THEN WHY DID THEY HAVE TO TEAR THE WALL APART?
Posted on 04/07/2011 5:08:49 PM PDT by Kleon
Jack Cashill, the right-wing journalist currently winning the national game of "'prove' the most outlandish thing you possibly can about Barack Obama" with his both his theory that Bill Ayers ghost-wrote "Dream From My Father" and his claim that the president's father was actually Jimi Hendrix, dropped a bombshell today: Barack Obama is not actually in a photo of Barack Obama and his grandparents.
(Excerpt) Read more at salon.com ...
Well, if his dad was Jimi Hendrix... that would definatey change my opinion about him.
That picture you posted is one of the clumsiest Photoshop jobs I have ever seen, and yet people are using it as “proof” that the picture with Obama in it is fake.
The picture I posted (not the disneyland one) is from the article.
Do your homework.
Surely you don’t expect the POSED image that was used for the insertion to be released for us to see?
And the shadow of a deformed hand that obviously should not be there...is THAT all you have? A ‘SHADOW’ that is nothing but a darkening of a part of the shoulder of the jacket? Probably the result of a little added black colouring?
You NEED so MUCH to believe, despite all evidence to the contrary?
WHY WAS THE WALL DESTROYED?
There are absolutely no anomalies in the original photo other than what is in ones imagination.
You’re right...I might as well give it up. Seems that anything that threatens the myth of the Dunham-zero relationship terrifies some people.
That image was contructed to make it appear the Dunhams visited zero at a certain time in a certain place.
TIME MAGAZINE printed it, so it must be right..sarc.
http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1834628_1754223,00.html
CAPTION:
Family Ties
When Ann returned to Indonesia, the young Barack remained behind in Hawaii, where he was raised by his maternal grandparents. He eventually attended Columbia University in New York, where this photo was taken in the 1980s.
GREAT FIND.
Definitely photochopped. And not even a very good job. So it goes.
THEN WHY DID THEY HAVE TO TEAR THE WALL APART?
The wall at the right side of the picture is clear evidence of painting using a pattern sampled from somewhere else on the wall. The little snippet of wall image repeats multiple times in a regular fashion. To anyone who has actually used Photoshop (as I have), it stands out like a sore thumb.
That picture is fake, and it doesn't prove a damn thing about anything, and yet people continue to claim that the picture without Obama in it is the real one.
Some people actually admit that it's fake, but also claim that it is a true representation of an actual picture, but it's a picture that no one has ever seen.
But they feel it must exist, because, well, if it didn't exist, their elaborate conspiracy theory would go up in smoke.
This is the classic Dan Rather "fake but accurate" gambit.
You’ve been here since 2003, and never seen the words “barf alert” next to a cheesy headline from an extreme leftist?
Have you watched Obama? He has less rhythm than Steve Martin in The Jerk.
Despite the fact that every thing else in the picture is sunwashed except for Barry, why is he wearing a wedding ring? I don't get that part.
Look at Barry's right hand. It is sunwashed. Look at his left hand, the tips of his fingers are sunwashed. Shadows from trees are all over the picture.
How can you tell it's a wedding ring and not some other sort of ring?
They are available in large variety of designs.
Image of ring zero wears
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/07/sarkozy_good_luck_to_obama.html
YOU have a need to believe 'the Dunhams visited zero in New York when he attended Columbia', therefor you can't see the obvious FAKE that threesome image is.
Now you show me an image of Sarkozy with zero? WTF?
WHY WAS THAT WALL DESTROYED?
Obviously the knee wasn’t in the original photo, but we don’t have that photo, so once Barack was photoshopped in, there isn’t any way to retroactively fill in that part of the photo with what was originally there. But I realize the Salon writer (like all Salon writers) is just being snarky.
TRUCE! I’ll move back to the real issue that actually has facts, not some conspiracy created by a very imaginative person.
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.