digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.

See the original image at thelede.blogs.nytimes.com —

In an Iranian Image, a Missile Too Many

thelede.blogs.nytimes.com — I know it's not a big deal. What's one missile, after all? Still, it's kinda funny.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • supaklaw, on 07/10/2008, -5/+351Iran sucks at Photoshop
    • WallnutBoy, on 07/10/2008, -22/+9Comment jacking.. Sorry.. but here's a more informative pic.

      http://www2.b3ta.com/host/creative/55664/121570244 ...
    • zebco, on 07/10/2008, -26/+5That wasn't the iranians, bud. Read the disclaimer at the top of the story, updated at 3:00 pm EST.
      • jabberwolf, on 07/11/2008, -0/+7Agence France-Presse said that it obtained the image from the Web site of Sepah News, the media arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, on Wednesday.

        For its part, Agence France-Presse retracted its four-missile version this morning, saying that the image was “apparently digitally altered” by Iranian state media.
      • cygnus2112, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1I think jabberwolf is suggesting you reboot, zebco. You fail life, miserably.
    • supaklaw, on 07/10/2008, -0/+15#1 Walnutboy, your new photo offers the same information unless someone is seriously impaired and couldn't see where the cloning/rubber stamping occurred in the image.

      #2 zebco, the "update" merely states the French are realizing the photo was not legitimate. Secondly, my statement isn't a put down of the Iranians, it's being facetious that it made front page news of the NYTimes, as a "pwn". In other words, even if the C.I.A. did it, does that make the fact they have missiles any less dangerous? Or is it easier to simply say "oh silly third worlders, your weapons and cheap tactics make us giggle". So cool out birdboy.
    • ramiro, on 07/11/2008, -6/+11Islamic fascists suck at Photoshop. This is not the first time the try to divulge fake pictures and fail miserably.
      Remember the ones during the latest incursion of IDF into Lebanon.
    • cawpin, on 07/11/2008, -4/+12Dupe from YESTERDAY

      http://digg.com/world_news/There_s_something_fishy ...
    • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -0/+8aajjcckk, in the mean time, the only one using propaganda now seems to be you.
      This was originally a photo supplied to the french news agency directly from the Iranian republican guard. Once every news source covered this, it was found out to be faked. The only "Pre war propaganda" I see here is Iran's.
      As for the US using nukes - give me a ***** break. We didn't use nukes on the caves bin laden was hiding in, we didn't use nukes against Iraq, we didn't use nukes against korea, vietnam, kosovo, and more. We used nukes to end WWII. It was an awful decision, but it made everyone understand how awful nuclear weapons are.
      • nigh7dagger, on 07/11/2008, -1/+3I don't see how it was awful. Millions would have died in any invasion attempt. If I'm not mistaken, around 220,000 died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. That means that 3 quarters of a million people were saved, not to mention how the horror of it has kept everyone from using nukes since then.
      • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -0/+5Whenever someone discusses houndreds of thousands of deaths as just a statistic, that's awful. We might have had no other choice, this might have saved many other lives, but that doesn't make the loss of life any less tragic. It might have been the right thing to do, but it was an awful thing to do as well.
      • psaffire, on 07/11/2008, -0/+4The Iranians are using propaganda to instill fear into Israel and stop the US from interfering.

        Plus, the outcome of Hiroshima was awful, but the decision wasn't. They knew what was coming after Nagasaki, but still wanted to continue... besides, it was a necessary sacrifice, it saved more people than it consumed.
      • LoveAndSeagulls, on 07/11/2008, -1/+3The real argument isn't how many people were saved... we can all agree that it saved more lives in the end... the issue is do you kill X number of civilians who are just everyday people or do you kill X number of soldiers, who knew they were risking their lives. Sure when the numbers are 200,000 vs millions, it seems easier to answer. And because of that, I feel that the US made the right choice using a nuke in that situation. But what if the numbers were closer? What if it's 500,000 civilians vs 1,2 million soldiers?
        Just something to think about..
      • cygnus2112, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1Moral justification can be equivalent to evil. The nukes on Nagasaki and Hiroshima will always be a dark mark on America's history, despite the evils of Japan during WWII.

        Thankfully, the U.S. has never used them against a civilian population again and hopefully never will. I can't say the same for Iran, which is why international pressure from the world's leaders must succeed. I doubt many of us would like either Iran or Israel to face a nuclear war - because it's civilians who will mostly pay that price.
      • psaffire, on 07/18/2008, -1/+0@LoveAndSeagulls:

        Even if the numbers are closer, the civilians aren't a threat... the soldiers are, that sacrifice will still have to be made.
    • jabberwolf, on 07/11/2008, -1/+2I think the photoshop was done because there was one missle that had failed to launch.

      And seeing as the mobile carrier for it looks like a fixed up garbage truck, I'm sure they didnt want to give that impression.

      • cygnus2112, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1While that may be the "reason", it's not an excuse. What if the Pentagon photoshopped more apaches in a picture of an invasion of Diyala or photoshopped images of WMD caches - people would be up in arms and calling for impeachment.

        While Fox News, CNN, CBS and other media outlets have used manufactured news and images - either out of agenda or mockery, it's nothing like a nation's military or a military arm of a militia to generate fake images and use them as war propaganda.

