Charles, just awesome, what a victory for our side!

Wow! The exposés keep piling up.

I am putting together a definitive overview of the whole scandal. Look for it soon!

Karridine at Brain Surgery With Spoons nailing Reuters today!

Thanks for the tip, Zombie!

OT - [Link: www.debunking911myths.com...] -

There's now a book about the Popular Mechanics investigation.

And still, to those with BDS, these Truths matter not ...

When the borg starts to look normal you know
This.Is.A.Big.Deal

LGF and Austin (TX) - Keeping it Weird

Way too go Charles! Even the tabloid television show "Inside Edition" had a story on the Reuters photo scandal featuring the green helmet guy.
Now what we need is an expose of the very anti-Israel British media and find out who is paying them to spread Arab lies and propaganda.

Michelle Malkin is on Bill O'Reilly right now talking about LGF and the photos.

Way too go Charles! Even the tabloid television show "Inside Edition" had a story on the Reuters photo scandal featuring the green helmet guy.
Now what we need is an expose of the very anti-Israel British media and find out who is paying them to spread Arab lies and propaganda.

Crap. I can't even come up with anything sarcastic for this. They took away my sarcasm. Damn them. Damn them all to hell!

But, cynicism can also be fun. Small comfort.

Adnan Hajj has a bridge he'd like to sell'ya.

(Well, two bridges actually.)

The guy in that first pic looks suspiciously like White Tee Shirt...

"A bridge too wierod"

/waaay too many rotating title candiates over the past 48 hrs. ...
:-)

# 12 Dar

One's in worse shape than the other -- it's cheaper ...
:-)

and find out who is paying them to spread Arab lies and propaganda.

Uh..that would be the Arabs.

Not surprising in the least. I just finished copying 12 pictures by one of our friendly Reuters crew all of the same one woman - and a few more of Wailing Woman, LOL.

Someone was hoping for a slam at AFP. Well here it is! Look to Update IV at Cox and Forkum

[Link: www.coxandforkum.com...]

Enjoy!

This in from reuters via drudge report.

"Reuters withdrew all 920 photographs by a freelance Lebanese photographer from its database on Monday after an urgent review of his work showed he had altered two images from the conflict between Israel and the armed group Hizbollah."

[Link: reuters.myway.com...]

Hezbollywood unravels.

Actually, I love Drudge's current Headline...

REAL OR ALTERED? REUTERS PULLS 920 PHOTOS BY HAJJ

Congrats again, Charles!

OT: First seen on JihadWatch: Feds Hunt For 11 Egyptians Missing In U.S.

According to the FBI and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, the men were among a larger group of students who arrived at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York from Cairo on July 29 with valid visas.

FBI Special Agent Richard Kolko said there is no threat associated with the men.

A law enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity said the men are between 18 and 22 years old.

I think I figured it out.
This is just part of the "production" of this war. I mean it all makes sense. No good war lasts more than two hours, and everything has to be set up perfectly.
This guy isn't a propogandist, he is just a director, setting up the right shots.

Welcome to Paliwood, or in this case, Hezbawood.

But But way back in pre-computer days I was told that photos DID NOT LIE.

And if you dare to call them on it, it's a) racism, b)Islamophobia, c) Zionism, d) Yankee imperialism, or e) all of the above.

They may be beginning to learn it don't quite work that way. Except in San Francisco.

Think Harry Mudd made many many "green helmet" men and "wailing" women and they are all over the place in Lebanon? He's cloned the people, the buildings, even smoke...there are pictures to prove it.

Yeah! Sarcasm (Star Trek induced, Nerdy sarcasm, but Sarcasm all the same) is back!

MMM sarcasm.

somewhat OT, but check out hughhewitt.com for the piece about MSM journalist Thomas Ricks who charged that Israel is *allowing* Hezbollah free space to continue firing rockets in order for Israel to have a pretext to continue the war.
Shortly afterwards, the swine backed away from those charges. But that they are being made at all!

If it bleeds misleads ,it leads

/al-Reuters

I guess Reuters will have to have an asterik under all their photos stating the photo may or may not have been altered for maximum jew hating quotient

Based on Reuters' reporting, as demolished in the past few days, I believe it is safe to say that nothing with a Reuters' byline can be considered true or accurate.

Has Gunga Dan taken up with the kiddies from Reuters? This stuff is starting to fall into the "fake but accurate" category.

Until Reuters comes clean on all this crappola, they are no longer credible (as if they ever were, for that matter).

Is Someone putting something into Britain's tea?
Charle's LA Tea Party.

