[Oleg Volk]

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a...g?msg_id=005zOm

Interesting to see the left and the right together all turn on Ashcroft and other critters...

[Kharn]

Oleg,
The link's busted (note the "..." in the middle of the address). Right click and select 'Copy Shortcut' in IE if you're copying it from another board in order to get the entire thing.

Kharn

[C.R.Sam]

This should work.
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005zOm
Lot of stuff there and good read.
We are not alone.

Sam

Strange....I don't see a difference tween my link and Oleg's. Yet mine works for me and Oleg's doesn't. New eyes needed ?

[Kharn]

C.R.Sam:
The board shortens the url displayed on the screen (with the "..." in the middle), so we dont see like 2 whole lines of the address (for the really, really long addresses); we only see the start and the end of the location, but the link has the full address (as is the case in your post; while in Oleg's post there was a problem copying the entire link).

Kharn

[Brian Dale]

This kind of activity by State guards was standard fare in tales that we used to hear about the old Soviet Union. The only time I've encountered it myself was on a day trip as a tourist in the early '80s. We received a warning to not even have a camera visible outside a bag at the border crossing into Morocco from the Spanish territory of Ceuta (across the Strait from Gibraltar).

By contrast, on another tourist trip, to Thailand, I asked a soldier on guard at the Grand (Royal) Palace in Bangkok if I might take his picture. He gave permission and stood proud, smiling broadly, as I snapped a couple. I took rolls of photographs there; they're justifiably proud of the architecture. After the trip, I often remarked to my friends that "Thais are a lot like Americans. They're proud of their country, and they're good hosts" (they have good food, too).

Employees at a Federal facility who detain, interrogate and steal from a citizen going about his business on the street need to be fired and prosecuted, and their supervisors officially reprimanded. I'll wait to see how the lawsuits turn out.

[Quartus]

The canaries have been in full chorus for at least two decades, and have been making noise a lot longer than that.


But point it out and you just get tinfoil hat remarks.

[Sean Cloherty]

I may be mistaken but don't the canaries DIE and thereby give warning of dangerous gases in the mines?

[Quartus]

Oh, details, DETAILS!


:D


Yeah, you got us.



Excellent sig, BTW.

[Keith]

I'm not sure what the point of that is?

It's clearly stated that the "Patriot Act" doesn't prohibit photography. The guy went along with these security guards willingly and allowed them to detain and question him. The photographer is an idiot, as is anyone who chooses to surrender their civil liberties at the request of someone with a badge.

And it's more than just a little silly to blame Ashcroft for the intrusive portions of the Patriot Act. He's just the stooge in charge of the department of justice. The people who passed the act (nearly unanimously) are in congress.
If you don't like the law, don't vote for your senator and congressman in the next election - they all approved it and they all are guilty. Yet now, they all point at the bureaucrat who works for them as the guilty party, and the sheeple light their torches and march off to the castle to burn it down around Ashcroft - the bureaucrat administering the law instead of the politicians who passed the law...

Keith

[gun-fucious]

The contracted federal security dood
(who would of been working outside the Gap store at the mall prior to 9/11)
is not allowed to confiscate personal property like exposed film.

[cracked butt]

I might have to try that some time. Take the digital camera to the city and take pictures of their federal building. :fire:

[DigitalWarrior]

It is OUR Fedral Building

[Henry Bowman]

I'd say the canary is dead and the hogs are squeeling to be fed.

No rhyme intended. Don't mind me. I'm an Ohioan on September 24, 2003. See other threads. :banghead:

[Kendra Pacelli]

I would have never thought about not taking pictures of Federal Buildings. I don't see what all the hype was about. I understand about 9/11, however, this was taken way out of proportion. This guy was right, we pay for those buildings, and we pay for its employees. His rights were violated, and I think he needs to expose it. He works for the paper, he should have someone write about this....


I sometimes wonder where our freedom begins and where it ends.

[Bigjake]

F:cuss: them. i'm driving to kent state this weekend to visit a buddy. its 5 min from akron, and you can sure as hell bet i'm going to go shoot a couple pictures of it now. thats just friggin wrong. they want to hassel me like that i've got the number of a MEAN atty thats already pissed off everyone localy and has nothing to lose....

[zahc]

They probably chirp a bit before they croak (mine canaries that is).

[cookhj]

i work at a facility where we do not permit people to take pictures of our building WHILE ON OUR PROPERTY. we can ASK people that are off property to please not take pictures. we are a big terrorist target and the less intel a tango can gather on us, the better. i know that taking a few pictures may seem harmless, but if you can get certain things in the picture, a tango micght find a weakness and try to exploit it. it's sad that the world has had to come to this, but that's the way it is.