        Hopefully people will start to realize how dangerous and manipulative and evil, yes evil, the Iranian Republican Guard actually is. And hopefully one day, the people of Iran will realize it and replace the oppressive regime for the betterment of their lives.

        Iran reminds me of cold-war Russia. The people live in squalor, while an elite few push for a nuke stand-off. Eventually, the cards will fall.
    • chaoswings, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1What I would like to know is why didn't they just make the picture smaller and not include the failed missle. After all, it does not look like they have any skills with photoshop but surely they know how to crop....its just dragging a box over an area.
    • squaredUP, on 07/11/2008, -1/+1Take it easy on 'em. They couldn't afford a fourth missile.
    • zkirill, on 07/11/2008, -1/+2In a Canadian Newspaper, there was a photograph of this and it wasn't showing the added missile. I think you own press & media added that to make Iran appear stronger and more threatening.
      • Faasnat, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2Naw, your paper's just behind. By the time they got wind of the story, the PhotoShopped image had been removed and replaced with the original....
    • heystoopid, on 07/11/2008, -1/+1Actually the photo was released by the Pentagon DOD Media release unit which they claimed had been allegedly lifted from an Iranian official news web site for distribution to the world conglomerate unified mass propaganda media for the dumb stupid and gullible to add credibility to the latest round of "Agadir Gunboat Diplomacy the US has using since up the hill Teddy Roosevelt era way back when !

      Choices can be fatal !
    • evanscott07, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1PHOTOSHOP ZE MISSILES!!!!
      but i am le tired...


    • LeeSoong, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1I really, really hope the
      ''You suck at photoshop''
      guy does an episode on this:

      'say you want to act like a super power country,
      but - but - you can only afford fireworks on sale from Sam's Club...'

      He would do an excellent job at mocking this shot.
    • spankaccount, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1Thanks go to Charles and littlegreenfootballs who originally discovered the faked images.
  • smokeonit, on 07/10/2008, -25/+12damn, the fars (=farce) news agency was caught photoshopping their photos... this is extremely embarassing!!!
    • wild, on 07/10/2008, -3/+1Nevermind
    • swrostmore, on 07/11/2008, -8/+3You mean Sepah News? I don't know where you're getting "fars" from, maybe Farsi, the language spoken in Iran?
      • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -1/+6How about you google "fars news agency" istead of us having to hassle with explaining it to you?
  • smokeonit, on 07/10/2008, -19/+11http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=2449 ...

    another example of PS'ing their news...!
    • swrostmore, on 07/10/2008, -12/+7littlegreenfootballs.com? Aren't those the guys who got a Dunkin Donuts commercial pulled because Rachel Ray's paisley scarf reminded them of a terrist?
      • pintomp3, on 07/11/2008, -5/+2terrorist scarves a serious threat to our freedoms. they are even more dangerous when combined with terrorists fist jabs.
      • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -4/+2Ad-hom? on digg?
  • westlingken, on 07/10/2008, -14/+7bastards
  • AddiX, on 07/10/2008, -6/+144I can see it now
    Photoshopping Missiles?
    Now i understand why Iran is considered such a threat. After they learn to photoshop correctly, surely they will be able to obtain a Nuclear bomb.
    • spookyttws, on 07/11/2008, -3/+22Good god, can you imagine if they find out about GIMP? Think of the mass distribution!
    • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -1/+11Out of the four missiles in that picture, 3 were very very real. Iranian Shihab 3 missiles are capable of reaching Europe. Iran's trying to upgrade them to reach as far as britain. And guess what? They're strong enough to carry nukes. They aren't really a threat to the US for now, but they sure as hell are a threat to the Arab neighbors and Europe.
      • solistus, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1Why is it that weapons in the hands of non-whites automatically constitutes a threat? Israel almost certainly has nukes that can reach London, but it would be patently ridiculous to say that Israel is a nuclear threat to Britain. Didn't the Cold War teach us anything about Mutually Assured Destruction? The only way labeling a nuclear Iran a serious threat to the West makes sense is if you assume that Iranians are completely irrational and/or insane.

        Iran is the centre of SHIA practice in Islam. For those keeping score, bin Laden is a radical Sunni. Lumping the Ayatollah and other religious extremists in Iran with the particularly violent brand of Wahhabi that emerged out of Saudi Arabia would be like expecting some Catholics during the Reformation to try to assassinate the Pope because some Protestants in a nearby country recently did. Religious extremism in Iran is certainly a real problem, and holds back the liberalisation and democratisation that the Iranian middle class is fighting for, but it is nothing at all like the religious extremism of bin Laden and his allies. Even the most radical Iranian figures do not call for martyrdom or the wholesale massacre of 'infidels.' There is no reason aside from buying into propaganda or succumbing to bigotry to expect a nuclear Iran to attack anyone. Iran would have nothing to gain and everything to lose by doing such a thing. Given their rising economy (thanks in no small part to oil prices), they have plenty to want to protect by NOT turning the entire world against them.
    • blackjack75, on 07/11/2008, -5/+6And they would bomb Europe why exactly? Unless we attack them, they are not a real threat.
      • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -7/+7No one considered Germany a threat. No one considered the Japanese a threat until Pearl Harbor. No one considered Al Qaeda a thread until 9/11.
        Your assumption that they will only attack us if we attack first seems to ignore the massive ammounts of hatred they have towards us.
        http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/im ...
        Today they simply burn our flags. Once they can, they'll burn us as well.
      • AddiX, on 07/11/2008, -0/+3i hope you realize that if Iran even looks at another country wrong they will be blown away in one quick strike. If I lived next store to Iraq and saw what happened there I would probably do some missile photoshopping too. Iran has never attacked anyone, you think they wanna pick a fight now that the U.S. has a huge base and aircraft carriers right next store to them?
      • ezcheezbandit, on 07/11/2008, -0/+4@ AddiX

