posted on Apr, 27 2013 @ 01:12 PM
Originally posted by Xtrozero
. . .
This picture below also shows a problem with the lines in the brick wall that suggests the photo had been doctored. It leads me to think the photo is
fake, more along the lines of someone trying to make money off of it more than a Government conspiracy doing a bad Photoshop job to support a false
As another Photoshop professional--which is to say, someone who's been using it since v2.0 and gets paid money to do so, and since some members
require credentials--I can see many problems with this photo. And the ones you point out are only some of the most obvious: For one thing, the guy's
forearm is way too long, and upon looking closely I can see why. Take a look around the elbow area, and you'll find another big-ass blob of a
When I first saw this photo several days ago, I noticed that the forearm was way too long; in fact, it was one of the most glaring things about it.
I've read many threads since then, but haven't bothered to comment until now--mainly because I didn't know what to make of it. But you've put it in
perspective. This seems to be a money-shot for some semi-professional photographer.
But someone doctored it. Why? And if, in fact, it was to hide the kid's wearing his backpack after the bombing--and not the backpack that's shown all
blown to s--- in the offical photos, what does it mean?
We simply don't know what to believe anymore. All we know for absolute certain is that GOVERNMENT LIES TO US--constantly, habitually, without
conscience, about things large and small. And lies so absurd that we wouldn't accept them from a 4-year-old, for Christ's sake--and yet the public
gobbles them up without question. Something is very, very wrong here....
ETA: Well, as OtherSideOfTheCoin points out, we do now know who took this photo. It still tells us nothing about how and why someone butchered the
hell out of it. Logic or not, this is a very poor hack-job of Photoshop manipulation. Why do they publish something so obvious? Who
edit on 4/27/2013 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)