BUSTED! BBC alters Iranian rally photos

[max]

They actually cut Ahmedenajd out of photo, and then said the huge crowd was a protest against Ahmedenajad.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/bbc-caught-in-mass-public-deception-with-iran-propaganda.html

[dannno]

http://www.infowars.com/iran-faces-greater-risks-than-it-knows/


Iran Faces Greater Risks Than It Knows


Paul Craig Roberts
Infowars
June 18, 2009

Stephen Kinzer’s book, All the Shah’s Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror, tells the story of the overthrow of Iran’s democratically elected leader, Mohammed Mosaddeq, by the CIA and the British MI6 in 1953. The CIA bribed Iranian government officials, businessmen, and reporters, and paid Iranians to demonstrate in the streets.

The 1953 street demonstrations, together with the cold war claim that the US had to grab Iran before the Soviets did, served as the US government’s justification for overthrowing Iranian democracy. What the Iranian people wanted was not important.

Today the street demonstrations in Tehran show signs of orchestration. The protesters, primarily young people, especially young women opposed to the dress codes, carry signs written in English: “Where is My Vote?” The signs are intended for the western media, not for the Iranian government.

More evidence of orchestration is provided by the protesters’ chant, “death to the dictator, death to Ahmadinejad.” Every Iranian knows that the president of Iran is a public figure with limited powers. His main role is to take the heat from the governing grand Ayatollah. No Iranian, and no informed westerner, could possibly believe that Ahmadinejad is a dictator. Even Ahmadinejad’s superior, Khamenei, is not a dictator as he is appointed by a government body that can remove him.

The demonstrations, like those in 1953, are intended to discredit the Iranian government and to establish for Western opinion that the government is a repressive regime that does not have the support of the Iranian people. This manipulation of opinion sets up Iran as another Iraq ruled by a dictator who must be overthrown by sanctions or an invasion.

On American TV, the protesters who are interviewed speak perfect English. They are either westernized secular Iranians who were allied with the Shah and fled to the West during the 1978 Iranian revolution or they are the young westernized residents of Tehran.

Many of the demonstrators may be sincere in their protest, hoping to free themselves from Islamic moral codes. But if reports of the US government’s plans to destabilize Iran are correct, paid troublemakers are in their ranks.

Some observers, such as George Friedman believe that the American destabilization plan will fail.

However, many ayatollahs feel animosity toward Ahmadinejad, who assaults the ayatollahs for corruption. Many in the Iranian countryside believe that the ayatollahs have too much wealth and power. Amadinejad’s attack on corruption resonates with the Iranian countryside but not with the ayatollahs.

Amadinejad’s campaign against corruption has brought Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri out against him. Montazeri is a rival to ruling Ayatollah Khamenei. Montazeri sees in the street protests an opportunity to challenge Khamenei for the leadership role.

So, once again, as so many times in history, the ambitions of one person might seal the fate of the Iranian state.

Khamenei knows that the elected president is an underling. If he has to sacrifice Ahmadinejad’s election in order to fend off Montazeri, he might recount the vote and elect Mousavi, thinking that will bring an end to the controversy.

Khamenei, solving his personal problem, would play into the hands of the American-Israeli assault on his country.

On the surface, the departure of Ahmadeinjad would cost Israel and the US the loss of their useful “anti-semitic” boggy-man. But in fact it would play into the American-Israeli propaganda. The story would be that the remote, isolated, Iranian ruling Ayatollah was forced by the Iranian people to admit the falsity of the rigged election, calling into question rule by Ayatollahs who do not stand for election.

Mousavi and Ayatollah Montazeri are putting their besieged country at risk. Possibly they believe that ridding Iran of Ahmadeinjad’s extreme image would gain Iran breathing room. If Mousavi and Montazeri succeed in their ambitions, one likely result would be a loss in Iran’s independence. The new rulers would have to continually defend Iran’s new moderate and reformist image by giving in to American demands. If the government admits to a rigged election, the legitimacy of the Iranian Revolution would be called into question, setting up Iran for more US interference in its internal affairs.

For the American neoconservatives, democratic countries are those countries that submit to America’s will, regardless of their form of government. “Democracy” is achieved by America ruling through puppet officials.

The American public might never know whether the Iranian election was legitimate or stolen. The US media serves as a propaganda device, not as a purveyor of truth. Election fraud is certainly a possibility–it happens even in America–and signs of fraud have appeared. Large numbers of votes were swiftly counted, which raises the question whether votes were counted or merely a result was announced.

