<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: New LGF photo controversy: Debunked? (Update: Bloggers insist it&#8217;s a p-shop) (Update: Video evidence?)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/</link>
	<description>The world’s first, full-service conservative Internet broadcast network</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 07:03:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hot Air &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Reuters, Adobe set to make news photos fauxto-proof</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-294216</link>
		<dc:creator>Hot Air &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Reuters, Adobe set to make news photos fauxto-proof</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2007 01:48:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-294216</guid>
		<description>[...] Reminds me of the V-chip. The responsible parties can&#8217;t or won&#8217;t police their own so they&#8217;ve deputized technology to do it for them. And of course it reminds me of DNA testing. Guilty parties abound and this is the only sure way to do justice. Or does it remind me of carbon dating? Sure, it&#8217;ll solve mysteries &#8212; while draining the wonder from life. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Reminds me of the V-chip. The responsible parties can&#8217;t or won&#8217;t police their own so they&#8217;ve deputized technology to do it for them. And of course it reminds me of DNA testing. Guilty parties abound and this is the only sure way to do justice. Or does it remind me of carbon dating? Sure, it&#8217;ll solve mysteries &#8212; while draining the wonder from life. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hot Air &#187; Blog Archive &#187; E&#38;P editor attacks bloggers over Reutersgate</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-41291</link>
		<dc:creator>Hot Air &#187; Blog Archive &#187; E&#38;P editor attacks bloggers over Reutersgate</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Aug 2006 18:27:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-41291</guid>
		<description>[...] Lay aside the fact our mystery man is most decidedly not Arab. Lay aside the fact that Charles Johnson, who first brought that photo to public attention, expressed skepticism that it was doctored from the very beginning, and that I myself attempted to prove it was genuine. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Lay aside the fact our mystery man is most decidedly not Arab. Lay aside the fact that Charles Johnson, who first brought that photo to public attention, expressed skepticism that it was doctored from the very beginning, and that I myself attempted to prove it was genuine. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RightWinged</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36545</link>
		<dc:creator>RightWinged</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:29:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36545</guid>
		<description>By the way, I&#039;m sorry about my obsession over this photo, but I fear that the Times is going to get away with this, especially with the breaking terror bust news overshadowing everything.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By the way, I&#8217;m sorry about my obsession over this photo, but I fear that the Times is going to get away with this, especially with the breaking terror bust news overshadowing everything.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RightWinged</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36541</link>
		<dc:creator>RightWinged</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:17:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36541</guid>
		<description>Anyone else who emailed the Times gotten a reply yet?  I haven&#039;t heard back yet, but I can&#039;t wait until they&#039;re forced to admit the PS.  I just wish everyone could see the obvious - that this is without question a sloppy ass photoshop.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone else who emailed the Times gotten a reply yet?  I haven&#8217;t heard back yet, but I can&#8217;t wait until they&#8217;re forced to admit the PS.  I just wish everyone could see the obvious &#8211; that this is without question a sloppy ass photoshop.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: V5</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36452</link>
		<dc:creator>V5</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 05:37:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36452</guid>
		<description>Re; The light blue cloth draped over the shoulder of the male/female/whatever in the original photo.

You&#039;ll notice that in the picture of the woman holding the baby, that the baby is also swaddled in a light blue blanket.  Could it be that the male/female/whatever has one of those blankets?

Re; The alternate angle shot with the man in the background.

That man is two tall, to light skinned, and has an obvious 5 o&#039;clock shadow.

Just my opinions though.

