WHOUWWW...... This is far out...!

Posted by: alliswell at September 15, 2005 7:37 AM

More deception from the lying liars.

Cair is a Muslim joke in America.

Posted by: dgene at September 15, 2005 7:46 AM

Ps. When you go to the GoogleCached page and click on the picture to enlarge it, the full scale of this fraud spreads even better before your eyes.

Posted by: alliswell at September 15, 2005 7:50 AM

Probably not original but,

I miss the CAIRfree days of my youth.

Pick one and laugh, they don't get any better.

Posted by: t-ham at September 15, 2005 7:55 AM

Just more proof of what a pathetic, low life joke this disorganization is. And one who is in serious need of someone who can draw.

Posted by: DCWatson at September 15, 2005 8:42 AM

This further establishes Ibrahin Hoopwer`s (and CAIR`s) evil hidden ideology which they seek to suppress when the truth is told.
CAIR is the frontline of Terror.

Posted by: leavingtheleft at September 15, 2005 8:43 AM

CAIR / MCB / MPB / MLA:

These are the "Political Wing" of the Islamic Terror Forward Battle Group (Westworld Sector) - just as Sinn Fein were / are to the IRA.

Same demands as the terrorists, different strategy - but all aiming for the same goal.

CAIR - if you actually purchased a pucker copy of PS7, you get access to great tutorials at www.adobe.com.

Surely you have scammed more than a few hundred Dollars to achieve that purchase??

Just pathetic.

Do we know who the "naked" infidel / apostate woman is /was? (I am of course assuming that she has not been killed by an Islamic Morality Squad for dressing like a brazen Western hussey?)

Posted by: albion at September 15, 2005 9:00 AM

My grandfather used to say that even a good liar requires talent. CAIR is finding that out the hard way.

Congratulations for exposing them with their pants down.

Posted by: cruzado at September 15, 2005 9:03 AM

Deception is eternal and compulsory part of Islam as it was practiced and preached by Mohammad. CAIR is a true muslim organisation of US and there is complete freedom of religion in this Great Democracy even this (?religious act)may be deception. I really wonder what this Sardar jee(Sikh fellow)has to do with (deceptive) CAIR. I may remind sardar jee about the historical fact that Khalsa Panth(present form of Sikhism) was created three centuries back to fight Islamic Persecution of sikhs by Moghuls. Islam is written on granite it never changes, every Sikh for them is another kafir, (and)has now right to live in this world.

Posted by: iqbal at September 15, 2005 9:24 AM

Not long after the birth of photography, mewling as it was delivered into the calm hands of Fox Talbot, photographs began to be doctored. At first it was for the chaste purposes of making money by taking it from the credulous -- thus the photographs (now to be seen, incidentally, at an exhibit somewhere -- possibly the Metropolitan?) of a ghostly spirit either leaving or entering the body of a real-live human. Such foolery was the kind of evidence that table-turning mediums, male and female, could offer, enrolling the latest technology -- the camera -- to prove the truth of their schemes and scams.

But the same doctoring was then put at the service of power. Khodynka, Gapon, pogroms in the south, now the war, now the Revolution -- and here comes Comrade Lenin, the great Ilyich, zhivee zhivykh, more alive than the living, Immortal and Hyper-Vivacious. And after Lenin is shot by Fanny Kaplan, and descends slowly to that meaningless (because he is immortal, because He is Lenin) grave, the photographs taken while he was alive, de son vivant, this more-alive-than-the-living Lenin, will be keys to power. Who stood next to Lenin? Who was closest to His Radiance? Who received the most rays from Our Sun?

One mustachioed wolf knew that photographs could be doctored with, could be re-touched, and turned to his advantage. And so Joseph Stalin, in his resistible rise to power, keeping in mind his duty to History and Untruth, had those photographs fiddled and fuddled with, until they came out the way they always should have. If History won't come right the first time, just seize Clio by the throat until she screams and begs for mercy. So here is are the group photographs, where so many people have been erased entirely, and a blank spot remains. And here are all those photgraphs where a certain fell fellow, who in the original had been several degrees of separation away from Ilyich, or perhaps was not in the original photograph at all, is now not merely present, but right next to Ilyich, who is looking intently at him. This fell fellow, a certain Iosip Djugashvili, would thus acquire the seeming endorsement of the Immortal and Hyper-Vivacious Lenin.

CAIR is only doing what comes naturally. Doctor words, doctor photographs, doctor and put a spin and omit and change and misinterpret and mislead and do whatever you have to do to keep the cause of Islam, the cause of Muslims, the role of Muslims, free from critical scrutiny. In the CAIR reworking of its photograph, the means are the same as those used by Stalin in the 1920s and 1930s (as the "wrecking" trials began), but CAIR's clumsy effort was not intended to raise high the roof beam for this or that political leader. No, it was to disguise, mainly for fellow Muslims (who must have protested) the unhijabbed appearance of one of the women at the CAIR propaganda stunt.

