Yes, this is SILLY, but it is a real threat to photographers and videographers everywhere. Just last month I posted some information about this and was told by a forum member that it was bogus.

As long as people cave in to this it's only going to get worse. The people need to fight back, legally.

As stated in the article, "Frank Sady said the whole episode reminded him of his visit to Poland before the fall of the Iron Curtain. 'We weren't allowed to photograph bridges, railway stations or factories. I was with Polish relatives and whenever I pointed my camera they would be worried the secret police would turn up.' "

We can learn from our mistakes or we are doomed to repeat them. The choice is ours.

I'll just add this.
Terrorist only succeed when they terrorise us and so far they seem to be winning.
Bob.

Last year was it - at Indian Point a guy was arested for taking photos. Made lots of news for the obvious reason but also that the guy was just taking one of those "Stand here and smile Bob!' type shots.

Many many years ago I had climbed up to the access road behind the Hollywood sign to take some night time shots. The ground started to rumble and these lights turned on and this voice came out from nowhere: "Can I help you?". It was one of the more surreal moments I have ever had but I told the voice I was going to take some shots of the city and, almost embaressed, the voice said "Ohh...ok, let me turn out the lights for you" but after the lights wents out the the conversation continued. That was the surreal part...sitting above the Hollywood sign in the dark having a conversation about f-stops, asa's and "so what do you do for a living?" with some voice echoing through the hills. I don't think anyone would be having that same conversation right now though. I doubt you would even get into the area at night.

I think we all need to use our brains (and sometimes hearts) when
taking pictures or videos.

Lets not broadcast information that can hurt security of our countries.
Lets not ask dumb questions at press conferences or reword a
question just asked that they said they could not answer.
Don't take a picture of a child that is crying because his family was
just killed or house burned to the ground.

Sorry just ranting......

Terrorist only succeed when they terrorise us and so far they seem to be winning.

Yes, they are the terrorists, yet we are the ones punished. Go figure!

RCourtney,

Excellent, common sense advice.

Filmy,

The HOLLYWOOD sign really needs some protection, even though it was just a promotion for a real estate development named "Hollywoodland" many miles away from the movie making in Culver City.

I'm sure you have heard of how the sign has been changed by lurkers-in-the-dark like you "O).

To "HOLYWOOD" when the pope visited, to "HOLLYWEED" when drug laws were changed, and to "OLLYWOOD" during the Iran-Contra scandal.

The deep voices from within belonged to L.A. County Park Rangers who are handling the security. Sounded like they were pretty nice to you though.

As they say about Star Wars, "Sith Happens."

To terrorize is "to create fear". It seems the bad guys succeeded spectacularly on 9/11, with millions of people driving around for more than a year afterwards with flapping U.S. flags on their cars. This to me was less of an act of patriotism and more of a scream for "MOMMY!!!!!".

Did this happen also in Australia and the UK for example?

(Sorry if I offended any flappers here. If I had lived in New York or DC at the time, I would certainly have been shaking pretty good with the rest of them afterwards.)

I have spent many nights sitting up there looking at the city below. It was a nice way to get away from the noise of the city. Living in Hollywood there were too few places one could just go and get away from it all. keeping in mind one of my main thrusts is audio - sitting up there seeing the lights below, and the LAPD choopers with their search lights flying around - all seemingly so close yet all you heard were crickets and an occasional dog bark. It was very calming. Normally no one else was up there anyway. However, yes, there have been people who do other things up there but the effort it took to climb up used to be enough to disuade the average tourist from leaving the road below. Most locals tell people how to drive the "long" way to get up there as well to disuade tourists even though there is a much easier, and senic, way. I took my wife up to the sign when she first came over from Sweden - and they had just put up a fence around the whole area and security cams as well. Had to park on the street below and walk up to the walking path but couldn't go up the hill because it was now fenced off. Now perhaps it was warented due to the traffic, which had increased because Madonna had also moved into the area (and painted her place bright pink and than would say she hated how fans found her place?!?!?!) but even so it was sad in a way to see this "protection" going up.

But beyond that it isn't so much the Hollywood sign that is of high concern it is what is behind it - and, as I experinced first hand, there has always been protection. But now living in a post September 11, 2001 world chances are anyone crawling up there would be taken down before they reach the crest of the hill and got onto the road. One thing my conversation that night reveled was what the concern was and up until that time I had no idea...and it was a scary thought to relize that it was considered a primary target back then, more so now.

Just goes to show you. If the US can't fix it's BIG problems it might as well dwell on the small ones.

"Just last month I posted some information about this and was told by a forum member that it was bogus."

A minority view to be sure.