Did Adnan Hajj stage photos using himself?

Check out the links on that post.

Interesting.

OT: but you might be interested in this survey in Indonesia of the RoP.

#26 chubby vegan

Think Harry Mudd made many many "green helmet" men and "wailing" women and they are all over the place in Lebanon?

Don't forget the upside down white car.

/the bridge, the road, it seems to be making the rounds too

It went from a 'little dust removal' to an out-and-out Vaudeville show within minutes.

Tip o'the iceberg...

OK, I'm bad at explaining this - but I see a brick shape with a bit of something draped over it on the ground under the tire to the right in both vehicle pictures. It's there - exactly the same shape, with the bit of something draped over it, in both pictures. So did the rubble magaically transport with the vehicle?

I sense a cut and paste moment here.

Hannity and Colmes are about to cover the Reuters photo scandal.

#30 Bill M.

Heh. If somebody could morph the TANG "memos" into the Reuters photo, I think that would say it all...

And now everyone who published one of these Reuters photographs needs to publish an apology/retraction, and also demand their money back from Reuters. And Reuters needs to demand a refund of payments made to Adnan Hajj.

That will clean things up right smartly. Nothing better than hitting them where it really hurts -- the pocket.

The MSM just keeps on hittin' them home runs. Here's another one for you, from my buddy Ron Coleman and the good folks on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals:

Floyd Abrams loses another one: No privilege for reporters’ phone records
August 7th, 2006 by Ron Coleman

We’ve never been big fans of the “press shield,” and I say that because I like the First Amendment. Now the Second Circuit court of Appeals has once again rebuffed a press attempt to shield information sought by the government in connection with a federal criminal investigation — where the criminals may have been reporters tipping off supporters of terrorists of an impending raid . . .

[Link: www.likelihoodofconfusion.com...]

Walid Shoebat

On Hannity&Colmes now:

Be an Activist for the Truth
Walid Shoebat Foundation.

An organization that cries out for the Justice of Israel and the Jewish people.

[Link: www.shoebat.com...]

I'll apologize in advance for this...

What we seem to have here is Hizbollocks taking it a bridge too far.

"Bridge on the River LIE"
/mea culpa..it's been a long day! ;)

I demand Reuters go back and investigate all the photos they've used that were taken by Israeli freelancers. Because I'm sure they've got Israeli freelance photographers too...right?

/snort

Three Cheers for Charles!
Dan Rather has been Rathered
so has Mary Mapes
and now Adnan Hajj has been Reutered

Who's next?

The Lizard King and His Lizardoid Minions really R-O-C-K!

It's to the point in the MSM and their "photos" that they ALL have to be taken with a grain of salt, compared to other photos, and analyzed extensively before they can be given even a modicum of credibility.

Obviously, the accuracy of the photos (to the Arabs and the Western world both) is that perhaps over 90% of the world's population would not know any of the landmarks being described. That, along with the average 22-second MTV attention span of the "news"-consuming public, who's gonna notice, right?

Guess what, al-Reuters, al-AP, al-Beeb, al-jazeera, and al-American networks --- WE ARE NOTICING! Your lies and bullshit are finally to the point with the public at large, that you have little to NO sway anymore! They've had enough already! How hard is it to report the TRUTH in an unbiased and fair manner? Apparently, it's impossible in the MSM! With LGF and many other blogs to watch over and report your every single move, and your every single alteration/fake/tall tale/out-and-out lie, you are being watched, reported, talked about, and held accountable for your biased, bought-and-paid-for bullshit you call "news".

There is a very special place reserved in Hell for your people in your organizations, MSM.

Hannity knocks it out of the park!

This a pic of the same bridge?

Hey editors at Reuters, you can use it if you want. It has not been retouched. Honest.

[Link: www.cranstonfinearts.com...]

#41 jrdroll

Mr. Shoebat is dynamite. Loving it. Would that Reuters would clone Mr. Shoebat instead of photos.

OT
L.A. Mayor Apologizes to Muslim Leaders
[Link: www.breitbart.com...]