What probably happened is this. The woman showed up, prepared to be hijabbed or not hijabbed. It was decided that for propaganda purposes with Infidels it might be nice to have, along with the hijabbed woman, an un-hijabbed woman. Or perhaps she was simply one of those "forward-looking" muslimas who do not wear the hijab, but remain firm believers in the Jihad. So she took off her hijab -- or perhaps found that gooing unhijabbed made her own propaganda effort more effective -- and not wearing it could be considered the physical form of taqiyya, religiously-sanctioned dissimuliation about the contents of Islam, or about the Believer's own beliefs.

A physical version of taqiyya, which has traditionally been practiced with words.

"War is deception" said Muhammad. Muhammad is uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil. It would be silly to expect CAIR not to follow his teachings and his example, every step of the way.

Posted by: Hugh at September 15, 2005 9:26 AM

They've learnt that technique from the Saudi censoring authorities! But whereas they used to use crayons; CAIR have graduated to Photoshop!

Watch out! They're trying hard to turn your wonderful country into a carbon copy of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. And they don't cair!

One shudders to think about it!

Posted by: Mark at September 15, 2005 9:29 AM

Excuse me for letting people down. However, I've taken a Photoshop course, and this is not worthy of deeming it as Photoshop work. It looks like a last minute work on Micro$soft Paint, very poorly done, as the black tints are not even the same. Other than that, all comments I agree with.

Posted by: EdwierdoVU at September 15, 2005 9:37 AM

I guess it was just plain "CAIRLESS" of them.

Posted by: jimmy at September 15, 2005 9:46 AM

or was it "CAIRFREE"

Posted by: jimmy at September 15, 2005 9:47 AM

Is it just me, or does the back of the head in the bottom left look kinda fake too?

Posted by: A.G.Frederick III at September 15, 2005 9:51 AM

In the google cache photo, one can also see the photoshopped black head-covering on the backs of the heads of two of the women in the bottom of the picture - the one all the way to the left and the one that is one up from the bottom on the right, facing away from the camera.

Posted by: TKELC at September 15, 2005 9:52 AM

CAIR is also incapable in "cleaning" their web files properly, here is the original [working] picture again [from their own server !! ].

Panic ?

att: large picture
http://www.cair-net.org/images/Vigil.jpg

Posted by: alliswell at September 15, 2005 9:56 AM

Holy Hijab snowjob.....

Posted by: chicagoray at September 15, 2005 10:14 AM

Have they even used a digital tool like paint shop pro?
The effect looks more like they used black marker pen to me.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at September 15, 2005 10:37 AM

Iqbal

It appears to have been some kind of interfaith prayer ceremony - that is what it says on the caption - so all religious groups strolled along to show their solidarity - you know how these things work - phot opportunities everyone hugging and saying we are all united by faith in opposition to blah blah blah

Posted by: Zico at September 15, 2005 10:42 AM

Pic is down now.

Posted by: Dr. Glenn Reynolds at September 15, 2005 10:58 AM

What probably happened is this. The woman showed up, prepared to be hijabbed or not hijabbed. It was decided that for propaganda purposes with Infidels it might be nice to have, along with the hijabbed woman, an un-hijabbed woman. Or perhaps she was simply one of those "forward-looking" muslimas who do not wear the hijab, but remain firm believers in the Jihad. So she took off her hijab -- or perhaps found that gooing unhijabbed made her own propaganda effort more effective -- and not wearing it could be considered the physical form of taqiyya, religiously-sanctioned dissimuliation about the contents of Islam, or about the Believer's own beliefs.

Or could the she in question be actually a he? At the risk of being politically incorrect, I find absolutely nothing feminine about the face on this doctored photograph.

Posted by: Razdan at September 15, 2005 11:00 AM

Google cache down too.....

Posted by: Dr. Glenn Reynolds at September 15, 2005 11:00 AM

As I posted on the LGF blog site,

Was that a woman in the doctored picture?

Maybe they should have blackened out 'her' entire face.

Posted by: muckfuslims at September 15, 2005 11:29 AM

Granny: You beat me with the punch line. I too thought they had taken a printed photo and used a felt marker on it. The people who used to doctor photos in the old USSR (they were skilled - no Photoshop then) would be pissing themselves laughing.

Posted by: johnb at September 15, 2005 11:30 AM

Look at the guy to the speaker's right. I'd bet money that his turbin is photoshopped also. I saved the full image and opened it in photoshop and zoomed in. At the top of every other dark head, scarved or unscarved, (except the woman of course) is a faint halo of reflected light, but not his. I'd give anything to see the original.

Posted by: Oyster at September 15, 2005 11:41 AM

What a sad bunch CAIR are.

Posted by: TooBad at September 15, 2005 11:49 AM

Razdan
I think she is a woman, indeed she looks like one of the stern GP practice manager types I know well. I think she turned up wearing shalwar kameeze and with a dopatta. Which is a woolly shawl worn by Indian Hindu and Sikh ladies as well as Moslem. I have one, a gift from India from a Hindu friend. As a fashion item it is sometimes marketed as a wrap or pashmina. The older ladies wear them as a practical garment in cold weather to keep the head and shoulders warm. More to keep their ears cosy than protect them from the evil gaze of men. Which is why the crudely drawn hijab looks so wrong. If this was a multi faith meeting, hence the Sikh and African gentlemen in the line up then she may not even have been Moslem.