~V5</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re; The light blue cloth draped over the shoulder of the male/female/whatever in the original photo.</p>
<p>You&#8217;ll notice that in the picture of the woman holding the baby, that the baby is also swaddled in a light blue blanket.  Could it be that the male/female/whatever has one of those blankets?</p>
<p>Re; The alternate angle shot with the man in the background.</p>
<p>That man is two tall, to light skinned, and has an obvious 5 o&#8217;clock shadow.</p>
<p>Just my opinions though.</p>
<p>~V5</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Casual Vices &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Cant figure this one out</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36444</link>
		<dc:creator>Casual Vices &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Cant figure this one out</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 04:30:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36444</guid>
		<description>[...] I dont know boys, this pic could be shopped in, but why in the world would someone do such a thing? Makes no sense. Perhaps a villianous character who was not supposed to get caught on film, accidently did? Who knows&#8230; But i tend to aggree with Allah on this one I was with you on Hajj, boys, but I’m afraid nothing short of a confession’s going to convince me on this one. I called Hajj’s work the worst photoshop ever; if this one’s doctored, it’s the dumbest photoshop ever. And until someone explains to me why the Times would be this dumb, I’m not sold. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I dont know boys, this pic could be shopped in, but why in the world would someone do such a thing? Makes no sense. Perhaps a villianous character who was not supposed to get caught on film, accidently did? Who knows&#8230; But i tend to aggree with Allah on this one I was with you on Hajj, boys, but I’m afraid nothing short of a confession’s going to convince me on this one. I called Hajj’s work the worst photoshop ever; if this one’s doctored, it’s the dumbest photoshop ever. And until someone explains to me why the Times would be this dumb, I’m not sold. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Axe</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36433</link>
		<dc:creator>Axe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:42:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36433</guid>
		<description>*above &lt;em&gt;his&lt;/em&gt; left ear.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>*above <em>his</em> left ear.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Axe</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36431</link>
		<dc:creator>Axe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:41:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36431</guid>
		<description>PS. The guy in the background can&#039;t possibly be the same guy, because he&#039;s wearing different clothes.  The &quot;Man&#039;s&quot; ... shawl? in the foreground touches his neck, and wraps around his chest, and the man in the background has none; the man in the foreground has a white scarf that is also not present on the man in the backkground.

This really is a photoshop Allah. I&#039;d put a smiley here, but I&#039;ve used my quota.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>PS. The guy in the background can&#8217;t possibly be the same guy, because he&#8217;s wearing different clothes.  The &#8220;Man&#8217;s&#8221; &#8230; shawl? in the foreground touches his neck, and wraps around his chest, and the man in the background has none; the man in the foreground has a white scarf that is also not present on the man in the backkground.</p>
<p>This really is a photoshop Allah. I&#8217;d put a smiley here, but I&#8217;ve used my quota.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Axe</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36429</link>
		<dc:creator>Axe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:37:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36429</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s a fake.

I&#039;ve blown it up, because I can&#039;t figure out why this man has something pasted to the back of his head, visible as a white bar on the top of his head and some misc. cloth above his right ear. That&#039;s not a head-covering I&#039;m familar with.

In fact, Hot Air powers-that-be, your new post, the smoking gun? whoever prepared that image had to &lt;em&gt;remove&lt;/em&gt; those artifacts. They aren&#039;t forground, and they aren&#039;t background.

The fact that he is wearing womens clothes doesn&#039;t help. Men don&#039;t cover themselves that way, and they don&#039;t cinch below their necks in modesty; those are muslim women&#039;s clothes (regional).

It&#039;s a fake. But I&#039;m surprised by my guess about how it was constructed. I think Randy might be correct: To create that image, you&#039;d have to paste a man&#039;s head onto an image of a muslim woman. Nice call RightWinged; made me actually look.

&lt;em&gt;(And that other woman really does look like Amidala :)&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s a fake.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve blown it up, because I can&#8217;t figure out why this man has something pasted to the back of his head, visible as a white bar on the top of his head and some misc. cloth above his right ear. That&#8217;s not a head-covering I&#8217;m familar with.</p>
<p>In fact, Hot Air powers-that-be, your new post, the smoking gun? whoever prepared that image had to <em>remove</em> those artifacts. They aren&#8217;t forground, and they aren&#8217;t background.</p>
<p>The fact that he is wearing womens clothes doesn&#8217;t help. Men don&#8217;t cover themselves that way, and they don&#8217;t cinch below their necks in modesty; those are muslim women&#8217;s clothes (regional).</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a fake. But I&#8217;m surprised by my guess about how it was constructed. I think Randy might be correct: To create that image, you&#8217;d have to paste a man&#8217;s head onto an image of a muslim woman. Nice call RightWinged; made me actually look.</p>
<p><em>(And that other woman really does look like Amidala :)</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RightWinged</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36424</link>
		<dc:creator>RightWinged</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:16:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36424</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Perchant&lt;/strong&gt;