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has apologized to Muslim leaders who accused him of taking Israel's side in the violence in Lebanon by going to a pro-Israel rally and ignoring their invitations to interfaith peace vigils.
Villaraigosa met with 10 Muslim leaders Sunday and explained that a mix-up by his staff had prevented him from seeing their invitations, said his spokeswoman, Janelle Erickson.
"The mayor did apologize that the staff didn't place the meeting on his schedule sooner," said Erickson, describing Sunday's hour-long discussion as "open and friendly."
Villaraigosa called the meeting after the Muslim leaders held a news conference Friday accusing him of not representing all groups touched by the conflict.
They noted that he attended a July 23 rally by the Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles, at which he condemned Hezbollah guerrilla rocket attacks on Israel, but failed to respond to repeated calls and e-mail invitations to interfaith vigils for people killed on both sides in Lebanon.
"It was gracious of him to say 'I apologize for the lack of communications,'" said Shakeel Syed, executive director of the Shura Council of Southern California.
The mayor pledged to visit mosques and attend events in the city's Islamic communities, and assigned one of his senior advisors as liaison to Muslim groups.

Charles Martel!

All these stupid faked photos.

I just hope this picture of a Pali sucide bomber was not a fake.

[Link: hodja.wordpress.com...]

One of my mottos used to be, “It still isn’t weird enough.”

That sounds like something Mr. Zappa woulda said.

Charles "The Hammer" Johnson

OT
does anyone out there know anything about the drone that was shot down today as it was headed for Tel Aviv?

Charles is on with Mark Levin on the radio. Great interview!
Charles speaks as well as he writes. Common sense is SOOOooo lacking in the main stream media and when they are caught with their pants down...

LGF is the greatest.

#22 LSD

The official said the government probably will seek to send the students home once located because they have violated the terms of their visas.

And that id-jot from from the FBI says there is "no threat" from this large group of Egyptians, all of whom were due at the same place (Montana State Univ) and all of whom disappeared?

At the very least, they committed immigration fraud and obviously had no intention of going to school. So what do they intend?

Any foreigner who enters this country then "disappears" poses some risk -- at the minimum, illegal immigration. When its a group that disappears en masse --

"Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action."

why is it that bloggers 6000 or more miles away sitting in front of a computer know more about what is really going on over in the ME than the reporters on the ground?

we can see the staging, the manipulation, the acting, the scripting all from here.

I was just wondering ‘cause I often see the dictator of Saudi Arabia called a leader but hardly ever a ruler. Ya see I always taught a leader is someone who is chosen by the group to be in charge of the body politic. A ruler is not chosen but imposed from above. Hmm, I guess the people of Saudi Arabia, China...
the rest at
[Link: amassachusettsrepublican.blogspot.com...]

Anyone have experience with basic installation and password settings in mySQL? I need some extremely basic help to get Snort installed.

#52 ibmkeyboard

LOL!

You are one sick mothe...

:-)

I have strong doubts about these photos being staged with cars being moved, the bridge falling, etc. There's not an easy way to described what I'm seeing (a diagram would help), but I think that extreme foreshortening of a telephoto lens contrasted with the inclusiveness of a wide-angle lens could explain would appear to be anomalies.

For instance, the bridge appears to me to have already fallen in every picture. Notice the white, angled piece of pavement hanging on the right, far side, directly behind the upright car. You can see a hint of it in every picture, indicating to me the bridge is already down.

I think the overturned truck is simply cropped out of the picture of the guys running across the bridge. Notice the red-and-white posts. One near the rear of the truck (see truck pics) has a rust-colored object on it. That post is not seen in the "running across the bridge" shoot, indicating to me that the photographer could have been standing with the truck just out of frame.

Notice, too, as someone else has already mentioned, that a large rock-like object directly under the truck bed is catching the sunlight in both pictures of the truck, suggesting the truck was not moved. There is also a flat pieces of debris with a rock beside it in both photos.

There's no doubt that Hajj is untrustworthy, and there may very well be some acting going on in these photos. But I'm not yet convinced of the other accusations.

# 59

If you want to advertise, contact Charles and pay for an ad.

New MSM motto:

Reality - Reutered and Rathered until it's news thats fit to print!

why is it that bloggers 6000 or more miles away sitting in front of a computer know more about what is really going on over in the ME than the reporters on the ground?

we can see the staging, the manipulation, the acting, the scripting all from here.

I was gone all weekend and still catching up with this story...

what should surprise but doesnt (and Charles already pointed to the alternative universe that exists in the demoncratic underground) is the total shutout of this story in some of the big guns of the Leftblogsphere

Not a peep from Kos (only a couple of diaries..which are handwringing that this is all blown out of proportion), nothing at Asstrios or Firedoglake...and Glenn "sockpuppet" Greenwald is taking up this same meme at Salon...

It is indisputably wrong for a media outlet to alter photographs or other information so as to falsely represent what is being reported. That is beyond dispute. Yet for three straight days now (and still going strong), the right-wing blogosphere has been wallowing in a self-celebratory swarm because two photographs taken in Lebanon and published by Reuters were found to have been altered using Photoshop by the freelance photographer who submitted them.