Which makes it even worse. I think there is the distinct possibility that the three women's head seen from the back in the bottomof the picture also being doctored. In particular the woman standing next to the young chap (his bald patch untouched, shame) is wearing a brown leatherette coat, the collar of which is not touched by her black scarf, and strands of fluffy fair hair can be seen floating around and above the "scarf"
This was done less because the women's hair was immodest and more to boost the numbers of apparent Moslems present.
Is there any way of tracing who the woman in the rose print shalwar kameeze actually is?

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at September 15, 2005 11:49 AM

"The photo is also now missing from the Google Cache."

Must be a cozy relationship between CAIR and GOOGLE. Removing a cache reference requires a direct request to Google - and a quick response.

Posted by: Report at September 15, 2005 11:52 AM

If you can't force them to wear it, paint it on.

Posted by: helox at September 15, 2005 11:56 AM

This is so silly as well as dishonest! Well, it's CAIR, that says it all!

Posted by: Dumbo at September 15, 2005 11:58 AM

CAIR is using the "burnt earth tactic", the Nazi-Fachists used the same tactic when they realized they had lost the war.

Posted by: alliswell at September 15, 2005 11:59 AM

The patterns on the three veils on the women in the foreground are the same, I think. Note the three main "folds" coming down on each one, and also the business going on in each at around 10 o'clock. The one on the left seems to be distorted somewhat, though by photoshop or jpeg lossiness is hard to tell.

Posted by: Brian O'Connell at September 15, 2005 12:15 PM

Granny, you make some excellent points. If, indeed, the woman whose hijab has been doctored in is a non-muslim it would be worthwhile finding out who exactly she is. It might even be worth contacting her (and, for that matter, any of the other members of this interfaith group) to show how CAIR really views other faiths. And though I wouldn't hold my breath on it, it might be worthwhile passing this information on to Washington Post and New York Times. While CAIR is probably involved in far more sinister things then mere air-brushing of photographs, this slip-up may end up serving to be the proverbial 'straw that broke the camel's back'.

Posted by: Razdan at September 15, 2005 12:15 PM

Google is back ONLINE + PHOTO !!!!

Posted by: alliswell at September 15, 2005 12:19 PM

Razdan
That would be best done by a US citizen/resident who knows their way round the Washington post and NY Times.
Any volunteers?

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at September 15, 2005 12:21 PM

I recovered the original photo from Cair's site. Two of the veils in the foreground and the one pointed out by Robert are doctored.

Posted by: Brian O'Connell at September 15, 2005 12:23 PM

Yes, Cair has relpaced the doctored photo with the original undoctored one. Now can you prove that the doctored one was ever up there?

Posted by: Brian O'Connell at September 15, 2005 12:30 PM

Hey,
Who says the Blond in front is a female? Looks like a male head to me...poor guy got defrauded in front of millions! Who owns the rights to the pic's? Can they sue!!! ;-)

Posted by: Ponch at September 15, 2005 12:30 PM

Sorry ahead of time if this appears too abrasive for some. I don't do "PC", sorry.

We might as well start matching their lousy propaganda with something more refined...or at least highly toxic. Leave no doubt to these cowards that non-muslims know what's up.

I recommend T-shirt ideas for the brave and indignant as one way to start actively helping a few that have been harmed by this "faith". as well as send a clear message

"100% Haram"

"I never met a 6 year old girl I didn't like!" - Abu al-Qasim Muhammad Ibn Abd Allah Ibn Abd al-Muttalib Ibn Hashim

"You can wear your Hijabs in America when Daniel Pearl gets his head back. (quotable Sura here)"

"Smack my bitch up (quotable Sura here)"

"Stoning a whore is so much fun!(quotable Sura here)"

"Got pigs blood?"

Anybody care to fill in the blanks or buddies with a good silk screener?

I know I've got my CC ready.

Posted by: Quantum Infidel at September 15, 2005 12:34 PM

I think Google should explain how their caches are as easily manipulated by Cair as Cair's own site.

Posted by: Brian O'Connell at September 15, 2005 12:42 PM

Oooops - forgot one.

"Allah made me do it!"

Posted by: Quantum Infidel at September 15, 2005 12:43 PM

Robert, you're being unfair. After all, most of their efforts are going into more traditional Islamic methods of erasure...such as knifing, shooting, burning and exploding.

Posted by: pst314 at September 15, 2005 12:46 PM

I THINK GOOGLE SHOULD EXPLAIN HOW THEIR CACHES ARE AS EASILY MANIPULATED BY CAIR AS CAIR'S OWN SITE.

Posted by: Brian O'Connell at September 15, 2005 12:42 PM

Posted by: alliswell at September 15, 2005 1:07 PM

"We have always been at war with Eurasia, eh, Ibrahim?"

Robert, what a boffo quote from Orwell's 1984

Posted by: dennisw at September 15, 2005 1:13 PM

While we're all on the CAIR subject, take a look at this for interesting reading:

CAIR is unusual in its extreme rhetoric

(Right-click open in new window)

Posted by: Report at September 15, 2005 1:14 PM

Now that I've taken a look at the woman unhijabbed, and seen the turbaned Sikh to the right, my conclusion is that she may not be a Muslim at all, but simply an appropriately pliant Hindu woman, who was inveigled into showing up for one of those phony interfaith expressions of support for inoffensive and misunderstood Islam, and on whom CAIR decided to paint a hijab, possibly because Muslims visiting the website did not wish to have their retinas sullied by the sight, on-site, at the site, of an unhijabbed woman.