&lt;blockquote&gt;The right half of his garb has fabric with what appears to be signatures ( autographs ) written all over it…or maybe it’s some writing that solves the mystery of this puzzle.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Lol @ the writing solving the puzzle.  I called my mom earlier today to check out all what&#039;s been going on in the blogosphere the past couple days, and showed her our new friend.  She doesn&#039;t know anything about photoshop, but she could clearly tell that this was not real.  Anyway, she saw the writing too, Perchant, and she almost said word for word what you said about that writing solving the mystery.

Here&#039;s my question about that fabric though... Does it remind anyone of a Sean Jean jacket?  Or one of the other &quot;hip-hop&quot; clothing jackets?  I can&#039;t think if it&#039;s P. Diddy (I hate saying/typing that) or Kanye west or who, but I&#039;ve seen a jacket made out of fabric that looked very much like that before.  Still trying to see if I can find anything like it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Perchant</strong></p>
<blockquote><p>The right half of his garb has fabric with what appears to be signatures ( autographs ) written all over it…or maybe it’s some writing that solves the mystery of this puzzle.</p></blockquote>
<p>Lol @ the writing solving the puzzle.  I called my mom earlier today to check out all what&#8217;s been going on in the blogosphere the past couple days, and showed her our new friend.  She doesn&#8217;t know anything about photoshop, but she could clearly tell that this was not real.  Anyway, she saw the writing too, Perchant, and she almost said word for word what you said about that writing solving the mystery.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s my question about that fabric though&#8230; Does it remind anyone of a Sean Jean jacket?  Or one of the other &#8220;hip-hop&#8221; clothing jackets?  I can&#8217;t think if it&#8217;s P. Diddy (I hate saying/typing that) or Kanye west or who, but I&#8217;ve seen a jacket made out of fabric that looked very much like that before.  Still trying to see if I can find anything like it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sister Toldjah</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36420</link>
		<dc:creator>Sister Toldjah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:05:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36420</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Veteran NBC correspondent on why Israel/Hezbollah war coverage is so slanted...&lt;/strong&gt;

Ike Seamans at NBC6.net has written a piece explaining why he believes the news reporting of the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah is so slanted.  He opines:
Because almost none of the American television networks have a vast stable of experienced ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Veteran NBC correspondent on why Israel/Hezbollah war coverage is so slanted&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Ike Seamans at NBC6.net has written a piece explaining why he believes the news reporting of the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah is so slanted.  He opines:<br />
Because almost none of the American television networks have a vast stable of experienced &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sister Toldjah</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36421</link>
		<dc:creator>Sister Toldjah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:05:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36421</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Veteran NBC correspondent on why Israel/Hezbollah war coverage is so slanted...&lt;/strong&gt;

Ike Seamans at NBC6.net has written a piece explaining why he believes the news reporting of the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah is so slanted.  He opines:
Because almost none of the American television networks have a vast stable of experienced ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Veteran NBC correspondent on why Israel/Hezbollah war coverage is so slanted&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Ike Seamans at NBC6.net has written a piece explaining why he believes the news reporting of the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah is so slanted.  He opines:<br />
Because almost none of the American television networks have a vast stable of experienced &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Perchant</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36417</link>
		<dc:creator>Perchant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:02:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36417</guid>
		<description>That is one crazy image.  The guy doesn&#039;t have a right arm.  The right half of his garb has fabric with what appears to be signatures ( autographs ) written all over it...or maybe it&#039;s some writing that solves the mystery of this puzzle.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That is one crazy image.  The guy doesn&#8217;t have a right arm.  The right half of his garb has fabric with what appears to be signatures ( autographs ) written all over it&#8230;or maybe it&#8217;s some writing that solves the mystery of this puzzle.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Axe</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36413</link>
		<dc:creator>Axe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 02:37:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36413</guid>
		<description>*abound</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>*abound</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Axe</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36412</link>
		<dc:creator>Axe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 02:35:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36412</guid>
		<description>Wow! You&#039;re missing it!