Greenpuppet goes on to poo-poo this as "well it happens all the time, and it isn't really as bad as when FoxNews allowed false quotes attributed to John Kerry... Nothing to see here but just the usual wingnutteria..move along."

And of course, for GiGi, Charles is a leader of the

the anti-Reuters lynch mob leaders, Little Green Footballs

but he just can't bring himself to say Charles' name!

Like a bridge over troublesome bloggers...

OT and most likely already posted, but bares repeating for those who haven't watched it, enjoy:

[Link: www.blackfive.net...]

My favorite line:

#4 I FOR ONE WILL NEVER...EVER... APOLOGIZE FOR BEING AN AMERICAN AND DON'T YOU EVER FEEL THAT YOU HAVE TO.

The public needs to know about the doctoring of photos and the staging of scenes, so that they are not deceived into thinking that war art for the sake of propaganda is actually news photography. Adnan Hajj is not an observer in this; he is part of the story.

I did see Fox News carrying the story about that doctored photo with smoke added to it, and Reuters' retraction of the photo. Kudos to Fox.

It would be good if the other media did the same so that people would have some healthy skepticism when they see the work of Adnan Hajj and understand that they are viewing art for propaganda and not news photography.

#36 Catt

You did a great job explaining what you meant.

Print out the two pictures that contain the upside down pick-up. Lay them on top of each other and shine a bright light behind them, (as my mother did),...

I believe that the picture containing the Lebanese Army post (Hajj3456.jpg) is the original, and that the picture containing running HizbAllah goon (Hajj1245.jpg) is an entire fake. Goonboy appears to be making great speed, considering the amount of debris around his feet. Goonboys one foot on the ground appears to be occupying the exact same space as a head sized piece of debris.

I think running Goonboy and the upside down truck were both 'shopped into an empty debris field.

===

Lebanese Army has posts within HizbAllah turf? Not recently, in fact, not since Haddad's Phalange militia withdrew from the area in the mid-80's has the Ceder Tree flag flown anywhere over south Lebanon.

===

Whoever it was that said Charles was overdoing this topic last night was wrong.

Return fire each and every single time you are fired upon, otherwise, the enemy will think they've won.

===

REUTERS
SUX,
R

"Reuters has zero tolerance for any doctoring of pictures and constantly reminds its photographers, both staff and freelance, of this strict and unalterable policy."

does anyone else thing this is a particularily ironic phrasing, given the altering involved...

now then, does the doctoring include any posing/staging of photographs, or just the editting with photoshop?

#53 Bad Penny

That sounds like something Mr. Zappa woulda said.

Very possible.

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

Allen: I agree about the bridge pics, after a close second look. It's not conclusive evidence of staging.

(We need to be aware of the microscope effect, where you study something so long you start to miss things.)

And we must have children running through the rubble.

It's all over, but they send children to run.

So dangerous.

62 Forkum 8/7/2006 06:34PM PDT

Notice, too, as someone else has already mentioned, that a large rock-like object directly under the truck bed is catching the sunlight in both pictures of the truck, suggesting the truck was not moved. There is also a flat pieces of debris with a rock beside it in both photos.

I'm the one who noticed that, but I assumed everyone would notice that the SETTING for the vehicle, and its underlying identical piece of debris, is totally different. What I meant to imply is that the vehicle was photoshopped into one of the two pictures.

Oh, the vehicle was moved alright - digitally.

In one bridge photo the deck is hanging out from the abuttment and there is exposed rebar all over. In the other the bridge has collapsed from the abuttment and the deck is still fairly intact with no rebar.

These two are NOT the same bridge.

Charles: Yes, I completely agree about the microscope effect. There's plenty to pin on Hajj. There's no need to rush to conclusions about other photos.

Another indication to me that the truck was not moved is the fissure in the pavement. You can see it or a hint of it in every photo (expect of course the one of the river). In the first pic, the guys are running across the fissure on the far right-hand side of the bridge. In the first photo of the overturned truck, you see a faint line of the fissure running in front of and parallel to the truck, and under the guy's feet. In the last pic, the truck is near the fissure (bottom left corner) on the far left-hand side of the bridge. This all indicates to me that the truck was simply out of frame in the first photo.

#62 Forkum and #73 Charles, you are coorect; these shots (except for #5) in Powerline's post do NOT show evidence of manipulation. (staging maybe, but I have no opinion there.)

