Check out some of today's additional oddities to the story at the site (and a link to where you too can get your very own "Flat Fatima"):

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/08/hmmmm-even-less.html#comments

BTW, in case you miss it while there, one posted reply had me ROFLMAO:

"No, no. This makes perfect sense. Bullets thrown at a house...the French have finally sent troops to Iraq!"

"How would any photo editor ever allow such a photo to be published?"

3. Because they consider the average reader to ignorant to know it is a fraud. [When it is revealed as a fraud, it is too late, the damage has been done.]

If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG.
Thompson/Rice

"bullets could have "hit her house" -- had they been thrown at it."

Damn!  that got an outloud belly laugh!  Nice one M.

Was GreenHelmutGuy observed in the area?

Do all the women look like men over there?

One learns to be skeptical in journalism, because so many people who try to get
information to reporters want either to advance causes or have fun, at the
expense of the reporter and his or her organization. This story makes one think
of whether Yahoo! News qualifies as part of journalism. I think a transmitter
of news service information is part of journalism. While only providing stuff
from a news service, it still has to make some judgments as to the worth of
stories and their placement. Ditto for Google News, which has developed a
reputation for veering left, based on story selection and placement. (I’ve
never looked at Google News myself, so can’t attest to the truth of that
assessment.) The item does suggest that people at Yahoo! should consider the qualifications
of whoever selects the “news.” This becomes especially important since, sadly,
the major news services presently provide much of doubtful truth or fairness.

Away from the deep think: I did some computer searches, but couldn’t find anything that
discussed everything that happens to a bullet after it leaves the firing
chamber. My experience with firearms is limited mostly to two weeks in basic
training, in 1956. (I briefly carried a handgun later, but never fired it.) Half a
century later, I recall lots of spent cartridges near me and others firing at
targets. Documentaries on Custer’s Last Stand show researchers looking for
cartridges that told where soldiers fired their weapons during the battle. The cartridges did not tell anything about where their targets, the Indians, were.

Perhaps because I enjoyed Westerns, I recall many a film where a surgeon or maybe an
enterprising layman removed a bullet from someone’s body, holding it in tongs
in a moment of triumph. So where was the cartridge? Wouldn’t that be in the
body, too? No, because, as one reasons, it separates from the bullet after
firing. So I know little. People at Yahoo! News and Agence France Presse know
nothing. (I followed the link & this was an AFP photo that ran on Yahoo!
News.)

But there’s another reason to doubt the photo. Look at those cartridges. How bright
and shiny they are! Look at the bullets. Do they look unused to you, too? Hmm.
Perhaps the cartridges, amazingly still connected to the bullets, had hit the
house. It would have to be made of gelatin. Ditto anything in the house that
the cartridges with bullets would have had to strike. Would such a structure
withstand 120-degree Iraqi summer heat? The clay and stone buildings that seem
to predominate in Iraq would leave a scratch or two, don’t you think? Impact would alter pristine shape of the bullets. Oui ou non, AFP?. And wouldn’t something from the barrel leave a record somewhere, a characteristic scratching? We have
many reasons to question Yahoo News! and AFP, don’t we?

You did not want to insult readers. I have struggled with this because I was curious to
learn what happens to the cartridge and bullet after firing. But your
conclusions are correct. To a willingness to believe, I would add a desire to
send a message, which overrode the skepticism that, I think, someone with
eyesight would experience at seeing the unscarred cartridges. Their provenance
is unknown, but likely not coming directly from coalition troops, in any way.
The unscarred cartridges cum bullets are facts. My conclusions are my opinions.
I think they are as undebatable as the facts.

AFP and Yahoo News! have erred badly. News philosophies and staffing have to change. Unlike others, I'm not inclined to engage in levity here. Like cause-backing hokum from the MSM influences too much public opinion. When something like this happens, one has to prove, beyond doubt, that AFP and Yahoo! made an egregious
blunder. Just laughing at it won’t do. Will AFP's and Yehoo! fiction become widely known as fiction? I doubt it will. It should.

The media is starting it's noise campaign to drown out any good news in the Petraeus report:

1 TNR's Beauchamp was an abotive 1st step "look what the war is doing to our troops"  (IE we have to surrender to save them)

2 Times's Bobby "terrorists are my buds" Ghosh grossly inflates the casaulty figures of the latest bombing by his buddies "the death toll could be 500" in his "Short Shelf Life of the Surge" (IE the surge is only generating a short term success)

 3 AP's Pauline Jelinek "Army suicides highest in 26 years."  (IE another continuation of the we must surrender to save our troops that's how we support them)

Get ready for story after story that plays fast and loose with the facts and makes our troops and our efforts to be either a total failure, our military as breaking, or out to be the SS.  The media elites will never give up in their efforts to destroy President Bush especially if it destroys America and leaves us open for our "just comeuppance" via more terrorist attacks.

Now is the golden opportunity for a (R) candidate to follow up on this, especially after the Obama gaffe.

-PJ

"Trake: Your lofty convictions are another blemish on the rump of congregational sectarianism." -Tumbler 5/15/07 

With a little vaseline, I can show you where the MSM can store the ammo...

He who throweth the first bullet.........

"I'm interested in the fact that the less secure a man is, the more likely he is to have extreme prejudice." Clint Eastwood