Nice catch.

Oh, thought it was the Birth Certificate.

Apparently ABC News didn’t get the memo that a recent photograph from North Korea featuring Kim Jong-Il was a fake, because they’re publishing it again today.

They're still not filling out the TPX reports correctly either...

Kim's dong is ill?

Hey, ABC, that photo's Already Been Chopped

re: #4 maddogg

Kim's dong is ill?

Please, that was the last thread.

In this undated photo released by (north) Korean Central News Agency via Korea News Service in Tokyo on Wednesday, November 5, 2008, North Korean leader Kim Jong Il, front row center, wearing glasses, poses with officers and soldiers with a squad of the (north) Korean People's Army Unit 534....

What difference does the date make if the pic is from The Twilight Zone?

IF you publish the fake photo enough times, it will become real.

///////////////////////////

The ABC version looks different- like they photoshoped it more to correct the shadow.

Is that Mao's "Little Red Book" clutched in the hand of that dude on the far left?

re: #8 saberry0530

IF you publish the fake photo enough times, it will become real.

///////////////////////////

Much like Obama's policies.

re: #5 bosforus

Hey bos! I've watched that little "cars sliding down the hill" video a bunch of times. Thanks! What a hoot!

And meanwhile my CNN RSS feed continues to provide breaking news: No good way to tell kids they have cancer. Oh really?

Stellar work there by the ABC... They are really throwing in the towel along with the other major media outlets...

Sink to the lowest possible energy level...

re: #12 Fat Bastard Vegetarian

Hey bos! I've watched that little "cars sliding down the hill" video a bunch of times. Thanks! What a hoot!

Ha ha, it's a good'n.

I would imagine it's difficult for them to know reality from propaganda. After all, spreading propaganda's what they do almost as well as north korea.

Give them a break. They thought the fearless leader was a gravity magnet that was able to bend light. Which also explains why North Korea is so dark at night /s

re: #15 buzzsawmonkey

Mao subscribed to Redbook? I bet he loved the recipes.

MMMM, Redhook ESB....

ohhh, Redbook, never mind.

He looks "ronely" standing there.

re: #15 buzzsawmonkey

Mao subscribed to Redbook? I bet he loved the recipes.

101 ways to cook tree bark?

re: #20 Walter L. Newton

He looks "ronely" standing there.

Let's photoshop Alex in.

re: #10 jetpilot1101

Is that Mao's "Little Red Book" clutched in the hand of that dude on the far left?

No, it's Arafishes folder, shrunk.

They don't care if it's fake.

It's looks good.

re: #14 tfc3rid

Stellar work there by the ABC... They are really throwing in the towel along with the other major media outlets...

Sink to the lowest possible energy level...

Maybe they are trying to cut back on their energy consumption since they are pretty much broke.

re: #20 Walter L. Newton

He looks "ronely" standing there.

That would be ronery

They seem to have corrected the shadow. That just makes it funnier, actually.

The media are slobs.

Incorrect but accurate!?

re: #27 lda

Thanks- I was beginning to think I was crazy.

re: #11 jetpilot1101

Much like Obama's policies.

much like "Palestine"

re: #15 buzzsawmonkey

Mao subscribed to Redbook? I bet he loved the recipes.

Especially when the chef is that well-known communist, KimChe.

Pwned

re: #26 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

That would be ronery

Hell, I don't know how to phonetically type out transliterated Korean.

re: #21 maddogg

101 ways to cook tree bark?

So wrong, but so funny.

Fauxduexgraph?

re: #36 harrylook

So wrong, but so funny.

Food thread.

I don't think it is fair of us to expect the media to print accurate, real, non faked news. I mean how do you get the stories you want if you have to do that?

/

re: #10 jetpilot1101

Is that Mao's "Little Red Book" clutched in the hand of that dude on the far left?

No - it's the Weather Underground's "Prairie Fire"

A question.

I believe the photo to be likely faked. There is little that the NK government says that is not lies. But, in anticipation of a possible objection, please explain this:

Could the bastard's shadow look different because he is standing closer to or farther away from the wall than the people he's standing next to? Why is that not a good explanation of the differences in the shadow. I'm having trouble picturing it.

Why Watson that's brilliant detective work !.....
Sherlock puffs his Opium pipe.....

ABC, Koreans, that's a piss poor job in photoshop.

re: #31 Sharmuta

Not crazy. One wonders, though, why they didn't fix the line while they were at it. Maybe next time.

'The North's statement also said authorities recently arrested unspecified agents who tried to gather soil, water, leaves and dust in the country's major munitions industrial area to gather information on its nuclear program.'
// ABC News.

. Authorities recently arrested some North Koreans preparing dinner.

re: #20 Walter L. Newton

He looks "ronely" standing there.

"'m so Ronery / So ronery / So ronery and sadry arone / There's no one / Just me onry / Sitting on my rittle throne / I work very hard to be number one guy / but, stiwr there's no one to right up my rife / Seems rike no one takes me serirousry / And so, I'm ronery / A rittle ronery / Poor rittle me / There's no one I can rerate to / Feewr rike a biwd in a cage / It's kinda siwry / but, not reawry / because, it's fiwring my body with rage / I'm the smartest, most crever, most physicawry fit / but, none of the women seem to give a shit / Maybe someday, they'wr awr notice me / And untiwr then, I'wr be ronery / Yeah, a rittle ronery / Poor rittle me"

re: #40 firedupengineer

No - it's the Weather Underground's "Prairie Fire"

Maybe it's Obama's "The Audacity of Hope" or one of the transcripts of Rev. Wright's sermons.

re: #41 Arlemagne

I think because you would have to move the sun for what you are thinking.

Woopie Do. Does that mean I'm finally with the in crowd?

/(no replies please)

re: #47 jetpilot1101

Maybe it's Obama's "The Audacity of Hope" or one of the transcripts of Rev. Wright's sermons.

ABC's chickens are coming home to roost.

Big surprise.

Harumph!

re: #41 Arlemagne

Because the sun doesn't cast shadows differently because you're closer to the camera. It's consistent.

re: #41 Arlemagne

A question.

I believe the photo to be likely faked. There is little that the NK government says that is not lies. But, in anticipation of a possible objection, please explain this:

Could the bastard's shadow look different because he is standing closer to or farther away from the wall than the people he's standing next to? Why is that not a good explanation of the differences in the shadow. I'm having trouble picturing it.

I'm pretty sure the big tell here is the angle of the shadows.

re: #47 jetpilot1101

Maybe it's Obama's "The Audacity of Hope" or one of the transcripts of Rev. Wright's sermons.

The Mao, Alinsky, Ayres, Wright collectors set for radical leftists.

re: #48 Bumr50

Or the earth.

re: #36 harrylook

So wrong, but so funny.

Hey dude, in Kim's workers paradise, when people bite their nails it ain't cause they are nervous.

/here kitty kitty

re: #27 lda

They seem to have corrected the shadow. That just makes it funnier, actually.

It appears to me to be a completely different photo.
Take note of the treeline and the building.

re: #41 Arlemagne

The shadow changed.

re: #44 LDA

LOL ! third time around is always a charm...

Hmm...perhaps Dear Leader needs a little Nuke Boost™....

re: #41 Arlemagne

Also- explain the missing black line.

re: #50 Wyatt Earp

ABC's chickens are coming home to roost.

Too bad North Korea they can't go roost in North Korea; sure would help the starvation problem that their benevolent leader has saddled them with.

re: #50 Wyatt Earp

When Obamas chickens come, will he have a scalpel or a hatchet?

It looks to me the north koreans corrected their fauxtograph with the shadow, but they did not correct the missing black line.

re: #44 LDA

Not crazy. One wonders, though, why they didn't fix the line while they were at it. Maybe next time.

Although unlikely, it IS possible that that is actually the run of the line. It could go down at that point right behind the guys' legs. It is even.

I would have to see the stairs without anyone standing in front of them.

re: #63 Bumr50

When Obamas chickens come, will he have a scalpel or a hatchet?

He'll chop off their heads with his halo.

There appear to be several versions of this photo out there - here's a larger version of the one used by ABC News with a better looking shadow:

[Link: www.daylife.com...]

8 rows in one photo, six in the other

Perhaps ABC News believes that the sun rises and sets differently on their boy, Kim? Or perhaps they are merely stupid fools without a clue?

re: #64 Sharmuta

It looks to me the north koreans corrected their fauxtograph with the shadow, but they did not correct the missing black line.

Somebody ate it.

Charles may we have a comparison side by side of the first pix and the second pix...please?

re: #37 Sharmuta

Fauxduexgraph?

Hiya Sharm.. You do realize i tried to translate that on the web..And nothing works..Not even French..You either have to convert the word or create a new language.. LOL

In other news:

From the who really cares department:

Tom Cruise skips son’s first film premiere

OTOH, how messed up is that kid gonna be after his freakin' dad skips his first film to promote his own piece of crap?

[Link: a.abcnews.com...]

In that photo, Kim Jong-Il's shadow appears to be at the same angle as everyone else's...

Also, I dunno... most stock photos are fake. The people in them are not employees of the company using the photo, for sure, even though that's kinda the implication. I don't really see that a as a problem, though - it's not as if they're trying to use it to cost someone a presidential election ala Rathergate.

re: #27 lda

They seem to have corrected the shadow. That just makes it funnier, actually.

In their defense, Dear Leader doesn't cast a shadow. He's a vampire. It's yet another reason the North is so dark at night.

re: #68 Charles

There appear to be several versions of this photo out there - here's a larger version of the one used by ABC News with a better looking shadow:

[Link: www.daylife.com...]

Still no line, which is probably the join between the wood. Looks like wooden bleachers.

re: #68 Charles

The black line is still missing. n00bs.

re: #66 Wyatt Earp

He'll chop off their heads with his halo.

Obama's halo is like Oddjob's hat?

re: #74 subsailor68

In other news:

From the who really cares department:

Tom Cruise skips son’s first film premiere

OTOH, how messed up is that kid gonna be after his freakin' dad skips his first film to promote his own piece of crap?

Good to see ya subsailor

re: #79 Son of the Black Dog

Obama's halo is like Oddjob's hat?

Yep, and him winning the presidency is like breaking into Fort Knox.

Honestly! Communists spreading propaganda. What is this world coming to?

This photo stuff reminds me of (I think it was National Lampoon many years ago) a fake yearbook with the following caption under one picture:

Chess Club
L to R: J Smith

re: #57 unrealizedviewpoint

Now that I've looked closer I agree. This is a completely different image. Compare the shadows on the pant creases of the men standing beside him ... especially the person four over to his right [in the photo] as that's pretty obviously different.

When the fat little pervert finally kicks the honeydew bucket, they'll probably stuff him and stand him up in fake photos for several years until a successor can murder his way to the surface of the cesspool.

re: #68 Charles

There appear to be several versions of this photo out there - here's a larger version of the one used by ABC News with a better looking shadow:

[Link: www.daylife.com...]

Heh.
Even the sun is scared of the Dear leader - note the difference between the standees on the right and left to him: good clear sun-shade.
Not so with the Dear Leader ...

re: #80 HoosierHoops

Good to see ya subsailor

Hi HH! Great to see you too.

:-)

Great leaders give off their own light...you'll see this with The Bama. All of his shadows will be skewed.

re: #76 Wyatt Earp

In their defense, Dear Leader doesn't cast a shadow. He's a vampire. It's yet another reason the North is so dark at night.

I've got it! He's one of those "Communist Vampires!"

Another walking, talking dead man. Never seen so many reincarnated bodies since the movie the Zombies or Osamas last voice communique.

re: #81 Wyatt Earp

Yep, and him winning the presidency is like breaking into Fort Knox.

You got that right!

re: #68 Charles

After Studying this one... It appears that the whole center group of soldiers from the 2nd row all the way up to the top have been transposed from another lineup photo. Look at the shadow haze on the heads of the whole first row as well the two clusters of people standing on both side of the framing....

Maybe ABC and NK could get some tips here. For instance, the author takes pains to point out that

"Shadows of objects are present in most photographs, and in creating a convincing fake, the technician must make all shadows fall in the same direction and be consistent in relative size and shape with the objects photographed."

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull.

W. C. Fields

...

Scientology Rule No. 234176 subsection c.

If your offspring appear in a mass media effort, you will skip it's first showing to honor the sacrifice of the Second Galactic Coalition.

Pity when the adopted ones get the shaft.

re: #95 yma o hyd

I CAN'T HEAR YOU, YID!

Glad to see those layers of editors and fact checkers are always on the ball.

No wonder more people turn to the web for news. Maybe the morons at ABC should do so as well.

re: #94 Dustyvet

If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull.

W. C. Fields B. H. Obama
Fixed it for you.

re: #93 Thom

{THOM}

How about a nice, rousing fart sound...just for old times sake...

Watch Day Three, The Coleman Challenges, Franken Cruising to Victory

Coleman was up by 360, but he's going to lose most of his 900 challenges.

/live feed

re: #87 subsailor68

Hi HH! Great to see you too.

:-)

:)
I'm on Vacation and having the huge party tonight for the Colts game..BBQ'd Cornish game hens...Wish us luck bro'

re: #96 Bumr50

Scientology Rule No. 234176 subsection c.

If your offspring appear in a mass media effort, you will skip it's first showing to honor the sacrifice of the Second Galactic Coalition.

Oh. I guess it's okay then.

