 8 05:09 PM

I'm dismissing the notion that we can be so easily manipulated by an "us versus them" distraction when the two "sides" agree on 99% of the things that are really going to matter in the long run. It's worse than "east coast versus west coast" - but in this case, it isn't just rap albums that are for sale.



MaggieL  Tuesday Aug 8 05:10 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
I honestly don't think anyone who had actually seen this photo (IE did their job) could have possibly published it on purpose, or expected nobody to notice that it looks like it was doctored with Microsoft Paint.
This is the blindness that sets in that causes you to see what you want to see. How could anybody have failed to notice that the Rathergate memos were produced with Microsoft Word?


MaggieL  Tuesday Aug 8 05:16 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
...when the two "sides" agree on 99% of the things that are really going to matter in the long run.
There's really more than two sides, and the differences between them *are* significant. You can't elucidate the underlying principles and values by just watching the behavior of politicians; they're constrained to the normative forces of the election process.

Nor can you ignore the underlying biases of any news source just because you find today's rhetoric and lack of comity distasteful; you have to factor in those biases when interpreting their reporting.


Flint  Tuesday Aug 8 05:38 PM

Point taken. But it is worthy to note that I don't watch TV. That alone does wonders.



Flint  Tuesday Aug 8 05:39 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaggieL
Nor can you ignore the underlying biases of any news source just because you find today's rhetoric and lack of comity distasteful; you have to factor in those biases when interpreting their reporting.
Point taken. But it is worthy to note that I don't watch TV.

That alone does wonders. Really.


MaggieL  Tuesday Aug 8 09:34 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
That alone does wonders. Really.
If not knowing what the ADA qualifies as a "wonder"...sure. As in "I wonder how you can discuss politics" perhaps. Not that you'd learn that from TV.

Of course PBS is radio too...and CNN, the NYT, Reuters and lot of other news sources are online.


Flint  Tuesday Aug 8 09:39 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaggieL
If not knowing what the ADA qualifies as a "wonder"...sure.
So you highly recomend them as a good source of telling me what to think?
I couldn't bear it if I wasn't getting my spoon-fed opinions from fancy expert sources.


MsSparkie  Tuesday Aug 8 09:50 PM

HEZBOLLYYWOOD !!!!!!!!!!!!!



New York Times has joined the fun. Some fake dead.

"New York Times Busted in Hezbollah Photo Fraud!

** Dead Men Walking! **

From the New York Times photo essay by Tyler Hicks on July 27, 2006 comes this unbelievable fraud!"



xoxoxoBruce  Wednesday Aug 9 12:20 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaggieL
This is the blindness that sets in that causes you to see what you want to see. How could anybody have failed to notice that the Rathergate memos were produced with Microsoft Word?
C'mon, could you tell? I read a ton of blogs on that one, as it was developing. It took a shitload of people that are knowledgeable on fonts, typewriters, military supplies, and the histories of each, batting in back and forth to come up with a consensus.
It was really fascinating to watch the dead ends and wrong conclusions reached. Then someone would chime in with another tid-bit of information, that would have to be checked and cross checked with several sources, then added to the verified info at hand.

It took the input of dozens of people, with sometimes obscure knowledge, to finally come to, not a guess, but a verifiable answer. No one person could say yes or no.

And you say how could anyone overlook it?


xoxoxoBruce  Wednesday Aug 9 12:26 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
snip~
But I can't help but notice that everyone has a bias, a narrative on what happened, everyone is in schools of thought which influence their point of view.
Or what you perceive to be bias.

Quote:
I would like them to admit the bias so that I can sort of triangulate on the truth. But they don't admit it, so I am left to work it out myself. What a pain in the ass!
How can they admit to your perceptions of their position, if they don't feel they are bias


MaggieL  Wednesday Aug 9 06:39 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce
C'mon, could you tell?
Yes.

I suppose I qualify as "knowlegable on fonts and typewriters", as well as having been in the military in the 1970's. A lot of my work in the 1980s was in typesetting and what was called at the time "word processing".

But an alleged memo from the 1970's in Times New Roman? Please.

It only took a ton of people to overcome the outlandish scenarios concocted to try to save the theory that those crude forgeries were genuine.

Maples and Rather had the paid advice of experts, and ignored it because it contradicted what they wanted to beleive. Too much of the press longs to become the living reincarnation of Woordward and Bernstein...more faux nostaligia.


Undertoad  Wednesday Aug 9 09:13 AM

I knew it immediately too. It's partly a "computer person" thing, partly a lifelong interest in fonts and typesetting and printing. You remember how documents were created and how they looked through history. How expensive it was to print certain ways.

