Bridge photos banned...when will it end!?!

[TheObiJuan]

http://www.courierpostonline.com/news/southjersey/m072005i.htm

This is retarded.
Legislation like this is the reason I keep a few copies of the photographer's rights booklet I printed up with me.

[cdifoto]

This is what gets me:

But, he added, "I'd rather get criticized for taking away someone's rights than be criticized for not taking precautions to protect the bridges."

The government clearly doesn't care about citizens' rights at all...

[timmciglobal]

You really need a picture to figure out where a bomb might cause the most damage.

Score one for the "make the idiot public feel safe while doing absolutly nothing to actually help"

Tim

[cdifoto]

That article said a bridge expert (or bomb expert?) could look at a picture and determine the bridge's weak points. Well here's a news flash:

THEY CAN JUST STAND THERE AND LOOK AT THE D@MN BRIDGE TOO!

[Kenyada]

That article said a bridge expert (or bomb expert?) could look at a picture and determine the bridge's weak points. Well here's a news flash:

THEY CAN JUST STAND THERE AND LOOK AT THE D@MN BRIDGE TOO!

Great point! As a bridge engineer, who regularly shoots photos of the bridges that we have designed and built, I hope this kind of tunnel vision does not spread. The structural integrity of bridges is no more difficult to understand than a house of cards.

[MatH]

Looks like you can get arrested for taking pictures. I think that even Russia wasn't so rigid in the peak of cold war :confused:

But at least people are protected :p

As a civil engineer I agreee with you Kenyada

[JTL]

It would clearly fail a First Amendment challenge...at least until John Roberts is confirmed...

I don't know about anyone else but I'm planning my escape. If you haven't read the "Handmaid's Tale" read it. If you have read it, re-read it...it's beginning to sound prophetic...

[Kenyada]

It would clearly fail a First Amendment challenge...at least until John Roberts is confirmed...

I don't know about anyone else but I'm planning my escape. If you haven't read the "Handmaid's Tale" read it. If you have read it, re-read it...it's beginning to sound prophetic...


I hear ya, and as a native New Yorker, I know you've got bridges headed in every direction. But the question is, where does one go to escape? Nah, I've pitched my tripod, dug it in deep, and I'm taking my shots... at my bridges...or at anyone who would harm them. That's the American way! :cool:

[gstafleu]

The question in the name of this thread, "when will it end," is fairly easy to answer, just read this article: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805F.shtml (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805F.shtml). (Not some wild-eyed leftists bit, the original article is from the New York Times.)

In that article, someone who has actually researched the subject, as opposed to just emoting, politicking, yelling and other forms of unsupported babbling about it, concludes that "suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation rather than a product of Islamic fundamentalism". And if you don't "believe" that, read the article first and then argue why he got it wrong.

So here is the chain of logic. The banning of taking bridge pictures will end when people stop being scared of terrorism. That will happen when the terroists stop. And that will happen when America no longer has troops on foreign soil. (Except where the population--as opposed to the government--of the foreign country actually welcomes them, but that often is not the case).

And when will America stop having troops on foreign soil? Well, America is a democracy, so guess who that is up to...

[TheObiJuan]

The question in the name of this thread, "when will it end," is fairly easy to answer, just read this article: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805F.shtml (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805F.shtml). (Not some wild-eyed leftists bit, the original article is from the New York Times.)

In that article, someone who has actually researched the subject, as opposed to just emoting, politicking, yelling and other forms of unsupported babbling about it, concludes that "suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation rather than a product of Islamic fundamentalism". And if you don't "believe" that, read the article first and then argue why he got it wrong.

So here is the chain of logic. The banning of taking bridge pictures will end when people stop being scared of terrorism. That will happen when the terroists stop. And that will happen when America no longer has troops on foreign soil. (Except where the population--as opposed to the government--of the foreign country actually welcomes them, but that often is not the case).

And when will America stop having troops on foreign soil? Well, America is a democracy, so guess who that is up to...


Being of Morracan/Spanish descent, I will not be shooting bridges, airports, subways, or trains, anytime soon. :p

As it is, I get many Arab jokes... from family too! :rolleyes:

Our involvement with Israel has really bitten us in the butt.
I agree that we should pull our funding and resources out.
I hope one Iraq is done, we leave the area.

[D70FAN]

Time to leave political views to other forums and BLOGs.