        Next "store"? really? you said it twice so let me correct you.

        Next Door. not Next Store. Next Door. you know, like a neighbor, right next door. what the hell is "next store" supposed to mean, like perusing a shopping mall?

        Which I happen to live next door to.
      • pnunn, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1Neck Store?
      • AddiX, on 07/11/2008, -2/+0brain fart, oh well, you showed me, didn't you? I bet you feel superior now? Your internet bully IQ just went up +2 diggs, congratulations!
      • cygnus2112, on 07/12/2008, -1/+1There are some extremists who would just LOVE the chance to nuke the Netherlands. Or France. Or England. Or Germany. Or Poland. Or even Russia.

        What they lack, right now, is the capability. Hopefully, those certain elements will always lack the opportunity.
      • cygnus2112, on 07/12/2008, -1/+3@AddiX: "Iran has never attacked anyone"

        Well, as long as you don't count the U.S. Embassy/Islamic Revolution. The Islamic Revolution against fellow Iranians. The Iran/Iraq War. Their current involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. The British sailors. Lebanon Civil War. Involvement with Hezbollah/Lebanon and strikes against Israel.

        But besides those, they are totally innocent!
      • solistus, on 07/12/2008, -2/+1cygnus: the only valid point you raised is Lebanon; Iran gets its hands dirty there quite frequently. The Embassy incident was a group of radical students, not the Iranian government. The Iran/Iraq war was started by IRAQ when Saddam invaded Iran in 1980. Their current involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan is still lacking a shred of evidence and doesn't make much sense; Iran stands to lose more than almost anyone else from an unstable Iraq. The British sailor incident was admitted by Britain as having been their fault; Coalition forces redrew the maps of water territory around Iraq and neglected to inform the Iranians, so Iran (rightfully, under international law) saw the incident as an invasion of sovereign territory by another country's military. Given the situation, the Iranians showed remarkable restraint, neither firing upon the Brits nor harming any of them once they were captured. The US would have tortured the ***** out of Iranians doing the same thing off our shores.

        dkapuchino: By the same logic, we should just kill everybody on Earth because they might end up being Hitler, right? Your argument is "We don't know, so let's assume they're bad guys." Why don't you feel the same way about every Western country with the bomb? Now that Israel has pretty much confirmed their nuclear program thanks to Olmert being an idiot and letting it slip on multiple occasions, I guess we should plan to bomb them as well?
      • lotu, on 07/12/2008, -0/+4@addiX Well this is just me personally but if I was Iran I would be using Photoshop to remove missiles not add them.
        Iran is never going to win in a war that the US gets involved in, and most certienetlly the US will get involved if anyone (Israeli) starts a war with Iran. So they should be trying to convince people that they really don't want a war.
      • cygnus2112, on 07/12/2008, -1/+3@solistus:

        1) The "Embassy Incident" was a group of radical students that now run the Iranian government, unless you're suggesting they just vanished into thin air after the revolution. The U.S. government was started by the leaders of the American Revolution, google George Washington.

        2) I suggest you read more about the Iran-Iraq Wa, specifically 1982 where Iraq withdrew from the attack and Iran pushed into Iraq, attacked Kuwaiti tankers and the UN forced Iran to accept a cease-fire. While Iraq certainly started the war, Iran escalated the war after Iraq retreated. Here, have a read: http://www.onwar.com/aced/chrono/c1900s/yr80/firan ...

        3) Britain has done NO SUCH THING, they never "admitted to being at fault" at all. Here, have a read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Iranian_seizure_ ...

        4) http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/06/europe/web0 ... :
        "Once in detention, they said, they were stripped and blindfolded, isolated from one another and interrogated. On one occasion, they were blindfolded and lined up facing a wall, and could hear guns being cocked behind them.
        Lieutenant Feliz Carman of the Royal Navy said that when the group was first detained on March 23, the captives were taken to a location and interrogated aggressively through the night. "The handling was rough, but no worse than that," he said."


        So, why are you defending Iran so much? A lot of what you've responded with is wrong or flawed. Why the propaganda?