:-)

Worse than the old Russian revisionism of history.

Busted by shades of light and gray.

re: #105 pat

Worse than the old Russian revisionism of history.

At least they told you what they were doing. Here, ABC just hopes we are all too stupid to realize what they are doing.

I can't wait until the ivory tower collapses.

Biggest tip-off is he is wearing a white jacket. Anyone notice that?

Is Fauxtographer now an official job description?

I think the strain of sparring with Bush finally took its toll on lil' Kimmie.

re: #105 pat

Worse than the old Russian revisionism of history.

Yeah, but the Russians had to do it with old fashioned film, negatives, and darkroom skills. Not as easy as photoshop.

This is rikely to not have happy ending....unlike most .....oh never mind

Amazing how much damage megalomaniac dictators can cause to human beings. Plus ca change...

So what we have here is a perfectly good photo of KIm that some sneak altered to insert those 4 other characters next to Dear Leader? Obviously he is the victim here. I blame Bush

re: #74 subsailor68

He's Tom Cruise's kid. He was fucked up before he was a zygote.

re: #103 HoosierHoops

:)
I'm on Vacation and having the huge party tonight for the Colts game..BBQ'd Cornish game hens...Wish us luck bro'

Hey, in all sincerity - good luck with the game! I'm off to Brit night tonight. Two Brits, an ex-merc, and me. We sit around, drink beer and tell lies. Always fun.

re: #108 Walter L. Newton

Biggest tip-off is he is wearing a white jacket. Anyone notice that?

Hi Walter..
A white jacket after labor day?
why..there ought to be a law!

re: #110 buzzsawmonkey

The Second Challenger Disaster?

Looks like it.

/and the canvassing board is being extremely consistent and fair in judging the ballots, they're falling where they should

re: #68 Charles

Better looking but still rong.

re: #119 HoosierHoops

There is a law-but it's for white shoes-the jacket...fashion police would be more forgiving.

re: #103 HoosierHoops

Hecks NO! As a Steeler fan, I don't wanna see Indy again!

PS- Is Harrison OK? He's on my fantasy team (along with Jacobs and M.Barber:-() and I'm getting killed trying to fill out my lineup.

Does the Sun always shine on Dear Leader or is the source of all illumination? How can he get any sleep?

re: #117 Iron Fist

He's Tom Cruise's kid. He was fucked up before he was a zygote.

Zygote! Now THAT's hilarious!

:-)

re: #121 Cap'n DOC

still rong

LOL

Did you mean to say still long?

re: #126 WriterMom

Wright.

There at least two different images with the same artifact.

Image #1 Trees and building in background.

Image #2 Sky and no building in background.

The Kim in both images and the step behind him is the same in both images. His right jacket pocket is darker in one but the collar and other details are the same.

In both images the step behind Kim don't match risers in the rest of the photo and the troops are different also.

re: #113 buzzsawmonkey

Nothing wrong with that; every day is Labor Day in a socialist paradise.

Yep, and a lot of people will be taking a few days off next year to celebrate Obama's version.

re: #123 Bumr50

Hecks NO! As a Steeler fan, I don't wanna see Indy again!

PS- Is Harrison OK? He's on my fantasy team (along with Jacobs and M.Barber:-() and I'm getting killed trying to fill out my lineup.

Harrison's out, didn't travel to Jacksonville according to Indianapolis Star & ESPN

re: #119 HoosierHoops

Hi Walter..
A white jacket after labor day?
why..there ought to be a law!

I guess you didnt hear what Kim had to say about that:

"I AM DA RAW!"

re: #101 WriterMom

Well, with no Gordon around, I'll just have to get Kim to pull my finger.

Another question. Two guys to the dictator's left, he also casts a vertical shadow. Was he photoshopped in as well?

I'm not saying he wasn't. But my skills at detecting photoshop fraud are not high. I am genuinely curious.

re: #118 subsailor68

Hey, in all sincerity - good luck with the game! I'm off to Brit night tonight. Two Brits, an ex-merc, and me. We sit around, drink beer and tell lies. Always fun.

Do you realize..this is so wierd..I worked at Mare Island and spent 3 years of my life building the 683 and you were on that boat?
After 20 years..working with 15,000 ship workers.. You are the only person i have communicated with since then. It took the Gov't 2 years to RIF all of us.
Every friday we had a party for 20 or 50 workers going to another Gov't job somewhere...Brothers and sisters we grew up together with.. Went to their weddings..saw the baby pics...
The last 3 months at Mare Island at i sat in bld 690 ( 1/2 million sq. ft.) with a buddy reading newspapers and sleeping. waiting for the phone call...

re: #132 Thom

Oh Yah!

re: #128 jcm

There at least two different images with the same artifact.

Image #1 Trees and building in background.

Image #2 Sky and no building in background.

The Kim in both images and the step behind him is the same in both images. His right jacket pocket is darker in one but the collar and other details are the same.

In both images the step behind Kim don't match risers in the rest of the photo and the troops are different also.

One snapshot, so many uses! Very creative Propaganda brigade.

re: #13 bosforus

And meanwhile my CNN RSS feed continues to provide breaking news: No good way to tell kids they have cancer. Oh really?

Have they tried clowns?

Just sayin'.

/ducks

These are obviously two entirely different photos. Aside from the background, there are many more people in the one without the trees in the background. More men per row and more rows.

As for the black line, it's missing behind the shadow of the guy standing next to "KJI" as well.

All very odd. Why bother to photoshop? Why not just use the body doubles they usually do?

re: #134 HoosierHoops

Aha! That's right, I remember you saying that. But, my boat was Pintado, SSN 672. I can't believe I'm old enough to have her put in commission and still around eight or so years after she was scrapped.

Sigh.

re: #123 Bumr50

Hecks NO! As a Steeler fan, I don't wanna see Indy again!

PS- Is Harrison OK? He's on my fantasy team (along with Jacobs and M.Barber:-() and I'm getting killed trying to fill out my lineup.

No..Harrison will not play tonight...Sanders is game time ..probably knowing our crazy Iowa player.

Will SecState Hillary wear white when she shakes down the Saudis for another 20 mil donation to help endow the Clinton noble family?

Nothing wrong with that photo. It's just a manifestation of Fearless Leader's long-documented and world-renowned magical powers:

[Link: users.nsw.chariot.net.au...]

I sure hope he's in good health. A leader with his perculiar gifts will never be seen again, and the smiles such a unique being brings shall most surely be missed.

On the other hand, even though this photo is faked, it's still probably the most recent image of Dear Leader available. I suspect that the next one we see will be of him with a hat on to hide his brain surgury. If, in fact, he lives.

I agree that it's probably fake.

The proof that it's a fake based on the shadow angles may not be solid however. On a recent episode of Mythbusters, they tested claims that the photo of men on the moon was faked based on the angle of various shadows on the photo.