[D70FAN]

The question in the name of this thread, "when will it end," is fairly easy to answer, just read this article: http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805F.shtml (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/051805F.shtml). (Not some wild-eyed leftists bit, the original article is from the New York Times.)

In that article, someone who has actually researched the subject, as opposed to just emoting, politicking, yelling and other forms of unsupported babbling about it, concludes that "suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation rather than a product of Islamic fundamentalism". And if you don't "believe" that, read the article first and then argue why he got it wrong.

So here is the chain of logic. The banning of taking bridge pictures will end when people stop being scared of terrorism. That will happen when the terroists stop. And that will happen when America no longer has troops on foreign soil. (Except where the population--as opposed to the government--of the foreign country actually welcomes them, but that often is not the case).

And when will America stop having troops on foreign soil? Well, America is a democracy, so guess who that is up to...

I always appreciate the Canadian point-of-view. Especially when quoting a beacon of political nuetrality like the New York Times.

Thanks.

[Jredtugboat]

This whole thing is crazy. I live in New York City and we have no end of bridges and tunnels in sight. If someone wants to blow them up, I believe there's no end of stock photos out there of all of our bridges.

(And I take photos on, and of, the Brooklyn Bridge all the time. No one's stopped me yet.)

[Cold Snail]

From just outside London, this viewpoint looks plain stupid.
Enter your bridge name in this link. (http://www.google.com/imghp?hl=en&tab=wi&q=)
Sorry, but somebody needs to smell the coffee.

I'm up in London on Monday taking photos (bridges included).

[Warin]

Time to leave political views to other forums and BLOGs.

Totally agree.

I post on a few political forums, and part of the reason I like it here so much is that it doesnt crop up.

Banning photographers from shooting bridges is inane, no matter what the political climate.

[Kenyada]

Time to leave political views to other forums and BLOGs.

I disagree. The relatively brief airing of political views, in the context of discussing the issue of the banning photography of bridges is not altogether unwarranted, IMHO. But since you're a valued senior member, I will respectfully withdraw from DCRP, with all due apologies for posting off-topic.

[aparmley]

nonsense Kenyada stick around. I enjoyed this thread - it breaks up the redundancy - Im a total newb which point in shoot is for me, I've listed 100 of them!

"A trained engineer can photograph a bridge and pick out critical spots where a bomb could cause the most damage," he said." -

That is a qoute from the article. Now, you don't see them banning Engineering school do you? Are they restricting the rental of engineering books from the local public library? Any mention of the crackdown on purchasing explosive materials, any systems made to flag to the purchase of those common ingredients that go into these types of bombs?? How about one of the most obvious ways of securing, protecting, or preventing such an attact, security patrols at these venues... I mean thats really what is the focus here right, preventing an explosive attack on a public structure such as a bridge, railway, public transportation. Is photography to blame here or is it that no one takes the time to notice things, ask questions, or governments taking actions to safegaurd/patrol/secure the safety of the public? The illusion of government safety measures - this is just a ploy to make the public think they are taking steps needed to safegaurd... illusions...

Just as most of you guys said - a simple visual study and understanding the simple physics of suspension would key most into where the most vulnerable places of a bridge are... LOL ...

I love this line its a great one ...

"And when will America stop having troops on foreign soil? Well, America is a democracy, so guess who that is up to..."

Certainly not the average American. I certainly was not polled or asked if we should invade a foreign soil. But, what politics comes down to these days is information, where do we get our political information? The Media! -- Considering the source, I would say all political conversations held by those who obtain their information from any form of media to be irrelevant....

[cdifoto]

"And when will America stop having troops on foreign soil? Well, America is a democracy, so guess who that is up to..."

NBC. Brokaw has some serious pull. :eek:

[D70FAN]

I disagree. The relatively brief airing of political views, in the context of discussing the issue of the banning photography of bridges is not altogether unwarranted, IMHO. But since you're a valued senior member, I will respectfully withdraw from DCRP, with all due apologies for posting off-topic.

Don't feel as though you owe me or anyone an appology for posting relevant photographic topics.

I definately agree that the banning of bridge photography, based on public fears for safety, is about as ignorant as it gets.

