It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Who took the picture of Joe Wilson?"

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:08 AM
link   
Another question is who benefits from the picture? Democrats or Republicans? What does it accomplish? Have we talked more about health care or the political divide? Seems like one big circle jerk to me.

Look how sneering and disdainful the two other guys are - they certainly don't appear surprised or shocked by the outburst of the person sitting next to them.

The picture seems awfully convenient. Curious.


www.psychologytoday.com...


If Joe Wilson's outburst during Obama's speech Wednesday night was truly "spontaneous," as Wilson claims, and no one (including Wilson himself) could have anticipated it, how come there is a sharply focused and neatly centered picture of Wilson right at the moment he shouted "You lie!" when the outburst lasted less than a second? In the picture, Wilson's mouth is still open, apparently in the middle of his shouting "lie..." Why did someone have a camera fixed and focused on him during Obama's speech?


[edit on 11/9/2009 by kosmicjack]




posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:10 AM
link   
OOh, great find. I didn't watch it, but I would certainly have been suspicious of this myself the moment I saw it. Very staged and directed. Maybe meant to make McCain look good since he supposed gave the congressman a dressing down?



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   
Chip Somodevilla from Getty images took the shot..

My guess, is he focused on that side of the aisle when the ruckus started after the President said the death panel misinfo was a lie..

It wasn't much later that this happened, and if is the usual case he (photographer) was taking multiple shots with a digital camera which can take many frames per second, and he got lucky with this one.

I could be wrong but it doesn't seem to be that much of a stretch.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by JacKatMtn
Chip Somodevilla from Getty images took the shot..

My guess, is he focused on that side of the aisle when the ruckus started after the President said the death panel misinfo was a lie..

It wasn't much later that this happened, and if is the usual case he (photographer) was taking multiple shots with a digital camera which can take many frames per second, and he got lucky with this one.

I could be wrong but it doesn't seem to be that much of a stretch.


It woul dalso depend on the original resolution of the image. Maybe he was taking a mega resolution image and caught this piece, then cropped it down? Hadn't really thought of that, but it would be feasible.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by JacKatMtn
 


Yes I saw that in the article as well.

I'm just curious about the sequence of events.

It's interesting to compare the reaction of the two members beside him as opposed to those of Biden and Pelosi. Biden and Pelosi looked startled and turn toward the outburst, which is a natural reaction. The two guys on either side of Wilson didn't appear to react in the same way. They seem somewhat composed and unaffected by the outburst.

Given that the transcripts of the speech were released ahead of time and the body language of those next to him, I just find it hard to believe that Wilson claims it was an unintentional outburst. And that a picture was snapped at that exact moment.

But that's just me.

It seems both sides have benefited politically from the flap but not citizens. Or health care.

[edit on 11/9/2009 by kosmicjack]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 


I did find a hi res of the image here:

imgur.com...


Not sure if that will help you with what you mentioned and I don't know if that is an original..

@kj - I see where you are going but, if this guy was in the middle of blurting that uncalled for statement, which took less than a second, I would think the reaction would have come a little bit later than this snapshot. Hopefully I haven't confuzzled my explanation


I will check and see if any more of that photographers photos from that night are there at Getty.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by kosmicjack
 


Funny you bring this up because when I first saw that photo, I thought the exact same thing regarding how convenient it was to capture that.

My conclusion was that there is constant video cameras all over congress and the photo was possibly a still frame from video footage they already had rolling.

Possible? I'm not sure how those things work. Is it for sure an actual photograph or is it possible it is a frame from the footage?



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Here's a page with all of the photographer's available pics..

LINK


Just 2 versions of the same, along with some other interesting pics of the address.

Was the shot pure luck or was it planned ? I don't know...


Keep digging



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by kosmicjack
Another question is who benefits from the picture? Democrats or Republicans? What does it accomplish? Have we talked more about health care or the political divide? Seems like one big circle jerk to me.

Look how sneering and disdainful the two other guys are - they certainly don't appear surprised or shocked by the outburst of the person sitting next to them.

The picture seems awfully convenient. Curious.


www.psychologytoday.com...


If Joe Wilson's outburst during Obama's speech Wednesday night was truly "spontaneous," as Wilson claims, and no one (including Wilson himself) could have anticipated it, how come there is a sharply focused and neatly centered picture of Wilson right at the moment he shouted "You lie!" when the outburst lasted less than a second? In the picture, Wilson's mouth is still open, apparently in the middle of his shouting "lie..." Why did someone have a camera fixed and focused on him during Obama's speech?


[edit on 11/9/2009 by kosmicjack]


I work in television so allow me to wade in for those reading this who are not familiar with how it works:

Multiple HD cameras are set up in the room. They record everything. You get one that pans and zooms on audience member faces. You get wide angles on the audience. You get over-the-shoulder shots at the Prez from behind the audience. You get a high angle covering the event. You have cameras shooting everything that goes on - not just the President himself.

The live feed is directed from a control room and fed to the networks. The director cuts from cam to cam as he sees fit. Meanwhile, still cameras are shooting all the various reactions from those in the room and angles on the President as well.

(*You can later seed a still of Hillary with her eyes closed for a second to the media and attach a story about how she fell asleep. Doesn't have to be true, but the photo will exist to fashion a story around just as they fashioned a tale about Obama looking at a girl's rump previously - though he never even saw the girl at all.)

Thus, it's really impossible NOT to have a shot of Joe Wilson's obnoxious behavior caught on tape by one of the cams. I would have been suspicious if by the next day we didn't have at least a still of him.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But HERE'S the real story you should consider:

That magazine recently put out an article claiming anyone who questions the official 9/11 tale should be considered mentally ill. This is exactly what was done with Area 51 when POPULAR MECHANICS proclaimed loudly the base had been moved. So I went there and found that the photo shown in PM of a desolate entrance was actually a parking lot some miles away from the base used by employees who were bussed in. The base was busy as ever with the same JANET flights, new buildings going up, etc. And let's not forget their infamous "Debunking 9/11" story that was as false as it gets.

ALL of that was propaganda for a purpose and is exactly what we see in PSYCHOLOGY TODAY recently. Think about it. The magazine claiming some authority on "psychology" and the magazine touting scientific logic both have stories being planted in them designed to steer your beliefs away from thinking too much.

btw- Next time you watch an old episode of "Scare Tactics" you might notice that light in the car being driven along a lonely road with the supposed "victim" sitting next to it. You might notice the various angles on the people when they get out of the car in the middle of nowhere. Do they not notice the light in the car? How about the camera crew squatting next to the car? How about the big light illuminating the area? Of course they are faking it.

Faking out the public for profit or propaganda goes on everyday.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   
well, the dummycraps were well known for being complete media whores during the bush era, why not the republicans now there's a dum.. er i mean dem in office?



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Joe Wilson was asking the president questions at the time so the video cameras were naturally on him while he was talking. The picture is just a still from the video.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join