They tested and found that it is possible to have various shadow angles even with a single light source.

Just saying...

it's interesting that the photo that ABC is using appears to be slightly different than the one from the london times. in the ABC photo the shadows appear to be corrected on Kim Jong il along with the guys directly beside him. but the line in the concrete is still missing.

re: #139 subsailor68

Aha! That's right, I remember you saying that. But, my boat was Pintado, SSN 672. I can't believe I'm old enough to have her put in commission and still around eight or so years after she was scrapped.

Sigh.

Oh thats right..You remember the 683 in DD#3..You had to have an OE clearance just to get on-board the engineering spaces.
I recall the 672.. but I spent most of my time in DD#4 with the 646 and decomming the 594 classes of boats.

Did anyone notice that these guys always wear crazy shades?
..and I mean really crazy ones
except when they can't afford them anymore......

re: #146 HoosierHoops

I barely remember the 683 - probably there when we came back for PSA. My time included the minor glitch when Guitarro sank alongside the pier. We also had Hawkbill and Drum under construction then.

re: #145 bryantay

And on further inspection... the London times photo the are standing on concrete and the in the ABC photo they are standing on grass.

Also the pants on the the guys next to KJI are different on both photos.

Please note the uniform jackets and pants of the soldiers standing next to Kim in the comparison photos. They are different ....
creased pants vs. BDU's.
Where did ABC get their new Fauxto?

re: #147 2by2

Did anyone notice that these guys always wear crazy shades?
..and I mean really crazy ones
except when they can't afford them anymore......

ROFLMAO!

re: #150 ctrlL

Please note the uniform jackets and pants of the soldiers standing next to Kim in the comparison photos. They are different ....
creased pants vs. BDU's.
Where did ABC get their new Fauxto?

Two different photosre: #128 jcm

There at least two different images with the same artifact.

Image #1 Trees and building in background.

Image #2 Sky and no building in background.

The Kim in both images and the step behind him is the same in both images. His right jacket pocket is darker in one but the collar and other details are the same.

In both images the step behind Kim don't match risers in the rest of the photo and the troops are different also.

re: #148 subsailor68

I barely remember the 683 - probably there when we came back for PSA. My time included the minor glitch when Guitarro sank alongside the pier. We also had Hawkbill and Drum under construction then.

I was working swing shift then and came back from lunch to see the Sail of the Guitarro was just sticking out of the water..
Did you know that the shop 38 supervisor killed himself that night for his part in that accident?
The Navy never forgave Mare Island for that...

re: #153 HoosierHoops

I was working swing shift then and came back from lunch to see the Sail of the Guitarro was just sticking out of the water..
Did you know that the shop 38 supervisor killed himself that night for his part in that accident?
The Navy never forgave Mare Island for that...

No, I didn't know about the shop 38 sup. That's tragic. A few of the early crew ended up shifting over to Pintado when that accident happened. And I do remember that Admiral Rickover was a bit perturbed (to say the least).

re: #153 HoosierHoops

I was working swing shift then and came back from lunch to see the Sail of the Guitarro was just sticking out of the water..
Did you know that the shop 38 supervisor killed himself that night for his part in that accident?
The Navy never forgave Mare Island for that...

Wasn't that a massive Charlie Fox, two different groups trimming the boat and not checking with the other and they combine put the open hatches under?

Tragic about the super.

OT:

Anyone audiophiles? Want to enter a discussion bout using a new TV for a Computer monitor?

re: #155 jcm

Wasn't that a massive Charlie Fox, two different groups trimming the boat and not checking with the other and they combine put the open hatches under?

Tragic about the super.

Yep, that's about what happened, and the shore power cables running through the engine room hatch really added to the problem IIRC.

re: #156 WrathofG-d

Sure. I have a 42" Westinghouse LCD that I use as a computer monitor. Had it for about 2 years. Love it.

Also just added a 73" Mitsubishi rear-projection TV downstairs. I have a PC hooked up to it as well. Very nice.

re: #155 jcm

Wasn't that a massive Charlie Fox, two different groups trimming the boat and not checking with the other and they combine put the open hatches under?

Tragic about the super.

You sir are exactly correct...it was a trimming the boat with the top side hatch open..It was our subsafe moment

re: #158 oh_dude

No concerns about burning out your LCD or anything like that?

re: #160 WrathofG-d

No concerns about burning out your LCD or anything like that?

My 73" Samsung has a lifetime warranty on the lamp.

re: #156 WrathofG-d

OT:

Anyone audiophiles? Want to enter a discussion bout using a new TV for a Computer monitor?

TV's have a lot lower resolution than a computer monitor.

If you're going to sit on a couch with a wireless keyboard and look at a large screen across the room it will work.

A 24" Monitor will have 1920 x 1200 resolution.
A 24" TV will have 1366 x 768
(Typical)

If you sit at monitor distance from the TV it will be piss poor.

re: #160 WrathofG-d

Nope. LCDs don't burn. You're thinking of Plasma. Plasma was notorious for image burn although made a lot of improvements over the years.

You're best bet is a monitor/TV that will support 1920x1080p. ("p" not "i")

On the PC side, you can run a video card with a DVI output and just a DVI to HDMI cable so it can plug into the monitor/TV. That makes a true "digital" connection between the PC and the TV

re: #161 HoosierHoops

My 73" Samsung has a lifetime warranty on the lamp.

73"?

I coming to your house for the game!

I'll bring beer.

re: #164 jcm

73"?

I coming to your house for the game!

I'll bring beer.

Oh Honey! Add two more for the party tonight!
/Bud light

re: #163 oh_dude

Wow thanks.

This is the TV. But I just might run out of HDMI inputs if I add my computer. I assume that a digital cable box would also have HDMI output.

I've been trying to connect my computer to my 1928 GE "Octagon", but no luck so far.

You guys may be barking up the wrong tree here.

#1) ABC is running a different photo entirely.
#2) The shadow cast in the "fake" photo may be legit. It is possible to have two shadows that look to be different angles based on what's casting the shadow. Mythbusters showed this on their "Conspiracy Theory" episode, about the "different shadows" on one of the moon landing photos. Turned out to be topography. Now, look again at the shadows in the "fake" picture, then look at the pant legs. Every shadow that has the larger angle has pants that increase in size as they approach the waist. Kim Jon Ill's pant legs are straight. Now, look at the person two people to the right from Ill. Straight pant legs, very similar shadow. It ALSO looks like Ill's right leg, the one casting the shdow, is held back a little (look at his foot).
#3) The white "line" is NOT a constant line. Look at the left side of the man left of Ill. The line isn't there, raising from the ground. This line appears to be an uneven wear/water line.

You're going to need more than that to prove this one is fauxtography.

re: #166 WrathofG-d

Wow thanks.