While I may be a senior member, due primarily to the passing of time, my value is relative. Discussing freedom to photograph bridges, or any other public property, is definately relevant here. However, quoting an op-ed, from an America-bashing tabloid, like the NYT, concerning the motives of suicide bombers, for the purposes of dissing US policy, and to some extent we its citizens, is not.

[aparmley]

not really related to this or photography, but I was just thinking about my bumper sticker which will never go out of style. "Don't blame me! I voted for the other guy!" - I don't really have it on my bumper - thats tacky!

LOL I am always thinking about whether or not if I go off taking pictures somewhere someone is going to say something, ask me what I am doing, why am I photographing, sometimes thinking about it just makes not bring the camera... Thats a sin I know, and I hate it but man alive... I was shooting some landscape shots at a local church before my best friends wedding and the pastor came out and started in on me like I was a criminal! It was pretty shocking.

[gstafleu]

Folks, someone asked a legitimate question, with, given the bridge banning, some obvious photographic implementations. Banning photography is a staple of many governments. Someone, I think, said that the USSR never went that far, but that is wrong. In the "old" days you could get picked up there for photographing the wrong thing, and it wasn't always clear why that thing was wrong. And just think of the photo jounalist, a woman, I forget her name, who got killed in an Iranian prison for taking pictures of another prison.

So I tried to give a dispassionate answer to the question, based on someone's research rather than political opinion. That's all. The guy quoted in the NYT is, as far as I know the only one who actually bothered to research the issue rather than just emote about it. I think you get farther that way.

[D70FAN]

Folks, someone asked a legitimate question, with, given the bridge banning, some obvious photographic implementations. Banning photography is a staple of many governments. Someone, I think, said that the USSR never went that far, but that is wrong. In the "old" days you could get picked up there for photographing the wrong thing, and it wasn't always clear why that thing was wrong. And just think of the photo jounalist, a woman, I forget her name, who got killed in an Iranian prison for taking pictures of another prison.

So I tried to give a dispassionate answer to the question, based on someone's research rather than political opinion. That's all. The guy quoted in the NYT is, as far as I know the only one who actually bothered to research the issue rather than just emote about it. I think you get farther that way.

You are really going off the deep end here. The research you sited has nothing whatsoever to do with photography. There is no relationship and it doesn't belong on these forums.

Try moveon.org.

[D70FAN]

not really related to this or photography, but I was just thinking about my bumper sticker which will never go out of style. "Don't blame me! I voted for the other guy!" - I don't really have it on my bumper - thats tacky!

LOL I am always thinking about whether or not if I go off taking pictures somewhere someone is going to say something, ask me what I am doing, why am I photographing, sometimes thinking about it just makes not bring the camera... Thats a sin I know, and I hate it but man alive... I was shooting some landscape shots at a local church before my best friends wedding and the pastor came out and started in on me like I was a criminal! It was pretty shocking.

You probably need to remind him that we live in the United States of America, which is still relatively free. I take my camera everywhere, and if someone questions my intentions I tell them, and that generally ends the conversation.

[gstafleu]

You are really going off the deep end here. The research you sited has nothing whatsoever to do with photography.

No, but it does bear on something that seems to have a direct effect (bridges) on photography. Having said that, this forum is indeed for photography issues, and what we are discussing, while related to photography, is not photography per se. So perhaps we should let this discussion just stand as is.

[aparmley]

You probably need to remind him that we live in the United States of America, which is still relatively free. I take my camera everywhere, and if someone questions my intentions I tell them, and that generally ends the conversation.

I can never come up with witty explanations on the spot like that. If I could, I would have choosen to go with, "Well, I'm an out of state big lottery winner turned real estate junky, I am positioning to purchase all of this land here and buldoze it all down and replace it with a skateboard park."

I quietly chuckle to myself ... he he he ... Naturally after having said that and catching his reaction with my camera, I would have told him that "I am only joking, I am creating a book of the areas finest stuctures built to praise the lord our God, and this one I must admit, is my favorite." Or something along those lines ... but instead I just say, nothing... what are you doing... Dork!

[D70FAN]

I can never come up with witty explanations on the spot like that. If I could, I would have choosen to go with, "Well, I'm an out of state big lottery winner turned real estate junky, I am positioning to purchase all of this land here and buldoze it all down and replace it with a skateboard park."

I quietly chuckle to myself ... he he he ... Naturally after having said that and catching his reaction with my camera, I would have told him that "I am only joking, I am creating a book of the areas finest stuctures built to praise the lord our God, and this one I must admit, is my favorite." Or something along those lines ... but instead I just say, nothing... what are you doing... Dork!

