First let me say I am against the idea of passing laws against maybes.
Having said that, it does not take much imagination to see the glorious
leader pointing out to his paradise bound disciples, "You want to place
your explosives here, and here, and here", pointing to the places on the
photograph. Such photos can be a great help planning attacks.
The problem with such laws is that they are more often abused to harass
the innocent then they are to stop the guilty. And of course they can
buy a postcard with a much better photo of that bridge than they could
take themselves. In fact they could mail that postcard to the glorious
leader with impunity.
"Dear Glorious Leader, We are in NYC having a great time. Here is a
picture of the World Trade Center we visited yesterday. --Yours
Faithfully, Paradise Bound Disciple."
graywolf
http://www.graywolfphoto.com
"Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof"
-----------------------------------
Mark Roberts wrote:
frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 11/17/05, P. J. Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Railroads are surprisingly easy to sabotage.
Well then they should make it illegal to put bombs near railroad
tracks. I can't believe that photographing them has ever lead to
bombing them.
I wonder if Osama's boys took piccies of the WTC before they flew into them?
Supposedly they did. The real question is "If they had been *prevented*
from taking pictures, how would that have helped us or hindered them?"
Whenever I hear of photographers being hassled because they might
terrorists I think, "OK, suppose I *am* a terrorist. Now I have a
picture of the Brooklyn Bridge! (for example) Hooray! Now I can... well,
I can.... I mean I'm gonna... erm, ahh... give it to a voodoo witch
doctor to stick pins into?"