This is the TV. But I just might run out of HDMI inputs if I add my computer. I assume that a digital cable box would also have HDMI output.

Do this one...
[Link: www.bestbuy.com...]

re: #167 Thom

I've been trying to connect my computer to my 1928 GE "Octagon", but no luck so far.

If you can find the schematics, I'll show you how to strip a video cable and solder it to the video on the TV. We might have some trouble with the refresh rate......

re: #169 HoosierHoops

I already have the TV.

re: #168 Kailen

You guys may be barking up the wrong tree here.

#1) ABC is running a different photo entirely.
#2) The shadow cast in the "fake" photo may be legit. It is possible to have two shadows that look to be different angles based on what's casting the shadow. Mythbusters showed this on their "Conspiracy Theory" episode, about the "different shadows" on one of the moon landing photos. Turned out to be topography. Now, look again at the shadows in the "fake" picture, then look at the pant legs. Every shadow that has the larger angle has pants that increase in size as they approach the waist. Kim Jon Ill's pant legs are straight. Now, look at the person two people to the right from Ill. Straight pant legs, very similar shadow. It ALSO looks like Ill's right leg, the one casting the shdow, is held back a little (look at his foot).
#3) The white "line" is NOT a constant line. Look at the left side of the man left of Ill. The line isn't there, raising from the ground. This line appears to be an uneven wear/water line.

You're going to need more than that to prove this one is fauxtography.

As I pointed out above.... It's the same image of Kim in both images.

Maybe Kim is just standing closer to the background, which makes his shadow look different. At any rate, ABC said the photo is undated, which means its not being used to reinforce any claims about Kim's health

re: #172 jcm

As I pointed out above.... It's the same image of Kim in both images.

So? He could have easily walked over from the first to the second photo, what concerns me more is that he is always wearing the same jacket, is North Korea that poor that they can't buy him a second jacket?

re: #172 jcm

As I pointed out above.... It's the same image of Kim in both images.

No, it's not. Both the pants and jack have different shadowing on them. And in the ABC one, his right arm is farther forward. Similar yes, but NOT identical.

Now, the missing black bar at the top of the concrete, that's more conclusive. I am not sure why that's there if it's not faked. Could be the way those things are build.

more evidence that the msm is not to be trusted.
it's all abt. their agenda and making everything fit that agenda.
they are not concerned w/ truth.
at best they are inept.

Apparently ABC News didn’t get the memo that a recent photograph from North Korea featuring Kim Jong-Il was a fake,

Actually the mainstreamers are fake. Probably be a lot less frustrating to stop trying to catch them on it since they don't give a shit. One guy who is always catching them, Brent Bozell, had a heart attack.

why is it important whether these are photoshopped or not?

re: #175 Kailen

As I was saying he walked over to the second photo.........easy for him.

re: #170 jcm

Thanks, but on re-thinking this goal, it occurs to me that the Octagon's 3" screen is considerably smaller than the screen on my laptop.

re: #166 WrathofG-d

Samsungs are pretty sweet. This is a very nice unit. Should be excellent as a PC monitor.

You can never have enough HDMI inputs!

If you end up needing more (rare), you can also buy an HDMI switch box that allows you to use multiple HDMI devices on a single HDMI connection.

Yes most HD cable/satellite boxes have an HDMI output.

re: #178 so.cal.swede

It is important in the same way that the increasingly-irrelevant notion of "truth" is important.

He's a man in a "uniform" standing in a pose.. imagine the shock and surprise that he looks nearly the same in both shots.

Being too quick to yell "Fauxtoshop!" is just as bad as the MSM being too quick to yell "Legit!"

re: #175 Kailen

No, it's not. Both the pants and jack have different shadowing on them. And in the ABC one, his right arm is farther forward. Similar yes, but NOT identical.

Now, the missing black bar at the top of the concrete, that's more conclusive. I am not sure why that's there if it's not faked. Could be the way those things are build.

Shadowing is different but that's more likely PS getting the contrast to match so the shadow depth appears different. Fold points on the pants, and jacket are the same, the collar has the same positioning, etc...

With out a HI-RES image an my PS which is at home I can't do a pixel to pixel compare. But I'm pretty sure the same image of Kim is shopped into both images and tweak to fit the images brightness, contrast, gamma and color balance.

re: #180 Thom

Thanks, but on re-thinking this goal, it occurs to me that the Octagon's 3" screen is considerably smaller than the screen on my laptop.

LOL! What you don't want to squint?

re: #159 HoosierHoops
My Dad was on the sub that inspired the SUBSAFE program.

re: #181 oh_dude

Samsungs are pretty sweet. This is a very nice unit. Should be excellent as a PC monitor.

You can never have enough HDMI inputs!

If you end up needing more (rare), you can also buy an HDMI switch box that allows you to use multiple HDMI devices on a single HDMI connection.

Yes most HD cable/satellite boxes have an HDMI output.

I just might have to if I add the PC to the TV. I am already running a PS3/Blue-Ray on the TV, and will run a HD Digital Cable soon...so...

re: #183 Kailen

He's a man in a "uniform" standing in a pose.. imagine the shock and surprise that he looks nearly the same in both shots.

Being too quick to yell "Fauxtoshop!" is just as bad as the MSM being too quick to yell "Legit!"

Funny that they arent talking about his "uniform" as the evidence.

re: #186 snowcrash

My Dad was on the sub that inspired the SUBSAFE program.

Was your dad part of the Thresher crew? If so, I'm so sorry.

re: #189 subsailor68
Yep. Long time ago.

re: #190 snowcrash

Yep. Long time ago.

Eternal Father, Strong to save,
Whose arm hath bound the restless wave,
Who bid'st the mighty Ocean deep
Its own appointed limits keep;
O hear us when we cry to thee,
for those in peril on the sea.

O Christ! Whose voice the waters heard
And hushed their raging at Thy word,
Who walked'st on the foaming deep,
and calm amidst its rage didst sleep;
Oh hear us when we cry to Thee
For those in peril on the sea!

Most Holy spirit! Who didst brood
Upon the chaos dark and rude,
And bid its angry tumult cease,
And give, for wild confusion, peace;
Oh, hear us when we cry to Thee
For those in peril on the sea!

O Trinity of love and power!
Our brethren shield in danger's hour;
From rock and tempest, fire and foe,
Protect them wheresoe'er they go;
Thus evermore shall rise to Thee,
Glad hymns of praise from land and sea.

Our thoughts should be with the poor bugger whose job it was to prepare this picture. Who is no doubt sharing an aquarium with Hans Blix right now.

re: #190 snowcrash

Yep. Long time ago.

I'm sure you probably know this, but for us submariners, our fallen comrades are listed as on "eternal patrol". God bless.

re: #190 snowcrash

Yep. Long time ago.