      • cygnus2112, on 07/12/2008, -1/+2Ahhh... I forgot a few notes:

        BAHRAIN -

        http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0 ...
        Bahrain Coup Suspects Say They Trained in Iran

        YEMEN -

        http://www.menewsline.com/article-1149,328-Yemen-S ...
        Yemen Says Shi'ite Rebels Trained In Iran

        ISRAEL/LEBANON -

        http://pipes.1913intel.com/2008/05/19/arrest-of-ga ...
        Arrest of Gaza man ‘trained in Iran’ made public

        http://sweetness-light.com/archive/hezbollah-priso ...
        Captured Hezbollah Fighter: We Trained In Iran

        http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/962279.html
        Report: Hamas leader says hundreds of militants trained in Iran, Syria

        http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-%20Obstacle%20 ...
        Iranian-trained terrorist arrested in Gaza

        IRAQ -

        http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/04/11/iraq.mai ...
        Iraqi insurgents being trained in Iran, U.S. says

        http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/05/25/iraq.ira ...
        U.S. general: Iraqi militants trained in Iran

        http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_kmafp/is_200 ...
        Iraqi extremists trained in Iran: US intelligence

        http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0 ...
        AFTER THE WAR: SOUTHERN IRAQ; Militia Trained in Iran Controls a Tense Town

        http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/summary_0199-17204 ...
        Terrorists trained by Iran tracked from Uzbekistan

        http://www.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUS ...
        U.S. says Iran still training Iraqi militias

        http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articl ...
        Iran continues to aid Iraq militias, US says

        AFGHANISTAN -

        http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news/article.ph ...
        Iranian Involvement in Afghanistan

        http://www.washtimes.com/news/2007/apr/17/20070417 ...
        Iran sending arms to Afghanistan, Iraq, Pace says

        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...
        Arms Seized in Afghanistan Sent From Iran, NATO Says

        http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1716 ...
        Iran Raises the Heat in Afghanistan
        "In the past six months, however, Iran's actions have taken a more sinister turn. U.S. and NATO troops have intercepted shipments of Iranian-made arms in Afghanistan, including mortars, plastic explosives and explosively formed penetrators that have been used to deadly effect against armored vehicles in Iraq. U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan William Wood said on January 31, "There is no question that elements of insurgency have received weapons from Iran." The discovery of the first caches of Iranian-made weapons in Afghanistan in April, says a State Department official, "sent shock waves through the system." Iran was doing more than just bringing western Afghanistan into its sphere of influence."

    • WiretapStudios, on 07/11/2008, -0/+4Why obtain one when they can just photoshop one into a picture?
    • spucky, on 07/11/2008, -1/+4You'll come crying back to the neocons to attack Iran when they photoshop a nuclear bomb onto one of our cities.
    • Faasnat, on 07/11/2008, -1/+2The scary thing is is that gov't may use the four missle image as justification to go in and "free" Iran.
  • dagnabbit, on 07/10/2008, -5/+122Was it worth it Iran? Is 4 missiles really that much more scary than 3?
    • floorman56, on 07/10/2008, -0/+88They didn't want to show that one missile didn't launch
    • Dibou, on 07/10/2008, -2/+39They were going for the, "We are so advanced we can shoot all our missiles simultaneously" thing.
      Having that one not be fired was kinda embarrassing for them.
    • WallnutBoy, on 07/10/2008, -13/+2I heard that apparently the original pic was found, so I don't think Iran actually did this =/
      • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -0/+4How about reading the article, and understanding that the Iranian's were the ones to spread this image?
      • cygnus2112, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1Reading is too challenging for some. They'd rather just blame media/western governments for absolutely everything besides actually taking the time to read an article.

        There's always two sides to a coin. I don't dismiss or blame the other side when a flip doesn't go my way.
    • domokunt, on 07/11/2008, -4/+38Apparantly USA = 3, since it has 3 letters in it, plus there are 3 numbers in 666, which is the sign of the devil, which Muslims don't believe in. The Iraq war started in 2003, the third year of the millennium and 3 planes crashed on 9/11 (because everyone ignored the 4th.) Hence why they had to add in the 4th missile. TRUTH.
      • justice7, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2i'm a believer!
      • 1timeuser, on 07/11/2008, -0/+12It all makes sense.... THE MASONS DID IT! LOOK ON THE BACK OF YOUR DOLLARS!
      • m0tbaillie, on 07/11/2008, -8/+2Muslims believe in the devil you ***** idiot.
      • lantza, on 07/11/2008, -1/+42003 was the 4th year of the millenium...
      • rchargel, on 07/11/2008, -5/+1@lantza

        "2003 was the 4th year of the millenium..."
        How exactly did you come by this number. Either you contend that the millennium started in 2000, in which case 2003 - 2000 = 3. Or you are accurate and content that the millennium started in 2001, in which case 2003 - 2001 = 2. In order for 2003 to be the fourth year, the millennium would have to have started on January 1st, 1999. I don't think anyone believes that to be the case.

        That said, Iran uses the Hijri Calendar, where it is currently the year 1429.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_calendar
      • jabberwolf, on 07/11/2008, -2/+1rchargelrchargel
        I think he was just kidding... good god I hope he was!!
      • ezcheezbandit, on 07/11/2008, -1/+9@rchargel

        lantza is right. do it like this:

        The millennium started on Jan 1, 2000. Dec 31, 2000 was the end of the first year. Jan 1, 2001 was the beginning of the second year. 2002 was the third year, 2003 was the fourth. Remember, we don't count zero. Six months may be 0.5 years but we still say it's the first year.

