Do real terrorists take pictures first? Like, ever?

Several mid eastern males were convicted post 9/11 of plotting terrorist acts against the highway tunnels leading into and out of Manhattan from New Jersey. Seems they videotaped them along with a bridge or two, and their own videotapes were used to convict them since the accompanying audio soundtrack had them also very clearly talking about their plans.... the police should thank God every day for stupid criminals....like the attempted shoe bomber on the airplane. He was the ultimate stupid criminal, trying to light the fuse in full view of the other passengers! ... If he had been smart enough to just lock himself inside the lavatory and then light his shoe fuse, he would have been successful, and we all wouldn't now be taking off our shoes at the world's airports and having them electronically sniffed.
 
Last edited:
Somebody hit on the truth above: Real Bad Guys would have all the video and still photos they need from cell phones and credit card size digital P&S cameras. More than likely taken from a moving vehicle passing by the target. Or on foot walking by the target.

However, it's us Good Guys who stop. Set up a tripod perhaps. Scout various locations for a good composition. Bracket our exposures. Use fully manual fully analog devices. Storing the archival images in our homes along with notes on location, time of day, exposure, development, printing instructions, etc.

Folks like us, who are asked repeatedly, "What are you doing? Why are you taking picures?" wouldn't last a week as terrorists.
 
Zvezdopadd said:
For your information, Saddam Hussein was hanged in December, 2006, so what are you talking about? All the remains of "the regime of late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein" were destroyed by so-called American "peacemakers". To my mind this nonsense is somehow connected with the idea of placing anti-missile defense complex in the territory of Czech Republic.
Click to expand...

Zvezdopadd, this is however indeed the case. In 2000, Czech police stopped a group taking "too many pictures" of the broadcasting center of "Radio Free America." Subsequent investigation determined that they were indeed a group of people plotting a terrorist attack and funded by the then Iraqi government. Hasn't this been reported in Russia yet? In any case, it has certainly made the new all over Europe. I think it is a completely different case involving the missile shield. JP
 
Hardly any reason to gather independent photos when you can easily scour other people's innocuous uploads. The info-rich web changes the gathering game.
 
JPSuisse said:
Zvezdopadd, this is however indeed the case. In 2000, Czech police stopped a group taking "too many pictures" of the broadcasting center of "Radio Free America." Subsequent investigation determined that they were indeed a group of people plotting a terrorist attack and funded by the then Iraqi government. Hasn't this been reported in Russia yet? In any case, it has certainly made the new all over Europe. I think it is a completely different case involving the missile shield. JP
Click to expand...

Of course, I heard about it, but as it seems to me to blow up the broadcasting center is not the easiest way to stop broadcasting of "Radio Free America" in the territory of Iraq.

Anyway, we're out of the topic.
 
JPSuisse said:
Zvezdopadd, this is however indeed the case. In 2000, Czech police stopped a group taking "too many pictures" of the broadcasting center of "Radio Free America." Subsequent investigation determined that they were indeed a group of people plotting a terrorist attack and funded by the then Iraqi government.
Click to expand...

Where did you hear that? By the agency bit I have on it, according to the Czech counter intelligences own claims, in 2003 - no exact date given, but presumably during the invasion of Iraq - the Czech (who had placed a double agent inside the Iraqi embassy) stopped a plot by the Iraqui secret service. No police or terrorists involved there on either side - and no arrest either, it rather looks as if the Iraqi ambassador simply had been told off, and handed over the guns.

Sevo
 
No, it is all BS. Government trying to control you on an international scale. They are winning too.

If I were a terrorist and needed a photo , I would just use my Canon P&S and nobody would be wiser. Then there is a pad and pencil.

I forgot, Google earth. There is a photo of my house and all the bomb making facilities in Iran. It is up there for anyone to see.
 
Of course you realise I blame that bloody fool George Dubya Bush.

The way he pronounced the word "terrorist" made it sound just like "tourist". So you can imagine the scene inside the FBI and Homeland Security......

"The President just issued a command to stop tourists taking photos. He says these folks are the real aeval durs and must be stopped."


.............."Goddam boy, lets get onto it right away!"

And no one has thought to tell them.

PS In English Aeval Durs = Evil doers....just thought you might like to know. Man that guy had a incisive grasp of international policy!
 
Last edited:
Terrorists also drive cars, travel, go shopping, buy food, rent houses, communicate, and the list goes on....