I am so sorry...The hoopster salutes your dad..
I spent hundreds of hours in a classroom to become SUBSAFE qual'd.
Your father is a hero.

Thanks guys.

Well, all, must go. It's been wonderful chatting with you.

UPDATE at 12/18/08 11:26:21 am:

ABC News has removed the photo from their article.

Sharp as bowling balls they are.

I haven't had the time to read all the comments, but...

Are we absolutely sure that this is an example of fauxtography? I've just inspected the pictures, and I'm not entirely convinced.

First of all, Kim is wearing slightly bell-bottomed pants, whereas the people on either side of him are wearing pants that go in at the ankle. This alone may account for the different shadow angles. And this theory is slightly confirmed by the shadow of the legs of the guy on the far right of the photo Charles posted above, which itself it also nearly vertical, because he too is wearing slightly bell-ed pants.

As for the absence of the thin black line on the step behind Kim: it just could very well be that the line stops in the center, but the point of its termination on either side is blocked by the legs of the two men standing on either side of Kim. It might simply be the way the platform was designed.

Lastly, it might also be the case that the central portion of the platform which lacks the thin black line has a different-angled facing from the lined parts on either side. I.e. the lined parts could recede backward slightly at an angle, where the unlined central portion could have a flat face. Maybe. But that also would account for the shadow difference.

I'm not saying any of these doubts are definitively true, I'm just saying that, to my eye, they might be true. This could be a pretty well-done Photoshop, but it seems to me that there's no lock-solid proof of that -- and it also could be an unretouched authentic photograph. For me, the jury is still out.

Gotta call it as I see it.

UPDATE at 12/18/08 11:26:21 am:

ABC News has removed the photo from their article.

Yeah, I was wondering about that -- by the time I saw thread thread and clicked that link, there was no photo for me to inspect.

Where is the most definitive proof that this is an undisputed example of fauxtography?

Anyone care to guess whether the NorKs paid for that copy of Photoshop?

re: #200 Cicero05

Well, whatever was used, at least it didn't leave a "EVAUATION COPY" watermark on the picture.

re: #41 Arlemagne

A question.

I believe the photo to be likely faked. There is little that the NK government says that is not lies. But, in anticipation of a possible objection, please explain this:

Could the bastard's shadow look different because he is standing closer to or farther away from the wall than the people he's standing next to? Why is that not a good explanation of the differences in the shadow. I'm having trouble picturing it.

Interesting observation. That also might contribute to the shadow difference.

More doubts.

re: #198 zombie

The dark line is missing from all three of the photographs linked above, even though they're apparently taken in different places. Unless they're carrying the same bleachers from place to place just for these photo ops, it strongly suggests the same kind of fakery in all three.

re: #65 WrathofG-d

Although unlikely, it IS possible that that is actually the run of the line. It could go down at that point right behind the guys' legs. It is even.

I would have to see the stairs without anyone standing in front of them.

I as well think that might be the case. The line might simply stop there, on either side.

Emphasis on the "might." Like I said, it could be a Photoshop, but this is not such a clear-cut case, if so.

I spent countless hours examining images for Photoshoppery during the 2006 scandal, and I saw many many like this that were too inconclusive to call, one way or the other. In all those instances, I rejected them, not including them in my essay. I only included lock-solid undisputed "fauxtography" examples.

If ABC thought the picture wasn't fake, why would they remove it? QED.

re: #203 Charles

The dark line is missing from all three of the photographs linked above, even though they're apparently taken in different places. Unless they're carrying the same bleachers from place to place just for these photo ops, it strongly suggests the same kind of fakery in all three.

They very well could be portable bleachers. Why not? They want to photograph Kim with his military entourage in various locations, all consistently -- I could easily imagine them having a "set" they pack up and bring around -- risers, bleachers, whatever they may be. Better than having to scrounge for an appropriate posing scenario in each location.

In fact, the more I think about it, the more it seems to me that the re-appearance of the same lineless bleachers in each of the photos only strengthens my doubts that it's a faked photo. It'd be just as bizarre and unlikely to unnecessarily remove the black central line in all three Photoshoppings than it would be to have a "presidential bleachers" set up for photo shoots.

re: #205 Thom

If ABC thought the picture wasn't fake, why would they remove it? QED.

They're running scared from the blogs, is my guess. They don't want to be caught looking like fools, and they think the blogosphere has more expertise in this field (spotting fakes) than they do. So they trust our eyes, not their own judgment.

re: #203 Charles

I wish we had higher-resoution versions of these images, which is the way we could really tell. The ones online just don't have enough detail to judge for sure.

Specifically, there would have to be a kludged area either on the inner side of the sets of legs on either side of Kim, where the black line would have met the pants of either officer, or a similar kludging on the outer edge where the pants now meet the line. In me trying to visualize how the Photoshopping was done, that would be the problem spot for me. But we just don't have the resolution to spot the kludging, if it was semi-expertly done.

No, it's not a clear-cut case, but that straight vertical shadow is highly suspicious to me. It's very unlikely that simply standing slightly forward would cause that much difference from the other obviously slanted shadows.

We're not going to be able to conclusively prove it, though.

BINGO!

This photo shows the same bleachers, and proves my theory: the black line DOES stop in the center.

Just as I suspected.

My doubts that this is an example of fauxtography just went way up.

re: #209 Charles

No, it's not a clear-cut case, but that straight vertical shadow is highly suspicious to me. It's very unlikely that simply standing slightly forward would cause that much difference from the other obviously slanted photos.

We're not going to be able to conclusively prove it, though.

I think the shadow angle is caused by the bell-pants on Kim vs. the ankle-hugging, inward-turning pants on the other officers.

My photo in comment #210 also proves that there IS a "presidential photo op bleacher" which is carted around and used for military guys to pose on in different locations.

Also, look at the caption int he #210 photo:

An undated picture, releaed from Korean Central News Agency on August 1, 2007, shows North Korean leader Kim Jong Il (C) posing with soldiers of Korean People's Army unit 4318 in front of a special podium for Kim Jong Il with a red mark at undisclosed place. KCNA released a picture on November 5 and British medias questioned the authenticity of the image for mismatching pixels. South Korea dismissed reports on November 9 that recently-released photographs of Kim Jong-Il may have been doctored, amid continued speculation over the North Korean leader's health. AFP PHOTO / KCNA via KNS (Photo credit should read KCNA/AFP/Getty Images)

What about the shadows of the hats being "off" as well? [Link: www.timesonline.co.uk...]

Considering how lame and amateurish everything else North Korea does, I also find it highly dubious that they could produce such an expert Photoshop. Because, if this is a fake (and that's still a possibility), it's a quite a very well done one. Everything else about Kim's presence in the photo -- the lighting, the sun's angle, the color saturation, the blending, the scale, etc. -- are all perfect. The only possible flaw in an otherwise masterful Photoshop would be the angle of the leg shadow. Too odd to miss that one obvious detail while attending to every other detail punctiliously.