Lets not ask dumb questions at press conferences or reword a

I assume you are talking about at news event press conferences like say a roof collapse and not say the daily press conferences from government spokespeople. Because that is terrible advice for say the White House press conference. It comes awfully close to don't question your government. I can think of many, many times where repeatedly asking the same question or rewording a question or asking for more information on question asked yesterday yielded information that was useful and important for citizens.

Saying they can't answer the question or deflecting the question by saying things like "You need to ask the Pentagon that" is a basic technique spokespeople use to stonewall the press.


About an hour ago, I was reading about the latest version of this technique. On Jan 5, the WH promised a full report on visits to the White House by a certain new political pariah, yesterday when asked again about that they said "We don't get into discussing staff-level meetings."

Sneak attacks are always a very unhealthy thing for a national consciousness, especially ours. We are so used to safety that we overreact. Pearl Harbor led to the Japanese-American internment camps. A kind of schizophrenia set in where we fought for liberty while rounding up "the Japs" in California. If we had been attacked by a Muslim navy, there would have been Muslim-Americans in the camps, etc. -- Hmmm....

Lately people in D.C. are quoting the comment by Franklin that he who compromises liberty for security, loses both. I understand that pure liberty is only an ideal and it's always a balancing act. But there is something fundamentally wrong with the notion that the government worries itself about me taking pictures of public structures, or could secretly monitor this very post that I am writing. (The response to this is--what are you worried about if you're not a terrorist?--and the answer to that is--who decides whether I'm doing something that, in someone's imagination, gives "comfort" to the enemy? Does criticizing the government comfort the enemy?)

I work two blocks from where WTC2 once stood--in fact my office was in that tower a year before 9/11. It was months before the City cleaners removed the bits of paper and cement dust from the window sill of my office. But unlike the odd continuing rallying cry of people in places like Nebraska and Utah, where nothing happened, New Yorkers are wiser for the experience but largely have gotten over the emotional impact of it. In place of the rubble there is an active construction site.

So--If a theoretical government security man approached me and said, "What are you doing with that camera?" My answer would be, "Where's Bin Laden, I'd like a picture of him."
.

That answer might get you arrested for "resisting an officer."

I don't think it is possible to joke with any security people anymore. Just look at all the people so far who have had their lives turned inside out for something that before 9/11 would have been considered completely innocuos.

In an airport--maybe.

On the streets of Noo Yawk--it's a condition of citizenship.

(Of course I didn't say I'd answer him out loud...)

As I've said before: we get what we vote for. Nobody to blame but ourselves.

Before reciting my analogy, I feel it's important to point out that I consider myself neither Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative. In my mind they are meaningless labels. I feel more like a guy who went on vacation for awhile and returned to find a large percentage of his countrymen foaming at the mouth as a result of some unknown mental illness...though I suspect it's mostly from stress, due to unwarranted FEAR.

Now the analogy:

Imagine the Woody Allen character in a fight against Muhammad Ali.

Imagine that Woody, throwing only a few meager jabs, manages to frighten Ali so much that Ali, in his frenzy to defend himself, ends up PUNCHING HIMSELF REPEATEDLY IN THE HEAD AND TESTES, while simultaneously emptying the contents of his bulging wallet into Woody's spit-bucket. From then on Ali is so frightened of Woody that he goes to extraordinary (i.e., ridiculous) lengths to outfox Woody, driving everyone around him to distraction and resulting in enormous inconvenience for all.

It's the apex of marital arts (or psy-ops) mastery when you can convince your opponent to beat his own ass AND burn all his cash.

If you can get your opponent to "protect" his loved ones so much he ends up smothering them to death, so much the better.

I am no admirer of terrorists or their activities but I'd say this band of Woody Allens managed a world-class Rope-A-Dope on my fellow 'muricans...to the point where TAKING PHOTOS OR VIDEO is considered POTENTIALLY HARMFUL.

Kafka couldn't have imagined anything weirder.

Possibility,

You're in fine form today!

I loved your analogy, and I also don't feel I belong in the company of either donkeys or elephants right now.

I'm a bit more of a true conservative (everybody has to be a True something :O), so there is no party animal (no pun intended) for me right now.

In one of the aforementioned species, there is nobody home. The other species is suffering from severe rabies right now.

The non-partisan independent estimate of the total cost of our current self-created war is now at $1-2T (Trillion Dollars).

For those English speakers who use different names for the big numbers beyond millions, it is $1,000,000,000,000.00 to $2,000,000,000,000.00.

In addition to the obvious, the above numbers also include the cost of long term VA disability care for $50,000+ U.S. soldiers, death benefits for 2,000+ U.S. soldiers, and replacement costs for the worn out heavy equipment and substantial expendables that have to be replaced but are not in the "war budget".