I looked at it for about three seconds and knew they had been caught. Like my eyes had been sensitized to spot things - it felt at first like a "Beautiful Mind" moment. And then I proceeded to laugh my ass off for the rest of the week as various sides lined up as they looked to first defend the document, and then to say it was fake but accurate. It was great entertainment.

I wound up not voting for Bush... I point that out to say, all my excitement for this has little to do with the politics of it, and everything to do with the Internet, enabling this army of fact-checkers to go to town. And how news changes in the net era.

In fact it will be a great sign that things have changed when the lefty bloggers do the same thing. But they have bigger fish to fry - they've just caused a powerful incumbent Senator to lose a primary on issues, something that just never happens without a scandal.



Flint  Wednesday Aug 9 09:16 AM

Whereas the doctored photo is visible to the naked eye, with no specialized knowledge or training necessary. We have evloved to intuitively pick up on patterns seen in nature. Also...nobody could theorize that "the crude forgery was genuine" because the wrong-ness of it is clearly visible, at a glance, to anyone who is not legally blind.

"Paint versus Word" is a very clever comparison, but doesn't quite get there.



Undertoad  Wednesday Aug 9 09:22 AM

How can they admit to my perceptions of bias? Good question I think they should just stop trying to say they're not biased. Stop trying to say that what's being presented is the objective Truth.

People say to me how can you watch that Fox News crap. It's simple, you just watch it with the thought in the back of your mind that it's biased and crap. Then you get more information. You don't even have to like them. I don't like my neighbor's dog, but his barking does give me information. I don't like all the blogs out there, some of them are just "echo chambers" for people who like to be with other people who think just like they do. But they come up with good information.



Flint  Wednesday Aug 9 09:24 AM

At the root of this is the fact that there is no such thing as objective truth.



Undertoad  Wednesday Aug 9 09:37 AM

But we won't go there in this thread.

I dislike Michelle Malkin, I think she is annoying and a total bitch and often completely wrong. This morning her post on more Lebanon coverage is must reading. First a NY Times caption is shown to be bogus as an injured man in one photo is shown in other photos to be merrily walking around.

Then a US News COVER is shown to be entirely bogus as the fire and ruins of an Israeli jet turn out to be... a tire fire!!!



Flint  Wednesday Aug 9 09:44 AM

I listen to Sean Hannity's talk radio show sometimes. Surprisingly, I don't always disagree with him 100%. But seriously, if you don't percieve a bias in your favorite news source it just means they share the same bias as you.



Flint  Wednesday Aug 9 09:46 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
But we won't go there in this thread.
Yes Sir, Sir! ha ha ha :::slinks off to philosophy forum:::


Griff  Wednesday Aug 9 10:12 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
But we won't go there in this thread.

I dislike Michelle Malkin, I think she is annoying and a total bitch and often completely wrong. This morning her post on more Lebanon coverage is must reading. First a NY Times caption is shown to be bogus as an injured man in one photo is shown in other photos to be merrily walking around.

Then a US News COVER is shown to be entirely bogus as the fire and ruins of an Israeli jet turn out to be... a tire fire!!!
I'm getting very irritated with news coverage. A "funny" bit about this stuff is that civics teachers are always telling the kids not to believe anything on the net, check with legitamit news sources. Then we have these situations where the net has to do the fact checking on our media filters.


MaggieL  Wednesday Aug 9 12:26 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
But seriously, if you don't percieve a bias in your favorite news source it just means they share the same bias as you.
I percieve biases in all my news sources. That's why I have a diverse set.


Flint  Wednesday Aug 9 12:58 PM

I honestly believe that if anything important is happening in the world, there will be a debate about it on the internet.



Sundae  Wednesday Aug 9 01:03 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
I honestly believe that if anything important is happening in the world, there will be a debate about it on the internet.
But even "important" is subject to bias. I broke my flip-flop yesterday and had to walk home with an elastic band round my foot to keep it on. Incredibly important to me, but not picked up by any photography agency. I guess they're all busy at the moment.


Flint  Wednesday Aug 9 01:06 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundae Girl
But even "important" is subject to bias. I broke my flip-flop yesterday and had to walk home with an elastic band round my foot to keep it on.
If you started a thread about that, and it stuck around and got alot of responses, and generated alot of attention, it would have been deemed "important" via democratic process.


