I wonder, does Thomas plan to sue the city?

That’s just another of way of saying “contempt of cop.”

Does any security guard or law enforcement officer think the following exchange would ever really happen?

Officer: My I see some identification?

Photographer: Sure. Though I’m under no legal obligation to provide you with ID, here you go. You should check it against the Terrorist Watch List. I’m probably on there.

Officer: Why are you taking pictures of this building?
Photographer: It will help in planning the jihad. Doh! I probably should have made up some other excuse. You’re going to arrest me on conspiracy charges now, aren’t you? I knew I should have taken a couple snaps with a point-and-shoot and then moved on.

The point is, stopping someone taking pictures of a building accomplishes nothing, and only wastes both the security officer’s time and the photographer’s time.

What’s next, stopping everyone on the street who has a cell phone to get their ID and ask them if they are describing the building to someone over the phone?

Are they our lords, masters or gods? Have they unilaterally repealed the first amendment?

could fall in the realms of either “indimidating an officer” or “offending an officer”

seems pretty stupid to me to be cussing at a fed then bitch and moan that nothing was done wrong

I’m convinced of it. The “boots on the ground” may not understand this but their bosses do.

They are not going to prevent a damn thing from happening. It’s retarded. Packages of any size can enter the subway system at any time on any day without detection.

Their efforts do absolutely nothing but terrorize the public.

A “terrorist” doesn’t need to kill a bunch of people just two will do. So if I were a terrorist or an organizer of terrorist. I’d send them to look for those checkpoints to commit the act in front of the police.

The public wouldn’t give a shit if a subway car went up at 3 in the morning with 2 homeless and one Arab Terrorist……..not like they would if 3 cops were going down every other week at one of those checkpoints.

My point is that the so-called terrorist aren’t stupid but these so-called security measure are.

When a terrorist uses weapon of mass destruction (truck bomb or airliner), the accuracy you’d assume a photo would provide just isn’t needed. Four planes hijacked on 9/11, three hit their targets by dead reckoning. The Oklahoma City bombing and the 1993 WTC bombing, the perps just drove up to the target and parked.

I read the 9/11 Commission report – never noticed any discussion of photos or cameras used for planning by the perpetrators.

It’s like the NYPD’s “random” subway searches – there’s an infinitesimal chance they’ll catch a potential terrorist that way… so all a photo-seeking terrorist has to do is dress up as a tourist and they’re set.

My guess would be that anyone with the intelligence and resources to take down a building would not stand out in front of a target in broad daylight with a camera. Especially when there are much easier ways to get those same photos.

Bin Laden is reported to be a very wealthy man. I think he can afford a Blackberry and can navigate to Google Maps, or hire some All-American looking guy to do a very slow drive-by in the back of cab in heavy downtown traffic, he could get his required photos.

In fact if Bin Laden himself drove the cab he would likely go undetected by anyone from DHS.

These “security measures” are laughable. They don’t seem to be targeting these “very determined terrorist” but instead are perfect for going after the bad guys from the old Batman Television Series.

This Governments Bull S–t doesn’t even match its own rhetoric.

Photography of federal buildings would not be prevented even if it were made illegal, yet I’m guessing DHS grunts and policy makers fear the repercussions if something did happen and there were no assumed policy or law enforced. I’m guessing these people are not taught the difference between real and imagined risk management.

Or, perhaps it is the idea that these same DHS officers or their superiors feel like they are “doing something” to fight terrorism, either on a personal level or as an organization, by questioning photographers on the street. Apparently some officials aren’t bothered by infringing the rights of law-abiding citizens, the same ones whose Constitution they have sworn to protect, as long the officials’ intentions are good.

Any chance the NYPD could forward a copy of their “Don’t harrass the photographers” memo to DHS ?

I’d like to give a reply to the statement: “There are certain things that the press cannot do when it comes to national security, and filming federal buildings is one of them,” by Luis Martinez.

That statement is factually and legally incorrect. I’d ask Luis Martinez to provide a law, citation, statute, or even point to a single sign posted anywhere near 26 Federal Plaza that would support his stated position.

It’s perplexing that Professional Law Enforcement Officials would assume that rules exist that in fact do not. That is not Professional, it is Amateurish and Incompetence at the very least.

It is clear to me that only a substantial civil penalty against the U.S. Attorney General, the Secretary of DHS, and the Officials directly involved will get the message to the guys on the ground that they must uphold the United States Constitution as it is written and stop playing it by ear.

S. Randall Thomas