Posted by: Hugh at September 15, 2005 1:25 PM

It is disturbing to view the webpage's cache dated the 14th of September, and then viewing the file properties of the picture to be dated as created and modified on the 15th...

http://x3e.xanga.com/221844453573013276158/b9560654.jpg

It just goes to show you, a picture is worth a thousand lies...

Posted by: BujutsuBloggerShorinRyuu at September 15, 2005 1:36 PM

What a pathetic, sorry bunch CAIR are for this little faus pas. I think Douggie Hooper should provide some kind of explanation. C'mon Douggie, tell us what happened. I'm sure once it is all explained we will all understand.

Posted by: TooBad at September 15, 2005 1:51 PM

Ooooh, deadly hair rays. The G-d of the universe created hair on a woman's head as her covering, must we always try to improve on the work of the Creator.(And why should we feel shame for our hair?)

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 15, 2005 1:58 PM

CAIR turns a photo into a clumsy lie? CAIR lies whenever it suits their purposes. It will twist the news and ignore the facts as long as it promotes their agenda (or increases donations).

http://angrygwn.mu.nu/archives/114409.php

Posted by: Angry in T.O. at September 15, 2005 2:02 PM

@ BujutsuBloggerShorinRyuu.
That is a very good post !

BujutsuBloggerShorinRyuu wrote:

It is disturbing to view the webpage's cache dated the 14th of September, and then viewing the file properties of the picture to be dated as created and modified on the 15th...

http://x3e.xanga.com/221844453573013276158/b9560654.jpg

It just goes to show you, a picture is worth a thousand lies...

Posted by: alliswell at September 15, 2005 2:05 PM

Hugh

I think your theory is correct - it is most probably either a Hindu or Sikh woman - my Sikh friend said she looks Indian Punjabi - she is wearing the traditional Punjabi clothes worn by Sikh and Hindu as well as Pakistani women - which would mean CAIR took it upon themselves to hijab an infidel woman - what this tells you about their reflexive mental state and their atrocious attitude I am sure you know.

Isnt there any news report or press release on this meeting that might name the participants in the photograph? Then we could find out for sure.

Posted by: Zico at September 15, 2005 2:15 PM

What an absolute insult, what a spit in the face of that lady, whoever she is, if she is Hindu or Sikh - what utter contempt and hatred this act displays - what sinister and vile minds and impulses it displays.

If it turns out that the lady is not a Muslim who showed up for the CAIR sponsored inter faith meeting and was then treated like this it shows what terrible people they are, that they can treat people with such contempt - that they are so twisted and extremist that the sight of an infidel woman with her head uncovered has to be changed - just as they want all infidel women to be.

And how two faced and hypocritical.

Posted by: Zico at September 15, 2005 2:20 PM

This work with the magic marker is almost as astonishing as the elaborate Arab disguise employed in Team America.

Almost.

Posted by: Saint Kansas at September 15, 2005 2:21 PM

I'm surprised they didn't photoshop her out completely. After all she is not casting her eyes down properly. Like the girls to her left.

Posted by: Borg at September 15, 2005 2:38 PM

"he who steals my purse steals nothing,
he who steals my good name..."

i would say, without hyperbole,
that everything in the photo
is now up for scrutinty.

done a little bit better as a cut and paste,
but i question whehter the
"CAIR.org" placard on the podium is original.

Posted by: gumshoe at September 15, 2005 2:57 PM

Question: how does anyone even know that the two people in the foreground who got photoshopped are women? The dark-haired head on the left has a their hair tied back and an earring, but a lot of guys tie their hair back and wear earrings. The light-haired head on the right could also be a man. In the larger photo here on CAIR's site, the light-haired person appears to be balding. The bald spot is quite a bit larger than that of the short-haired guy to the left. You don't see that much in women.

Posted by: Jinx McHue at September 15, 2005 3:12 PM

"CAIR's Communications Department works in conjunction with local and national media to ensure an accurate portrayal of Islam and Muslims is presented to the American public. CAIR monitors local, national and international media in part, to challenge negative stereotypes, but also to applaud and encourage positive representations of Islam and Muslims. Over the years, CAIR has become a respected and credible source for journalists and other media professionals."

"Over the years, CAIR has become a respected and credible source for journalists and other media professionals."

say it again,Ibrahim.

Posted by: gumshoe at September 15, 2005 3:13 PM

ProtestWarrior started a thread submitting suggested PhotoShop touchups:

http://forum.protestwarrior.com/viewtopic.php?t=102619

Posted by: Minnesocold at September 15, 2005 3:16 PM

Zico
With the false hijab removed she looks even more like a recently retired doctors secretary of my aquaintance. A very efficient no-nonsense lady from Northern India, which does fit with your friends opinion.
I wonder what they would have made of, (or out of) a nun?