Here is the text of an email I just sent to Powerline:

---

Regarding your recent post "A Bridge Too Weird", I think you've gotten a bit caught up with the storm over Adnan Hajj's duplicity. With one exception, your inferences are quite far from what the image evidence shows.

For brevity, I'll refer to the images by sequence, #1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

My qualifications: over 12 years in the visual FX industry, and 19 years of experience in photography.

Regarding shot #5, there is no doubt that is a different bridge; the lack of rebar is the big giveaway.

But the others are all consistent with being shot around the same time and place. The wrecked car isn't moving at all; Hajj is switching lenses, using both very long telephoto lenses and wideangles (probably 20mm wide and a 300mm telephoto, assuming standard 35mm framesize... that means film or either of the full-frame digital cameras, Canon 1Ds mark II or a Canon 5D. I happen to own the latter).

Shot 1,3 and 4 were all shot wide, probably around 20mm. The characteristic distortion of the tower roof in #4 demonstrates this. Shot #2, however, was shot with a long telephoto, probably around 300mm; this shot shows a lot of telephoto compression (i.e. the background details are all a lot bigger in frame, even though the subject remains about the same size). The smashed bridge is indeed in that shot, but it's barely visible because of this flattening effect; all we can see of it is the rebar "fur", behind the three red-and-white posts. The rebar shows that the bridge is NOT open in shot #2.

In shot #2, the car is sitting at precisely the same angle (relative to the ground) as shot #4, even the lighting on the dented corner of the car's door (to camera right of hole #1) that we see is *precisely* the same. That shows that the car *did not move* between those two shots; there is no way anybody can manipulate a 3000-pound car that precisely and that quickly. It also shows that they were shot very close together in time, as the sun hasn't moved enough to alter the highlight.

Shot #4 thereby shows how much room there is between the bridge and wrecked car. That leaves leaves lots of space for Hajj to shoot #3 without the car in it.

By the way, I'm completely ignoring the last photo posted at Power Line since it is obviously not the same bridge.

M'kay, Al-Reuters is now calling Hajj a freelancer... Lizards, methinks if we can verify asshat Hajj's actual employment status with Al-Reuters, this would be a coup de grais!

THe vehicle pics have different backgrounds.

The upper one has a blue road sign and some multi story buildings to the right. THe lower one has a white road sign, no buildings and is missing some bushes, a concrete pole and some red objects to the right.

They are fishy if anything.

#75 Catt, I do precisely this sort of thing (digital manipulations and photorealistic CGI rendering) for a living, and there is no way the car was "moved digitally". There is no way that Hajj would try to pass off a photochop as amateurish as the one that started all this, if he were capable of not only moving that car with NO artifacts, but even adjust its perspective perfectly to match the different lenses used in #2 and #4.

All the different pictures of people running and some others with captions like 'woman looking at sky near bombed building' I would bet money on the people being asked to make some dramatic pose; but I disagree that the fliped over car was moved (although it is clearly being used as a prop, and was probably there long before the bridge was bombed).

If you look at the 4th picture, it gives a good idea of where the car actually is, at the back left of the road before the bridge even begins. If you compare the 2nd Photo to this, you can see a large piece of concrete under the back of the car which is half covered in shadow. It is in the same place in both photos. If the car is and never was actually on the bridge, that certainly explains the 3rd photo, no car, yes well it wasn't on the bridge. Where is the car in Photo 1 then? If you see the half sized red and white posts, I think these mark the center of the bridge, and the car is further to the left. You can see the half sized red and white posts in both photos 2 and 4. Photo 2 makes the car appear to be much closer to the building in the background, but could it just be the angle and distance/lens that was used to take this picture?

And obviously the second bridge is not the same as the first but maybe it is another bridge in the same town? up or down stream a mile? Would make sense for Israel to blow up both bridges if there were more than 1.

It seems to me that it would be a good idea to maintain credibility to be certain what has been faked before finger pointing at anything that doesn't have an immediate and obvious explaination. Hope I don't get flamed for this, just my opinion.

Now we've got a whole bunch of apparently staged photographs, grom the green helmet guy, to the old woman with the scar on her face, to these bridge photos. This is the next stage of the Reutersgate scandal and we need the MSM to respond to it sooner than immediately.

As far as I'm concerned, every photograph coming out of Lebanon must be considered suspect and there needs to be an independent investigation of Reuters in particular and their pro-Hizballah photographers. As funny as much of this is, it's also rather scary and deadly serious.

#78

I also emailed Powerline. It's called foreshortening.

..Maybe I should have read the comments first, looks like I am late to the party..