Forget the dude at the bottom right. The dudette at the bottom left--that&#039;s Queen Amidala! Come on; that&#039;s clearly Natalie Portman in the character of Amidala.

Questions about.

developing ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow! You&#8217;re missing it!</p>
<p>Forget the dude at the bottom right. The dudette at the bottom left&#8211;that&#8217;s Queen Amidala! Come on; that&#8217;s clearly Natalie Portman in the character of Amidala.</p>
<p>Questions about.</p>
<p>developing &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RightWinged</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36379</link>
		<dc:creator>RightWinged</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 01:36:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36379</guid>
		<description>(reply to your last comment Allah August 9, 2006 at 9:11 PM) I don&#039;t know if this is Hicks doing or an editor, but it is almost undoubtedly photoshopped... how can you not see it man?

&lt;blockquote&gt;
Same guy? Different? Two different guys?&lt;/blockquote&gt;

It doesn&#039;t matter who any of these &quot;black guys&quot; are, hell it could be Joe Lieberman in blackface paint... it doesn&#039;t change the fact that the Times photo in question is such an obvious photoshop.  Check out the enlargement, including the negative I created.  I&#039;m &lt;i&gt;this close&lt;/i&gt; to saying I&#039;m 100% certain it&#039;s PSed, but skeptics (well, just you really) are the only thing keeping me from going all the way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>(reply to your last comment Allah August 9, 2006 at 9:11 PM) I don&#8217;t know if this is Hicks doing or an editor, but it is almost undoubtedly photoshopped&#8230; how can you not see it man?</p>
<blockquote><p>
Same guy? Different? Two different guys?</p></blockquote>
<p>It doesn&#8217;t matter who any of these &#8220;black guys&#8221; are, hell it could be Joe Lieberman in blackface paint&#8230; it doesn&#8217;t change the fact that the Times photo in question is such an obvious photoshop.  Check out the enlargement, including the negative I created.  I&#8217;m <i>this close</i> to saying I&#8217;m 100% certain it&#8217;s PSed, but skeptics (well, just you really) are the only thing keeping me from going all the way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Allahpundit</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36372</link>
		<dc:creator>Allahpundit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 01:11:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36372</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;I will feel like a real ass if it turns out not to be, but I can’t see how this photo could possibly be real.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

If Hicks denies it, how many of you guys will accept his denial?

Or we then in for a round of &quot;Hicks lied&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>I will feel like a real ass if it turns out not to be, but I can’t see how this photo could possibly be real.</p></blockquote>
<p>If Hicks denies it, how many of you guys will accept his denial?</p>
<p>Or we then in for a round of &#8220;Hicks lied&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RightWinged</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36369</link>
		<dc:creator>RightWinged</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 01:06:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36369</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;You’ll also note he’s wearing a light-blue pullover, similar to the color of the garment draped over photoshop guy’s left shoulder.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Allah, you&#039;re crazy man.  You&#039;ve done a great job through all of this, but I&#039;m saddened by the over cautious attitude today, when this is so obviously a photoshop.  I will feel like a real ass if it turns out not to be, but I can&#039;t see how this photo could possibly be real.  You can see the woman&#039;s scarf all around the back of his pasted head, and all the way down to his chin and tucked in to her shirt.