Undertoad  Wednesday Aug 9 01:07 PM

Totally clean dust-free toys are added to scenes of destruction for dramatic effect

Al Jazzera video proves that the tire fire mentioned above was caused by a misfired Hezbollah missile



glatt  Wednesday Aug 9 01:08 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundae Girl
But even "important" is subject to bias. I broke my flip-flop yesterday and had to walk home with an elastic band round my foot to keep it on. Incredibly important to me, but not picked up by any photography agency. I guess they're all busy at the moment.
I interviewed a woman on Monday for a job opening we had. She broke her shoe on the way to the interview. So after the interview, I got her a roll of packing tape and some scissors for her to try to fix the thing well enough to get home.

I'm just saying, it could be worse.

(Oh, and she didn't get the job.)


Sundae  Wednesday Aug 9 01:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flint
If you started a thread about that, and it stuck around and got alot of responses, and generated alot of attention, it would have been deemed "important" via democratic process.
Tis true I admit - look at the whale penii!

Quote:
Originally Posted by glatt
I'm just saying, it could be worse.

(Oh, and she didn't get the job.)
Yup, she had a worse day than me! Although it could be a turning point in her life - you could open a newspaper one day and see a totally new style of packing tape shoe designed by this woman...!


Undertoad  Wednesday Aug 9 01:23 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundae Girl
But even "important" is subject to bias. I broke my flip-flop yesterday and had to walk home with an elastic band round my foot to keep it on. Incredibly important to me, but not picked up by any photography agency. I guess they're all busy at the moment.


IDF activity causes footwear failure

Cellar user Sundae Girl experienced footwear failure on Tuesday
as she came under mortar fire from IDF tanks. She was only
able to return to her Midlands home by improvising a quick fix.
Experts say poor shoes are a major cause of stress in war zones.

Adnan Hajj/Reuters


glatt  Wednesday Aug 9 01:28 PM

Wow, Sundae, you feet are a bit more masculine than I pictured. No offense intended.



Ibby  Wednesday Aug 9 01:30 PM

NONONO, UT, youve got it all wrong! I found Hajj's real picture...



Sundae  Wednesday Aug 9 01:43 PM

The scary thing was it was a red rubber band - only used by the Post Office in this country but pinched from the postroom by me. My toenails are purple at the moment though. Nail varnish, not bruising I hasten to add.



Trilby  Wednesday Aug 9 02:00 PM

This is all very delicious! Thanks for the laughs!

Seriously, though, I always knew my paranoia would some day pay off.



xoxoxoBruce  Thursday Aug 10 11:34 PM

Obviously a fasho-Islamic plot, the USPS also uses red elastic bands.

note ~ I usually say rubber bands but when reporting terrorist activities accuracy is important... just ask Homeland Security.



Undertoad  Thursday Aug 10 11:39 PM

And I knew that you knew that, because you gave me that band, in a set of them, and you told me how they came to be in your possession And now the cycle is complete



tjauh  Friday Aug 11 06:25 AM

Some more Picture

These are really nice pictures...

and Please tell me if they are photoshoped or not ....


The attached Zipped file contains a power Point Presentation of all the images.


Regards



tjauh  Friday Aug 11 06:37 AM

Check this Report and tell me were are the Fraudulant photos.....


http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle14258.htm



tjauh  Friday Aug 11 06:39 AM

Checkout this blog...

http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=1...ghlight=beirut



glatt  Friday Aug 11 09:18 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by tjauh
The attached Zipped file contains a power Point Presentation of all the images.
You've got to be joking. Do you actually think anyone is going to unzip a file to see a powerpoint presentation on dead kids in rubble?


mlandman  Friday Aug 11 11:48 AM

TJAUH

COME NOW.

a file TITLED: "aggressionagainstlebanon" --- spew your lies elsewhere.

Hezbollah grabs IDF soldiers, starts a calculated war that it had prepared for and launches 100s of MISSILES to Israel.

Israel intentionally sends leaflets directing civilians where to go and targets Hezbollah bases, WHICH HAVE BEEN DOCUMENTED THAT HEZBOLLAH USES CIVILANS AS SHIELDS EVERY CHANCE THEY GET.

Civilian deaths have happened on both sides, yes. Most of us know which side tries to avoid them, and which side doesn't give a flying F, as long as they kill as many jews as possible. So, I think you can take your powerpoint presentation called "agression AGAINST LEBANON", which is what the Hezbollah supporters would WANT you to believe, and shove it!



barefoot serpent  Friday Aug 11 01:18 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by mlandman
/snip/Israel intentionally sends leaflets directing civilians where to go and targets Hezbollah bases/snip/
a leaflet and the translation can be found here


xoxoxoBruce  Friday Aug 11 11:53 PM

I guess we're now officially part of the Hezbollah "Military Media" propaganda network.