I overlayed the 11:10 AM "civil defense worker running" and the 8:43 AM "citizens run near ruined car" ohotos, and I agree, the overturned car hasn't moved. It just looks that way due to the depth of field flattening effect of a long zoom lens.

Most of the safety cones or whatever we see in the 11:10 AM picture are obscured by the people in the 8:43 AM picture, but there's round object in the road that appears between the two guys on the right side of the 8:43 AM picture and the guy in black that looks like it's the round base of the overturned traffic cone seen in the 11:10 AM picture. Its position just looks different due to the foreshortening effect of the zoom used on the 11:10 AM picture.

Also, the concrete base of the metal tower we see directly above the overturned car's tires at left in the 11:10 AM picture is also present in the 8:43 AM picture, but like the building, appears in the far distance between the car's tires and the guy in black.

Scott at Powerline has posted an update.

"SCOTT adds: Thanks to the many readers who have written to reconcile the effects observed in the first four photos as the result of the use of different lenses."

[Link: powerlineblog.com...]

79 Forkum

I've decided to give up for the day - I'm going cross eyed. Charles was right (this set is weird). I fully expect that it will all fall into place tomorrow, after I have my brain back.

/:)

Also, the 7:30 AM picture of "citizens running towards the camera" appears it was taken while standing somewhat to the right of the overturned car. The traffic cones we see at the right of the 11:10 AM shot are now at the left, and we see the top of the overturned cone whose round base we see in the other pictures.

While I'd love to see someone investigate the quality and "truthiness" of the media reporting; other than what's being done in the blog-sphere, just who would/could do this without infringing on freedom of the press? Just about the only ones who would have any authority are the board of directors and, and the NYSlimes as an example, many times the board of directors is just hunky-dory with the coverage as presented.

#79 Forkum

Love your work. Keep up the good fight.

#87 Dar ul Harb

I can see that now.

Still, that last bridge shot is not the same one.

Hajj is being lazy I think on his captioning.

I don't have a kazillion years of experience with photo editing software...

There's something really odd about photos 2 and 3, though. They appear to be of the same scene, and it's reasonable that the difference is because different lenses and settings were used.

It looks like the white car might be the same one in both photos. If so, where's the upside-down-truck in the third photo? It should be right about where the bridge ends.

In photo 2, there are dark objects (front and rear of a dark vehicle as viewed from the side?) on both sides of running man's head, in the background closer to the building than to the foreground. In photo 3, you can see something that looks like it might be the same dark object.

Also, in photo 2, in the foreground out from the door handle, there appears to be a largish pile of rubble, or at least some rocks and pieces of concrete. In photo 4, the area appears to be fairly rubble-free. It almost looks like the vehicle was dragged across that area.

I have no idea whether any of that means anything or even if I'm seeing anything strange, but something just doesn't look right.

Anyone else notice...

Photo 1

Photo 2

Same trees, same building circled in red... Except in Photo 2, the car has been moved closer.

Please host elsewhere if possible.

#93, Orson Buggy

Still, that last bridge shot is not the same one.

Hajj is being lazy I think on his captioning.

Agree with both statements. And the real issue with these photos is, why is anyone running, other than to inject some drama into what would otherwise be a dull set of "bombed out bridge" photos?

The staging is not in the set, but in the "acting" and "direction".

I'd prepared a great animated GIF overlaying the two car pics, convinced that some shoppery was definately involved, then threw it out when I realized exactly what Seerak is saying.

I was thrown off by the presence of that thin red power pole (?) in the background of both pics. The key was realizing the pole with all the greenery is way in the background of the other photo, which also has a similar tower in the same relative position. One pic shows the nearer tower, by the guard post (?) and the other shows the tower much further on.

Wow, you can really do some crazy things with different lenses, can't you?

#73 Charles

Allen: I agree about the bridge pics, after a close second look. It's not conclusive evidence of staging.

You might want to update your original post to reflect your current thinking, if you're not already in the process of doing that.

/as it is, it comes across as if you're sure they're staged

I had to go look again.

And I think I sort of see what you all mean. Angles, foreshortening. Fancy lenses and stuff. It all does seem to fit.

Ahhh. OK.

Question - the difference in the rubble fields in front of the vehicle in the two pictures - why does one seem cleaner? Is that possibly a lens thing?

/Maybe they just swept.

One of my mottos used to be, “It still isn’t weird enough.”

Wasn't that Hunter S. Thompson, originally?