All good comebacks. With your permission I will use these should the occasion arrise. ;)

[cdifoto]

Tell them your friend Ahmad asked you to take some pictures. You weren't sure why but you did hear the name Bin Laden a good bit in the background when he had you on the phone.

(joking of course)

Seriously though if I get asked what I'm doing, I say "taking pictures...this here is called a camera..."

[D70FAN]

Tell them your friend Ahmad asked you to take some pictures. You weren't sure why but you did hear the name Bin Laden a good bit in the background when he had you on the phone.

(joking of course)

Seriously though if I get asked what I'm doing, I say "taking pictures...this here is called a camera..."

Now we are getting somewhere! Constructive discussion...

Is somebody writing all of this down? Maybe we can submit an op-ed to the New York Times.

[TheObiJuan]

I always appreciate the Canadian point-of-view. Especially when quoting a beacon of political nuetrality like the New York Times.

Thanks.

Haha, I love your wittyness and intelligence, George.
:p

[TheObiJuan]

I disagree. The relatively brief airing of political views, in the context of discussing the issue of the banning photography of bridges is not altogether unwarranted, IMHO. But since you're a valued senior member, I will respectfully withdraw from DCRP, with all due apologies for posting off-topic.

Nothing YOU said really sounded like it was inciting political debate.
Stick around.

[D70FAN]

Coincidentally... I was asked to leave the front entry area of the GM Desert Proving Grounds this morning. Since it is private property (but with public access) I did as requested since I'm not sure where the public access ends and GM property begins.

I volunteered to erase the photos, but was told that was not necessary ( :confused: ). So anyway here is the top secret photo...

...heads will roll!!!

[TheObiJuan]

Coincidentally... I was asked to leave the front entry area of the GM Desert Proving Grounds this morning. Since it is private property (but with public access) I did as requested since I'm not sure where the public access ends and GM property begins.

I volunteered to erase the photos, but was told that was not necessary ( :confused: ). So anyway here is the top secret photo...

...heads will roll!!!

their new cars can bend light, eh?
hehe,
Did you see any interesting cars out there?

[kornhauser]

A month after 9-11 my family and I flew to New York for a wedding. My mother's husband got stopped at airport security. Appartently the metal screws in him (arm, not head!) from a car accident set the metal detector off. I had a Sony Mavica at the time and couldn't resist taking a picture of him while they grabbed him from the line. My camera flashed; hence I was quickly taken out also. Rather, surrounded by two Army National Guardsmen, a plain clothes Customs officer and a Secret Service agent. Thankfully, my daughter said something to the effect of, "my dad's a cop". Rather than having to surrender my camera, the Secret Service agent asked me if I could show her the picture, then delete it. Was more than happy to do it. After it was all said and done, we had an hour before our flight had to leave and I stayed talking with the Customs officer and Secret Service agent for a while. They were very friendly and quite professional, despite the stress. I understand the need for the "black-out" areas, even though that would have been a priceless picture!

[jamison55]

I always appreciate the Canadian point-of-view. Especially when quoting a beacon of political nuetrality like the New York Times.

Now THAT is funny!

I got stopped taking pictures at an airport a year or so ago. Not by a security staff member, but by a guy in a hardhat. There was an empty area of the terminal with miles of empty seats, and I thought they'd make a great image. He comes over and says I can't take pictures. I said "nonsense, people take pictures in airports all of the time". His logic was that since there were no people in the seats, I couldn't take a picture. People are idiots...

[Rhys]

After a couple of weeks, all the furore will die down and people will all forget their rules and regulations. It's illegal to take pictures of loads of things but they get taken anyway. One just has to be pleasant and unobtrusive or do it when people are too busy to accost you. I have some splended photos of a prison - illegal subject but taken from 100 yards away with a telephoto lens...

[D70FAN]

their new cars can bend light, eh?
hehe,
Did you see any interesting cars out there?

Well oddly enough, there was a new Mazda just arriving on a car carrier. No badging, but the Mazda emblem was on the wheels. Pretty stealthy eh?

I may start to hang around there more often during the summer, just to see what shows up. ;)

[Rhys]

Well oddly enough, there was a new Mazda just arriving on a car carrier. No badging, but the Mazda emblem was on the wheels. Pretty stealthy eh?