[gun-fucious]

i wonder when the feds will invent a digital camera image scrambler

thats one thing about goode olde film

[DMK]

The guy went along with these security guards willingly and allowed them to detain and question him. The photographer is an idiot, as is anyone who chooses to surrender their civil liberties at the request of someone with a badge. My thoughts exactly. The first words out of my mouth would have been "Am I under arrest? No, then have a nice day."

People like this are just like the mental giants that say "Sure, you can search my car/house/personal effects officer, I have nothing to hide." :fire:

If you willingly give up your rights then don't go crying about big brother! :banghead:

[Marko Kloos]

The first words out of my mouth would have been "Am I under arrest? No, then have a nice day."

Bingo. And the only proper reply to the question "Mind if I search your car?" is "Yes, I do mind, unless you show me a search warrant". That holds doubly true if you have nothing to hide.

[cracked butt]

I'm wondering if the feds didn't send an agent out to do a quick search of the man's house and computer harddrive while he was being detained?:uhoh:

[Moparmike]

Scary Schiße.

[Joe Demko]

Could mine canaries carry coconuts while gripping them by the husk?

[cookhj]

are you implying that coconuts migrate? :neener:

[Bigjake]

what is the air speed velocity of an unladen mine canary??

[Moparmike]

What do you mean? African or European 'canary'?

[Bigjake]

well i don't know that...... AHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[Bigjake]

so back to the post, could you stick the mall ninga type securtiy with a lawsuit for harassment or something??

[chaim]

What would have happened if this was a CCW state and you were packing? You'd have guns pointed at your head, you'd be on the ground with a knee in your back and cuffs on your wrists before you could say "second amendment".

There are tons of federal buildings around here. I'm half tempted to test it myself. If this story is not just an isolated incident this is bad. We've gone over the edge and we are not taking anymore about "if" we become totalitarian but we are talking about "how much further" we will go.

This brings to mind the trip my high school choir went on to the Soviet Union. We were told not to take pictures of certain things. Being high school kids, we did. We were often seen and at worst when I took a picture of a bridge I was told not to take a picture of X again. No film was seized, no cameras confiscated and no students were detained. That was the Soviet Union, we were American HS students from the DC area and at least a quarter of us had parents working for NSA, the CIA or the military and some (such as myself) had already enlisted and were going to basic shortly after graduation a few months later (since I had joined the Reserves in HS I was already going to drills).

Fast forward 14 years and normal people are being harassed and detained for taking pictures in American cities. Sounds like we are spitting on the graves of all those who fought in our many wars for the freedom we (are supposed to) have today.:fire:

[Orthonym]

I read about half the posts in reply to that and had to stop, get up and pace around - so angry I could not sit still. Reminds me of our local "coarsest". I really believe even our "officer friendly" American police differ only in degree, not in kind, from Heinrich Himmler and Felix Dzerzhinsky. Yes, LawDog, even you. Sorry.

Weep for the Republic

[Don Galt]

When guys with guns demand that you go with them, you are effectively under arrest.

This person was unlawfully detained and searched, and the people who did it belong in jail.

Don't say he had it coming because he didn't refuse to cooperate!

People who refuse to cooperate end up injured or dead.

[Brian Dale]

Look what just happened to twoblink!

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=41856

[Orthonym]

and I think there are two things going on here.

1. People running military facilities would rather not have foreign spies taking pictures of them. The Swiss used to enforce this all the time. I remember a story told me by a friend who was a U.S. Army officer back in the fifties and sixties. He had some leave from his station in Germany and decided to drive his Healy around Switzerland. He stopped at a beautiful outlook to take pictures. There was a bridge visible from the beautiful outlook. A Swiss policeman drove up and asked him what he was doing. Explanations did not help, it was "Your camera, please!" The cop opened the camera, zzzziiiped all the film out, handed camera and film back, and told my guy where to put in a claim for the value of the film. As the man said in the book, "Thank God they're only neutral!"

2. NOBODY likes strangers taking pictures of him. I believe there have been lawsuits and criminal trials on this matter since photography was invented, some going all the way to the Supremes. IANAL, but I think that it's generally OK to take pictures in a public place of anything or anyone visible. Is not this the justification for police surveillance cameras?


So: We have two things combined here; human feelings and State supremacy. (And humans who are part of the State supremacy,i.e., "I'm not the head baboon in the troop, but I'm one of his good buddies")

[KC]

"Is not this the justification for police surveillance cameras? "

But remember, only the police need surveilance cameras. What do you, as a private citizen need pictures of anything? Isnt that potentially intruding on someones elses personal space (and maybe damaging their aura?) Afterall, if you can't remember what a thing looked like, you can just go and look at it again, or, just buy a postcard from someone. If we outlaw (non-police) cameras, only criminals will have cameras. That would be a Good Thing; Do it for The Children.

[Orthonym]

and, of course, Bump!

[geekWithA.45]

A good friend of mine wrote a Haiku that has become my favorite:


Down in the coalmine
all the canaries are dead.
So just keep digging.