The US media’s response to the election was equally rapid. Having invested heavily in demonizing Ahmadinejad, the media is unwilling to accept election results that vindicate Ahmadinejad and declared fraud in advance of evidence, despite the pre-election poll results published in the June 15 Washington Post, which found Ahmadinejad to be the projected winner.

There are many American interest groups that have a vested interest in the charge that the election was rigged. What is important to many Americans is not whether the election was fair, but whether the winner’s rhetoric is allied with their goals.

For example, those numerous Americans who believe that both presidential and congressional elections were stolen during the Karl Rove Republican years are tempted to use the Iranian election protests to shame Americans for accepting the stolen Bush elections.

Feminists take the side of the “reformer” Mousavi.

Neoconservatives damn the election for suppressing the “peace candidate” who might acquiescent to Israel’s demands to halt the development of Iranian nuclear energy.

Ideological and emotional agendas result in people distancing themselves from factual and analytical information, preferring instead information that fits with their material interests and emotional disposition. The primacy of emotion over fact bids ill for the future. The extraordinary attention given to the Iranian election suggests that many American interests and emotions have a stake in the outcome.

[TonySutton]

The pictures shown are not the same. Look at the windows of the building in the center rear of both pictures. There are blinds drawn in one picture which are not in the other. The pictures were taken from the same perspective but they were certainly not the same picture.

[dannno]

The pictures shown are not the same. Look at the windows of the building in the center rear of both pictures. There are blinds drawn in one picture which are not in the other. The pictures were taken from the same perspective but they were certainly not the same picture.

Yes, the PrisonPlanet article does point this out:



The BBC photograph is clearly a similar shot of the same pro-Ahmadinejad rally featured in the L.A. Times image


I recommend reading AJ related articles thoroughly before attempting to debunk, or direct your debunk at the OP's title ;)

[erowe1]

The pictures shown are not the same. Look at the windows of the building in the center rear of both pictures. There are blinds drawn in one picture which are not in the other. The pictures were taken from the same perspective but they were certainly not the same picture.

It's not the same exact picture, but it is two pictures of the same crowd at the same pro-Ahmadinejad rally.

[TonySutton]

It's not the same exact picture, but it is two pictures of the same crowd at the same pro-Ahmadinejad rally.

It is very doubtful that numerous window blinds were opened and closed in the building. I am looking at exploded versions for both pictures and can not find a single point of continuity that leads me to believe the crowd is the same crowd.

I can find points where continuity breaks.

If you look at the tree which is in the background of both pictures. Find the right hand edge of the tree and follow down the picture into the crowd. In the picture with Ahmadinejad you run into a black box. (speaker?) In the picture without Ahmadinejad you run into a guard rail with kids hanging on it.

[Kraig]

lol but we are loonies right guys?

[dannno]

It is very doubtful that numerous window blinds were opened and closed in the building. I am looking at exploded versions for both pictures and can not find a single point of continuity that leads me to believe the crowd is the same crowd.

I can find points where continuity breaks.

If you look at the tree which is in the background of both pictures. Find the right hand edge of the tree and follow down the picture into the crowd. In the picture with Ahmadinejad you run into a black box. (speaker?) In the picture without Ahmadinejad you run into a guard rail with kids hanging on it.

Bullshit, look at the red awning on the round building. Lines up perfectly.

[devil21]

Its two different pictures but only the angle is different. The scene is the same. That would be a neat trick to have the trees look identical on different sides of the building. The tree itself is what gives it away. Exact same structure and branching.

[max]

It is very doubtful that numerous window blinds were opened and closed in the building. I am looking at exploded versions for both pictures and can not find a single point of continuity that leads me to believe the crowd is the same crowd.

I can find points where continuity breaks.

If you look at the tree which is in the background of both pictures. Find the right hand edge of the tree and follow down the picture into the crowd. In the picture with Ahmadinejad you run into a black box. (speaker?) In the picture without Ahmadinejad you run into a guard rail with kids hanging on it.

OK....media never lies. I'm just a conspiracy theorist. MSM would never engage in such trickery...

The media always tells us the truth...:rolleyes:.

[Krugerrand]

Maybe the LA Times photoshopped in Ahmadinejad.:eek:

Just kidding. Not that I trust either news source.

[TonySutton]

Bullshit, look at the red awning on the round building. Lines up perfectly.

The picture was taken from roughly the same place, yes. I specifically stated "The pictures were taken from the same perspective but they were certainly not the same picture."

The OP infers it is the same picture when he says "BBC alters photos" and "They actually cut Ahmedenajd out of photo."

I was not arguing whether the crowd was pro-Ahmadeinjad or pro-Mousavi. My argument was whether it was the same picture.