I may start to hang around there more often during the summer, just to see what shows up. ;)

What's the point? They're just cars - tin boxes on wheels that sometimes work.

[D70FAN]

What's the point? They're just cars - tin boxes on wheels that sometimes work.

Their just cameras - metal and plastic boxes that take pictures.

Most people have a passion. Some are lucky enough to have more than one. Too bad I can only (almost) afford one, and live vicariously through others for the rest.

The GM proving grounds are kind of a peep-show for car guys (and gals). ;)

[vjack]

http://www.courierpostonline.com/news/southjersey/m072005i.htm

This is retarded.
Legislation like this is the reason I keep a few copies of the photographer's rights booklet I printed up with me.

What "photographer's rights booklet" are you referring to? Is this something you could share with the group?

[cwphoto]

Great point! As a bridge engineer, who regularly shoots photos of the bridges that we have designed and built, I hope this kind of tunnel vision does not spread. The structural integrity of bridges is no more difficult to understand than a house of cards.

Exactly. The thing that gets me is that you/we are probably training potential terrorist-sympathisers at our engineering schools! Remember the flight schools?

[TheObiJuan]

What "photographer's rights booklet" are you referring to? Is this something you could share with the group?


Here you go vjack.
http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf

[Rhys]

Exactly. The thing that gets me is that you/we are probably training potential terrorist-sympathisers at our engineering schools! Remember the flight schools?

There seems to me to be a direct link between Islam and terrorism - not between photography and terrorism. Terrorists will just visit your municipal office or a library even and will pick up a copy of the bridge blueprints or the blueprints of a similar bridge and won't need a photo of a bridge.

[jeisner]

There seems to me to be a direct link between Islam and terrorism

WOW thats a horrible/dangerous generalisation...

[Warin]

There seems to me to be a direct link between Islam and terrorism - not between photography and terrorism.

The vast majority of those who follow the Islamic faith are peaceful people who deplore the violence done in the name of their religion. A lot like the vast majority of Catholics deplored the violence done by the IRA. But then, I suppose, since you are from England, that all of the Irish were to blame every time a bomb went off, right?

[Rhys]

The vast majority of those who follow the Islamic faith are peaceful people who deplore the violence done in the name of their religion. A lot like the vast majority of Catholics deplored the violence done by the IRA. But then, I suppose, since you are from England, that all of the Irish were to blame every time a bomb went off, right?

Nope. I'm Welsh.

And the Northern Ireland problem is disguised by the fact most Protestants are Loyalists and most Catholics are Republicans. The problem was based on half the population wanting to be governed from Southern Ireland and the other half wanting to be governed from London. Then it all broke down into gangsterism and everybody pretty much forgot what they were fighting for and just went at it hammer and tongs without much real idea - except racketeering and other such crimes became the mainstay. Essentially now it's warring drugs cartels who claim to be unionists, loyalists etc. Personally, I'd be in favour of creating a Republic of Northern Ireland, building a dirty great big wall all around so the population can't escape and leaving them to sort it out amongst themselves.

[erichlund]

There seems to me to be a direct link between Islam and terrorism - not between photography and terrorism. Terrorists will just visit your municipal office or a library even and will pick up a copy of the bridge blueprints or the blueprints of a similar bridge and won't need a photo of a bridge.

Nah - I think it's the heat. When was the last time you heard of a Norwegian Terrorist. ;)

Cheers,
Eric

[D70FAN]

Hey. I tried to keep this from becomming the CBS/NBC/ABC Evening News.

How about getting back on topic. Unless you are a PJ with pictures of these conflicts.

[TheObiJuan]

I agree George.
But briefly, I would like to state that many poor muslim countries ARE breeding grounds for terrorism camps. Malaysia, Bali, etc....


I am going to Hawaii, next month and I hope I don't encounter any problems with my gear at the airport. I intent to carry on my camera bag and tripod. Apparently, photogs are allowed two items with most airlines.

There aren't any bridges in Maui, right? :eyes:

[gstafleu]

There seems to me to be a direct link between Islam and terrorism

That's a bit rich, Rhys. There is a direct link between terrorism and troops on foreign soil. As it happens, there are quite a few western troops in various Islamic countries (Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia,...). So yes, there is quite a bit of Islamic terrorism. But the cause are these troops, not Islam. Wouldn't you be ticked off if some foreign country put troops on US ground against your wishes?