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at September 15, 2005 3:42 PM

1. CAIR supports free enterprise, freedom of religion and freedom of expression.

2. CAIR is committed to protecting the civil rights of all Americans, regardless of faith.

3. CAIR supports domestic policies that promote civil rights, diversity and freedom of religion.

4. CAIR opposes domestic policies that limit civil rights, permit racial, ethnic or religious profiling, infringe on due process, or that prevent Muslims and others from participating fully in American civic life.

5. CAIR is a natural ally of groups, religious or secular, that advocate justice and human rights in America and around the world.

6. CAIR supports foreign policies that help create free and equitable trade, encourage human rights and promote representative government based on socio-economic justice.

7. CAIR believes the active practice of Islam strengthens the social and religious fabric of our nation.

8. CAIR condemns all acts of violence against civilians by any individual, group or state.

9. CAIR advocates dialogue between faith communities both in America and worldwide.

10. CAIR supports equal and complementary rights and responsibilities for men and women.

Hmmmmmmm

Moose

Posted by: Moose at September 15, 2005 3:44 PM

Ahhh, that's better.
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b302/Minnesocold/Cair_retouch.jpg

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 15, 2005 3:48 PM

Minnesocold, those are all great!
http://forum.protestwarrior.com/viewtopic.php?t=102619

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 15, 2005 3:50 PM

Ai,ai,ai,ai,ai,I like you verry much!

But seriously if I was this lady, and my gut reaction is more and more now that she is not a Moslem I would be livid. Not at the Carmen Miranda skit on 122 above, that's just a bit of fun, as is the Brunhilde helmet on the same site. Likewise were I one of the bystanders also censored for daring to have hair.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at September 15, 2005 3:58 PM

The lady in question has features that look more like Indian Punjabi Sikh woman though she may as well be a Muslim Punjabi from Pakistan. It would be intersting to know her identity.

Posted by: Oneniceguy at September 15, 2005 4:19 PM

CAIR-Contact:

Council on American-Islamic Relations
453 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.
Washington, DC 20003

Tel: 202-488-8787
Fax: 202-488-0833
Email: cair@cair-net.org

Posted by: alliswell at September 15, 2005 4:28 PM

Carolyn wrote:

Ooooh, deadly hair rays. The G-d of the universe created hair on a woman's head as her covering, must we always try to improve on the work of the Creator.(And why should we feel shame for our hair?)

This is just another one of those logical inconsitencies one confronts when trying to understand or rationalize the Islamic thought process. Men are forbidden to shave their beards because the G-d of the universe created hair on a man's face. Shaving is considered an attempt to improve on the work of the Creator, such blasphemy. Such logic should lead us to conclude that clothing of any type is blasphemous.

Posted by: Lisa at September 15, 2005 4:32 PM

Mr. Hitler, nice name mate. Original too. What part of this do you not understand, furor?

So let us guess, shonk, you dislike the Jews, right?

Posted by: Unbridled at September 15, 2005 4:42 PM

By the way, donger, your link to tripod failed and no image is shown. Wait a tick, are you the one that did CAIR's photoshop job?

If it was a fake, why did you....I mean they, pull it from their site, mate?

Stop being stupid, arse.

Posted by: Unbridled at September 15, 2005 4:44 PM

The photo caption provided by CAIR said: "Leaders of the interfaith community gathered for an interfaith candlelight vigil at the Capitol Reflecting Pool in Washington, D.C. to mark the fourth anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks on Friday, September 9th".

Clearly, CAIR does not believe it is OK for women to be seen in public in the manner chosen by the participants, including the attendant reporters. So much for interfaith love, muslim style...

Posted by: Jumpintimmy at September 15, 2005 5:00 PM

I have a dream.

A group of enlightened, well-connected individuals form an "Educate About Islam Team" to educate fellow American Infidels on Islam.

They launch a fundraising campaign and raise millions. (Why not, the Marxists got millions in a single check from George Soros, so it's possible.)

Somehow, the members of the Educate About Islam Team and their contributors are kept secret.

A series of 30-second TV spots are produced. The spots would be void of opinion and invective. Instead, each would contain plain statements of facts, each with reference to the canonical text that proves Moslems themselves acknowledge the contents of the spot as factual and true.

There would be a foundational spot explaining that the Qur'an is the literal word of God and has abrogation, and presents the surah that commands Moslems to emulate the Sunnah (Mohammed's sayings and deeds).

Then onto the Sunnah itself: There would be the Banu Qaynuqa Expulsion Spot, the Kab Ashraf Spot, the Aisha Pedophilia Spot, the Ibn Sunayna Spot, the Banu Nadir Spot, the Killing Of The Shepherd Spot, the Qurayza Massacre Spot, The Torture Killing Of Kinana Spot, the Killing Of The Slave Wife and Mother Spot, the Slaying Of The Old Woman From Fazara Spot, the Killing Of Abdullah Khatal And His Daughter Spot, the The Murder of Asma Marwan Spot, and the Attack Upon Tabuk Spot.

The spots would dramatically re-enact each Sunnah crime in full costume and set. The actors would be disguised and their identities also kept secret.

Each spot would be punctuated with a fundraising appeal.

When the Team attempts to place the ads on CNN, Fox News, and other big networks at market rate, a PR campaign would be launched around the Team's free speech lawsuit against the networks for refusing to air them.