Going pack to my last post. It appears these were not taken on the same day due to the absence of the speakers and the very large stand where the tv cameras were sitting. I have worked these types of outdoor events and setup/tear down takes some time.

Best guess, BBC tried to use a file photo which is too common in journalism nowadays.

When people use the wrong words to convey their message they can weaken their message. It is important to say what you mean and mean what you say or risk losing credibility.

[dannno]

The picture was taken from roughly the same place, yes. I specifically stated "The pictures were taken from the same perspective but they were certainly not the same picture."

The OP infers it is the same picture when he says "BBC alters photos" and "They actually cut Ahmedenajd out of photo."

I was not arguing whether the crowd was pro-Ahmadeinjad or pro-Mousavi. My argument was whether it was the same picture.

Going pack to my last post. It appears these were not taken on the same day due to the absence of the speakers and the very large stand where the tv cameras were sitting. I have worked these types of outdoor events and setup/tear down takes some time.

Best guess, BBC tried to use a file photo which is too common in journalism nowadays.

When people use the wrong words to convey their message they can weaken their message. It is important to say what you mean and mean what you say or risk losing credibility.


Ya I know, checkout my initial response to your post. The article the OP posted said you were right about that, but then you started talking about numerous windows that were opened and closed and how that wouldn't happen..at that point it sounded like you were insinuating that it wasn't taken from the same area.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Isn't there a Ron Paul Supporter in IRAN?

Who else is left in America that provides an unbiased, uncompensated reports/pics?

[Old Ducker]

The view from the other side: Pro-Ahmedinejad rally photoshopped:

http://kheirkhah.ir/media/Image/Weblog%202/Keyhan-ehtics.jpg

[dannno]

The view from the other side: Pro-Ahmedinejad rally photoshopped:

http://kheirkhah.ir/media/Image/Weblog%202/Keyhan-ehtics.jpg

Too bad nobody is actually viewing that side.

I wonder if that image wasn't prepared by a CIA asset to make Ahmad look bad? I have no proof, but it is certainly something they would do.

[Matt Collins]

They actually cut Ahmedenajd out of photoNo they didn't.

[Matt Collins]

It's not the same exact picture, but it is two pictures of the same crowd at the same pro-Ahmadinejad rally.How do you know it's the same crowd? And how do you know it's also a pro Amadi rally? Have you translated the signs the people were holding?

[Matt Collins]

Best guess, BBC tried to use a file photo which is too common in journalism nowadays.That is more than likely what happened. Since they didn't have a recent photo of an Iranian rally, they just used one they could find, regardless of whether it was related to the story or not. They may not have even known what the photo was from.

It's bad policy and bad journalism. But it doesn't mean they are trying to lie or spread propaganda.

[dannno]

How do you know it's the same crowd? And how do you know it's also a pro Amadi rally? Have you translated the signs the people were holding?

Because apparently we don't need glasses.

This is the same rally, the buildings in the background are exactly the same.

The OP was wrong that the photos were chopped, but even the article he posted recognized that they were different photos. Don't claim that these photos are not taken at the same place during the Ahmad rally, you'll just look foolish.

[dannno]

That is more than likely what happened. Since they didn't have a recent photo of an Iranian rally, they just used one they could find, regardless of whether it was related to the story or not. They may not have even known what the photo was from.

It's bad policy and bad journalism. But it doesn't mean they are trying to lie or spread propaganda.

Give me a break. That was not a file photo.

You establishment protectors get really ridiculous sometimes.

[Reason]

two different pictures from two different times.

[Matt Collins]

two different pictures from two different times.Exactly. Anyone who looks at these pictures closely for more than 3 seconds can see this.

[Matt Collins]

This is the same rally, the buildings in the background are exactly the same.

The OP was wrong that the photos were chopped, but even the article he posted recognized that they were different photos. Don't claim that these photos are not taken at the same place during the Ahmad rally, you'll just look foolish.


They are not the same rally. Yes the photos are from the same place, but it's obviously two different events.

-First notice the composition of the crowd, specifically which colors are prominent.

-Second the blinds in the windows of the building behind

-Third the bus and stage / speakers at the bottom of the image are not there in the second image. And there is no where the concrete is visible in the "original" photo.

It ain't rocket surgery.... :rolleyes:


http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/iran_protest_rally_lie1.jpg

http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/iran_protest_rally_lie2.jpg

[Matt Collins]

Allow me to give another example.... here are two different photos taken at different times of the same place....



http://www.stumblers.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/obama_oval_01-21-09.jpg
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2009/01/21/us/21obama5-600.jpg

[Cowlesy]

looks like one image is from up on the platform, and one is from the lower platform and a different angle....who cares about this anyway?