I'm Dutch, and I know that the Dutch weren't very impressed by the Spanish (in the 15th and 16th century), or the French (Napoleonic times) or the Germans (AH) "visiting" them with their troops. Neither, for that matter, were the Indonesians all that impressed when the Dutch "visited" them for a while. In general, people really don't like to be "visited" by someone else's army. Does that surprise you?

[erichlund]

I agree George.
But briefly, I would like to state that many poor muslim countries ARE breeding grounds for terrorism camps. Malaysia, Bali, etc....


I am going to Hawaii, next month and I hope I don't encounter any problems with my gear at the airport. I intent to carry on my camera bag and tripod. Apparently, photogs are allowed two items with most airlines.

There aren't any bridges in Maui, right? :eyes:

There was a thread on Hawaii on one of the other sites. The problem in Hawaii is locals stealing camera equipment from tourists. Apparently it's become quite common to pop the trunk of a rental and grab the equipment while the owners are doing something else, like enjoying the beach. The key to avoid this is to go out with a single purpose. If you're going to the beach to swim, leave the camera at the hotel, either in the hotel safe, or leave the "Do not disturb" sign up. When you want to go out to shoot, take only the equipment you need, because you don't want to leave stuff in the rental car. Finally, make sure your equipment is well insured. If your camera does get stolen, be sure to file a police report. It won't get your equipment back, but it will validate your insurance claim.

Cheers,
Eric

[cwphoto]

WOW thats a horrible/dangerous generalisation...

True nonetheless...

[TheObiJuan]

There was a thread on Hawaii on one of the other sites. The problem in Hawaii is locals stealing camera equipment from tourists. Apparently it's become quite common to pop the trunk of a rental and grab the equipment while the owners are doing something else, like enjoying the beach. The key to avoid this is to go out with a single purpose. If you're going to the beach to swim, leave the camera at the hotel, either in the hotel safe, or leave the "Do not disturb" sign up. When you want to go out to shoot, take only the equipment you need, because you don't want to leave stuff in the rental car. Finally, make sure your equipment is well insured. If your camera does get stolen, be sure to file a police report. It won't get your equipment back, but it will validate your insurance claim.

Cheers,
Eric

I did all of what you said on my cruises, down to the safe in the room.
If my bag was not at my side, it was in the safe. I never lost sight of it. Would anyone leave 4k layin' around?

I will be extra vigilinte in Hawaii, thanks for the tip.
I have all of my gear documented and photographed for isurance purposes. :D

[gstafleu]

True nonetheless...

I'm sorry cwphoto, but you're wrong there, it is simply not true. For one thing, the group that "scored" the largest number of suicide attacks between 1980 and 2003 were the Tamil Tigers (76 out of 315), and they are Hindus.

What causes terrorist attacks against western countries is not Islam fundamentalism, but the simple fact that we from the west have troops on the ground in Muslim countries. To see this, just consider the four recent attacks against us.

After the Gulf war, the US stationed troops in Saudi Arabia. At the time a large number of people already warned that this was a particularly bad idea. Not just because people in general do not like a foreign military presence, but also because Muslims consider Saudi Arabia as holy ground. A double whammy, so to speak.

The presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia enabled Osama Bin Laden to find fanatics to carry out his schemes. The large majority of the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, as is Bin Laden himself. Hardly a coincidence, I would say.

A couple of years later western countries attacked another Muslim country, Iraq. This attack was carried out by the US with as its main partners the UK, Australia and Spain. Not too long after this Australia was attacked (in Bali, via a tourist resort frequented by Australians), then Spain (Madrid), and now London.

So in all four major attacks against the west, there is a very clear chain of cause and effect: having troops on the ground in a foreign country provokes terrorism. Not Islam fundamentalism provokes terrorism. Certainly, Islamic fundamentalists are involved. But what stirs them into action is the presence of foreign troops on their soil. Remove the troops, and terrorism stops. Keep them and "remove" Islam, and they will still go on, as shown by the Tamil Tigers (whatever you may think of them, they perceive themselves to be under foreign occupation).

