ralpress.org

We can’t find the plot, so let’s harrass some harmless tourists instead.

Officers of the Met treating guests to our country with contempt, behaving as if they’ve been trained in North Korea, and frankly, demonstrating that they lack sufficient common sense and judgement to be entrusted with the rights-circumventing powers they’ve been given:

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

How long ago it now seems that we used to regularly hear government ministers resolutely declare “If we let the terrorists change our way of life, they’ve won”. We don’t bloody well hear it now, do we?

(Title quip shamelessly nicked from commenter on Craig Murray’s blog)

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Photorestrict/

From the preamble:

On the 16th of February, the Government passed a law (in the Counter Terrorism Act) making it illegal to take a photograph of a police office, military personnel or member of the intelligence services - or a photograph which “may be of use for terrorism”. This definition is vague at best, and open to interpretation by the police - who under Home Secretary guidelines can “restrict photography in public places”.

We call for these vague restrictions to be lifted, as they can easily be mis-used by the police.

If (when!!) you sign, remember to confirm your signature by clicking on the link in the confirmation email message.

IMO the amendments to the Counter Terrorism Act passed on 16th February are a deliberate and disgraceful attempt to reduce the accountability of our police force. If the events of last week weren’t enough to convince you of just how valuable public scrutiny of police activity is, then cast your eyes over this latest incident to be publicized. There are plenty more examples where this came from. And remember, the police are being equipped with Tazers this year. Prepare for plenty of stories from ordinary citizens of aggressive police officers threatening and dishing out electrocution punishments to any person not complying with their (often legally dubious) orders in sufficiently rapid fashion.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Photorestrict/

You won’t find many more deserving recipients of a cup of slime:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/mar/06/mandelson-green-slime-protest

It’ll no doubt be the National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit database for the seditious slime-chucker (probably for me too, for being aware of the existence of their website).

Has it always been media policy to blur out the registration numbers of ministerial cars, or did this begin after Section 76 of the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 came into force?

UPDATE: Craig Murray is more pithy.

I’ve uploaded a few dozen images to my flickr account that I took at a couple of recent London events, the Peace in Gaza rally at Hyde Park in January and yesterday’s Mass Picture Taking Rally at New Scotland Yard, organized by the NUJ.

I had quite ambivalent feelings about the Hyde Park rally. Marching alongside people supporting an organization that strives for the development of a religion governed state and one that encourages suicide bombings, among other horrors, is not usually my idea of a good fun, worthy day out. My concerns were purely humanitarian. I’ve heard the arguments from both parties in the conflict, reiterated many times over the years and nothing changes my view that it is unconscionable for a powerful, high-tech military controlled by a post-industrial state, to be pumping artillery shells into and dropping bombs onto what is in effect a giant refugee camp. The relative numbers killed and maimed by Hamas’ rockets and by the IDF’s strikes tell their own story. If you want to argue that Israel’s response has been proportional, please don’t do it here. Frankly, I’m sick of hearing it.

Back to domestic matters, I attended the NUJ protest outside New Scotland Yard yesterday despite not being a member of the union and despite not working within the media. I went along to register my support for the aims of the event and to express my outrage at the nature of the relevant articles within the Amendments to the Counter Terrorism Act, which came into force yesterday. I’ve posted the images I took to my flickr account. It felt quite presumptuous, this amateurish amateur taking pictures of some the UK’s most experienced photojournalists. I hope no one looking at my pics assumes that I’m claiming to be a pro-photographer. That “Pro” flickr account label implies only that I’ve paid for the unlimited (well, less limited) flickr service. It does not imply that I regard myself as an accomplished photographer! (Something that will anyway be obvious to anyone viewing the images).

The NUJ members who attended the event were a great bunch of people. Welcoming, witty, pragmatic and mischievous. The police can have few complaints about the behaviour of the several hundred who turned up, it was all constructive and good natured. I was however a little disappointed at the narrow focus on the rights of professional photographers at the expense of ordinary, camera-wielding members of the public. The focus of the event may not have been surprising given its organiser, but I feel that the  amendments to the act at issue are equally relevant to all citizens, regardless of their occupation. It’s hard to see how democracy and accountability would be better served if the only citizens allowed to photograph our police and security services were paid up members of the NUJ. Still, not wishing be unduly critical. The NUJ is taking a stand against bad, authoritarian laws, which is more than most UK organisations are doing.

UPDATES:

• Heh, I’ve just seen myself on Tristam’s Spark’s flickr stream (I’m the one taking pictures, not the one causing twitter to grind to a halt yet again).
• A video by Jason N Parkinson with interviews with key journalists who explain the motivation behind the event and their concerns about the relevant legislation. (I make a very brief appearance in this too, at around 03:50. I’m at the back of the group on the right, briefly holding up a camera above the heads of the photographers in front.)