... get ready.....
 
I would, but I'd use my iPhone, upload the pix to a remote server immediately, and do a hard reset of the phone before leaving the target site. Harrassment of tourists and pro photogs snapping away with regular cameras is foolishness if the goal is thwarting terrorist reconnaissance. That's not security, it's security theater -- a show who's sole purpose is to give average citizens the warm, fuzzy feeling that their government is working to keep them safe.
Ari
 
Maybe the law enforcement policy makers saw a movie called "Road Scholar" that came out 15-20 years ago. One of the lines in that movie (the narrator observing a phalanx of visitors snapping away at the Statue of Liberty) was "Tourists are terrorists with cameras; terrorists are tourists with guns."
 
kermaier said:
That's not security, it's security theater -- a show who's sole purpose is to give average citizens the warm, fuzzy feeling that their government is working to keep them safe.
Ari
Click to expand...

Absolutely right. All government's do it - They must be seen doing something. And tee'ing off innocent citizens is always risk free for beaurocrats. We are as easy a mark to them as we are to the actual terrorists. Its a sad reflection on the actual level of intelligence of some people charged with our safety and speaks volumes for the reason why the superior courts have placed stringent limits on arbitrary policing powers. And it explains why civil libertarians appear so "jumpy" sometimes. They are justified in doing so.
 
Jamie123 said:
Well apparently Saddam Hussein was planning to blow up a radio station in Prague back in 2000. The police found out about it because one of the "spies" was photographing this ugly building a bit too thoroughly. Not a joke.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't believe this is true. Saddam Hussein was a Baaht party fascist swine, true enough, but not a terrorist with this kind of modus operandi.
 
Olsen said:
I can assure you that a few decent nations do not...
Click to expand...

Glad to hear it. But then again it does not surprise me that much if you are referring to Norway. Northern European democracies are much under rated by English speaking nations. I tend to think that Norway, Sweden, Denmark etc are much more civilised in some senses than ours....apparently the UN agrees. The UNDP ranks these countries as way ahead of many (but I am glad to say, not Australia) in its human development index that measures a range of different factors that tell us how advanced a country really is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Human_Development_Index
 
peterm1 said:
The UNDP ranks these countries as way ahead of many (but I am glad to say, not Australia) in its human development index that measures a range of different factors that tell us how advanced a country really is.
Click to expand...

... at child welfare rather than at the more intellectual side to human rights, though - so that post-socialist dictatorships with a working food aid, school and hospital system like e.g. Cuba or Belarus fare better than many countries where personal freedom is much more respected.
 
sevo said:
... at child welfare rather than at the more intellectual side to human rights, though - so that post-socialist dictatorships with a working food aid, school and hospital system like e.g. Cuba or Belarus fare better than many countries where personal freedom is much more respected.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm Sorry I dont think I can agree. Cuba is ranked number 51 and Belarus 68. I dont see too many "countries where personal freedom is much more respected" listed behind them..........................
unless you count Columbia (77), Kazakhstan (82), Libya (55) and other such exemplars of governmental enlightenment as such.
 
sevo said:
... at child welfare rather than at the more intellectual side to human rights, though - so that post-socialist dictatorships with a working food aid, school and hospital system like e.g. Cuba or Belarus fare better than many countries where personal freedom is much more respected.
Click to expand...


Grouping Scandinavian democracies with Cuba and Belarus seems more than a bit disingenuous. Those nations are hardly dictatorships.

And, I doubt there is any inverse correlation between "a working food aid, school and hospital system" and "personal freedom".

As it is, I'm not sure I'd like the "personal freedom" to be hungry, remain uneducated, and be unable to get needed health care.
 
wgerrard said:
And, I doubt there is any inverse correlation between "a working food aid, school and hospital system" and "personal freedom".
Click to expand...

No, that is uncorrelated - most fascist and socialist dictatorships improved on health care and education for the masses, while killing everybody in opposition plus a few odd minorities. And the other way around, if nobody had come to the rescue, Iceland would now be a model state of personal freedom and perfect education, but have the infant mortality of a starving nation that can't afford even basic medical imports...

wgerrard said:
As it is, I'm not sure I'd like the "personal freedom" to be hungry, remain uneducated, and be unable to get needed health care.
Click to expand...

The original question was where you'd be beat up or harassed for photographing - for a while I'd probably rather eat than photograph, but I still dislike having the latter right taken away from me...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom