Clearly you just don't get it Sam. This is a source people used to actually trust. No longer. Of course you and moonie are still free to believe what they publish if you like. In fact I would be shocked if you had enough integrity to actually call this what it was, outright lies. You seem to have no problem calling anyone else a liar when you think it appropriate, yet when a news source has been caught lying you are strangly silent about that aspect of it.

__________________
[IMG]http://www.gersbachia.com/gort%5Fanim%5B1%5D.gif[/IMG]
The universe grows smaller every day and the threat of aggression by any group anywhere can no longer be tolerated. There must be security for all or no one is secure... - Klaatu

Couldn't the "main hole" have also been made by simply removing the big round rotating spotlight fixture?

The location of the "main hole" is quite telling isn't it?

Seems to me that being hit by a missile would have caused much more severe damage. (there would be bassically nothing left of the vehicle)

Again, you be the judge. Seems to me that the damage would have been much more severe if it was actually hit by a missle. Give me 10 minites with a maddox and I could do similar and much worse damage.

I'm not claiming to know how the hole got there, but I certainly don't think the story jibes.

But I do think that the theory that it was caused by a shaped charge is simply out of the question.

__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -- Rummy

Wise words from a wise man.

Media bias and manipulation are nothing new; although I’m surprised that Reuters has publicly acknowledged a doctored photograph. Reuters has taken the position that this was a freelance photographer from Lebanon – that sounds disarming, but this freelancer has provided Reuters with photos for over ten years, according to a Reuters story itself. And given that this agency says it has strict standards, but that this photo slipped through the cracks, this is quite a blow to the agency’s credibility.

Skimming over a few articles from google, though, it does not seem that Reuters adopts much of an anti-Israel stance. Some articles have a bias, in that they focus on Lebanon's humanitarian crisis or the mounting death toll without many words devoted to Israel’s situation. But other articles seem objective. Reuters is, in my opinion, hard to trust anway, because it has apparently sided with the LOTIS Committee, that meeting of the elite of the world’s financiers and bankers pushing for corporate deregulation.

A desperate thread topic? Not at all, moon; this is a very concerning and legitimate thread topic. This is a clear indicator of the biases and deceptions that the media machine is vulnerable to – this is no small deal. This particular photo may be “a fuss about nothing,” (I disagree, but that’s just opinion) but are you going to assume that this is an isolated incident? That other photos have not been staged to meet a sort of agenda?

What does Reuters have to do with “liberal” and “conservative?” The old Left and Right are transforming, swoop, and I would wager that Reuters is allied with a whole new crowd.

__________________
[i]No man is an island...
Therefore, send not to know
For whom the bell tolls,
It tolls for thee.[/i]
—John Donne

Hezbollah has vowed to destroy Israel. They will not stop. That was the point of the comment. Do we have to spell EVERYTHING out?

__________________
[img]http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/3605/11ul2.jpg[/img]

Do you think they had much of a choice? How could they deny it?

It's kinda like when the NY Times dude got busted for making up stories for years.

The evidence is simply too overwhelming to deny. The retraction is damage control.

__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -- Rummy

Wise words from a wise man.

The MSM is having fits, not being the only annointed dissemblers of information. Pravda was their template. "If it doesn't come from us, it's not relevant."

The Internet has put the lie to them.

__________________
[img]http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/3605/11ul2.jpg[/img]

Larf. What a DESPERATE bunch of defeated neocons. Lol. Some guy added some SMOKE to a pic for EFFECT. It isn't a fabrication of events, you goddam desperate lemons, lol.

Anybody would think that someone had touched out Lindy England's electric cattle prod. Larf.

__________________
[I]668.....the neighbour of the beast.[/I]

Yes it is fabrication.

You just don't get it do you moon? Ever think some people feel betrayed because many of them actually trusted the source?

Trying to change the subject to someone else is just plain fucking disingenuous. But then again you are not from the USA so I don't expect you would understand. After all you have admitted to being Hamas in another thread.

So do you think it is a good thing that the major syndicated news outlets have been busted lying to the public?

__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -- Rummy

Wise words from a wise man.

If you think that a little SMOKE re-touching is somehow significant enough to damn Reuters, even though they've already sacked the guy, then it's YOU that's fucking stupid.

__________________
[I]668.....the neighbour of the beast.[/I]

When it all gets boiled down, this is what the so called left loonies are reduced too. As I stated before to others, is there anything in your rhetoric worth responding too, at least in a serious tone? Think not.