UT, wear your jammies to bed tonight in case Homeland Security or another of those pesky organizations comes calling.



Elspode  Saturday Aug 12 02:19 AM

Hell with that, UT...let 'em see your wicked willy waving wild in the wind.



xoxoxoBruce  Saturday Aug 12 02:24 AM

Uh, Elspode....it's kind of chilly here tonight.



dar512  Monday Aug 14 09:46 AM

A funny jab at the Beirut picture here.



DanaC  Tuesday Aug 15 05:58 AM

Quote:
only used by the Post Office in this country but pinched from the postroom by me.
Isn't that considered treasonous?


Sundae  Tuesday Aug 15 07:40 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaC
Isn't that considered treasonous?
You can now contact me at 1, The Tower, London. Well until next week anyway. After that contact my parents re where to send the flowers....


MaggieL  Tuesday Aug 15 11:18 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce
I guess we're now officially part of the Hezbollah "Military Media" propaganda network.
But that's the great thing about being in Hezbollah, when it's convenient you suddenly become a civilian again.


xoxoxoBruce  Tuesday Aug 15 08:36 PM

Yeah, every payday...poof...you're a civilian.



MaggieL  Tuesday Aug 15 08:45 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce
Yeah, every payday...poof...you're a civilian.
There's all kinds of compensation. Like beleiving you're doing the Will of Allah. Even if you call it something else.


Spexxvet  Wednesday Aug 16 10:46 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaggieL
There's all kinds of compensation. Like beleiving you're doing the Will of Allah. Even if you call it something else.
Or Jesus/God


MaggieL  Wednesday Aug 16 12:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spexxvet
Or Jesus/God
Indeed.


Undertoad  Wednesday Nov 15 07:22 AM

Well the video is no longer available, but a few days ago the actual photographer of the original US News cover shot came forward on Lightstalkers, a professional news photographers site. Bruno Stevens explained the details behind this shot:



This is the shot that made the US News cover.



Stevens submitted the shot with the caption:
Quote:
Kfar Chima, near Beirut, July 17, 2006. An Israeli Air Force F16 has alledgedly been shot down while bombing a group of Hezbollah owned trucks, at least one of these trucks contained a medium range ground to ground missile launcher.
Maybe the meaning of "allegedly" got lost because he misspelled it. After returning to the site and gathering more details, he then submitted a more complete caption:
Quote:
Kfar Chima, near Beirut, July 17, 2006. The Israeli Air Force bombed a group of Hezbollah chartered trucks parked on the back of large Lebanese Army barracks, at least one of these trucks contained a medium range ground to ground missile launcher, at least one missile was hit, misfiring high into the sky before falling down and starting a huge fire in the barracks’ parking lot.
This correlates with what people figured out from the Al Jazzera video. Stevens also shot the now-dead missile launcher inside the targeted truck:



Quote:
This is a very important piece of evidence showing probable collusion between Hezbollah and the Lebanese Army, there is little doubt that the Lebanese Army was aware of the presence of at least one missile launcher and at least one large missile on their parking lot. The size of the launcher, destroyed a couple of days later from the ground by an unknown party suggest missiles 10 to 14 meters long.
A few days after he submitted all of the above, the top pic appeared in Time, and as is the usual practice, editors re-wrote Stevens' caption.
Quote:
The wreckage of a downed Israeli jet that was targeting Hizballah trucks billows smoke behind a Hizballah gunman in Kfar Chima, near Beirut. Jet fuel set the surrounding area ablaze.
Got that? The fine detail from the photographer who was actually there, was discarded, in favor of a suitable narrative. Hizballah shot the jet down. Missile launching trucks became simple trucks. A legitimate military target was whitewashed out, the photo of the evidence is not reprinted. The ruin was the result of Israeli actions and not a Hezb misfire as they probably tried to launch at the last minute and fucked up.

Now people are calling Stevens anti-semitic because they don't know he didn't write that caption. Seems to me he did good work documenting what happened and revisiting the location several times to collect facts. Too bad the facts became a casualty.
Quote:
There were 6 to 8 large articulated trucks parked there, making it a very legitimate target for the Israeli Air Force, quite far away from civilian houses. Guilad, I can’t see why showing and explaining this makes me antisemitic or even anti-Israeli. Quite, quite, the contrary in fact.



SPUCK  Thursday Nov 16 06:57 AM

Most interesting!



Your reply here?

The Cellar Image of the Day is just a section of a larger web community: a bunch of interesting folks talking about everything. Add your two cents to IotD by joining the Cellar.