posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 01:41 PM
One of the worst and most misleading things is a photograph.
Aside from the technology that allows manipulations, a photograph is a point perspective, taken in milliseconds, narrow in scope of view, without
narrative, without time, location, conditions, or chronological perspective.
Where a photograph is placed, within any context or comparison, related or not, will dictate presumption through manipulation, and leave open to any
interpretation unless selected for skewed perspective.
A photograph shows a bloody dead child on the ground with a soldier nearby, rifle in hand, looking down on it.
What does this mean? Why is the child bloody? Why is the soldier standing there with the rifle in his hand? What's he looking at?
Did the soldier kill the child? Did the soldier discover the child? If the soldier hadn't been in the area, would the child still be alive?
If the soldier had arrived sooner, would the child still be alive? Did the soldier have anything to do with the death of the child, intentionally, or
Did the soldier kill the child by accident?
It could be that during a firefight between forces, a child ran across between the forces, and got caught in the crossfire. But then which side
It could be that the child ran in front of a car, was run over, and a nearby patrolling soldier was the only one caught from the angle the photograph
was taken from.
It could be that a group of Muj were using women and children as shields, and this unfortunate child was killed during the engagement.
It could be that a car ran into an IED which exploded, and the child was thrown clear.
Or, it could be that the child's father, who by order of the village chiefs, was given the choice to sacrifice one son, or he and his whole family
would be killed, since he had done some work for the Americans.
His choice. One son, or his entire family.
This actually happened.
The photograph visually demonstrates a fact. One armed soldier, one dead, bloody child.
At that time, at that moment, from that angle.
Yet there is no truth to be found within this fact.
Just to make a twisted point.
I'd be ashamed.
[edit on 8-10-2009 by dooper]