The front man in the PR campaign would direct viewers to the EducateAboutIslamTeam.com website to download the spots for viewing on their home computers.

Fox News would finally relent to the PR battering, and begin airing the spot. A crack team of Moslems would then bomb Fox's offices in Midtown, killing dozens and sparking an international outcry from Infidels, polytheists, pagans, and secular humanists.

The PR campaign front man is beheaded, but it turns out he had a terminal illness and was going to die soon anyway.

The Team team then produces and releases the Beheaded PR Front Man Spot.

Then the politicians, cowards all, begin to actually examine Islam and openly question our state of affairs.

Voila. Our so-called public discourse on this hate-bloodlust-murder-conquest nightmare called the nation of Islam would be entirely re-framed, and in less that six months time.

Posted by: Shaughn at September 15, 2005 5:03 PM

Robert:

I'm echoing Brian O'Connell's comment above. Would you please find out from Google how CAIR can manipulate Google's cache so easily?

Ty

Posted by: Tyrell Biggs at September 15, 2005 5:27 PM

This is small potatoes.

If you want to see stuff faked, follow this link to a website analyzing some of the raw news footage used in mainstream news programs around the world. The videos were shot in the Gaza strip.

http://seconddraft.org./movies.php

Also check out Wolrd Net Daily, exposing some related fake news.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46286

Posted by: Steve O at September 15, 2005 5:32 PM

Hitler, again, nice name. The other one was a racist horse's arse too.

Have you labeled? Mr. Hitler, you've labeled yourself.

Again, clicking on the link you provided has failed. Onlt a Tripod logo appears, mate. If you're gonna be a troll, donger, why don't you go and play with the other sawed off joo haters.

Nothing worse that a radical Muslim or one that apologizes for them. You appear to be a bit light in the top paddock, mate.

Posted by: Unbridled at September 15, 2005 6:02 PM

Tyrell, et al.,

CAIR did absolutely nothing to manipulate Google's cache server. A cache server is nothing more than a temporary storage location that automatically updates itself with the latest version of a webpage from the originating server. In this regard, a cache server acts similary to your own local browser cache. The cache is used to accelrate the loading of web pages on a computer (yours) running a browser client. When you enter a URL, such as www.jihadwatch.com, in your browser address window, the client application sends a synchronization packet to the jihadwatch server along with the request. The jihadwatch server returns an acknowledgment packet to establish the connection and subsequent serialized packets with the web page data. The client application parses the first of these packets to determine if the web page already exists in the local client cache, amd if so, is it the current version. If the cache has the current version (the web page has not chnaged) then the cache version is loaded so that the browser need not wait for the remaining packets from the server to render the webpage. If the cache has an older version, then the cache version is discarded and replaced with the newer version received from the server.

Google, Yahoo and other internet nodes also contain server caches. As your request gets routed through these nodes on the way to the jihadwatch server, each node checks it cache and the return acknowledgment to see if it already has the current web page. If it does, it returns the web page from its own cache to the client instead of waiting for the jihadwatch server to process the web page. These nodes, in effect, act as proxy servers. Furthermore, since these nodes also provide search functions, web crawlers are constantly scouring all known web page servers for the latest version of web pages to load into the cache.

This isn't complicated or mysterious stuff to understand. there is no secret society or back room machinations occuring.

Posted by: Lisa at September 15, 2005 6:02 PM

"3. CAIR supports domestic policies that promote civil rights, diversity and freedom of religion."
-Moose

"domestic policies"...

you won't find them campaigning for any of this stuff as beneficial to,oh,say the KSA(Kingdom of Saudi Arabia).

any hypocrisy here?

Posted by: gumshoe at September 15, 2005 6:29 PM

@lisa. Good, Clear., Thank you.

So let's stay with the subject, the bastards changed the picture in 3 hours, and thanks to BujutsuBloggerShorinRyuu, we can prove it:

--

BujutsuBloggerShorinRyuu wrote:

It is disturbing to view the webpage's cache dated the 14th of September, and then viewing the file properties of the picture to be dated as created and modified on the 15th...

http://x3e.xanga.com/221844453573013276158/b9560654.jpg

It just goes to show you, a picture is worth a thousand lies...

Posted by: alliswell at September 15, 2005 6:55 PM

@lisa. Good, Clear., Thank you.

So let's stay with the subject, the bastards changed the picture in 3 hours, and thanks to BujutsuBloggerShorinRyuu, we can prove it:

--

BujutsuBloggerShorinRyuu wrote:

It is disturbing to view the webpage's cache dated the 14th of September, and then viewing the file properties of the picture to be dated as created and modified on the 15th...

http://x3e.xanga.com/221844453573013276158/b9560654.jpg

It just goes to show you, a picture is worth a thousand lies...

Posted by: alliswell at September 15, 2005 6:55 PM

My great grandma can do a better photoshop job than that! Sheesh! Guess the person who did it was at flight training school the day they gave out photoshop lessons!

Posted by: jimi at September 15, 2005 8:41 PM

Those photo touchups are too funny. I did a photo consolidation quiz (which is the real CAIR touchup) on my website. I don't think I have laughed so hard in weeks.