        Remember how centuries are counted? It's the 21st century even though we are in the year 2000? and the 20th century started in 1900 remember? 1500's was the 16th century etc...

        Learn your maths. You failed the test.

        Edit:
        @jabberwolf you also fail.
      • Zebceponaf, on 07/11/2008, -2/+7Cliff Notes for the above comment...

        2000.....2001....2002....2003.

        4 years, count'em.
      • Faasnat, on 07/11/2008, -0/+4Actually, didn't the new millennium start on January 1, 2001? That would make 2003 the third year...
    • silfiriel, on 07/11/2008, -2/+1makes you wonder though.....what the US have photoshoped, since Photoshop is made in the USA.
    • DismantleRepair, on 07/11/2008, -0/+133% scarier, in fact.
  • ssn697, on 07/10/2008, -2/+31Hilarious. Gotta love that one news service just "found " the picture on an Iranian run website, passed it on as gospel, then it was parroted across the globe.

    I have 8 fingers on one hand as well. I have the photo to prove it!
  • dennugsmello15, on 07/10/2008, -5/+52Iran is just covering up that one of their missles did not fire. Ha Ha Ahmadinejad!
    • Lane, on 07/11/2008, -10/+1I don't know if that name is spelled correctly and for some reason I don't care!
    • boonesfarm, on 07/11/2008, -2/+1...I could be your Jim Cavievel^.....
      (...not sure if that's spelled correctly either)
    • lukemann, on 07/11/2008, -2/+0The fuse must have went out.
    • heystoopid, on 07/11/2008, -1/+1Nah the Pentagon's back to it's old get ready for the next round of the never ending war of the US versus the rest of the world gunboat diplomacy Smedly Butler warned us about back in the old days !

      Propaganda RULES THE WORLD !
  • c4sh, on 07/10/2008, -11/+21The shadows are all wrong, definitely Photoshopped.
    • wolferz, on 07/11/2008, -4/+3What? You thought the alternate picture from 2 seconds before with the 4th missile still on the launch pad or the nice outlines indicating the what was copied wasn't enough to prove it?

      You are on a collision course with a quote about either Sherlock or Captain Obvious.
  • Ricemanstm, on 07/10/2008, -6/+16Awesome. There is no homosexuality in Iran and they are "experts" at Photoshop. Cool.
  • salamnder, on 07/10/2008, -16/+13Watchout Diggers are saying the US photoshopped it so we can attack or something like that. More like Iran photoshopped to show they didn't miss fire a rocket, per http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/news/2008/07/iranian_m ...
    • zebco, on 07/10/2008, -15/+7Don't be an idiot and don't be so assumptive. NOBODY knows who photoshopped the version with 4 missiles and that's what the disclaimer is saying at the top of the original story.
      It is not beyond the realm of a government that makes up evidence to attack countries to photoshop evidence in the war to try to gain momentum and support for a potential (eventual) war.
      Idiot.
      • Nitesmoke, on 07/11/2008, -7/+9You remind me of those assholes I saw on Digg the time that bridge collapsed a year or so ago. Everyone like you were commenting: "it was the government, so they can blame it on al quaida!!!" Or "oh god, I hope it wasn't a terrorist attack because the Republicans can use that to fan the war flames." instead of "I hope it wasn't a terrorist attack because terrorists killing innocent commuters is wrong."
      • unreg, on 07/11/2008, -3/+9Zebco:

        You are a shining example of stupidity.
    • griz, on 07/11/2008, -1/+4Doesn't matter who shopped it, the point is that our news media used it without verifying the legitimacy of the image or its source.
    • InfiniteNothing, on 07/11/2008, -2/+3Well, now that you mention it, the 'shop could have been for the purpose of escalating tensions.
  • More4, on 07/10/2008, -9/+7False News and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad must share the same graphics department.
  • StarWarsFan, on 07/10/2008, -4/+180Begun, the Photoshop War has.
  • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 07/10/2008, -14/+15LULZ @ IRAN
    • ssn697, on 07/10/2008, -3/+8There was no misfired missile! Allah (PBUH!) made the 4th missile fire successfully. We were just not worthy of seeing it until it was published in the Infidels newspapers!
  • popz41, on 07/10/2008, -3/+8Well duh, you can't trust most of the media.
    • geekee, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1You can't trust Iran's state-run media anyway. What else are they lying about?
  • thoughtcrime, on 07/10/2008, -14/+8I have a couple of thoughts which aren't really related to the Photoshopping incident, but here goes anyway. My first comment is...aren't we all glad that the "Black Messiah" (BM ®) has stated unequivocally, that "the use of nuclear weapons under *any* circumstances is unacceptable" (great message to send an adversary armed with long range missiles). My second thought is how our "friends" the Russians have threatened us with military retaliation if we deploy a missile shield in the former eastern block countries (i.e., to reduce the effectiveness of a long range missile strike). Wonder how BM ® will tackle that one?
  • kamel, on 07/10/2008, -0/+30I don't know how anyone thinks that they can pass these off anymore. They're seen by millions of people. And it doesn't really take a lot of skill to find unnatural repeating patterns in pictures. You'd think they (anyone trying to shop a pic) would at least use a different image source to paste into their propaganda.
    • InfiniteNothing, on 07/11/2008, -0/+6In fact, there is software that can programatically detect clone style 'shops. How 'bout we pass the images through that filter before we put it on a front page.
    • ironiridis, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2Shhhuuuuussh! National secrets! You're aiding the terrorists!
  • winston80, on 07/10/2008, -5/+10Because one of the missile failed to launch and thats how they covered it up
  • dives425, on 07/10/2008, -2/+15All those years of reading Slylock Fox finally paid off
  • seantubridy, on 07/10/2008, -0/+14Iran has missile envy.
  • BennyGreenberg, on 07/10/2008, -3/+10Those Iranians are always cloning around
  • bootykika, on 07/10/2008, -0/+176IRAN: NOW WITH 33% MORE MISSILES
  • loganhid, on 07/10/2008, -20/+16Iran has every right to have missiles with countries like the US and Israel bullying them
    • yojiffyskippy, on 07/11/2008, -3/+18Actually the article is about their sophomoric attempt at Photoshopped propaganda and not whether or not they should have missiles. However, I think we can all agree that they do have the right to have as many imaginary missiles like the one in this photo.
    • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -3/+10You obviously haven't a clue about the history of the history of Iran in the middle east.
      Truth of the matter is, up until 1979, Iran was an ally to both the US and Israel. It was with the rise of the extremist Islam revolution, that declared the US and Israel as "The big Satan" and "the little Satan" respectively.
      Iran has been actively funding and training terrorists groups, including the extremist Hezbollah, which was responsible for bombings of Jewish synagogues in South America, the US Marine Barracks in Beirut, the US Embassy in Beirut, and countless of other terrorists attacks. Today, using Iranian weapons, training and money, they are undermining the Lebanese government, trying to take over the government by force. An act that is widely criticized through out the world.

      Truth of the matter is, neither Israel or the US have to worry about the Iranian missiles. They can't reach the US, and Israel has the Arrow anti-ballistic missile defenses set up. The Iranian missiles are a threat to Europe and the Arab countries in the middle east.

      I'm sure non of your propaganda sources tell you that though.
      • Cayfox, on 07/11/2008, -2/+2You either don't have a clue, or you're being deliberately dishonest with your ***** revisionist history. You left out the part where America installed a deeply unpopular dictatorship in their country. You can't call someone an aggressor when you're in their country pushing them around. And it's hard to justify a war against someone who you know full well isn't a real threat.
      • Player1, on 07/11/2008, -3/+1Nice generic liberal response.
        Actually, the Iranian Islamic Revolution to overthrow the Shah was supported by the overwhelming majority of Iranian people. One of the main goals put forth at the start of the revolution was to end secularism and American influence in their government.
        ... Maybe you're thinking of the Afghani/Soviet conflict.
      • TobiasParker, on 07/12/2008, -0/+4Player 1: No you are just thinking of the wrong coup. The united states overthrew a democratically elected government which was later overthrown by Khomeni.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%2 ...

      • Player1, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1Huh. The more you know.
  • vic42482, on 07/10/2008, -1/+58Why waste real expensive missiles on scaring the West, when you can just multiply them in photoshop. Makes sense to me.
    • griz, on 07/11/2008, -0/+3Sorta like pre-digging a few hundred thousand graves.Who's to say those missiles were even fired from that range?
  • rms099k, on 07/10/2008, -3/+18"See that sign up here - up here. "Defcon." That indicates our current defense condition. It should read "Defcon 5," which means peace. It's still on 4 because of that little stunt you pulled. Actually, if we hadn't caught it in time, it might have gone to Defcon 1. You know what that means, David?" - Wargames
    • salamnder, on 07/11/2008, -1/+2dug for wargams reference!
    • StGhurka, on 07/11/2008, -3/+17Points deducted for naming the movie.
    • DamienKarras, on 07/11/2008, -2/+0That was just on AMC today. I'd never seen it before, and could only catch a small bit of it. Scary when put in the context of post-9/11 America. :-
      • TobiasParker, on 07/12/2008, -0/+2No it isn't. I ***** hate that. "Oh it is scary post 9/11" . Why? The only time that anything has ever became more scary due to violence was when "Ooog" figured out that if he jabbed "Oggg" with a pointy stick then "Oggg" would be dead and "Ooog" could sleep in "Oggg"'s cave. After that, all of the cavemen were like "Oh *****, i can die if someone jabs me with a stick, what has the world come to?"