Oops, sorry... I got too excited... I missed that Powerline mentioned the magical warping car as well... D'oh... :)

Hey, at least I did the fancy red elipses in MS Paint! ;)

#99, Catt

Question - the difference in the rubble fields in front of the vehicle in the two pictures - why does one seem cleaner? Is that possibly a lens thing?

If you notice at the bottom of the frame of the 8:43 AM picture, there's a squarish piece of concrete right at the edge of the frame, in line with the car's door handle. I'm not talking about the whitish block that's at the edge of the car's shadow, by the way. Look down at the very edge of the photo. This same block appears in the 11:10 AM picture as well, but looks dark, and is slightly above the edge of the frame in the lower left corner, but still in line with the overturned car's door handle. Between this block, and the car is the area where the "civil defense worker" is running in the 11:10 AM picture. It's largely debris-free, just as it is in the 8:43 shot. it's only once you look up beside and beyond the car that the foreshortening effect of the long zoom lens used in the 11:10 AM picture brings all the rubble between the car and the building into the same apparent depth of field.

Cattt: I agree with Dar ul Harb. I think it's just the foreshortening. Notice the faint line running parallel to the truck in the first pic of truck (it goes through the guy's right foot). That line (a fissure in the pavement) is basically the bottom edge of the second picture. So what few rocks and debris you see in the second pic is foreshortened and compacted into a smaller area of the first pic, making it appear to have more debris. It's really just the same debris viewed from an extremely lower angle.

I'm pretty sure the 11:10 AM photo has had the contrast boosted somewhat to bring out the rubble in sharp relief. Note that both the car and the ground in the 8:43 are kind of dirty brown, but by the time Hajj gets out the zoom, both the car and the ground have lightened in tone considerably (the car is almost white now) and the shadows have darkened a bit, indicating that the contrast has been stretched.

#103, Forkum

It's really just the same debris viewed from an extremely lower angle.

Well, it's not a lower angle exactly, but rather a smaller angle. Hajj is likely to be standing considerably farther away from the car when using the zoom, and so what would look tiny and on the horizon to you with the unaided eye (such as the building) is much bigger to the lens, but it's viewed through a smaller angle of the overall panorama.

We can see in the 11:10 both the top of the overturned car, and the stuff below and behind it that we couldn't see when we were standing right next to the car.

Just one more note to say I concur with Seerak in #82, if Hajj was good enough at Photoshop to composite in a car without leving artifacts, he would likely never have been caught for his smoke "bomb."

Asserting otherwise is like those LLLs who think that President Bush is both a Machiavelian evil genius and an idiot at the same time...

Machiavellian, PIMF.

leaving, PIMF. :)

Could not there be two seperate spans to the bridge?

Possibly with an island in the middle.

After 5 years in photo school perspective can be a disconcerting fact.

What a bad day for Reuters. There are still over 5K visitors on at 12AM Eastern. Wow.

Can anyone give me a closer location for this bridge. I would like to map search it using satillete photos.

I wonder if the reference to the 12:44 a.m. on July 13 time stamp is a typo on the part of Power Line, or if that's the actual camera time stamp. It makes no sense for it to be an AM time, after the sequence of photos from 8am-11am before it, and of course the fact that it's daytime.

102 Dar ul Harb

OK. Thanks for the explanation.

I decided to create quick diagrams to explain my earlier comments. See Update V in this post.

#62 Forkum, #78 Seerak, #81 Orson Buggy, #94 YouGottaBeKidding, #95 efuseakay, et.al.

I've been a "serious amateur photographer" for a couple of decades now, and concur with the opinion that the #2, #3, and #4 pictures are probably from the same approximate point in time and location.

The lens used and location of the photographer can account for the variances in those shots.

#2 is definitely a long telephoto shot from some distance behind the overturned truck towards the bombed-out bridge and the buildings in the background.
The perspective foreshortening of the telephoto would make the buildings and parked car appear closer than they are, and would also serve to de-emphasize the gap caused by the collapsed section of the bridge. (It's my assumption that the overturned truck is located on the near side of the bridge, and the parked car on the opposite side)

#3 is wide angle, taken from near the edge of the collapsed bridge

#4 is taken from the same side of the overturned truck as in #2, except the photographer is much closer to it so the apparent size of the truck approximates the size in the #2 shot. He is also lined up more to the right than his position for #2, as the rear axle is pointing well to the left of the tower that it's pointing almost directly at in #2. It's likely that the head of the man in the black shirt is blocking the view of the parked car from this angle. (The red & white circular object is visible just above the tip of his right shoulder)

These shots do not appear to me to be digitally manipulated.

