Prev: tough to be a wedding photographer
Next: Panasonic: Rasberry of the month award
From: Claire on 18 Jul 2010 00:22
On 18 July, 05:12, Max Muir <orb_at_cts_dot_...(a)fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> > > > I don't hold any brief for the IRA.
>
> > > Right.  Even Sinn Fein recognises there was some famine relief.
>
> > Good God! I never thought I’d see a post in which Sinn Fein came out
> > looking like the voice of reason! I got up because I couldn’t sleep
> > but think I should lie back down again!!! ;-)
>
> Apparently you don't understand the  significance of the word "Even".
>
> Still, full marks for creative misinterpretation.

I know, don’t worry, I wouldn’t want to give them credit where it
isn’t due! ;-)
From: gamer_reg on 23 Jul 2010 07:20
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 14:37:34 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com>
wrote:

>The terrorist-under-ever-bed style kooks in Britain still hold sway.
>No wonder they won't let their citizens have guns, they'd be the first
>targets!
>
>Amateur Photographer
>
>A rail firm has been forced into an embarrassing climbdown - and to
>make an apology - after a passenger was told he faced arrest under
>anti-terror laws for taking pictures on a train.
>
>Nigel Roberts, 41, had taken photographs with his mobile phone on a
>Weymouth to London train to highlight what he saw as overcrowding and
>potential danger caused by heavy luggage in the aisles.
>
>Roberts claimed that, in an emergency, passengers would not have been
>able to get out of the train and he raised his concerns with a ticket
>inspector, showing him the pictures he had taken.
>
>However, the inspector said Roberts risked being arrested under anti-
>terrorism legislation and threatened to call police.
>
>The guard told Roberts that, under the Terrorism Act, he was not
>allowed to take pictures on any trains.
>
>'But this is not the case,' a South West Trains spokeswoman told
>Amateur Photographer.
>
>'This was clearly a misunderstanding. These pictures were not a threat
>to the public. As far as we are concerned, people can take pictures on
>our trains.'
>
>South West Trains admitted that the train had been crowded with
>people, who had been on a cruise, returning from Southampton.
>
>The spokeswoman said the train company has now issued a written
>apology to Roberts.


I wonder if you would have the same stance were one of your children
or maybe your spouse a victum of one of the indiscriminant bombings we
have seen in recent years? I dare say you might be a bit more thankful
for a measure of paranoia were you a victum rather than just a
detractor.
From: Claire on 23 Jul 2010 13:36
On 23 July, 12:20, gamer_...(a)yahoo.com wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 14:37:34 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >The terrorist-under-ever-bed style kooks in Britain still hold sway.
> >No wonder they won't let their citizens have guns, they'd be the first
> >targets!
>
> >Amateur Photographer
>
> >A rail firm has been forced into an embarrassing climbdown - and to
> >make an apology - after a passenger was told he faced arrest under
> >anti-terror laws for taking pictures on a train.
>
> >Nigel Roberts, 41, had taken photographs with his mobile phone on a
> >Weymouth to London train to highlight what he saw as overcrowding and
> >potential danger caused by heavy luggage in the aisles.
>
> >Roberts claimed that, in an emergency, passengers would not have been
> >able to get out of the train and he raised his concerns with a ticket
> >inspector, showing him the pictures he had taken.
>
> >However, the inspector said Roberts risked being arrested under anti-
> >terrorism legislation and threatened to call police.
>
> >The guard told Roberts that, under the Terrorism Act, he was not
> >allowed to take pictures on any trains.
>
> >'But this is not the case,' a South West Trains spokeswoman told
> >Amateur Photographer.
>
> >'This was clearly a misunderstanding. These pictures were not a threat
> >to the public. As far as we are concerned, people can take pictures on
> >our trains.'
>
> >South West Trains admitted that the train had been crowded with
> >people, who had been on a cruise, returning from Southampton.
>
> >The spokeswoman said the train company has now issued a written
> >apology to Roberts.
>
> I wonder if you would have the same stance were one of your children
> or maybe your spouse a victum of one of the indiscriminant bombings we
> have seen in recent years? I dare say you might be a bit more thankful
> for a measure of paranoia were you a victum rather than just a
> detractor.

