Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   The FBI tracked down an 86-year-old man because he took a picture of the famous painting of Ho Chi Minh in Dorchester, MA   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 92
    More: Asinine, FBI, Levi Strauss, counter-terrorism  
•       •       •

9313 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jul 2014 at 12:27 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



92 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-15 08:32:34 AM  
Good.  The threat of global communism didn't die with the Soviet Union, you know.
 
2014-07-15 08:52:07 AM  
Let's hope the Streisand Effect kicks in here.  If a few hundred FARKers showed up with cameras, we could bring the FBI to its knees.
 
2014-07-15 09:01:51 AM  
I have never had an experience like I had when attempting to photograph the "Rainbow Swash" outside Boston in 2004. Let me explain.

DAMN YOU OBAMA AND YOUR JACKBOOTED FASCIST TIME MACHINE
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-07-15 09:07:49 AM  
They didn't just track him down. They tracked him down and left a business card. Imagine if they had left a nuclear bomb, or coated the card with anthrax.
 
2014-07-15 09:16:17 AM  
Questioning someone about taking pictures of a big LNG storage tank (art or no art) doesn't seem like that big of a security overreach. I don't live very far from a nuclear power plant. If I went and took pictures of it, I wouldn't be surprised if someone wanted to come and talk to me about it - and things are a hell of a lot less tense in this country now than they were in 2004.
 
2014-07-15 09:23:09 AM  
I have never had an experience like I had when attempting to photograph the "Rainbow Swash" outside Boston in 2004.

Way to keep current.
 
2014-07-15 09:25:39 AM  

PC LOAD LETTER: I have never had an experience like I had when attempting to photograph the "Rainbow Swash" outside Boston in 2004.

Way to keep current.


If you were looking for news, I'm afraid you're come to the wrong place.
 
2014-07-15 09:26:48 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: PC LOAD LETTER: I have never had an experience like I had when attempting to photograph the "Rainbow Swash" outside Boston in 2004.

Way to keep current.

If you were looking for news, I'm afraid you're come to the wrong place.


well, this is news. It's now a case the ACLU is pursuing
 
2014-07-15 10:04:42 AM  
Well, the headline is best correct -- the man is 86 years-old now.
 
2014-07-15 11:44:08 AM  

Sybarite: Questioning someone about taking pictures of a big LNG storage tank (art or no art) doesn't seem like that big of a security overreach. I don't live very far from a nuclear power plant. If I went and took pictures of it, I wouldn't be surprised if someone wanted to come and talk to me about it - and things are a hell of a lot less tense in this country now than they were in 2004.


true
pictures are QUITE dangerous
we should completely ignore, freedom of the press, freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom of travel

go ahead and tell us again how dangerous the world is

/ooo look, there is a link on the main page describing your brain - coward
 
2014-07-15 11:57:22 AM  

Sybarite: Questioning someone about taking pictures of a big LNG storage tank (art or no art) doesn't seem like that big of a security overreach. I don't live very far from a nuclear power plant. If I went and took pictures of it, I wouldn't be surprised if someone wanted to come and talk to me about it - and things are a hell of a lot less tense in this country now than they were in 2004.


Standing on a public sidewalk, taking a picture of something clearly visible from said sidewalk, is not a security threat. Getting a visit from the Feds for doing such a thing is very much an overreach of authority.

If the item being imaged shouldn't be imaged because of security reasons, it shouldn't be clearly visible from a public sidewalk in the first place. The onus isn't on John Q. Photographer to intuit this and avert his eyes and lens from the brightly-painted thing.
 
2014-07-15 12:26:00 PM  
"No officer, this isn't an RPG, it;s my Nikon!..."


/dummies
 
2014-07-15 12:29:44 PM  
Sounds about right for a bunch of dicks.
 
2014-07-15 12:33:13 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: PC LOAD LETTER: I have never had an experience like I had when attempting to photograph the "Rainbow Swash" outside Boston in 2004.

Way to keep current.

If you were looking for news, I'm afraid you're come to the wrong place.


