Be afraid, be very afraid ........

[astral]

<p>Another disturbing news report has appeared on the UK's Amateur Photographer magazine website:<br /> <br /> <em><a href="http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Photographers_face_wider_anti_terror_curbs_news_281398.html">"<strong>Photographers face wider anti terror curbs - Cameras trigger terrorism fears</strong> "</a> </em></p>

<p>Please don't shoot the messenger ......</p>

<p> </p>

[longname]

<p>The sweetest ****ing part of it all is that they call it Project Argus. At least someone has a sense of humor.</p>

[patricklavoie]

<p>the best way of keeping a whole population to your control is to keep them afraid and in state of alert everyday..bravo if in the UK they are able to do that ; )</p>

<p> </p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>I'm going to paraphrase someone who put it so well that his short message still rings in my ears.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The terrorists didn't need photos to fly two planes into the World Trade Center.<br>

They blow up tube (subway) stations, without photographs.<br>

Suicide bombers the world over find crowds to kill, without photographs.<br>

Who needs to fear photographers? Not honest citizens, and not honest law enforcement. Most recently, photographers exposed multiple incidents of police misconduct at the G20 conference.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Photography is about light. The corupt fear the light.</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>Patrick, I have a book on grafitti. My favorite piece of grafitti in the whole world is:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Be alert!<br>

England needs lerts!</p>

</blockquote>

[jackaldridge]

<p>Ha! I love it Joseph.<br>

Mine is...<br>

"If you can't be an athlete... be an athletic supporter!"</p>

[colin carron]

<p>Yes, it is all rather depressing. We can expect a rash of over-zealous vigilantes reporting people with cameras. On a more serious note the recent G20 demo in London shows that street photography is not only alive and well in the UK but a vital tool in providing evidence of any police overstepping the mark. Several incidents came to light including one death where photo evidence will be central to finding out what happened. </p>

[marta_cajiao]

<p>There's a law that does protect the photographer that everyone who carries a camera should be aware of and while in some cases the police have been able to arrest a normal citizen who have taken photos of public places with certain restrictions,if you know the law concerning when or when it is okay to 'shoot' then all will be well,anyone intersted in knowing his/her rights should google it and be aware and not fear the police or getting arrested.</p>

[colin carron]

<p>In my experience most police in the UK take a fairly relaxed attitude to photography and know the photographer's rights. The only problem I have had was with a Community Support Officer whose training is much less thorough than for 'real' police<br>

I should also say in thr interest of balance that I think mostly the UK police do a fine job under such circumstances with the majority showing exemplary discipline. And photography has in past cases often shown that the police acted correctly under the circumstances.</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>That's okay. They monitor where we go with our cell phones because of a little known GPS chip in all the phones: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D97OF3TO0&show_article=1</p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>in 1938-39 after taking away most guns from people in the UK,<br>

there was great fear that the germans would come pouring over the narrow englich channel<br>

( nobody really knew how ill planned and incompetent the germans were)<br>

anyway the call went out for the "brothers across the sea" ( americans)<br>

to donate rifles and shotguns to asist the " loyal brits" to defend their island<br>

from the terrible germans.<br>

at that point in time, americans had mixed feelings about helping either the british or the germans.<br>

the idea was to ignore them and let them work it out.<br>

at that time facts about the opression of jewish people and other minorities were not well known.<br>

or even suspected. and anti-semitism and anti-black feelings existed in the usa.<br>

anyway we donated thousends of hunting weapons to the "brits"<br>

most were never used or needed.<br>

and despite promises never were any returned.<br>

I think later the british, fearful of a popular uprising, destroyed them.</p>

<p>the UK is not the same as the USA, there are many good things and good people there.<br>

but not the same kind of attitude. The british invented? personal freedom. but do not always practice it.<br>

we fought two wars over that and ALMOST fought a third.</p>

[astral]

<p>Marta, I take it that you don't live in Britain: here there is no specific law that "protects" anyone carrying a camera, etc. Sadly, in Britain, unlike the USA and some European countries many so-called "rights and freedoms" are not enshrined in legislation.<br>

<br /> Colin, I agree that the quasi-police Community Support "Officers" are all-too-often poorly trained and over-officious. However, while I agree with your <em>sentiments </em> concerning the 'regular' police, my personal experience does not really support the assertion, except as a very broad generalisation. Also, in the past two years there have been very many cases - widely reported - where police officers <em>have not </em> acted correctly. But that's not quite the issue here.<br /> <br /> The issue raised in the AP report is that <em>volunteers </em> may be recruited to be the <em>ears and eyes of national security</em> . With just three hours training they will have even less knowledge about the issues than the quasi-police Community Support Officers .... It reminds me of my visit to Bulgaria in the 1970s when even the Youth Organisations were recruited as informers: scary.</p>

[tom_cheshire]

<p>I got news for all these terrorist experts. People who are terrorists are not obvious. They are not going to be standing around photo'ing with a recognizable camera. There is no need to harrass photog's. </p>

<p>Now, think about it, any self respecting terrorist would use his cell phone and blend in with the crowd. At the very least, there are Minox, Tessina, and small digitals. Better yet, why not a camcorder? Blend in with the tourists that way. </p>

<p>See how stupid it all becomes? I do a little detective work. Do you think I'm standing there with the 4x5 press camera? </p>

[tom_cheshire]

<p>Oh, yeah, forgot to say if you are doing your spying on the cheap, just buy a beer can camera from Hong Kong. LOL. This world is just getting too weird. </p>