Even if the man in the blue pullover in the NBC video was the same man who&#039;s head we see in the Times/Hicks photo, it is still a photoshop.  I know, what was the purpose, right?  But what was the purpose of the Hajj smoke PS?  It really didn&#039;t do anything.  It was just darker, and a little more.. poorly done and leaving clues by photoshopping buildings.. but would the original or his PS make anyone view the scene differently.  I don&#039;t think so.  I don&#039;t know the intention of this Times photoshop, but I can&#039;t see how this could possibly be real... what is coming out of the back of the guy&#039;s head?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>You’ll also note he’s wearing a light-blue pullover, similar to the color of the garment draped over photoshop guy’s left shoulder.</p></blockquote>
<p>Allah, you&#8217;re crazy man.  You&#8217;ve done a great job through all of this, but I&#8217;m saddened by the over cautious attitude today, when this is so obviously a photoshop.  I will feel like a real ass if it turns out not to be, but I can&#8217;t see how this photo could possibly be real.  You can see the woman&#8217;s scarf all around the back of his pasted head, and all the way down to his chin and tucked in to her shirt.</p>
<p>Even if the man in the blue pullover in the NBC video was the same man who&#8217;s head we see in the Times/Hicks photo, it is still a photoshop.  I know, what was the purpose, right?  But what was the purpose of the Hajj smoke PS?  It really didn&#8217;t do anything.  It was just darker, and a little more.. poorly done and leaving clues by photoshopping buildings.. but would the original or his PS make anyone view the scene differently.  I don&#8217;t think so.  I don&#8217;t know the intention of this Times photoshop, but I can&#8217;t see how this could possibly be real&#8230; what is coming out of the back of the guy&#8217;s head?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pillage Idiot</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36358</link>
		<dc:creator>Pillage Idiot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 00:56:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36358</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Doctored photo of Lebanese woman?...&lt;/strong&gt;

Possibly related: LGF has a photo from a guy who&#039;s even worse with Photoshop than I am. UPDATE: Allah thinks the photo at LGF isn&#039;t photoshopped: &quot;I really hope Im wrong with this latest debunking, though. Because now that its been on Drudge, if...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Doctored photo of Lebanese woman?&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>Possibly related: LGF has a photo from a guy who&#8217;s even worse with Photoshop than I am. UPDATE: Allah thinks the photo at LGF isn&#8217;t photoshopped: &#8220;I really hope Im wrong with this latest debunking, though. Because now that its been on Drudge, if&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: TexasXtreme</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36354</link>
		<dc:creator>TexasXtreme</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 00:45:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36354</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Faked picture? Your call:...&lt;/strong&gt;

With Reutergate underway, Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs is increasing the blogosphere’s scrutiny of the mainstream media’s photojournalistic output.  With the ease of doctoring photos nowadays, it’s amazing how poor some of these Phot...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Faked picture? Your call:&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>With Reutergate underway, Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs is increasing the blogosphere’s scrutiny of the mainstream media’s photojournalistic output.  With the ease of doctoring photos nowadays, it’s amazing how poor some of these Phot&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Iowa Voice</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36340</link>
		<dc:creator>Iowa Voice</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Aug 2006 00:09:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36340</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Even More Photoshopping In The Media...&lt;/strong&gt;

We may have yet another case of photoshopping, this time at the New York Times.  Charles at LGF has the image, and it sure as heck looks to me like they inserted a man&#039;s head in place of a woman.

The question is, why?  One comment poses the theory ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Even More Photoshopping In The Media&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>We may have yet another case of photoshopping, this time at the New York Times.  Charles at LGF has the image, and it sure as heck looks to me like they inserted a man&#8217;s head in place of a woman.</p>
<p>The question is, why?  One comment poses the theory &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Perchant</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36336</link>
		<dc:creator>Perchant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 23:56:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36336</guid>
		<description>If it&#039;s not a cut and paste head, it&#039;s intended to fool jaded eye people into accusing it of being a cut and paste head.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If it&#8217;s not a cut and paste head, it&#8217;s intended to fool jaded eye people into accusing it of being a cut and paste head.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RightWinged</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36335</link>
		<dc:creator>RightWinged</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 23:55:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36335</guid>
		<description>I am a little concerned at the overcautiousness I&#039;m seeing here.  Yes, we all know we don&#039;t want to go to far out on a limb here band have something backfire, but I think everything that was questionable we&#039;ve all labeled as such, everything that was a smoking gun we&#039;ve labeled as such, and anything that was just odd we&#039;ve labeled as such... BUT THIS IS AN OBVIOUS PHOTOSHOP!