This does not mean, however, that Hajj and his cohorts didn't thoroughly stage-manage the scene for set-up shots in and around the debris.

To demonstrate what I'm referring to above, here are some shots I took a couple years ago to illustrate this very effect to some non-photographers:

Here's the perspective using a telephoto lens.

This is the same setup, except shot with a wide-angle lens (from a closer location... note that the front subject is approximately the same size as in the telephoto shot)

This is an overview of the setup I used for both shots.

#114 Forkum: you did what I was thinking of doing... except I was going to model it in 3D and do a "zooming" animation to make my point. I didn't bother because I figured things were moving faster than I could.

Incidentally, it would be interesting to see what Microsoft's newly announced 3D scene reconstruction software could do with these shots: [Link: slashdot.org...]

OK, so I downloaded and analyzed the 5 photos in question in "A Bridge Too Wierd".

I do believe that the first three photos are contiguous, at least in location and time(and "characters"). You can see the break in the bridge in the second photo - which the third photo shows clearly (and is apparently taken from someone standing ON TOP OF the "three-hole-car").

I am ambivalent on whether the "Three-Hole-Car" is visible on the first one; I found a grouping of 4 or so pixels that might be the car on the first photo... but it's not a "fer sure". The resolution is just too minimal.

However, it is OBVIOUS that the car was at least transported from one site to another for the 4th photo. It's clearly the same car, and clearly in a different place. So, it's entirely possible that the second and third photos included a "prop" car.

Lastly, the same "cast of characters" are in all photos, including the 5th one, which is obviously of something completly unrelated to the other 4 - despite the wording and times indicated in the captions.

These facts, taken with the observations noted above, indicate that with amaturish obviousness that EVERY SINGLE ONE of these shots were STAGED - most likely LONG after the bridge bombing.

-DirtyHarry (I think this is my second posting ever here. Yay Me! :-) )

Seerak: Yes, 3D cgi would be perfect. It may take moving 3D graphics to fully explain the effect for some. I doubt the effort would be worth it though (as you noted).

If anyone's interested, we may actually be able to find & match up these locations, I've found 2 bridges that could match the locations photographed thanks to google earth/maps:
[Link: maps.google.com...]
[Link: maps.google.com...]
There only appears to be one river in the area, unless I'm really missing something...

#114-116 - oh wow, I see
Makes more sense now (and here I was starting to think it was multiple locations!)
I suppose I should know better, turns out I know the math better than I recognize the side effects, hehe.

After a bit more looking...
The first 4 pictures match up with:
[Link: maps.google.com...]
(building is SW, tower is NE - see shadow, pictures taken from N side of bridge)
The 5th picture seems to match:
[Link: maps.google.com...]
(taken from the E side of bridge)
Interesting to note that all the pictures were taken from the same side of the river- and there really aren't any other bridges anywhere nearby, so taking out those 2 bridges was apparently effective :P
(nearest car-capable bridge is rougly 5 miles away from those 2 - wanna guess if it's still standing?)
(I'm going on and on... will quit bothering the thread now)

The second picture is clearly photoshopped or the guy running in front of the car (actually a pickup) is a dwarf. Look how big the wheel is relative to his body height and he's CLOSER to the camera than the car.

I agree with all the telephoto comments. Those all look unmanipulated to me. The other bridge could be a different span of the same road. There are some bridges across another river south of Tyre that I found that could match it. The lack of rebar could be because the original span was a two-lane road, and when the highway was four-laned, the new bridge was built next to it.

Be careful not to overhype this one. It may backfire on you.

Dont have time to read this whole thing, but ---what a good job--. Time this "practice" of phony pics got discussed big time. Everyone knows this has been going on for eons. Congrats to uncovering..before the world..this duplicitious "stuff".

#123 drool

The second picture is clearly photoshopped or the guy running in front of the car (actually a pickup) is a dwarf. Look how big the wheel is relative to his body height and he's CLOSER to the camera than the car.

That's one of the effects of "telephoto compression", objects in the background are made to look much closer to the viewer, and to each other, than they actually are.

One of the results of this is that our brains attempt to process the information based on what we think of as "normal" perspective and it's essentially an optical illusion that makes the sizes seem out of kilter.

If you watch baseball games, you might notice the same effect when viewing the pitcher, batter and umpire from the centerfield camera. Because of the telephoto compression, the perspective is thrown off and your mind can sometimes perceive the batter and umpire looking bigger to you than the pitcher because your brain knows that things in the background should be smaller in perspective, but because of the telephoto lens, the size falloff isn't as large as it should be, so your brain calculates that it's actually larger.