Finally, please accept that I'm not saying this to "bash" any country. Having troops on foreign soil has, unfortunately, been a staple of history. All countries have been equally guilty of it, no one country more or less than any other. The reason I'm saying this is very simple: the violence should stop. If we don't understand what causes the violence, it won't stop. Realizing that we are ourselves are part of the cause may not be pleasant, but it is necessary. If we keep thinking that some religion is the cause of the violence and then fight that religion, we just cause more violence. And I think we'll all agree we do not want that.

[D70FAN]

That's a bit rich, Rhys. There is a direct link between terrorism and troops on foreign soil. As it happens, there are quite a few western troops in various Islamic countries (Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia,...). So yes, there is quite a bit of Islamic terrorism. But the cause are these troops, not Islam. Wouldn't you be ticked off if some foreign country put troops on US ground against your wishes?

I'm Dutch, and I know that the Dutch weren't very impressed by the Spanish (in the 15th and 16th century), or the French (Napoleonic times) or the Germans (AH) "visiting" them with their troops. Neither, for that matter, were the Indonesians all that impressed when the Dutch "visited" them for a while. In general, people really don't like to be "visited" by someone else's army. Does that surprise you?

Let us know when you get it. Maybe think back past your limited recollection to the many terrorist bombings that occurred well before the current conflict.

P.S. And again, this is not a political forum. Neither of your last posts has anything even remotely to do with the purpose of this board.

[Kenyada]

If the original question was "...when will it end!?!" maybe the answer is, when people like ourselves lay down the rhetoric, and pick up our cameras to record the human condition, exploring our similarities, rather than exploiting our differences. Perhaps that's where/how we can do the most good, in reflecting the madness and the noise, as opposed to amplifying it.

Some noted PJ's in the Vietnam War - one in particular - reflected the madness. A young girl running down a road, naked and screaming, as the fire of napalm exploded behind her. That photograph touched the hearts of millions of people - hawks and doves alike, and maybe shortened the war by a month or two, as it depicted the war's real cost.

Now, I'm not sure it's our responsibility to find a better way, but I do know that no one else will if we don't at least try.

Kenyada

[TheObiJuan]

blah blah blah, Canadian liberal crap.....
:D

It is my opinion that it is the impovrished Muslim culture that spreads terrorism.
Just as impovrished America tends to spread nasty gangs of thugs.
I see it here, where I live.

Bringing this thread to cameras again...

I hear people can't take pics of ports anymore too. Usually the best citiscapes are taken from ports.. :(

[Rachel Robbins.]

My impression from NPR's story about photographers who have been questioned - and sometimes detained - for photographing dams, chemical plants (or things near them), and the like, is that photographing these things is not illegal nationwide. Obviously, in the story that started this thread, some local governments can choose differently, and is unfortunate....

What I got from the NPR story is that it is legal for police to check into photographers shooting around sensitive structures.

However, the report did mention that there are no national guidelines about the level of questioning/detainment allowed, and so police in different areas of the country will have different methods and different understanding of the laws around this issue.

My take on it, after hearing that story, is that as long as you are aware of the situation and polite with officers who might question you, you'll probably be okay, but there will be exceptions, regionally.

[gstafleu]

I hear people can't take pics of ports anymore too. Usually the best citiscapes are taken from ports.. :(

The only place that I'm aware of in Canada where you can't take pictures is in the customs hall in arrivals at Toronto airport. I saw someone doing that (with a flash!), and the officials got all excited. This in spite of the fact that no notices prohibiting pictures were posted. To this day I can't understand why they would get excited. What do they think you would do with a pic, plot the best route to sneak by them? Somehow I can't escape the feeling that the large lineups which don't make them look very good have something to do with it...

Gerard "give me liberalness or give me, well, a couple of lenses will do" Stafleu

[erichlund]

I did all of what you said on my cruises, down to the safe in the room.
If my bag was not at my side, it was in the safe. I never lost sight of it. Would anyone leave 4k layin' around?

I will be extra vigilinte in Hawaii, thanks for the tip.
I have all of my gear documented and photographed for isurance purposes. :D

Of course, you do all that, and then someone robs your home and steals a bunch of stuff, including your cameras and the computer with all your pictures. DAMHIKT.

C'est la vie.
Eric

[Rhys]

Of course, you do all that, and then someone robs your home and steals a bunch of stuff, including your cameras and the computer with all your pictures. DAMHIKT.

C'est la vie.
Eric

But you do make backups, don't you?