Again, I understand the need for caution, but come on! How can anyone not see that this is a photoshop.  Just look at the blown up version of the head on LGF, or see my negative of that same blow up.  Photoshop all the way.  As for the &quot;why&quot;?  I have no clue.  I still don&#039;t understand the purpose of Hajj&#039;s smoke PS.. it didn&#039;t &lt;i&gt;really&lt;/i&gt; change much.  All I know is that this is a black man&#039;s face pasted on the head of a woman wearing a headscarf.

Your move NY Times, someone&#039;s head has to roll.  Will this be Hicks&#039;s fault?  Or is did some editor do this?  Will you get the right guy or find a scapegoat?  The anticipation is a killer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am a little concerned at the overcautiousness I&#8217;m seeing here.  Yes, we all know we don&#8217;t want to go to far out on a limb here band have something backfire, but I think everything that was questionable we&#8217;ve all labeled as such, everything that was a smoking gun we&#8217;ve labeled as such, and anything that was just odd we&#8217;ve labeled as such&#8230; BUT THIS IS AN OBVIOUS PHOTOSHOP!</p>
<p>Again, I understand the need for caution, but come on! How can anyone not see that this is a photoshop.  Just look at the blown up version of the head on LGF, or see my negative of that same blow up.  Photoshop all the way.  As for the &#8220;why&#8221;?  I have no clue.  I still don&#8217;t understand the purpose of Hajj&#8217;s smoke PS.. it didn&#8217;t <i>really</i> change much.  All I know is that this is a black man&#8217;s face pasted on the head of a woman wearing a headscarf.</p>
<p>Your move NY Times, someone&#8217;s head has to roll.  Will this be Hicks&#8217;s fault?  Or is did some editor do this?  Will you get the right guy or find a scapegoat?  The anticipation is a killer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RightWinged.com</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36325</link>
		<dc:creator>RightWinged.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 23:12:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36325</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;ANOTHER Lebanon Photo Scandal At The NY Times?!?!?!...&lt;/strong&gt;

When will the MSM hire some competent editors and honest photoshoppers photographers so us bloggers can get some sleep!? LGF has presented us with yet another, shall we say odd, Tyler Hicks photo from the NY Times. Before I get......</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>ANOTHER Lebanon Photo Scandal At The NY Times?!?!?!&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>When will the MSM hire some competent editors and honest photoshoppers photographers so us bloggers can get some sleep!? LGF has presented us with yet another, shall we say odd, Tyler Hicks photo from the NY Times. Before I get&#8230;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jcon96</title>
		<link>http://hotair.com/archives/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/comment-page-1/#comment-36324</link>
		<dc:creator>jcon96</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 23:11:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/08/09/new-lgf-photo-controversy-debunked/#comment-36324</guid>
		<description>Sorry, but I know folks want to be careful not to make wild allegations, but the odd cut outs at the top right and left of the black guys head looks like a very sloppy cutout, and I am a photo novice. The coloring &quot;halo&quot; around his head, the lighting. Nope, a paste over. Maybe somebody that should not have been there? It may not be the same guy from the back of the room, but I would say that is a obvious photoshop.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry, but I know folks want to be careful not to make wild allegations, but the odd cut outs at the top right and left of the black guys head looks like a very sloppy cutout, and I am a photo novice. The coloring &#8220;halo&#8221; around his head, the lighting. Nope, a paste over. Maybe somebody that should not have been there? It may not be the same guy from the back of the room, but I would say that is a obvious photoshop.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
