Photography is not a crime or threat
- 3
- Add a Comment
Bruce Schneier wrote a fantastic article that appeared in today’s Guardian about the continuing harassment of photographers by idiots who believe that photography is some how related to terrorism. He drives home the point that there has never been a connection.
Since 9/11, there has been an increasing war on photography. Photographers have been harrassed, questioned, detained, arrested or worse, and declared to be unwelcome. We’ve been repeatedly told to watch out for photographers, especially suspicious ones. Clearly any terrorist is going to first photograph his target, so vigilance is required.
Except that it’s nonsense. The 9/11 terrorists didn’t photograph anything. Nor did the London transport bombers, the Madrid subway bombers, or the liquid bombers arrested in 2006. Timothy McVeigh didn’t photograph the Oklahoma City Federal Building. The Unabomber didn’t photograph anything; neither did shoe-bomber Richard Reid. Photographs aren’t being found amongst the papers of Palestinian suicide bombers. The IRA wasn’t known for its photography. Even those manufactured terrorist plots that the US government likes to talk about — the Ft. Dix terrorists, the JFK airport bombers, the Miami 7, the Lackawanna 6 — no photography.
The entire article is a fantastic read and it’s even worth printing out and taking along with you to show to the next rent-a-cop that harasses you for having a camera and uses “terrorism” to justify his warnings.
3 Comments
venzket
June 5th, 2008
at 11:29pm
This is really interesting. My brother is going to egypt and it is illegal to take pictures of bridges and buildings.
Nice post keep it up!
-Tad Venzke
www.lockergnome.com)
TK_M
June 6th, 2008
at 2:00pm
I’ve been reading his security newsletters for 3 years now and he talks SENSE.
While not perfect, he generally cuts through so much garbage and false security that he should be required reading for anyone interested in computer security, or security in general. The only downside to reading his writings is a depressing sense of frustation at how we are so greatly incoenienced all the time in the name or security, when so much of it is pointless. He often does point out all the really good ways in which we could all be a lot safer, but these are not done. Instead we get the “looks good” security theatricals, that actually achieve little, or nothing.
Spence
June 6th, 2008
at 2:51pm
Where are the “facts” coming from that no one photographed before any of these terrorist atacks?