Posted on 01/17/2006 6:54:45 AM PST by OPS4
N.Y. Times caught in photo fakery Pakistanis shown with 'missile' allegedly fired by U.S.
Posted: January 16, 2006 8:18 p.m. Eastern
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- © 2006 WorldNetDaily.com The New York Times is accused of running a staged photograph of beleaguered Pakistanis standing with a missile in the midst of their damaged home after a U.S. predator-drone attack aimed at al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri.
The problem, say analysts, is the "missile" actually is an old, unexploded artillery shell, possibly with its fuse intact.
But on its website, the Times captioned the photo by Agence France-Presse this way: "Pakistani men with the remains of a missile fired at a house in the Bajur tribal zone near the Afghan border."
The photograph adds fuel to the anti-American protests by Islamic groups over the purported CIA airstrike Saturday, which Pakistan claims killed innocent civilians. Investigators are trying to determine if Zawahiri was among at least 17 people killed in the attack, which destroyed three houses in the Pashtun town of Damadola.
The Times corrected the photo caption after Thomas Lifson, editor and publisher of The American Thinker brought attention to it.
The photo can be seen here, with a new caption saying, "A picture caption on Saturday with an article about a U.S. airstrike on a village in Pakistan misidentified an unexploded ordinance. It was not the remains of a missile fired at a house."
Lifson says the old artillery shell "must have been found elsewhere and posed with the ruins and the little boy as a means at pulling of the heartstrings of the gullible readers of the New York Times."
Ned Barnett, an expert on military technology and frequent contributor to The History Channel, told Lifson that based on his extensive experience in researching military technology, "I can verify that this is a 152mm or 155mm artillery shell – unfired – and by the looks of it, fairly old. It also looks like it has a fuse in it, suggesting that the guys in the photo are either ditch-water dumb or have a death-wish."
Barnett said the Times' "claim that it was the remains of a rocket is nonsense. Rockets are frail, light-weight, flimsy things (for obvious reasons). Artillery shells are robust, mostly cast steel (the explosive weight is really rather small considering the overall weight of the shell), again for obvious reasons."
God BLess America! OPS4
something about those people in the pic makes me think the whole thing is phony. shadows maybe?
These anti-Amercian fools just continue to prove what criminals they are -- the useful idiots of the left --- where crime and lies are the order of the day.
---It also looks like it has a fuse in it, suggesting that the guys in the photo are either ditch-water dumb or have a death-wish."---
I'd go with "ditch-water dumb".
Future IED for terrorist was all it was that was pulled out of the house.
It was "outed" here soon after the article appeared.
"A picture caption on Saturday with an article about a U.S. airstrike on a village in Pakistan misidentified an unexploded ordinance."
or·di·nance
Pronunciation: 'ord-n&n(t)s, 'or-d&n-&n(t)s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French & Medieval Latin; Middle French ordenance, literally, act of arranging, from Medieval Latin ordinantia, from Latin ordinant-, ordinans, present participle of ordinare to put in order -- more at ORDAIN
1 a : an authoritative decree or direction : ORDER b : a law set forth by a governmental authority; specifically : a municipal regulation
2 : something ordained or decreed by fate or a deity
3 : a prescribed usage, practice, or ceremony
OR, fancy this:
Main Entry: ord·nance
Pronunciation: 'ord-n&n(t)s
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ordinaunce, from Middle French ordenance, literally, act of arranging
1 a : military supplies including weapons, ammunition, combat vehicles, and maintenance tools and equipment b : a service of the army charged with the procuring, distributing, and safekeeping of ordnance
2 : CANNON, ARTILLERY
Assuming the NYT is being quoted correctly, they need to get some real editors on staff (the type of editors who can not only sniff out the and print the truth, but also, can spell).
I am sure, but everyone was not on when it was posted, Worldnetdaily updated info, with a spokesmen, in this article, I did not see quoted as of late.
Ops4 God Bless America!
Freepers in pajamas need to get some credit...I think the post was pulled because the photo was from Getty
But the MSM has standards, and editors, and Jounalism School graduates. How can this happen?
They are campaigning for Darwin Awards?
In addition to it being an old stock photo, a freeper yesterday pointed out that the photos original file name indicated that the photo was taken in Afghanistan. In other words, it was "fake but accurate."
Holy crap that thing is SOOOOO artillery. The copper band on the bottom has been grooved so the thing was fired. I dont see a clear fuze on top so the thing was probably severely damaged or came off on impact. That is a pretty common thing.
Faulty intelligence at the Times?
My guess? Some of the writers maybe from Pravda, and are used to writing in Russian. The NY Times must be a division of Pravda.LOL!
Ops4 God Bless America!
Looks like a 105MM or 5in. 54/Cal HE round.
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.