The following is commentary by Whatreallyhappened.com about the incidence with the photoshopped photo of Beirut in 2006. We at 100777.com couldn't agree more.

Looking back at the Public Relations aspect of the recent debacle in Lebanon, one incident deserves a final parting examination. And that is the furor that erupted over a Reuter's photograph of Beirut that was obviously doctored.

In the above, the top panel is the original photograph, and the bottom is what Reuter's released. The obviousness of the alteration quickly attracted notice and the photographer was suspended and Reuter's withdrew the photo. Isdrael then claimed that all the work done by Reuiter's in Lebanon, in particulat the Qana massacre, was now suspect.

How very convenient.

My "day job" is in an industry that is expert at image trickery. I work in film visual effects. It was that expertise that resulted in my outing of the Vincent Foster murder almost 14 years ago and launched this website.

But one does not need to be an expert to see that the altered photo is altered. Someone used the rubber stamp brush in Photoshop to swirl the clouds around, causing the repeating pattern seen in the plumes.

Why?

Take a look at the original image. Does it need alternation or enhancement? Do the changes made with photoshop in any way alter the content or meaning of the photo, or make the captionm more or less appropriate? No. The alteration has no purpose at all ... except to call attention to itself, at a time when Israel desperately needed to discredit the reports coming out of Lebanon.

One final point. Photographers do not select which of their photos get published and which so not. That decision is made by numerous other people, including the photo editor, the section editor, and finally the managing editor. For this photo to have gone out, many people had to sign off on it. Do you really think that the altered photo got all the way through Reuter's management, office staff, photo editors, webmasters, etc. without someone noticing the obvious signs of fakery?

Me neither.

This fake was designed to be spotted. It was put out by Reuter's intentionally with the sole purpose of handing Israel a means to discount media reports of the war crimes being committed inside Lebanon.

Who in Reuter's put the welfare of Israel above their oen company's credibility, I wonder?