Yep, there apparently is a special set of bleachers, you're right. And it does look like that's the explanation for the missing line.

re: #214 carefulnow

What about the shadows of the hats being "off" as well? [Link: www.timesonline.co.uk...]

I don't see that. Not enough resolution to grasp the hat-shadow issue. Could be many other explanations for that as well, because the surfaces on which the hat-shadows fall (people's bodies) are irregular and inconsistent, which could alter the shadow shapes -- unlike the (possibly) consisitently flat stair front.

re: #216 Charles

Yep, there apparently is a special set of bleachers, you're right. And it does look like that's the explanation for the missing line.

So far, I see only three indications of possible Photoshopping:

a. Leg-angle shadow.
b. Missing black line.
c. Hat shadow inconsistency.

My answer to all three is:

a. Pant-cuff shape accounts for leg-shadow differences.
b. Missing black line is actually physically missing on the bleachers -- it wasn't digitally removed.
c. Hat shadows not clearly visible, and fall on irregular surfaces, so nothing is conclusive.

I updated with a link to that photo...

The pic is real. But the Kim figure is a good wax impersonation.

UPDATE at 12/18/08 12:18:10 pm:

Hold the presses! Zombie discovered another picture of one of these Kim Jong-Il photo ops that suggests these images are not faked after all

Oooh, just saw your update Charles -- thanks!

Still, there is another aspect of "photo fraud," in my "Taxonomy of Fraud":

"4. Giving false or misleading captions to otherwise real photos that were taken at a different time or place. "

In other words, this may still count as a"fake" photo in that it was taken at a different time than the North Korean government claims. But I'm beginning to have very serious doubts that it falls into category 1 in the taxonomy:

"1. Digitally manipulating images after the photographs have been taken."

I just see no evidence of digital manipulation.

re: #220 solomonpanting

The pic is real. But the Kim figure is a good wax impersonation.

Another possibility! Could indeed be a fake stand-in.

re: #221 zombie

Oooh, just saw your update Charles -- thanks!

Still, there is another aspect of "photo fraud," in my "Taxonomy of Fraud":

If Kim is actually a wax figure as solomonpanting suggests, shouldn't that be the "Taxidermy of Fraud"?

Charles, you can now flip this scandal 180 degrees!

No longer mocking ABC for running the supposed fauxtograph, you can instead turn the spotlight on The Times Online who thought they had caught their own Photoshopping scandal. In their eagerness to catch up with the blogs on this issue, they glommed on to a dubious case and seem to have made fools of themselves.

Once again, the MSM blunders!

One way or the other -- either the Times got it wrong, or ABC, got it wrong -- one of the MSM outlets made a big boo-boo.

It seems the Times was excited by an email from a single reader, and ran with the scandal, without looking into it too closely:

A Times Online reader with an eye for detail has pointed out that there is something shady about the shadows in the picture.

A close inspection of the photograph published yesterday by the Korean Central News Agency suggests that the shadow cast by Mr Kim is very different to those cast by the soldiers standing alongside him.

Anthony, from Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia...

It's an even funnier scnadal, flipped around like this!

re: #223 Cicero05

If Kim is actually a wax figure as solomonpanting suggests, shouldn't that be the "Taxidermy of Fraud"?

Ha ha! Classic.

I found it highly unlikely that a person entrusted with the fakery would have missed recreating the line running behind the back. Speaking as someone who uses Photoshop and the dreaded clone tool in my daily work, I can say it's not difficult at all to do. They certainly wouldn't have missed it on three separate photographs, so Zombie's find of the special bleachers all adds up to that issue being a non-issue. That leaves the shadow, which is remarkable, but I think can be explained by some natural anomaly.

An entire country with just one lousy set of bleachers that follows around the Dear Leader. Whodathunkit?

(clarification) "not difficult at all to do", meaning: not difficult to recreate the line.

re: #227 Cicero05

That's ok, the platoon that has to tote it around gets an extra ration of tree bark every other month.

Unfortunately, the platoon is killed and replaced every month so no one on the bleacher-toting detail will be around long enough to notice that they haven't toted around the bleacher in quite some time.

re: #229 Thom

Lately, "Kim" has been nailed to the lower bleacher, but everyone's pretending not to notice.

Charles, look again at the original FULL photo.

Notice the shadow of the leg of the guy standing fourth to the right of Kim. It is just as straight as Kim's is.

Kim's leg shadow only seems anomalous when compared to the shadows of the two guys on his immediate left and right. But the leg shadows of several of the other officers in the front row are also vertical or nearly vertical. So Kim's doesn't look so strange after all, when the full photo is considered.

I really think the explanation lies in the different shapes of the pants and pant cuffs -- some are tucked in, some go out like bell-bottoms, etc.

For me, that seals it -- the fact that there are other straight leg shadows in the front row. I'm now firmly in the "this isn't Photoshopped" camp.

The Big Show Down

First, let's start with who and what Hamas is. They are the Gaza branch of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, which gave us al Qaeda co-founder Ayman Zawahiri. The MB has never renounced Al Qaeda or vice versa, they are joined at the hip as violent Islamic terror groups hell bent on taking over the world and imposing a global Caliphate. Gaza leaders have been famously quoted calling for the destruction of the US and the Islamic takeover of Europe.

Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel "by Islamic means" and their leaders are famous for sending other people's children on suicide attacks while sending their own kids to Europe for safety.

Hamas is openly allied with Hezbollah, Syria and Iran. They have been holding a kidnapped soldier for over 900 days.

There is only one way to fix them and that is a concerted military effort that crushes their leadership and eliminates all of their military capability. Israel should invade Gaza and hand the whole fetid mess over to Fateh. I am sure that the kleptocrats of the PA would be most merciful to the people at Hamas that ran them out of town. When Israel attacks Gaza, the northern border with Lebanon will erupt and that will present Israel with the golden opportunity to give Lebanon the gift of a Hezbollah free future. Israel would be remiss if they did not crush Syria's military and strike at Iran's fuel refineries.

Recent reports that Iran has emplaced Tor-M1 anti-air units and has begun to get shipments of S-300 AA missiles show once again, that waiting to fight an enemy with whom war is inevitable, only increases the cost when war finally comes. Israel's ability to sustain the long term air strikes needs to crush Iran's nuclear program is waning. This is disturbing in the extreme. Even worse, there is every likelihood that the all-knowing schiesskopf arriving at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in a month (Sing, Tony! Sing!) will prevent Israel from striking Iran.