Pedestrian Infidel
The Pedestrian Infidel Blog,

http://pedestrianinfidel.blogspot.com/

Posted by: pedestrian infidel at September 15, 2005 8:59 PM

Lisa, I get all that.

But the current Google cache for the front page is from Sep 15, 2005 03:13:50 GMT. This is Sep 14, 2005 11:13:50 pm EDT (4 hours difference, allowing 1 hour for daylight savings). Robert posted about the Cair site and the Google cache of it on Sep 15 at 7:08 am EDT, or 8 hours later. I never saw the site before any changes so I don' know when it changed, but doesn't this timeline seem odd to you?

It seems as if the cache of Sep 15 GMT is itself changing, rather than being updated with a new cache, whose timestamp would be different.

I may have just hurt my brain.

Posted by: Brian O'Connell at September 15, 2005 9:25 PM

So CAIR has hijabophobia? This is too funny! And the trail to follow was so easy at first. Now we have shades of Orwell's 1984.

CAIR does similar things with print stories as well. They imagine Islamophobia everywhere.

Posted by: WatchfulEye at September 15, 2005 9:34 PM

I was just thinking the same thing, Watchful Eye. It seems they have some sort of psychopathic aversion to seeing women's hair. So phobic about it, they can't stand to show such a thing on their website. Shock! Horror! Woman's hair! OMG! So much for their claim they support freedom of expression and religion, and equal rights for women. Creeps me out. And proves to me they are completely untrustworthy, with evil, ulterior motives.

I think that poor woman in front is not a Muslim at all. She's wearing a nice flowered dress. She must be Hindu. Their women wear such pretty things. Do Muslims allow women to wear nice patterned fabric? Everything I've seen them wear is dull as dishwater. Like the two to the left of the photoshopped woman. They've got their heads lowered, drab colours. She's out there, head up, flowers on her dress. No, I don't think she's Muslim. Not drab and cowed enough.

Posted by: feralee at September 15, 2005 9:51 PM

No Google conspiracy. Google only caches the text of web sites, not the images. If an image that is referenced in a cached web page is altered, then it will be altered on the cached site too.

Posted by: mobile at September 16, 2005 12:59 AM

Well, I apologize for my apparent lack of knowledge about Google cache. On the plus side, I know I have to rely more upon Google cache if I want to demonstrate manipulation of images. But that doesn't really hurt the evidence...

For those of you still skeptical:
We know their front page did link to an undoctored photo on 15 September, named "Vigil.jpg".
We know the cache of the front page was not showing the image at all (undoctored or otherwise) for a period of time on the 15th.
We know the cache of the front page for 14 September contained an image link for a file called "Vigil.jpg". In my screen capture, the cache was displaying the updated and undoctored Vigil.jpg, dated the 15th.
Because there was a continuity in the code referencing a "Vigil.jpg" from the 14th through the 15th, the only reason why the image would be missing from the cache for that period of time is because they were getting rid of the old "Vigil.jpg" and replacing it with the new and undoctored "Vigil.jpg".

Posted by: BujutsuBloggerShorinRyuu at September 16, 2005 2:24 AM

She must be Hindu. Their women wear such pretty things. Do Muslims allow women to wear nice patterned fabric?

They used to. When I was a child/young woman in east London it was difficult at first to distinguish between the Asian women whether they were Moslem, Hindu or Sikh. They all worn saris or shalwar kameezes, in beautiful colours, and the only scarves you saw were a gauzy strip to finish the outfit (a school friend likened the use to my wearing lace gloves to a wedding) The only people to wear the long black and face veils were up the west end and were the elderly retainers to the wealthy arab families.

Now this has changed and not just in the west. I was listening to BBC Radio 3 a few weeks ago, their world music programme. They were interviewing a young man of Pakistani heritage, who has been working with the revival/conservation of Pakistani folk music. Some of the things he said about the suppression of music in Pakistan and Afghanistan were interesting and I may repeat them if appropriate on another thread. Then he said, "of course making peoples lives miserable is not confined to music. The people of suchandsuch region also had a wonderful tradition of textiles, beautiful embroidery and colours, that's all gone now."

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at September 16, 2005 4:10 AM

She must be Hindu. Their women wear such pretty things. Do Muslims allow women to wear nice patterned fabric?

They used to. When I was a child/young woman in east London it was difficult at first to distinguish between the Asian women whether they were Moslem, Hindu or Sikh. They all worn saris or shalwar kameezes, in beautiful colours, and the only scarves you saw were a gauzy strip to finish the outfit (a school friend likened the use to my wearing lace gloves to a wedding) The only people to wear the long black and face veils were up the west end and were the elderly retainers to the wealthy arab families.

Now this has changed and not just in the west. I was listening to BBC Radio 3 a few weeks ago, their world music programme. They were interviewing a young man of Pakistani heritage, who has been working with the revival/conservation of Pakistani folk music. Some of the things he said about the suppression of music in Pakistan and Afghanistan were interesting and I may repeat them if appropriate on another thread. Then he said, "of course making peoples lives miserable is not confined to music. The people of suchandsuch region also had a wonderful tradition of textiles, beautiful embroidery and colours, that's all gone now."

