DOCTORED IRANIAN MISSILE PHOTOS

[TrexLink]

I decided to start a new thread rather than include this with the War With Iran one as it also ties in with media manipulation in general.  The photos are available on the link.  Edit - I see I have posted it in the wrong section - if a moderator would be so good as to move it, it would be appreciated.

Iran doctored missile test-firing photo: defence analyst

19 hours ago

LONDON (AFP) — A defence analyst said on Thursday that Iran had apparently doctored photographs of missile test-firings and exaggerated the capabilities of the weapons.

Iran on Wednesday test-fired nine missiles -- including a Shahab-3 it said was capable of reaching Israel -- angering the United States amid fears that the standoff over the Islamic republic's contested nuclear drive could lead to war.

Photographs published on the Iranian Revolutionary Guards website showed four missiles taking off from a desert launchpad.

But one of the missiles had apparently been added to the photograph using elements from the smoke trail and dust clouds from two of the other missiles.

After being shown the photograph by AFP, Mark Fitzpatrick of the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) said: "It very much does appear that Iran doctored the photo to cover up what apparently was a misfiring of one of the missiles.

"The whole purpose of this testing was to send a signal so Iran both exaggerated the capabilities of the missile in their prose and apparently doctored the photos as well."

In Washington, a US intelligence official also urged caution about information released by Iran.

"While I cannot comment one way or the other on these particular photos, it would be wrong to assume that the US intelligence community accepts at face value what the Iranians disclose about their missile tests," the official said.

The state-run Iranian channel Al-Alam said the missiles test-fired by the Revolutionary Guards included a Shahab-3 with a one-tonne conventional warhead and a range of 2,000 kilometres (1,240 miles).

But Fitzpatrick, a former US State Department official, said: "In terms of capability, they claimed the Shahab-3 could travel 2,000 kilometres carrying a one-tonne warhead. This is very unlikely.

"The Shahab-3 normally has a range of 1,300 kilometres and the range can be extended to 2,000 kilometres but it would require a much lighter warhead.

"This is typical of Iran to exaggerate the accomplishments of the missiles and its nuclear programme."

Several experts on photography agreed that the photograph had been manipulated.

"It's a doctored image," said Gerard Issert, a technician at Granon, one of the largest photo laboratories in Paris.

"Although the missiles weren't all equidistant from the camera, they're the same size in the picture," Issert told AFP in the southern French city of Arles.

A defiant Iran test-fired more missiles on Thursday, as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned Tehran that Washington had beefed up its security presence in the Gulf and would not hesitate to defend Israel and other allies in the region.

The United States believes Iran is covertly developing nuclear weapons, a claim denied by the Islamic republic which insists the purpose of its programme is energy.


Link: http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5h02c0KdPqnRSFFVj9dn9pWaVMCJQ

 

[geo]

Am I surprised ???  Nope!

I think most all countries will at least attempt to put a positive spin on this kind of thing.  How would it look if they had said.... our missiles will launch 50% of the time & of those launched, only 10% could hit a target in the next county.

This is a PR battle to the finish

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

States did the same thing with the success/accuracy rate of the Patriot missile in Gulf War 1.

 

[MedTechStudent]

"The whole purpose of this testing was to send a signal so Iran both exaggerated the capabilities of the missile in their prose and apparently doctored the photos as well."

Sorry someone has to quickly explain this to me.  Send what signal?  "Watch out for us." ?  Is it not acts like this that provoke war?

 

[geo]

Sorry someone has to quickly explain this to me.  Send what signal?  "Watch out for us." ?  Is it not acts like this that provoke war?

signal is.... "DON'T MESS WITH US" - we will do what we want to do within the confines of our own country and no one try to say otherwise.... "OR ELSE"

another signal would be "WE WILL NOT LET ANYONE PUSH US AROUND".
another signal would be "IF ANYONE DOES THE PUSHING AROUND HERE.... IT'S US!!!"

 

[a_majoor]

The main difference here is the MSM simply takes these doctored photos and reports from the middle east without question (remember the doctored photos and "staged rescues" from the recent Lebanon conflict?) until the Blogosphere outs them; while virtually any report from a Western source is subject to detailed critique from the MSM.

As for the media response when they are "outed" we see a small retraction on the inside page, but no change in behaviour. One would have thought the lessons of reporting staged rescues and showing photoshopped pictures of alleged bomb damage in Lebanon would have made them a bit more cautious and apply fact checking with some more dedication and zeal, but no.....

 

[JayJay144]

is it possible that they are just trying to save their better weapons but at the same time using old weapons to still send a message? Iran isn't the tin pot that Iraq was. Their country has some ability to inflict damage even though I can see Iran taking most of the damage. They can still cause complications if they really wanted to make the first move.

It's interesting to hear all the talk about Iran and their development of nuclear weapons but I'm sure that through the black market they've already grabbed hold of nuclear warheads and other things.

there's a good website to track news from the middle east. www.debka.com It's a website that was created by retired intelligence officers. They have extensive coverage of the developments going on. it has good information but it's also very eye opening.

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9608/06/iran.threat/  Here's an example going as far back as 96 as to Iran.

Recently Iran even spent 6 billion dollars on weapons for their ally Syria. tanks, missiles, anit air systems and aircraft. This can be found in the search feature of debkafile.

 

[geo]

Iran isn't the tinpot that Iraq was ??? WTF is that supposed to mean ???
When those two countries went "mano y mano" many years ago - they each took as much as they dished out.

 

[JayJay144]

I agree. Their war was very gruesome. Think of it this way though. Iran has been able to rebuild its military in the 20 years since the war with Iraq. They have had more access to newer technology and funding.

Following the Gulf war Iraq had no ability to rebuild it's forces. Iran however has taken advantage of arms supplied by the Russians even in recent months they have been spending lots of money. It's too bad sanctions can't prevent more of it's military spending. perhaps something can be done about it.