I'm going to assume it took the FBI 10 years to track him down
 
2014-07-15 12:33:51 PM  

Sybarite: Questioning someone about taking pictures of a big LNG storage tank (art or no art) doesn't seem like that big of a security overreach. I don't live very far from a nuclear power plant. If I went and took pictures of it, I wouldn't be surprised if someone wanted to come and talk to me about it - and things are a hell of a lot less tense in this country now than they were in 2004.


I now call before showing up to certain locations or talk to local police when photographing which alleviates any misunderstand.
 
2014-07-15 12:34:51 PM  
It's a giant farking LNG tank just outside of a major metropolitan area, and this was 2004 when we were still losing our collective shiat.  Someone checking up on a person taking pictures of a giant farking bomb is not unreasonable.

Is it stupid?  Yep.  But it is a step up from the kabuki theater that made up the majority of our security measures.
 
2014-07-15 12:34:51 PM  

namatad: Sybarite: Questioning someone about taking pictures of a big LNG storage tank (art or no art) doesn't seem like that big of a security overreach. I don't live very far from a nuclear power plant. If I went and took pictures of it, I wouldn't be surprised if someone wanted to come and talk to me about it - and things are a hell of a lot less tense in this country now than they were in 2004.

true
pictures are QUITE dangerous
we should completely ignore, freedom of the press, freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom of travel

go ahead and tell us again how dangerous the world is

/ooo look, there is a link on the main page describing your brain - coward


Get back to me when those "freedoms" you listed are as important as my right bear arms.
 
2014-07-15 12:35:13 PM  
I wonder if this guy voted for Bush-Cheney.
 
2014-07-15 12:35:19 PM  
And it's not the original picture. They torn that one down and repainted the other one.

/and no, the original did not have a picture of Dwayne Johnson on it...
 
2014-07-15 12:35:29 PM  
 
2014-07-15 12:35:43 PM  
This is what happens when you pick government type "Democratic"...your defensive spies get a penalty.

Now, if we'd sunk the points into Unification, we'd be all set.
 
2014-07-15 12:36:25 PM  
"It is actually one of the largest copyrighted pieces of art in the world."

I didn't think you were allowed to photograph copyrighted art.
 
2014-07-15 12:36:29 PM  
I once shot a picture of an elephant in my pajamas.

/statute of limitation, farkers.
//look it up
 
2014-07-15 12:37:11 PM  
 
2014-07-15 12:37:23 PM  
I am 86 years old and a retired senior corporate executive

...so i probably won't believe a lot of what you say because people with jobs at that high a level are well known to be very smooth liars.
 
2014-07-15 12:37:31 PM  
In before "I don't get it"
 
2014-07-15 12:37:55 PM  

Running a-puck: It's a giant farking LNG tank just outside of a major metropolitan area, and this was 2004 when we were still losing our collective shiat.  Someone checking up on a person taking pictures of a giant farking bomb is not unreasonable.

Is it stupid?  Yep.  But it is a step up from the kabuki theater that made up the majority of our security measures.


This.

csb:  had an acquaintance photographing abandoned buildings (also in Boston) some years back.  A security guard stopped her, and was flat-out embarassed, but said "Ma'am, I have to ask you.  Are you a terrorist?"

Seriously...he was REQUIRED to ask her that.
 
2014-07-15 12:38:15 PM  

LarryDan43: namatad: Sybarite: Questioning someone about taking pictures of a big LNG storage tank (art or no art) doesn't seem like that big of a security overreach. I don't live very far from a nuclear power plant. If I went and took pictures of it, I wouldn't be surprised if someone wanted to come and talk to me about it - and things are a hell of a lot less tense in this country now than they were in 2004.

true
pictures are QUITE dangerous
we should completely ignore, freedom of the press, freedom of expression, freedom of association, freedom of travel

go ahead and tell us again how dangerous the world is

/ooo look, there is a link on the main page describing your brain - coward

Get back to me when those "freedoms" you listed are as important as my right bear arms.


What do you do with all the left bear arms?
 
2014-07-15 12:38:40 PM  
From what I've heard the NYPD will go after you these days if you take pictures of trains in train stations.
 
2014-07-15 12:38:55 PM  
I have never had an experience like I had when attempting to photograph the "Rainbow Swash" outside Boston in 2004. Let me explain.

I think I see the problem here.
 
2014-07-15 12:39:07 PM  
So, consider this: A professional photographer taking a photo of a well-known Boston landmark is now considered to be engaged in suspicious terrorist activity?

You betcha - comrade.
 
2014-07-15 12:39:45 PM  
He's lucky the FBI didn't shoot him in the back of the head while interviewing him.
 
2014-07-15 12:40:03 PM  
The guys that tracked him down were wearing black suits. This can mean only one thing: they have a dress code where they work.
 
2014-07-15 12:41:07 PM  
Perhaps the private security guards embellished the initial encounter with the photographer. Since they called the FBI, I'm guessing that may have been the case.
 
2014-07-15 12:41:43 PM  

KidneyStone: I am 86 years old and a retired senior corporate executive

...so i probably won't believe a lot of what you say because people with jobs at that high a level are well known to be very smooth liars.


If only there was a term for pre judging people.
 
2014-07-15 12:42:03 PM  

Running a-puck: It's a giant farking LNG tank just outside of a major metropolitan area, and this was 2004 when we were still losing our collective shiat.  Someone checking up on a person taking pictures of a giant farking bomb is not unreasonable.

Is it stupid?  Yep.  But it is a step up from the kabuki theater that made up the majority of our security measures.


paxarcana.files.wordpress.com

Never Forget 1-31-07!
 
2014-07-15 12:42:04 PM  
So, the FBI is following up on leads of suspicious activity to fight terrorism, and this whiny little biatch is upset that they dared to ask him some questions.

If they drag you into a room with a single light bulb over your head, sure, you've got a legit complaint.  But in the process of looking for people who wish to do us harm, sometimes an innocent person is going to be asked a question or two.

This photog sounds like a complete douche.
 
2014-07-15 12:44:47 PM  

Occam's Nailfile: So, the FBI is following up on leads of suspicious activity to fight terrorism, and this whiny little biatch is upset that they dared to ask him some questions.

If they drag you into a room with a single light bulb over your head, sure, you've got a legit complaint.  But in the process of looking for people who wish to do us harm, sometimes an innocent person is going to be asked a question or two.

This photog sounds like a complete douche.


There are four lights !
 
2014-07-15 12:46:16 PM  
So... you weren't detained or anything, right?  They just asked you some questions?  Sounds like the system works.

I'm much more troubled by the fact that 200,000 people had nothing better to do with their money than buy a book of your stupid pictures, but whatever...
 
2014-07-15 12:48:37 PM  
Number 1) This happened 10 years ago. Why is he biatching about it now?

Number 2) Nobody gives a rats ass if you take pictures there in 2014.
 
2014-07-15 12:49:22 PM  

Sybarite: Questioning someone about taking pictures of a big LNG storage tank (art or no art) doesn't seem like that big of a security overreach. I don't live very far from a nuclear power plant. If I went and took pictures of it, I wouldn't be surprised if someone wanted to come and talk to me about it - and things are a hell of a lot less tense in this country now than they were in 2004.


If you had any idea of the photos I've taken you'd shiat your paranoid little britches.  Yet the only time I've ever had the men in suits come to my door was for something completely unrelated.  What I was looking into is no longer classified but looking into it is still discouraged.
 
2014-07-15 12:49:40 PM  

Occam's Nailfile: So, the FBI is following up on leads of suspicious activity to fight terrorism, and this whiny little biatch is upset that they dared to ask him some questions.

If they drag you into a room with a single light bulb over your head, sure, you've got a legit complaint.  But in the process of looking for people who wish to do us harm, sometimes an innocent person is going to be asked a question or two.



trippdogg: So... you weren't detained or anything, right?  They just asked you some questions?  Sounds like the system works.


ITT: Frightened children licking jackboots.
 
2014-07-15 12:49:55 PM  
To me, it's more striking that they didn't even bother to do ANY background checking before they hunting this guy down. The guy is a world renowned photographer of graffiti and public
art. Multiple books published, exhibits etc...All of that being known, they still chased this guy down. Let's try to use Occam Razor before concluding some 80+ year old guy with a camera is
a threat.
 
2014-07-15 12:50:32 PM  

Sybarite: nuclear power plant. If I went and took pictures of it,


Is this a boobies thread?
blogs.ocweekly.com
 
2014-07-15 12:51:19 PM  

Occam's Nailfile: So, the FBI is following up on leads of suspicious activity to fight terrorism, and this whiny little biatch is upset that they dared to ask him some questions.

If they drag you into a room with a single light bulb over your head, sure, you've got a legit complaint.  But in the process of looking for people who wish to do us harm, sometimes an innocent person is going to be asked a question or two.

This photog sounds like a complete douche.


Your posts sound angry.

People with anger issues can do violent things and should be watched.

Let's put this in a national database listing that you may have anger problems.

A database shared nationally that you can't ever get out of. The same one used for background checks at work.

See the issue yet?
 
2014-07-15 12:52:47 PM  
im sure there were some super-secret things going on in that tank, gov't things we cant know about.  of course spies would try to take pics of that stuff.  i mean, it's totally logical to put super-secret things in a giant tourist attraction that people want to take pictures of.  and since this was 10 years ago im sure the details are far too redacted for anything in that article to be specifically true.

thanks, Patriot Act! I feel safer!
 
2014-07-15 12:53:51 PM  

Occam's Nailfile: So, the FBI is following up on leads of suspicious activity to fight terrorism, and this whiny little biatch is upset that they dared to ask him some questions.

If they drag you into a room with a single light bulb over your head, sure, you've got a legit complaint.  But in the process of looking for people who wish to do us harm, sometimes an innocent person is going to be asked a question or two.

This photog sounds like a complete douche.


except that isn't what this is about. Sure they asked him some questions and/or made his neighbors nervous by asking them about their neighbor. BUT the issue is the photographer is now part of a SAR database that can keep records for 30+ years. This is a database of encounters with law enforcement for citizens doing nothing wrong and much of protected by the constitution. There is no way to purge oneself from these databases. This guy was well within his rights to photograph that structure. He evidently decided it wasn't worth hassling with the security guards giving him crap so he left. The then got him placed in a database and visited by the FBI for the audacity to want to take a picture of a landmark.

So while you are like no big deal no harm no foul, the FBI visiting people for exercising their freedoms is a HUGE problem. What if the FBI just went and visited everyone at a protest ? Whats the harm, they are only asking questions right ? It wouldn't have any kind of chilling effect on people going to political protests at all.
 
2014-07-15 12:54:24 PM  

Running a-puck: It's a giant farking LNG tank just outside of a major metropolitan area, and this was 2004 when we were still losing our collective shiat.  Someone checking up on a person taking pictures of a giant farking bomb is not unreasonable.

Is it stupid?  Yep.  But it is a step up from the kabuki theater that made up the majority of our security measures.


Came here to say this. Large containers of LNG have enormous destructive potential, and law enforcement does not screw around safeguarding them.

CSB: I used to work near Logan Airport, and had a great view of harbor traffic from my office. You could always tell when a LNG tanker was coming through because police boats swarmed into the channel and kicked out everyone else.
 
2014-07-15 12:54:26 PM  

rkiller1: Sybarite: nuclear power plant. If I went and took pictures of it,

Is this a boobies thread?
[blogs.ocweekly.com image 448x328]


Hey, is that the CN Tower in that pic?
 
2014-07-15 12:57:33 PM  

Mr. Shabooboo: To me, it's more striking that they didn't even bother to do ANY background checking before they hunting this guy down. The guy is a world renowned photographer of graffiti and public
art. Multiple books published, exhibits etc...All of that being known, they still chased this guy down. Let's try to use Occam Razor before concluding some 80+ year old guy with a camera is
a threat.


The FBI is a paint-by-numbers organization. Their agents are not expected to exercise a lot of judgment, and can get in serious trouble for showing initiative. The agents were probably aware that he was a photographer, and not a threat, but still had to do a face-to-face so they could check box 897 on their report. Because if he happens to be the one in a billion case of a white, middle class photographer that just embraced terrorism, the FBI bureaucracy would not understand.

Since just about everyone on here has read Snow Crash, the model that US law enforcement is asymptotically approaching is Fedworld.
 
Displayed 50 of 92 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report