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at September 16, 2005 4:12 AM

Well, I guess this means CAIR better be more cairful...they is (or is that ARE) exposing themselves...

Redneck cowgirl

Posted by: mswg at September 16, 2005 9:47 AM

It just goes to show you, a picture is worth a thousand lies...
Posted by: alliswell

Apt.

Posted by: desi_singh at September 16, 2005 9:54 AM

Regarding "Google Cache" and how it works - Google is not a "cache server" in the normal sense. Google stores a copy of the HTML text that has the instructions for how to display the page.

Google Cache (and the internet archive at http://archive.org/ do NOT store the graphical components in the cache.

When you pull up the page from the cache, -your browser- requests the -current- graphic from the original web server. That's why the web page was dated the 14th, but the graphic is from the 15th.

There is a lawsuit underway somewhere else over this misunderstanding - a law firm doing research pulled up an old web page from archive.org, and that caused the web logs at the company they were investigating to receive requests for the graphical elements - which exposed the fact that the law firm was doing the investigation. The target of the investigation is asserting unauthorized access of their web site and copyright violation when the evidence was presented in court (a flimsy claim at best)

Posted by: Art Stone at September 16, 2005 11:17 AM

You may be giving them too much credit. Are you sure that's Photoshop? (I could do a better job with Windows Paint, for goodness' sake.)

It looks like plain old black Magic Marker to me.

respectfully,
Daniel in Brookline

Posted by: Daniel in Brookline at September 16, 2005 11:19 AM

Not surprising. Post WWII the Moslem world took-on Stalinism as a model for their political vehicles, with the rhetoric of the Third Reich - two sides of the same coin.

Posted by: DirtCrashr at September 16, 2005 11:34 AM

Dare
CAIR
bare
hair?

Posted by: Bleepless at September 16, 2005 11:58 AM

Art has helped clear up any misunderstandings or "guessing" regarding Google's cache as posted earlier.

Additional information:

Google cache raises copyright concerns

Google takes a snapshot of each page examined...

Google's cache of the www.cair.com page

Posted by: Report at September 16, 2005 12:25 PM

The Google help page says: 'The "Cached" link will be missing for sites that have not been indexed, as well as for sites whose owners have requested we not cache their content.'

The following email was just intercepted [ha] from CAIR:

"Please don't cache our content, it [is] interfering with ability to decieve unbelievers. Thank you."

Posted by: Report at September 16, 2005 12:35 PM

As a bald person, frankly I am offended and humiliated by hair, and applaud CAIR for covering it up. I wish all news organizations were as sympathetic to us baldies as CAIR.

Posted by: PlutosDad at September 16, 2005 3:00 PM

Come on, be real. You are making a big deal out of this. What's wrong with you people?

If
THE US SUPREME COURT FEMALE JUSTICES WEAR HIJAB AND ABAYA" why do you pick on CAIR? Huh.

Hey, there is a photo of our beloved Justice wearing --- you guessed it___________

Posted by: dtlc at September 17, 2005 10:46 AM

Have you seen this one? The head coverings are awesome.

Posted by: gail at September 17, 2005 12:09 PM

Sorry, just scroll up on that link.

Posted by: gail at September 17, 2005 12:10 PM

That woman is, beyond the shadow of a doubt, either Hindu or Seikh.

Someone should notify them about this because it will cause an outrage.

CAIR could potentially get sued over this.

I have notified Andy Whitehead from Anti-CAIR over this picture. Hoping he brings up a story on this.

Posted by: uskafir at September 17, 2005 7:19 PM

Just want to point out. If islam is such a great religion. Then why are the women who are in the hajibs bowing their heads and the one on the far left looks as if she is ashamed or afraid of something. We all know how muslim men treat their women. Wonder if that has something to do with it. They look like they aren't happy being their or ashamed. Ironic. Isn't it.

Posted by: bigboy402 at September 18, 2005 12:45 AM

Never forget that Islam means "submission", not "peace"...

The leaders of this pagan death cult, those who refused to denounce the child-rapists and mass-murderer of Beslan (blaming the victims instead), the men who ritually beheaded and disemboweled women in Fallujah, who (like Omar the Mad of Taliban infamy) tell their followers that deoderant and toilet-paper are the "tools of Satan", these same perverts want all the world grovelling at their unwashed feet...

And the sodomite-laden "main-stream" media seem ready to lock their lips and submit already...

"Israel the democracy is evil", the bestial followers of a certain Mohammed claim. "Come back to the 12th Century oppression, disease, starvation, and worse that we offer..."

I find it beyond incomprehensible that some reject George W. Bush as some sort of "Hitler" and regard Saddam and his sadists as some sort of holy martyrs... What sort of fantasy world do these people inhabit?

But then, the Bible already told us that many would reject God, who then will cause them to believe a lie and be damned (Hint: look up 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12, Revelation 3:17-20)...

It's not too late for you!

Posted by: jtb-in-texas at September 19, 2005 9:02 AM

For fans of photo editing, a Dutch blogsite contains some interesting variants of this CAIR photograph here (scroll down). (note: possibly explicit or offensive content ahead.)

Posted by: fnord at September 20, 2005 7:31 AM