I worked in Central London during the 7/7 bombings, the failed
bombings a week later and the shooting of Dominique Demonises a few
days after that. I had a news reporter on my tube carriage one day
giving a load of waffle about the determined spirit of Londoners. A
former colleague of oar’s lost his fiancé on 7/7, she and he were
Muslims. My colleague’s friend was in the British Medical Association
building covered in blood when the bus exploded. She had to leave her
job suffering from PTSD. Somebody told me that a woman who was coming
into the office for a meeting was caught up in it and still made it
for the meeting with her suit covered in soot! She just did what
everybody usually does when they are running late and need to get
somewhere! Thats shock of course. Thankfully nobody I knew was hurt
but it was still too close to home. I remember reading in the Metro
about how Israelis are told to identify suicide bombers by
unseasonable clothing. The following day I and another girl looked at
each other worryingly as a middle eastern looking gentleman sat on the
platform in a big fleecy coat! I can’t say that living in a climate of
fear, suspicion and paranoia was a very productive experience but
things did return to normal for most people. It doesn’t mean the
threat has gone away but most people have regained their perspective.
From: Claire on 23 Jul 2010 13:50
On 23 July, 18:36, Claire <claireonuse...(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 23 July, 12:20, gamer_...(a)yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 14:37:34 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3...(a)gmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >The terrorist-under-ever-bed style kooks in Britain still hold sway.
> > >No wonder they won't let their citizens have guns, they'd be the first
> > >targets!
>
> > >Amateur Photographer
>
> > >A rail firm has been forced into an embarrassing climbdown - and to
> > >make an apology - after a passenger was told he faced arrest under
> > >anti-terror laws for taking pictures on a train.
>
> > >Nigel Roberts, 41, had taken photographs with his mobile phone on a
> > >Weymouth to London train to highlight what he saw as overcrowding and
> > >potential danger caused by heavy luggage in the aisles.
>
> > >Roberts claimed that, in an emergency, passengers would not have been
> > >able to get out of the train and he raised his concerns with a ticket
> > >inspector, showing him the pictures he had taken.
>
> > >However, the inspector said Roberts risked being arrested under anti-
> > >terrorism legislation and threatened to call police.
>
> > >The guard told Roberts that, under the Terrorism Act, he was not
> > >allowed to take pictures on any trains.
>
> > >'But this is not the case,' a South West Trains spokeswoman told
> > >Amateur Photographer.
>
> > >'This was clearly a misunderstanding. These pictures were not a threat
> > >to the public. As far as we are concerned, people can take pictures on
> > >our trains.'
>
> > >South West Trains admitted that the train had been crowded with
> > >people, who had been on a cruise, returning from Southampton.
>
> > >The spokeswoman said the train company has now issued a written
> > >apology to Roberts.
>
> > I wonder if you would have the same stance were one of your children
> > or maybe your spouse a victum of one of the indiscriminant bombings we
> > have seen in recent years? I dare say you might be a bit more thankful
> > for a measure of paranoia were you a victum rather than just a
> > detractor.
>
> I worked in Central London during the 7/7 bombings, the failed
> bombings a week later and the shooting of Dominique Demonises a few
> days after that. I had a news reporter on my tube carriage one day
> giving a load of waffle about the determined spirit of Londoners. A
> former colleague of oar’s lost his fiancé on 7/7, she and he were
> Muslims. My colleague’s friend was in the British Medical Association
> building covered in blood when the bus exploded. She had to leave her
> job suffering from PTSD. Somebody told me that a woman who was coming
> into the office for a meeting was caught up in it and still made it
> for the meeting with her suit covered in soot! She just did what
> everybody usually does when they are running late and need to get
> somewhere! Thats shock of course. Thankfully nobody I knew was hurt
> but it was still too close to home. I remember reading in the Metro
> about how Israelis are told to identify suicide bombers by
> unseasonable clothing. The following day I and another girl looked at
> each other worryingly as a middle eastern looking gentleman sat on the
> platform in a big fleecy coat! I can’t say that living in a climate of
> fear, suspicion and paranoia was a very productive experience but
> things did return to normal for most people. It doesn’t mean the
> threat has gone away but most people have regained their perspective.

It certainly gives an idea of how living with the sustained threat of
terrorism must effect people though.
From: Robert Coe on 25 Jul 2010 19:48
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:20:40 -0400, gamer_reg(a)yahoo.com wrote:
: On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 14:37:34 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rander3127(a)gmail.com>
: wrote:
:
: >The terrorist-under-ever-bed style kooks in Britain still hold sway.
: >No wonder they won't let their citizens have guns, they'd be the first
: >targets!
: >
: >Amateur Photographer
: >
: >A rail firm has been forced into an embarrassing climbdown - and to
: >make an apology - after a passenger was told he faced arrest under
: >anti-terror laws for taking pictures on a train.
: >
: >Nigel Roberts, 41, had taken photographs with his mobile phone on a
: >Weymouth to London train to highlight what he saw as overcrowding and
: >potential danger caused by heavy luggage in the aisles.
: >
: >Roberts claimed that, in an emergency, passengers would not have been
: >able to get out of the train and he raised his concerns with a ticket
: >inspector, showing him the pictures he had taken.
: >
: >However, the inspector said Roberts risked being arrested under anti-
: >terrorism legislation and threatened to call police.
: >
: >The guard told Roberts that, under the Terrorism Act, he was not
: >allowed to take pictures on any trains.
: >
: >'But this is not the case,' a South West Trains spokeswoman told
: >Amateur Photographer.
: >
: >'This was clearly a misunderstanding. These pictures were not a threat
: >to the public. As far as we are concerned, people can take pictures on
: >our trains.'
: >
: >South West Trains admitted that the train had been crowded with
: >people, who had been on a cruise, returning from Southampton.
: >
: >The spokeswoman said the train company has now issued a written
: >apology to Roberts.
:
:
: I wonder if you would have the same stance were one of your children
: or maybe your spouse a victum of one of the indiscriminant bombings we
: have seen in recent years? I dare say you might be a bit more thankful
: for a measure of paranoia were you a victum rather than just a
: detractor.

If the paranoia actually made people safer. Does it?

In the U.S., at least, we're subjected to such a constant barrage of
propoganda ("NOW MORE THAN EVER, we have to be super-duper-vigilant," etc.,
etc., etc. that everybody just tunes it out. If they ever happened to warn us
of an actual threat, no one would believe them.

Bob
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Prev: tough to be a wedding photographer
Next: Panasonic: Rasberry of the month award