Why the Soviets doctored this iconic photo

And the same for the change in tint of the Reichstag flag, to give it a somewhat grimier, more battle-stained appearance, I'd suppose, that, also, I hadn't seen mentioned anywhere else before....

I watched it, I follow the object of it...however, if one reads the Flags of Our Fathers book, and watches the film, I'm not saying the whole thing is exactly true as depicted in each version, text and cinematographically, however, the reference is quite clearly made that the original photo of the flag raising was markedly different than the one depicted in the USMC Iwo Jima memorial. The book and film quite clearly re-enact what ostensibly happened, evidently, and that the iconic Iwo Jima photo was itself due to a re-reraising of that flag, with the connotation of the flag actually being lifted under fee by all those in the photo in unison captured entirely by accident, as Joe Rosenthal shot successive multiple images, and just purely by sheer happenstance captured the one hat was most emotionally evocative. Now, obviously, I can merely relate what the book and film sought to explain, and the view expressed quite clearly of the evident hypocrisy involved, as well as the sheer aggravation expressed in the film, as theunit commander involved was quite clearly shown as resenting the need to re-pitch another flag, so the first one could be preserved by, as also expressed, the Navy Secretary at the time, who'd just landed on the island, which I believe was, I think, James Forrestal, the one there was so mic controversy about as to his end, which has always had something of a mystery surrounding it. Clearly, the whole thing with the Reichstag photo, and the arm with multiple watches on it oossiby giving a connotation of looting was, certainly, the more egregious of the two cases, and, certainly, I think I vaguely recall reading about that also being re-staged, though not about the watches, that aspect was new to me. It's rather like that fragment supposedly locked away of a piece of the German dictator's skull with a bullet hole in it, that actually termed out to be from a female, the obvious supposed connotation being maybe that it was from the skull of Eva Braun perhaps, I !merely mention that by way of analogy. It was all 73 years ago, for God's sake, and Stalin was almost as bad as that German monster, God knows, so, I'd certainly think the Reicjsta case was the more egregious. Obviously, climbing all over USMC PFC Ira Hayes at the time by the USMC Commandant between his alcoholism, generated by his apparent PTSD I gather, as well as the USMC admiring only later that the photo actually showed PFC or Corp Harlin Block, as PFC Hayes and the others always contended, as depicted in the film, was also NAD, certainly, however, as I'd said, it was all 73 years ago...I'd read a recent piece that the photo was still being forensically analyzed of late, whether y USMC or Natl Archives, I can't recall, I'll try t find the reference I'd seen, I have no idea what happened, I'd merely think Stalin and his cohorts obviously didn't want a looter depicted with his arm having multiple watches rather in keeping with all the myriad other more egregious abuses he committed while in power, while the way the Iwo Jima photo was re-staged supposedly, while clearly not good, if that actually did happen, as is now recounted many times, was more a fluke of circumstance, born of Navy Secretary Forrestsl:s overzealous eagerness to have the original in a museum, as opposed to being owned by the unit involved, mixed with he desire to have a larger flag depicted instead...I don't know which is the more egregious, actually, I merely thought to mention this aspects, esp about the Iwo Jima case, as the video didn't....still, the whole watch thing was rather novel, as I'd said, that aspect I hadn't seen anywhere before, obviously....

Typical Russian ways. Make themself look better.