I'm sorry you took offense at my comment (in spite of the smiley intended to lighten it a bit).
To clarify my point, it seems clear to me that you and Misirlou have dug in your heels on this and neither of you is going to persuade the other to budge. And the past few posts by both of you seem to have gotten pretty far from photography, which is why I thought it best to suggest that the two of you stop.
It was only my suggestion, so if the two of you want to continue your 'discussion', that's up to you (and Michael).
Just to do my best to offend Misirlou as much as I seem to have offended you, I'll state that my own view is that
1. Those photos were obviously doctored with malicious intent;
2. Given Fox's unsavory reputation, I consider it highly likely that they were the ones who doctored them, and not Media Watch; and
3. I consider the NY Times a much more reliable (but not infallible) source of news than Fox.
-Eric (aka "Boy")
Thanks for the clarification. When I was a kid (no, I won't go there), my teacher used to quip "Confucious said 'to him that taketh offense, let him also take the gate'" A small pun. I don't see a real problem, just a misunderstanding because we're thinking at different levels (doesn't matter which level, just different). We should be sensitive enough to realize, however, that the U.S. (for example) is the Foreign Occupation Govt. in Iraq, and the "insurgents" are probably in most cases fighting for their country's liberation. I was in the Army for 3 years, and I did my jobs with much positive attitude. And when I left, I was perfectly willing to accept criticism of same, even if it stung a bit. My wish is that Fox for example would become less hypocritical - they're entitled to have an agenda I suppose.