Police delete London tourists photos to prevent terrorism

#1
Like most visitors to London, Klaus Matzka and his teenage son Loris took several photographs of some of the city's sights, including the famous red double-decker buses. More unusually perhaps, they also took pictures of the Vauxhall bus station, which Matzka regards as "modern sculpture".

But the tourists have said they had to return home to Vienna without their holiday pictures after two policemen forced them to delete the photographs from their cameras in the name of preventing terrorism.

Matkza, a 69-year-old retired television cameraman with a taste for modern architecture, was told that photographing anything to do with transport was "strictly forbidden". The policemen also recorded the pair's details, including passport numbers and hotel addresses.

In a letter in today's Guardian, Matzka wrote: "I understand the need for some sensitivity in an era of terrorism, but isn't it naive to think terrorism can be prevented by terrorising tourists?"

"Google Street View is allowed to show any details of our cities on the world wide web," he said. "But a father and his son are not allowed to take pictures of famous London landmarks."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/16/police-delete-tourist-photos
 

Command_doh

LE
Book Reviewer
#2
It is a bit silly when they are elderly cloggies, I must admit. But I for one get a major sad on when photographed in my official capacity as a civil servant, as threats have been made against serving Officers before. There has to be a common sense approach - if someone is taking pictures of nearby M16 HQ and looking distinctly shifty, then thats cause for deletion. But if you have 50 Japanese tourists taking pictures of coppers outside some faceless gobment building, who gives a flying fcuk?
 
#3
Such is life under NuLab Nazi Britain. Seeming inocuous and innocent "happy snaps" can be seen by the regime as preparation for terrorism. In 1997 this was a free country, freedom to think and go about our legal lives perfectly unhindered. We lived for 30 years with Irish Terrorism without having any thoughts about ID cards, or the repressive measures now employed on our streets.
 
#5
This was the sort of thing you heard stories of in the Eastern Bloc and in African dictatorships.

Well that'd explain it.
 
#7
Command_doh said:
It is a bit silly when they are elderly cloggies, I must admit. But I for one get a major sad on when photographed in my official capacity as a civil servant, as threats have been made against serving Officers before. There has to be a common sense approach - if someone is taking pictures of nearby M16 HQ and looking distinctly shifty, then thats cause for deletion. But if you have 50 Japanese tourists taking pictures of coppers outside some faceless gobment building, who gives a flying fcuk?
They were quite happy to have it in the bond movie, and a quick google and you can get nice clear close ups!
 

Attachments

#8
^Took the nephew there and took a few pics when in London a few years ago because he wanted to see 'where James Bond worked'.

What a bunch of spoilsports!
 
#9
What has UK Plc come to.

On the one hand it confiscates tourist pictures, on the other it allows google to drive a car with a camera around town taking digital images of anything, everything and anybody - with or without their permission?
 
#11
Trotsky said:
It will be a PCSO who doesn't understand their powers..............

Trotsky
Or a PCSO who does know his/her powers yet feels the need to large it up with somebody who doesn't know his/her powers. :)
 
#12
old_bloke said:
Sorry to say but NULABOURZANUK and plod are arrse .
Comrade you should not criticize Comrade Brown and the Peoples Police.

Onwards, our grain stores are full and tractor production increases.....
 
#15
Taz_786 said:
^Took the nephew there and took a few pics when in London a few years ago because he wanted to see 'where James Bond worked'.

What a bunch of spoilsports!
James O'Bond worked in Spring Gardens. Arrived on his motorbike apparently.
 
#16
In a way, this is the success of international terrorism. The Police and security services are mega paranoid about hostile reconassance and therefore act on their, sometimes necessary, and founded, paranoia. they therefore try to restrict civil liberties in the name of security. This causes dissafection within the innocent populace fueling hostility towards the state.

The terrorists win a small victory without firing a shot or exploding a device.
 
#17
Command_doh said:
But I for one get a major sad on when photographed in my official capacity as a civil servant, as threats have been made against serving Officers before.
Err, thats got feck all to do with anti terrorism. You're a snivel serpent so you're public property...in your official capacity. The only threats you'll get are from disgruntled people the SC has fucked over, not Abdulla the mad exploding waistcoat wearing bearded jihadist. Unless you're MI6, I can't see why some tourist taking a snap of you would constitute a national threat.

There has to be a common sense approach - if someone is taking pictures of nearby M16 HQ and looking distinctly shifty, then thats cause for deletion.
No its not. Who decides who's looking 'shifty'? MI6 HQ is a fecking massive building in the heart of London. Of course people; shifty or not are going to take phots of it. Do you suggest a camera embargo in the City of London?


But if you have 50 Japanese tourists taking pictures of coppers outside some faceless gobment building, who gives a flying fcuk?
Taking phots of coppers should not be an offence anywhere. Legislation has protected the police and not the public. I thought legislation was to serve and protect the public?

I'm not going to going along the predictable and highly over used route of quoting 'Zanulabiour etc, etc' or any of that crap.

I forget who said a few years ago that 11/10/01 was a very good excuse for a lot of government agencies (UK and US) to write their own cheques and build and establish their own empires using the fear of terrorism as a means of terrorism in its own right. The stranglehold on the country in the name of preventing terrorism is ensuring the very few real terrorists knocking around don't actually need to do an awful lot. As soon as the country changes how it does its day to day business, the terrorist has won. Airport security, every minor badge holding bureaucrat, the police and the numerous 'agencies' and legislations that have cropped up in the past eight years are conditioning the public into a mindset of fear and compliance. The country is restricting its own people far more than its effectively restricting any potential terrorist.
 
#19
Hang on chaps. Didn't this happen in Walthamstow?
 

Similar threads

Top