<p>It is easy to tell a photographer from a non-photog'. The photog's are interested in composition and take their time. </p>

[phyrpowr]

<p>I'll sing my same old song: anything I can take a picture of, has already been photographed, published, put on the web, and indexed in the libraries<br>

Might be cool if a British photog, arrested for "illegal photography" showed up at the Police station, or magistrate's office, with an armload of magazines and a demand that everyone down to the copyboy be hauled in </p>

[longname]

<p>I have a feeling this is just another "tool" to use to condemn someone. Pretty much all cellphones now come with cameras. Some that even can compete with the digi p&s'. If they want to haul someone in for questioning: "Oh you got a camera? Come with us."</p>

<p>To live in fear and paranoia, and to create an atmosphere that breeds it admits that the terrosist tactics worked.</p>

[phyrpowr]

<p>Oh, yeah, and if you follow one of the links, these 30-60,000 monitors will be "hand picked...carefully chosen"</p>

<p><em>YOU CANNOT "HANDPICK" 60,000 PEOPLE!</em></p>

[andylynn]

<p>60,000 people will be trained to keep an eye out for terrorists, which includes anybody with a large lens and lord knows who else.</p>

<p>Is that considered strange and a bit scary in Britain? It would in the US. Can these people actually do anything or do they just report back to the higher ups in the domestic spying apparatus?</p>

[chris_waller]

<p>Joseph,<br>

You are absolutely right, and what is more ironic is that at the recent G20 demonstrations in London, it was the cameras in mobile 'phones which shed light on the thuggish behaviour of the police.<br>

If the 'war against terrorism' is in the hands of boneheads like those who warn the public to be wary of photographers, then God help us all.</p>

[colin carron]

<p>Chris, the 'thuggish behaviour of the police' you speak of amounts to a handful of incidents (4, I think - all still to be investigated) in a day of omgoing skirmishes over a wide area all being recorded on phones and cameras. So thuggish behaviour on the day seems to have been relatively rare and isol;ated incidents. I'm not saying everything in this particular garden is rosy - just that it needs to be considered in context.</p>

<p>But I agree the 'be wary of photographers' thing is daft as it will be counter-productive.</p>

[olofwessels]

<p>What really surprises me is that I don't think the UK government went to such extremes during the rain of terror from the I.R.A. so why did they went completely nuts now?<br>

Sure there is some danger of a terrorist attack, but thinking you can stop a religious fanatic by imposing such dragonic laws is just plain stupid.</p>

[john_h.1]

<p><em>americans had mixed feelings about helping either the british or the germans.</em><br>

<em></em><br>

Helpng the Germans? That' a new one.<br>

<em><br /></em></p>

[fate_faith_change_chains]

<p>The line between terrorist and freedomfighter is getting thinner, so photographers become terrorists. P for Photographer, T for Terrorist, F for Freedomfighter and <a href="http://vforvendetta.warnerbros.com/trailer.html">V for Vendetta.... </a></p>

[michael_dimarzio]

<p>That is amazing, 60,000 trained in identfying people with cameras at public areas?</p>

<p>Security guards? Amazing. Like the recent DHS report defining a new Right Wing terrorist threat. No threat was actually identified, only that there was a threat. By their definition, groups such as the Catholic Church is a potential theat.</p>

<p><<A Home Office spokesman told us: 'It's all about being vigilant. These people are hand-picked - carefully chosen - and there's a level of common sense that they need to apply.'>></p>

<p>I also like this one-</p>

<p><<It recently emerged that terror suspects released without charge after police raids in the North West had been seen photographing shopping centres and a nightclub in Manchester.>></p>

<p>Now we get this vague language, they're terror suspects, even though they're released without being charged. Not being charged with what? Amazing.</p>

<p>Can't say I really like the thought of British Brown Shoes. America will follow.</p>

[walter_degroot]

<p>to: <a href="../photodb/user?user_id=937861">John Henneberger</a><br>

I am not supporting this, just reporting how things WERE then.<br>

I was a little child at that time. My father told me some of the things that migh occur.<br>

in the late 1930's there was a strong isoatenist attitude in america<br>

the german - american BUND sometimes wore uniforms. there was some symath for the germans.<br>

then as now america was split.<br>

anti-black and anti jewish, even anti-catholic and anti-irish feelings were strong.<br>

in short , there was a lot of hate.<br>

the mistreatment of the jews either was concealed from the american people or not known.<br>

Mussolini was praised for " getting the trains to run on time"<br>

the germans were considered one of the most technically advanced nation.<br>

and was admired for the "strong leadership<br>

only a small minority of americans realized the threat that Nazi germany presented.<br>

or the growing power of japan.<br>

it all changed rapidly on dec 7.<br>

roosevelt edged us into ww2 with lend lease and other programs. I think he and a few near the top knew what was really going<br>

on in europe. after the revolutionary was and the war of 1812, britian was not well thought of<br>

during ww 1 genera persing ( one of the leading us generals)<br>

refused to put us soldiers under the command of french and british officers.<br>

briish and french officers considered soldiers to eb expendable cannon fodder.<br>

a different attute for shure. not the same outlook on the value of life.<br>

hey a LT later became presient. other lower ranking us soldiers becqme high government officials.<br>

there is a definate difference. between people in the us and the rest of the world.<br>

some us police say: say " i am a cop, I can do what I want"<br>

but I think it is rare. most police in the us are well trainded and understand how to deal with a situation.</p>

<p> </p>