        Millions of people died in Terrorist Attacks before 9/11, just ask the Irish, the Israelis, the Palestinians, the Tibetans, the Native Americans, most of Africa, Indians, and the Chinese. Absolutely nothing changed after 9/11 except for laws restricting my privacy and *FREEEEEEEDOM* [/Mel Gibson]. That is not even counting the horror of the past 200 years of "civilized" warfare. Oh nos some morons flew airplanes into skyscrapers and 3000 people died, the world isn't safe anymore! *****. I live less than 300 miles from NYC and have a better chance of lightning shooting out of my monitor and frying my brain than of a Terrorist affecting my life in any way. Stop being afraid, and stop letting people do bad things because you are afraid.
  • zebco, on 07/10/2008, -11/+3Read the update on the story, folks:

    TODAY:
    Latest update at 3 p.m. Eastern Agence France-Presse has retracted the image as “apparently digitally altered.”
    They don't know exactly at what stage the 'altering' took place.
    But even American intelligence reports that 7 to 10 missiles were launched. So why does it matter if someone 'shopped one in a batch of 3 when 7 to 10 were definitely fired anyway?
    • swrostmore, on 07/11/2008, -5/+4It doesn't really matter, in the larger scheme of things. It's just interesting in that it reveals to what limited extent State press releases, such as those coming from Sepah or Fox, can be trusted.
    • nasalspray, on 07/11/2008, -10/+1And we all know how "intelligent" American intelligence was leading up to our current quagmire.

      They don't know how many freaking missiles were fired, if any. Six, Seven, Three, Ten? Just make it up. As long as they can keep people scared.

      Democracy, pfffft. It's a DEIMOCRACY.
    • unkyduck, on 07/11/2008, -7/+3And American "intelligence" would never lie, exaggerate, or photoshop...
      • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -1/+3Here's the deal. You submit an article showing a picture the US photoshopped in the past 10 years, proving it has been photoshopped, and I'll not only digg it up, I'll also shout it to all my friends.

        Until then, please refrain from the Anti-American bigotry any time the Issue of Iran comes up.
      • swrostmore, on 07/11/2008, -2/+1http://digg.com/television/Fox_News_We_Photoshop_Y ...
      • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2Last time I checked, Fox News wasn't "The US".
        Please spare me the stupid Fox=Bush=Evil comments. Point to a photoshopped image released by a government official, or STFU.
      • swrostmore, on 07/11/2008, -2/+1No Iranian government official released this photoshopped image, Sepah did, and I'm sure if you ask any Iranian nationalist, he'd deny that Sepah news is a government mouthpiece. Just like American nationalists deny that Fox is a government mouthpiece.
    • griz, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1Means that our news media uses unverifiable sourced for images. That's just insane. These papers are becoming more like blogs which are riddled with opinion and unverifiable sources.
      • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1OMG! the MSM is becoming Digg! WTF?
    • superkendall, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1It matters because it lets you know trust images in media.
    • sho222, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1If you read the linked it article, the author believes the photoshopping was to cover up the misfiring rocket truck. It wasn't to exaggerate the number of missles launched.
  • ithejosh, on 07/10/2008, -2/+94>3
    You lose.
  • Apoy, on 07/11/2008, -3/+16You all sure photoshop is the software use here? What if they are supporting open source software such as GIMP.

    • YZBot, on 07/11/2008, -1/+10"Photshopped" has just become a common term people use when they imply something has been digitally altered.

    • wolferz, on 07/11/2008, -0/+4If that was the case there would be more compression artifacts in the pictures... seeing as how they are in jpeg format and gimp butchers jpeg images even at the highest quality settings.

      Take a picture of a parking lot some time... one that has a fair amount of blemishes in the asphalt... or the bedding around a flower garden... or grass... then open and re-save the image in gimp as a jpeg, max settings... compare side by side in a program that has full jpeg support.

      you will see the difference.
    • gcnaddict, on 07/11/2008, -0/+5You've never been to Iran, then.

      They pirate *everything*. Hell, their software stores (actual stores, not guys on carts) have one or two *copies* of each CD with a crack already present on it which they then copy. They sell that copy to the consumer.

      The pirates over there even got creative. I saw a copy of XP "Santa Claus Edition" which had a santa bootscreen, santa themes, a trojan, etc. (inb4 muslims don't believe in santa)

      It's pretty nutty stuff.
    • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -3/+2GIMP is part of the GNU project. GNU was initiated by Richard Stallman and is part of the *Free* software foundation. Stallman is a Jew born in New York City. Do you really see the Iranians supporting such a thing?
      • aghati, on 07/11/2008, -0/+3lol
        As long as it does the job, NO ONE cares!
    • KurtangleTN, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1judging by the quality of it, ya looks like gimp
  • johndajap56, on 07/11/2008, -3/+20I guess Iran doesn't know how to use the swirl tool
    • gcnaddict, on 07/11/2008, -0/+14not like it matters. Do you remember the story of that pedophile that was caught after the INTERPOL unswirled his heavily swirled face in one of his pictures?
  • kris2pe, on 07/11/2008, -4/+4Another scheme to increase oil prices!
    • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -1/+2You mean "another excuse" to increase oil prices.
      Now here's the big question. Do you idlely watch as the oil prices keep on raising, while you're told it has to do with instability in the middle east, or do you do something to tell anyone involved with oil to go f*** themselves, while you shift to alternative energy.
  • MrFurious2k, on 07/11/2008, -1/+20Sir - we're out of missiles to fire!

    Are you thinking what I'm thinking?

    Clone feature in Photoshop?

    Precisely.
  • AndreiOttawa, on 07/11/2008, -10/+1I still don't see that missile traces are identical. They look similar, but not identical.
    • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -3/+3I find it harder and harder every day to defend Canadians from people who stereotype them.
  • govsucks, on 07/11/2008, -2/+98Now see, some poor Iranian digital artist is going to get a car battery hooked to his nuts just because the people in the internet tubes MUST point everything out.
    • WiretapStudios, on 07/11/2008, -0/+15Graphic design is a cutthroat market. In Iran they take it so literally.
    • ms292606, on 07/11/2008, -1/+3dugg for the use of tube theory.
    • nmnnotmyname, on 07/11/2008, -0/+10Well maybe if he didn't suck at photoshop so much...
    • fwertz, on 07/12/2008, -0/+1Hit'em Endo.
  • BadAsh71, on 07/11/2008, -8/+1This was amusing when it hit the front page of Digg yesterday. Thanks for the dupe!

    Btw, I think officially they stated that they fired off 7 missiles but their Photoshopped pic only showed 4 while they really only fired off 3.

    Are we sure Fox News didn't have something to do with this :)
  • cyborgmexican, on 07/11/2008, -7/+19Shouldnt gas prices go down because of this?
    • BadAsh71, on 07/11/2008, -2/+3For some reason this one was getting digged down but it gave me a little chuckle so you get my digg :)
    • squaredUP, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2Not if the stock guys 'get scared' again for any reason. Neurotic ********
  • CHANNELOCK, on 07/11/2008, -7/+0Johh Kerry was Photoshop next Jane Fonda in a Vietnam war protest photo.
    More black smoke was Photoshop above Beirut during the Israeli siege.
    Wrinkle and age blotches were Photoshop removed from 50% Internet dating site female photos
    • hierophantus, on 07/11/2008, -1/+1John Kerry references are super timely. You should ask Jay Leno for a job.
  • BotchaMcCoola, on 07/11/2008, -1/+1Does this not play into them wanting the US and Israel to stay in doubt about their retaliatory capabilities? A little scary at first and now a little less scary. Seems consistent with Ahmadinijad's crazy man act. They may have done this deliberately.
  • cipher64, on 07/11/2008, -3/+2That should be good news I guess 'cus that was the one missile they were going to attack the world with. Who cares about the other three.
  • pintomp3, on 07/11/2008, -3/+63weapons of mass duplication.
  • Steinr, on 07/11/2008, -7/+3Yeah but who says that Iran Photoshopped it. It could have been the international propaganda machine or Israel or someone else entirely.
    • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -1/+4They've really got you conditioned, haven't they?
      If you had read the article, you'd know that AFP got the images from the Iraninan Revolutionary Guard. Yet still, your first thought is "Iran can't be to blame, it has to be the evil west".

      But then again, Mossad agents might have given the Iranians faulty cameras, which actually duplicate missiles when pictured.
  • dblespresso, on 07/11/2008, -0/+11Animated gif with copied sections highlighted:
    http://www.suitablyflip.com/suitably_flip/2008/07/ ...

    Original un-altered photo:
    http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/30602_Real ...
  • carynyao, on 07/11/2008, -3/+2The Iranians watch Donnie's You Suck at Photoshop series... Donnie's newest episode talks about how to clone lots of little spermie Ronnies from one Giant Ronnie using the Smart Objects tool!

    http://digg.com/design/You_Suck_at_Photoshop_11_Sm ...
  • radner, on 07/11/2008, -9/+5It's a trap!
  • bobangitanov2, on 07/11/2008, -7/+4What's the big fuss about those home made rockets that land randomly a few hundred miles away?
    Oh my god they're gonna attack Israel! They might kill some bugs on their way up, that's about it.
  • Ph03N1X418, on 07/11/2008, -4/+1haha n00bs:p
  • talkingwires, on 07/11/2008, -4/+9This past two mornings, I wake up to find this on the front page. Will it be on the front page tomorrow, too? I can't wait to find out!
    • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2This sucks. Digg's front page should only be about "Green energy is good", "oh wait, it isn't", "well, actually it is". With interruptions of "Mccain is evil", "oh wait, he is". "well, actually, he is".
  • griz, on 07/11/2008, -5/+5Not a big deal? This is a huge deal. This sort of thing needs to be reported accurately, not with this kind of misleading imagery to promote more fear! It is any wonder why we do dislike and distrust the media?
    • dkapuchino, on 07/11/2008, -2/+6Would you be willing to pay an extra 20$ a month so these media groups can hire photoshop experts to check each and every picture they receive?

      The ones misleading were the Iranians. They fed the Media with false images. This isn't even the first time they've done it. Shouldn't you be disliking and distrusting the Iranians?
    • booshack, on 07/11/2008, -0/+1I... I ... didn't know!
  • leubstop, on 07/11/2008, -1/+21I think they are using a pirated copy of photoshop.
  • Andysan, on 07/11/2008, -2/+4No country "tests" four missiles simultaneously. It's hard enough to test one what with all the instrumentation, safety, recovery, and PR necessary. To shoot four at once is just representative of a bunch of clowns trying to impress the gullible press -- and it worked. The kids on my street shot off more impressive fireworks on the 4th of July. Theirs all went off!
    • WiretapStudios, on 07/11/2008, -0/+2I've had plenty of fireworks...there's always a dud in the bunch.
  • vkiperman, on 07/11/2008, -1/+1Nice retraction.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 109 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.