Posted on 08/05/2006 3:52:31 PM PDT by Hadean
Well, it still might not be the first use of the word. I'll ask the OED people to track it down.
I suspect it might have been coined by Limbaugh or one of his callers. At least he/they probably gave it popular parlance.
But since the poster I cited, Wayne Mann, was a big deal on the alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater usenet group in its hey day during the early to mid '90s.
So it might have gotten its start from there.
Not that it's that much of a phrase anyway. It certainly doesn't rank with "vanity" or "disruptor" or some others that come to mind.
LOL
Maybe the photographer and Mr. Green Helmet travel together...LOL. They both wind up in a lot of places it seems... Having had friends stuck in Lebanon detail how hard it was to get out and how many hours they spent in their attempt to get to Beirut to be evac'd, I have no clue how these guys are getting around this easily.
Given that roads were still being hit and they were talking so much about cars being targeted (especially between the 'high target' areas...where these two keep showing up) it sure seems odd they have apparently traveled without any problems.
This definitely is turning into a side story of the bigger story...those Qana photos causing questions as soon as they were released has started a snowball effect I don't think these photographers were expecting with all these other photos being reexamined!
Whatever.... I guess you still miss my point that pictures can be shown to be fraudulent without the original. But, since you say there are no UFOs, are you sure? Can you prove it. I didn't think so.
...and this is where I stop caring about anything that comes out of your mouth. Thanks for the interesting conversation.
stop being such a purist. can't you tell just by looking at it. Haven't you ever seen a fire before? did the smoke ever look so perfect?
Ok....pardon my ignorance re: these matters....
but to what purpose would Reuters 'add' plumes of smoke to these pictures? To what gain or purpose??? What could their motive/agenda have possibly been?
Much like the conspiracy theory wackos that claim that Bush had the twin towers blown up (or down) with explosives.....
I just don't 'get' the reasoningm, motivation, or gain in doing so.
Please explain and enlighten me.
Great work by LGF and all you FReepers. There's a wealth of knowledge on FR!
Sometimes I feel like a nut, but I amost always want to hang around with them.
You cared??? LMAOUAYPI
A couple of us did it once and the thread poster had a conniption fit, lol.
"Her" perfect thread was invaded by TROLLS!
Freepmail.
Got it!
""to remove dust marks and that he made mistakes due to the bad lighting conditions he was working under."
HORSES**T
Oh, that's easy. You see, the MSM doesn't care about the truth. All they care about is profit. Get a money shot with lots of destruction and people start paying more attention to your product. This, of course, gives the freelance Arab photographer a lot of incentive, since it also happens to be in his best interest to make the war look as bad as possible. The more destruction, smoke and fire, the less humane Israel is. And wow, a few bucks to boot!
So it's all a very mutual friendship; a win-win situation for both sides. Not so much for America or Israel, but hey, at least a few bucks are made all around and the middle east propaganda machine has a ready & willing outlet straight into our living rooms.
BUMP!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.