[Elwar]

So...during one picture from one angle everyone was waving red and green flags, then when the camera guy got down closer to the crowd everyone put down their flags and started holding up signs?

Is that what the consensus is here?

Pretty clear cut.

Also notice to the right of the awning...in the first picture the tree is blocked by flags or something, in the second picture it's not blocked.

[Matt Collins]

looks like one image is from up on the platform, and one is from the lower platform and a different angleNo these are not taken at the same event. Study both pictures and you'll see this.


....who cares about this anyway?I do. It's another example of Alex Jones giving the liberty movement a bad name and making us look like idiotic conspiracy theorists (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=196431).

[Cowlesy]

No these are not taken at the same event. Study both pictures and you'll see this.

I do. It's another example of Alex Jones giving the liberty movement a bad name and making us look like idiotic conspiracy theorists (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=196431).

I'm at work so i'll take a look later.

:rolleyes:

<makes hand-jerk motion>

Why are you always trying to start crap around here?

If he's so awful and causes problems why does Ron Paul interview on his show so often?

[Matt Collins]

Why are you always trying to start crap around here? I'm not starting anything. I am simply defending the liberty movement from those who would associated us with conspiracy nonsense.


If he's so awful and causes problems why does Ron Paul interview on his show so often?His interviews are decent.

[Old Ducker]

Too bad nobody is actually viewing that side.

I wonder if that image wasn't prepared by a CIA asset to make Ahmad look bad? I have no proof, but it is certainly something they would do.


I think you're insane. I don't mean this as an insult, just an observation.

[Imperial]

Can someone find another angle of the Mousavi rally? Cuz I thought I have seen pictures of the front side of him that looked like the same rally.

[Give me liberty]

I think you're insane. I don't mean this as an insult, just an observation.

I think that was meant to be an insult
stop insulting other members of there different belifes

if you dont like it here, beat it.

[Matt Collins]

http://www.ilovebonnie.net/tinfoil-hat.jpg

[revolutionisnow]

I disagree on this one, these are not photos from the same rally. In the photo you can see the protesters holding up posters of someone else.

http://i39.tinypic.com/11793pc.jpg

[max]

I'm not starting anything. I am simply defending the liberty movement from those who would associated us with conspiracy nonsense.

.

In other words, You are afraid of what the big bad media and its sheep followers might say about you if you dare to believe in a "conspiracy."...Heaven forbid we cause you any social discomfort.

I suppose the 1954 CIA coup in Iran was "conspiracy nonsense" too?...

good grief........"Establishment Libertariansim"....watered down so as not to cause people the discomfort of independent thought.

I bet you're one of these types who advocate a "kinder, gentler FED" instead of killing the damn beast altogether....Probably a Mark Sanford lover too

[dannno]

I disagree on this one, these are not photos from the same rally. In the photo you can see the protesters holding up posters of someone else.

http://i39.tinypic.com/11793pc.jpg


So there was an Ahmad get together and an opposition Mousavi get together in the same place within such close proximity of time?

I smell something fishy, and I dunno if I buy the stock photo theory. Which one was a stock photo? And why were they there at that point in time?

[erowe1]

The pictures shown are not the same. Look at the windows of the building in the center rear of both pictures. There are blinds drawn in one picture which are not in the other. The pictures were taken from the same perspective but they were certainly not the same picture.

Nobody is saying that they're exactly the same and at the exact same moment in time. But it's clearly the same crowd. They're also clearly not from the same vantage point, which is why you don't see the speakers (or Ahmadinejad) in the BBC one. They're from a similar angle, but one was taken from a place where the stage was between the camera and the crowd and the other was not. Why are there more blinds open in the LA Times one? Gee, I don't know. Maybe because once Ahmadinejad came out to address the crowd the people in the building wanted to see him.

Look, I hate Alex Jones' propaganda as much as the next guy. But every once in awhile he accidentally says something true. I don't see any way around it here. BBC took a photo of a pro-Ahmadinejad rally and put a caption on it that made it look like and anti-Ahmadinejad rally, and then fixed the caption after they got caught.

[fr33domfightr]

My understanding is these were competing rally's. One day was for Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the next day for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Both were at the same location, on different days.


FF

[max]

My understanding is these were competing rally's. One day was for Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the next day for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Both were at the same location, on different days.


FF

Mousavi's rallies are covered in green colors......u dont see that in the pics

[Matt Collins]

In other words, You are afraid of what the big bad media and its sheep followers might say about you if you dare to believe in a "conspiracy."...Heaven forbid we cause you any social discomfort.
No... You don't win people over to your side when they don't think you are legitimate or they think you are crazy.