Iran is perhaps months away from the BOMB and they must be stopped whatever the price. The failure to not live up to his promise to stop terror regimes from getting the bomb will weigh very heavily in future estimates of the Bush Presidency. If Iran has the bomb, Hezbollah has the bomb, al Qaeda has the bomb and Hamas has the bomb. The nightmare of terrorists with nuclear weapons is at hand.

Whaddya know, looks like there are TWO nearly identical portable "reviewing stands," enough for two phalanxes of officers when necessary:

Kim inspecting military units on the same reviewing stands at yet a different location.

Can't really tell about the black line in this one, but it just further confirms that these reviewing stand(s) follow him around.

re: #232 ayatollah ghilmeini

Wrong thread!

Well, looks like I've successfully fulfilled my Daily Debunking Duty. Now it's back to the real world! Paperwork awaits.

those can't be real legs

re: #234 zombie

Wrong thread!

uh..tell me again..is this thread about bleachers, TVs or submarines?

re: #234 zombie

shnizzle

The bleachers are angled which would explain the shadows and the missing white line.

I think his right leg may just be a bit forward of the left. That would actually be a more stable stance a sick guy shooting multiple photos with his goons. Note his foot.

Portable photo stand with podium and sound system ect... seems quite ordinary. Not nearly as fake as a disposable Greek-revival Hollywood stage set for a single speech.

Looks like a central piece of canvas that probably covers the joint at the middle of the portable stage and extends above the edge( rolled over the edge). Note how is has more "bend", like it is rolled for transport. While the drapes on the right and left are nailed to the frame (see right of photo). The central canvas is also slightly lower than the others.

Off-Topic - Can we get a way of weeding out off-topic posts and keeping them to open threads. ?

Maybe the ABC photo isn't fake, I can't believe that a major news network would fake a document to catch headlines! The embalmers art can make him look real enough for a "still" photo. That would be the only way to get his winter coat on. The guy behind him could be propping him up with a stick...

I'm just saying... it could happen.

HOLD UP!

Hold the presses! Zombie discovered another picture of one of these Kim Jong-Il photo ops that suggests these images are not faked after all: Getty Images - An undated picture, releaed from Korean.

Notice the bottom part of his pants with the doctored photo and the original Getty image linked above.

It's similar but it flipped the other way in the doctored photo.

re: #235 zombie

Well, looks like I've successfully fulfilled my Daily Debunking Duty. Now it's back to the real world! Paperwork awaits.

Pay special attention to the bottom part of his pants. See my post #242.

Well-l-l-l-l-l-l...

The picture may be undated, but the article on the Getty Images page says:

An undated picture, releaed [sic] from Korean Central News Agency on August 1, 2007, shows North Korean leader Kim Jong Il

And the uniform is not the same either...

/came in late... have not read upthread...

Seriously? From that far away, it could be you in that photo, Charles.

As far as the discrepancies in the shadow angles, I think that might be explained by distance of the figures from the bleachers. Standing with your heels right up against it, there would hardly be a shadow. Further forward you would cast a wider shadow, like #2 & #3 to the left of him.

I would be more interested in the contours of the shadow his head and shoulders are casting on the soldier's uniform immediately behind him.

re: #242 the_flying_pig

HOLD UP!

Notice the bottom part of his pants with the doctored photo and the original Getty image linked above.

It's similar but it flipped the other way in the doctored photo.

re: #243 the_flying_pig

Pay special attention to the bottom part of his pants. See my post #242.

I see what you're pointing out, but it's not relevant: yes, the pants have larger indentation-creases on different sides in each of the two photos, but if you look closely, they are not exact duplicates of each other that have been reversed -- he just happened at random to have a slightly larger crease on the left in one photo, and a slightly larger crease on the right in the other photo. They are not mirror images of each other -- just look vaguely similar is all.

It's no further proof of any Photoshopping.

re: #152 jcm

jcm
Sorry for the total delay ... storm tomorrow ... shopping today.
What caught my eye is the total difference with the pants of the flanking soldiers to KJI. Charles photo does not match either of the images that you have in your post #128.
Looks like the Norko's might be a bit anal-retentive oooooor maybe hyper-careful regarding dear leader and his surroundings.
Have a good night all.

re: #168 Kailen

You guys may be barking up the wrong tree here.

#1) ABC is running a different photo entirely.
#2) The shadow cast in the "fake" photo may be legit. It is possible to have two shadows that look to be different angles based on what's casting the shadow. Mythbusters showed this on their "Conspiracy Theory" episode, about the "different shadows" on one of the moon landing photos. Turned out to be topography. Now, look again at the shadows in the "fake" picture, then look at the pant legs. Every shadow that has the larger angle has pants that increase in size as they approach the waist. Kim Jon Ill's pant legs are straight. Now, look at the person two people to the right from Ill. Straight pant legs, very similar shadow. It ALSO looks like Ill's right leg, the one casting the shdow, is held back a little (look at his foot).
#3) The white "line" is NOT a constant line. Look at the left side of the man left of Ill. The line isn't there, raising from the ground. This line appears to be an uneven wear/water line.

You're going to need more than that to prove this one is fauxtography.

I think you're right.

different photos,,,,men to his left and right are in dress uni's in one pic and fatigues in the other pic...maybe one of the comments above has mentioned this i did not read them all...donk

re: #248 zombie

I think you're right.

Thank you.

re: #248 zombie

Here's a photoshopped photo from at least 9/07 Scroll to bottom. His leg "shadow" is from an image transfer - this vertical appearance is similar. Note how the podium bleeds into his shoes. Also note the bunny ears -

December frapping 1st, we had this story. Where were you when it was floating around then, Charles? :-D

[Link: snappedshot.com...]

Respectfully,
Brian

re: #252 snapped shot

December frapping 1st, we had this story. Where were you when it was floating around then, Charles? :-D

[Link: snappedshot.com...]

Respectfully,
Brian

Search for my comments on this thread above -- I think I've presented a pretty good case that the photo in question (the one this thread was about) is NOT faked. Pay special attention to the photo I link to in comment #210, which shows that the podium line DOES in reality stop in the middle -- but in your post you claimed the the missing line was one of the most compelling bits of evidence pointing to fakery. Also see my summary of explanations for the anomolies in comment #218.

True, your post on this topic did come out 17 days earlier, but if the photo isn't a fake to begin with, then it doesn't matter who noticed it first!

re: #251 kafir lover

Here's a photoshopped photo from at least 9/07 Scroll to bottom. His leg "shadow" is from an image transfer - this vertical appearance is similar. Note how the podium bleeds into his shoes. Also note the bunny ears -

I just don't see what you're referring to exactly. I don't see how the podium bleeds into his shoes -- what I see is the white color of the podium reflecting off his shoes, which are shinier than everyone else's. And the leg shadow seems, well, perfectly normal to me. But the accidental bunny ears are pretty funny!