The CIA would never be capable of finding some woman to claim the photos were of her even though no trace of their presence on the porn site could be found. That would be totally unbelievable. Much more likely that the disturbing images of murder and rape showed these incidents to be totally not a big deal. /sarcasm

Whether they're real or fake, I'd imagine these possible fake images are a more accurate description than what descriptions we've heard.

No. The Boston Globe and the New York Times ran a massive investigation of this, and the editor of the Globe was nearly fired for their publication.

Personally I can tell you the uniforms, equipment, settings etc. are all wrong.

"Whether real or fake" is just about the most inane excuse for journalistic malpractice that I've ever heard. It's akin to Dan Rather's "The story wasn't true, but I felt that it needed to be told."

You want to be one of the cool kids, wear a Che t-shirt and a Guy Fawkes mask, claim the mantle of truth and justice while decrying the evil empire? That's fine. But it is wholly unacceptable to play the apologist for publishers of false rape photographs. It endangers lives, insults rape victims, and makes a mockery of true journalism.