Proclaiming unfounded accusations as fact, associating the movement with those who are seen as loony or non-credible, and perpetuating misinformed ideas helps to prevent the liberty movement from being accepted by the mainstream.


I suppose the 1954 CIA coup in Iran was "conspiracy nonsense" too?...

I bet you're one of these types who advocate a "kinder, gentler FED" instead of killing the damn beast altogether....Probably a Mark Sanford lover tooNo on both accounts (and I don't know anything about Sanford).

[erowe1]

Here's another picture of the same crowd. You can easily see how it's so huge and spread out that it would be easy to take two different pictures just hours apart that seem to show completely different groups of people in the same massive crowd in pictures taken from similar angles but that are actually taken from totally different spots. In this one I can barely even tell where the stage is there in the upper left.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-election28-pictures,0,1746965.photogallery?index=12

[LATruth]

Mousavi's rallies are covered in green colors......u dont see that in the pics

Actually, you do. These are 2 diff photos, as much as I'd hate to say it. The casual observer would never notice. The main area of focus for me to determine this were the windows on the circular building having conflicting open and shut blinds. It wasn't 1 variance which could be played off as an angry resident tired of the noise or what have you. There are many differences. AJ has been wrong before, and usually admits it. He likes to "get the news out there" sometimes too fast without proper proofing. This is also often stated on his show by him.

[Matt Collins]

Nobody is saying that they're exactly the same and at the exact same moment in time. But it's clearly the same crowd.No, it's clearly not. Look at the predominant colors of the crowd and the signs / flags they are holding.

I put on concerts for a living, I spend a lot of time looking into massive crowds.



Look, I hate Alex Jones' propaganda as much as the next guy. But every once in awhile he accidentally says something true. I don't see any way around it here. BBC took a photo of a pro-Ahmadinejad rally and put a caption on it that made it look like and anti-Ahmadinejad rally, and then fixed the caption after they got caught.We don't know what the second rally was for. All we know is that it was at the same place as a Amadi rally. It wasn't at the same time, and it wasn't the same crowd.

[Matt Collins]

So there was an Ahmad get together and an opposition Mousavi get together in the same place within such close proximity of time?Who said it was within close proximity of time? :confused:

[erowe1]

I disagree on this one, these are not photos from the same rally. In the photo you can see the protesters holding up posters of someone else.

http://i39.tinypic.com/11793pc.jpg

What are those pictures? They don't look like pictures of Mousavi either. And the other guy was right, you don't see all the pro-Mousavi green stuff. They look like they might be pictures of the Ayatola, which supports the claim that it's an Ahmadinejad rally.

[Matt Collins]

Mousavi's rallies are covered in green colors......u dont see that in the picsThe picture with Amadi in it has lots of green colors in the crowd.

[max]

No... You don't win people over to your side when they don't think you are legitimate or they think you are crazy.



Why give a flying rat's ass about what closed minded simpletons think?

Once you start going that road of watering the truth down in order not to "come off as crazy"....you have already lost.

What are u gonna do if Ron Paul wins the GOP nomination in 2010 and the media then convinces 60% of the country that Ron Paul is a wacko?...

Do we then ditch Ron Paul in favor of a watered down version of him, because people "think he's crazy" and we need to "win them over."


Screw that....It's time we put the media on the defensive and call them out as dirty liars.

I still dont see why, in light of the 1954 CIA coup...and so many others.....that the idea that this shit in Iran is not what it seems....is so "crazy"

[Imperial]

suppose the 1954 CIA coup in Iran was "conspiracy nonsense" too?...

I bet you're one of these types who advocate a "kinder, gentler FED" instead of killing the damn beast altogether....Probably a Mark Sanford lover too

You realize that is a massive strawman, right? A fallacy of thought by attributing ideas to him he doesn't necessarily advocate to make it easier to eliminate your opponent.

I don't see why people don't see the population that there could have been no vote-rigging but the protests have erupted only from a perception of vote fraud. You realize there are Iranian politicians who would benefit from a revolution...

[Matt Collins]

Why give a flying rat's ass about what closed minded simpletons think? Well if you want their vote, then you have to care about what they think.



Once you start going that road of watering the truth down in order not to "come off as crazy"....you have already lost.Who said anything about watering down truth or compromising principles? :confused:


What are u gonna do if Ron Paul wins the GOP nomination in 2010 and the media then convinces 60% of the country that Ron Paul is a wacko?...Huh? This makes no sense


It's time we put the media on the defensive and call them out as dirty liars.I agree. In fact I don't consume media anymore. However this instance described in this thread is not an example of the media "lying".




