Am I the only person who thinks this Bush image is suspicous?

[Proletariat]

Check this out: http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/WORLD/europ.../20/bush.europe/top.bush.belgium.2.jpg

It's on the front page of CNN.com. It looks SOOO edited.

EDIT: Image now also on http://www.foxnews.com and http://www.msnbc.com

 

[kylebisme]

I have to argee.

 

[artikk]

it probably is edited

 

[AFB]

Hahaha, that is such a sh!ty job too.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

definitely looks photochopped.

 

[dahunan]

soon there will be some with pot leafs and waterbongs in them

 

[alchemize]

It does look fake, but then look at a different variant of it on MSNBC:

Text

That one looks real (shadows, etc.). Why would AP photoshop it?

 

[AFB]

Originally posted by: alchemize
Why would AP photoshop it?

Bored intern?

 

[realsup]

IMPEACH :disgust:

 

[GoPackGo]

they both look photochopped...and very poorly done.

 

[Martin]

I think its just the way the shadows from the flashes below make them appear.

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: Martin
I think its just the way the shadows from the flashes below make them appear.

I think its just the way the photochopping from Photoshop makes them appear.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Martin
I think its just the way the shadows from the flashes below make them appear.

interesting lighting in the event that these are real

 

[Abraxas]

Let us say for the moment that they are indeed photoshopped or edited in some other fashion. Why is that a big deal? There some meaning to the press cleaning up photos that I am missing?

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: Abraxas
Let us say for the moment that they are indeed photoshopped or edited in some other fashion. Why is that a big deal? There some meaning to the press cleaning up photos that I am missing?

Well I've seen a lot of Bush photos that I've been suspicous about, but this one was just so blatant I had to post it.

I am pretty sure the AP has access to VERY nice editing programs. I don't see why they would do such a crappy job.

 

[Schneider879]

I could do a better job than that easily.

 

[Isla]

Higgledy Piggledy, my white hen
She lays eggs for the gentlemen
You cannot persuade her with a gun or lariat
To come across for the proletariat

Dorothy Parker


Sorry, I just couldn't resist!

<---pro Proletariat

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Check this out: http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/WORLD/europ.../20/bush.europe/top.bush.belgium.2.jpg

It's on the front page of CNN.com. It looks SOOO edited.

EDIT: Image now also on http://www.foxnews.com and http://www.msnbc.com

And you libs claim that the MSM doesn't make up stuff about Bush. They even fake the photos now! Go ahead and rave about how true it is!

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: alchemize
It does look fake, but then look at a different variant of it on MSNBC:

Text

That one looks real (shadows, etc.). Why would AP photoshop it?

Different position in the aircraft port and with shadows.

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: Abraxas
Let us say for the moment that they are indeed photoshopped or edited in some other fashion. Why is that a big deal? There some meaning to the press cleaning up photos that I am missing?

Well I've seen a lot of Bush photos that I've been suspicous about, but this one was just so blatant I had to post it.

I am pretty sure the AP has access to VERY nice editing programs. I don't see why they would do such a crappy job.

Liberal press trying to make him look bad?

 

[Abraxas]

Originally posted by: Condor

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: Abraxas
Let us say for the moment that they are indeed photoshopped or edited in some other fashion. Why is that a big deal? There some meaning to the press cleaning up photos that I am missing?

Well I've seen a lot of Bush photos that I've been suspicous about, but this one was just so blatant I had to post it.

I am pretty sure the AP has access to VERY nice editing programs. I don't see why they would do such a crappy job.

Liberal press trying to make him look bad?

And why would the "liberal press" need to photoshop an image of Bush to make him look bad? And if they did, why would they make it look like an obvious photoshop job?

Edit: Typo

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: Condor
Liberal press trying to make him look bad?

:roll:

 

[kylebisme]

How would you say he might look bad in that photo, Condor?

 

[judasmachine]

they prolly didn't want to send the real bush to europe. cardboard would do just fine.

 

[Martin]

are there no fan of occam's razor in here?