Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/04/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] WikiLeaks
From: steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour)
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 23:14:50 -0700
References: <B1BDEE6C-2CCA-455E-994D-9443729166AC@gmail.com> <t2z36172e5a1004051941zdefd2d54w7bb68cd4347904af@mail.gmail.com>

On Apr 5, 2010, at 7:41 PM, Geoff Hopkinson wrote:

> In my opinion this is inappropriate for the LUG.

and this...?

Folks, some more pictures and a tale. While waiting to collect my child from
school I walked along a footpath adjacent to a railway station photographing
some clouds over the wire fence surrounding the property. I crossed through
the station walkway (open to all), shot some more from the opposite footpath
then walked back through the public access  to exit. I stopped and made a
single photograph of the clouds since there were less poles in the way.
Within 60 secs a rail employee moved quickly to me and told me that
photography was forbidden. I was completely surprised by this patent
foolishness. However, I explained that I was taking a picture of the
beautiful clouds. To no avail! Sir, all photography is forbidden on our
property. It is against the law!

This is a public thoroughfare, a school on one side , shops the other and
the actual station platforms below. I would say several thousand people per
week use it. Heaven forbid that any of them might have evil camera-phones
for clandestine pictures of the dirty tiles and rubbish bins or other
national security assets sited there. Not seeking any confrontation I left
this worthy and fearless guardian of freedom to his patrol and agreed to
follow his ridiculous directive. Tonight I have actually located the
department's policy explicitly permitting me to use my camera there as an
amateur and within limits and naturally requiring that I follow sensible
guidelines, not flashing the drivers etc. Yet it also tells me that I must
obey every directive from their employees or they may detain me for arrest
by a policeman. Even worse, should you have permission under their own
policy to take photos within their property, it is VERBOTEN to post any
pictures on the internet in case terrorists look at them. I'm not making
this up. What unbelievable nonsense. So there it is. This foolishness so
incensed me that I fell compelled to share the product of my blatant and
appalling offence with you here. I shall burn in hell, then for these links.
To compound my offence, these were taken with a fast fifty AT f 5.6!!

 

<
http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/96037500
>

<
http://tinyurl.com/6fhkou
>

 

Oh and thank heavens this defender of national security did not detect the
photo of the scene of the crime, else I might still be handcuffed or left
beaten next to their Coke machine. Sssh, there's  a Senorita! But you can
clearly see the location of their coke machine which every extremist maniac
will be sure to pinpoint for a suicide bombing.

<
http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/96037503
>


http://tinyurl.com/6r2pc8


 

 





> 
> Cheers
> Geoff
> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
> 
> 
> On 6 April 2010 11:06, Steve Barbour <steve.barbour at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> http://wikileaks.org/
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] WikiLeaks)
In reply to: Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] WikiLeaks)
Message from hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson) ([Leica] WikiLeaks)