I still dont see why, in light of the 1954 CIA coup...and so many others.....that the idea that this shit in Iran is not what it seems....is so "crazy"I completely agree. And I would bet money our government is running covert ops both in NK and Iran at the moment. Why do they want to get nuclear weapons?

But that has nothing to do with conspiracies and AJ being wrong / perceived as crazy.

[Old Ducker]

You realize that is a massive strawman, right? A fallacy of thought by attributing ideas to him he doesn't necessarily advocate to make it easier to eliminate your opponent.

I don't see why people don't see the population that there could have been no vote-rigging but the protests have erupted only from a perception of vote fraud. You realize there are Iranian politicians who would benefit from a revolution...

The conspiracy buffs in regards to Iran just don't understand that country or they would understand why a home-grown revolution was untimately inevitable. The 1953 coup should be viewed in context, which was mainly driven by the cold war, but also by the politics of oil.

I don't think the US government wants a prosperous Iran as it would compete with it for regional influence. Iran, unleashed, would become the dominant economy in the middle east and while it would be friendly to the US, it would no doubt adopt a lone wolf foreign policy.

[erowe1]

No, it's clearly not. Look at the predominant colors of the crowd and the signs / flags they are holding.

I put on concerts for a living, I spend a lot of time looking into massive crowds.


We don't know what the second rally was for. All we know is that it was at the same place as a Amadi rally. It wasn't at the same time, and it wasn't the same crowd.

They're different parts of the crowd and at different times. How would you be able to tell they're not the same rally? What exactly is your theory? That one enormous crowd gathered in the morning and then dispersed and then another one gathered in the afternoon? Or maybe one of those news outlets accidentally used a picture from some previous rally that had happened in that same plaza on some other day?

Here are some facts that I know, and I just base my judgment on these facts:
1) I know there was an enormous pro-Ahmadinejad rally in that plaza from the LA Times photo taken from behind the stage.
2) I know from this other LA Times picture that the crowd was far more enormous than can be seen in that photo or the BBC one.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-election28-pictures,0,1746965.photogallery?index=12
3) I know that the BBC posted a photo taken from up close to one part of an enormous crowd in that same plaza used in the context of a story about the huge rallies going on in the same time period as that covered by the LA Times story.
4) I know nothing of any other rally besides the pro-Ahmadinejad one that happened there in the time period in question.
5) The BBC initially used a caption implying that their picture was anti-Ahmadinejad and then changed it to a more generic caption.
6) Nothing in the BBC picture appears to to be from a pro-Mousavi rally. In fact, they have what look to be pictures of the Ayatola, which would suggest it is a pro-Ahmadinejad rally, similar to the pictures seen in these other LA Times photos:
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-election28-pictures,0,1746965.photogallery?index=91
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-election28-pictures,0,1746965.photogallery?index=78
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iran-election28-pictures,0,1746965.photogallery?index=60

That's enough for me. These are just pictures of different parts of the crowd at different times in the course of the same pro-Ahmadinejad rally.

[LATruth]

That's enough for me. These are just pictures of different parts of the crowd at different times in the course of the same pro-Ahmadinejad rally.

Explain the windows on the white circular building having conflicing shades/curtains being open and shut. If everyone is outside etc who is causing the discrepancy?

[dannno]

You guys are right, I've been looking at pictures of those Mousavi rallies for days, and this is obviously not a picture of one of them.

I guess I just assumed that whoever said those were pictures of Mousavi in the protest signs knew wtf they were talking about. I'll continue to listen to Alex Jones because he is obviously more credible.

[LATruth]

You guys are right, I've been looking at pictures of those Mousavi rallies for days, and this is obviously not a picture of one of them.

I guess I just assumed that whoever said those were pictures of Mousavi in the protest signs knew wtf they were talking about. I'll continue to listen to Alex Jones because he is obviously more credible.

This will not sway me from Alex Jones, news is often wrong. In Alex's case he's more right than he ever is wrong. Shit happens.

[dannno]

Explain the windows on the white circular building having conflicing shades/curtains being open and shut. If everyone is outside etc who is causing the discrepancy?

The lighting is different, they were taken during different times of the day.

The second one seems to be after things have calmed down a bit. At first there were a lot of windows open because it is probably hot over there, and people didn't mind being a part of it and hearing Ahmad speak. After a few hours it gets a bit tiring and so people in the building probably shut their window to keep out the noise and perhaps the hottest heat of the day. I dunno what the temps have been like over there, just speculating, but I think noise was a factor either way.

[Matt Collins]

They're different parts of the crowd and at different times. How would you be able to tell they're not the same rally? Read my post above.






4) I know nothing of any other rally besides the pro-Ahmadinejad one that happened there in the time period in question.But that doesn't mean it didn't.

[erowe1]

OK, so I noticed that the BBC photo was a stock photo from Getty Images. So I've been trying to find it there, so far to no avail. However, they do have photos from massive rallies that happened in that plaza. And it looks like these happened on at least two different days after the election and possibly more before it (though in some cases the location is hard to identify). So I stand corrected. It may well be the case that these are not the exact same rally (although I still think they could be, just at different points in the day and taken of different parts of the crowd).

However, every photo I can find from any rally that appears to have been in that plaza is clearly pro-Ahmadinejad, and Getty Images has captions on them saying so. You can also see the same types of Ayatola photos in peoples' hands in some of them. You all can look around there and see if you think otherwise. It would be great if someone could turn up the very one the BBC used. Try fiddling with different search terms. Here's something to get you started if you want.
http://www.gettyimages.com/Search/Search.aspx?contractUrl=2&language=en-US&family=editorial&assetType=image&p=ahmadinejad%20supporters&src=standard#

[Old Ducker]

OK, so I noticed that the BBC photo was a stock photo from Getty Images. So I've been trying to find it there, so far to no avail. However, they do have photos from massive rallies that happened in that plaza. And it looks like these happened on at least two different days after the election and possibly more before it (though in some cases the location is hard to identify). So I stand corrected. It may well be the case that these are not the exact same rally.

However, every photo I can find from any rally that appears to have been in that plaza is clearly pro-Ahmadinejad, and Getty Images has captions on them saying so.
You all can look around there and see if you think otherwise. It would be great if someone could turn up the very one the BBC used. Try fiddling with different search terms. Here's something to get you started if you want.
http://www.gettyimages.com/Search/Search.aspx?contractUrl=2&language=en-US&family=editorial&assetType=image&p=ahmadinejad%20supporters&src=standard#9

Where is Ahmedinejad? He hasn't appeared in public in Iran since Sunday. With all these supporters, you'd think he'd be out there encouraging them. Or perhaps the CIA is holding him hostage. :rolleyes:

[erowe1]

Here's the source of the BBC one:
http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/88518851/Getty-Images-News

It's definitely NOT a pro-Mousavi crowd as BBC said in their original caption. But it's also apparently not the same rally as the one that had Ahmadinejad in it in the LA Times photo. The one with Ahmadinejad was (as far as I can tell) from his press conference on June 14. Whereas this one is a state-sponsored rally on June 16th.

Although I have to suck it up and admit I was wrong, I also feel a certain satisfaction about getting confirmation of what I already believed. Alex Jones and the BBC are both unreliable.

[dannno]

Where is Ahmedinejad? He hasn't appeared in public in Iran since Sunday. With all these supporters, you'd think he'd be out there encouraging them. Or perhaps the CIA is holding him hostage. :rolleyes:

Perhaps he is attempting to avoid confrontation and instability... since that is the #1 goal of this CIA operation :rolleyes:

[Matt Collins]

Alex Jones and the BBC are both unreliable.Duh...

[dannno]

Alex Jones and the BBC are both unreliable.

The point of the story was that the BBC used a photo of an Ahmad rally and said it was a Mousavi rally.

Sounds like their basic theory was correct.

[erowe1]

The point of the story was that the BBC used a photo of an Ahmad rally and said it was a Mousavi rally.

Sounds like their basic theory was correct.

Yeah, that part was correct. But they also based it on the evidence of the LA Times photo that had Ahmadinejad in it, when the BBC actually was a different rally that Ahmadinejad didn't attend. So the Prison Planet folks got lucky and accidentally stumbled on an accurate charge against the BBC on false grounds. This doesn't reflect well on their own ability to make sure they know what they're talking about before they report.

Of course, nor does this reflect well on the BBC. Imagine how full of crap they have to be for this to happen. It's practically like some Joe Blow randomly selecting any one of their stories and saying they got it all wrong without any knowledge of the facts and happening to be right.

[Xchange]

Ahmadinejad is having civil servants bused in and and making them attend his rally's...( though he's in Russia)...

like someone else posted
They also just got busted trying to clone/brush the crowd to make them look huge..

Ahmadinejad sucks at Photoshop
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/06/17/ahmadinijad-sucks-at.html

And can anyone forget this...lol
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/07/10/iran-you-suck-at-pho.html#previouspost

[LATruth]

Ahmadinejad is having civil servants bused in and and making them attend his rally's...( though he's in Russia)...

like someone else posted
They also just got busted trying to clone/brush the crowd to make them look huge..

Ahmadinejad sucks at Photoshop
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/06/17/ahmadinijad-sucks-at.html

And can anyone forget this...lol
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/07/10/iran-you-suck-at-pho.html#previouspost

Let it be known that unless you are in Iran you have no idea whats going on in reality regarding the current events we are discussing. Which is why I am in heavy discussion with a particular iranian on another forum, some of that discussion has been posted here:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=196202&page=8

[Matt Collins]

So the Prison Planet folks got lucky and accidentally stumbled on an accurate charge against the BBC on false grounds. This doesn't reflect well on their own ability to make sure they know what they're talking about before they report.EXACTLY.


Of course, nor does this reflect well on the BBC. Imagine how full of crap they have to be for this to happen. It's practically like some Joe Blow randomly selecting any one of their stories and saying they got it all wrong without any knowledge of the facts and happening to be right.Thanks again for another voice of intelligent reason in here.

[LATruth]

AJ gets lucky a lot I guess. He should halt all moneybombs, go to an unpaid subscription model, and revert to buying lotto tickets.

[max]

Ahmadinejad is having civil servants bused in and and making them attend his rally's...
[/url]

Your are in Iran? Did you witness this yourself happening in Iran?.

...Or is that what you heard from a "news" report?

[Xchange]

Your are in Iran? Did you witness this yourself happening in Iran?.

...Or is that what you heard from a "news" report?

Heard it from friends that are in Tehran

[Imperial]

Perhaps he is attempting to avoid confrontation and instability... since that is the #1 goal of this CIA operation :rolleyes:

Ahmadinejad went to a conference of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization(SCO), an economic Asian partnership- it mostly has China, Central Asian nations like Kazakhstan, and Russia with observer status. This is to show the foreign world he has legitimacy.


...Or is that what you heard from a "news" report?

Plus, we do know the paramilitary-militia Basiji came in once the protests started too. Most deaths are from fights with these guys, who are a base of support for Ahmadinejad.

[Xchange]

Plus, we do know the paramilitary-militia Basiji came in once the protests started too. Most deaths are from fights with these guys, who are a base of support for Ahmadinejad.

Basiji in plain clothes swarming and breaking into university dorms from a couple nights ago...
YouTube - Hamleye Basijiha Be Mojtamae Sobhan (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BjczWD8F0U)

Basiji are shooting at civilians
YouTube - Iran after election 2009 (Basijis are shooting at civilans ) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIrX6UiXReE)

[LATruth]

Basiji in plain clothes swarming and breaking into university dorms from a couple nights ago...

...Basiji are shooting at civilians


Interesting...


The Basij (literally "Mobilization") — also Bassij or Baseej, or Persian: بسيج; also Baseej-e Mostaz'afin,(shouldn't this be Mosta'zafin) (literally "Mobilization of the Oppressed);" and officially Nirouye Moqavemate Basij ("Basij Resistance Force")[1] Persian: نیروی مقاومت بسیج — is a volunteer-based Iranian paramilitary force founded by the order of the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini on November 1979. The Basij are subordinate to, and receive their orders from, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards.

[Imperial]

Ive been doing more research, and apparently the Basij were made with the IRGC back around 93. After Khomeini died, Rafsanjani became the biggest power player in Iran. He backed Khamenei to Khomeini's position and used him as a pawn for several years, until Khamenei made the IRGC and Basij as his own powerbase and took dominance again.

[jmdrake]

I'm not starting anything. I am simply defending the liberty movement from those who would associated us with conspiracy nonsense.

His interviews are decent.

Fine. BBC photos in this instance were conspiracy theory. The idea that 2 planes couldn't take down 3 buildings in New York is conspiracy fact. The evidence of thermite has also now been published in a peer reviewed scientific journal. Now everybody's happy. :D

Seriously, Alex Jones does "gotcha" journalism and sometimes doing that you get "got" yourself. This isn't any worse than any of the mistakes I see in the mainstream media. The mainstream media just doesn't also make claims that the general public doesn't want to believe.

As for the BBC, they clearly reported that building 7 had fallen minutes before it actually had and they tried to cover it up. Their "response" was itself a bigger cover up. Still someone should post your observations to the Prison planet forum. AJ has in the past admitted on air that he was wrong about a particular fact. (And to be fair this was actually written by a staff writer. Watson's gotten it wrong before.)

[HOLLYWOOD]

One of the latest:

Tehran Mousavi at Imam Sq 20 June Tazahorat

Does anyone have decent high res photos or HD video like the guy holding an HD one in this vid?

YouTube - Tehran Mousavi at Imam Sq 20 June Tazahorat (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHa6h2XYv1U)