What the authorities are worried about are details that aren't
published. Recent changes, new security measures, photo reconnaissance
is very good at that. The fact that most photographs are useless in
that regard just means that they guard against everything. It's CYA in
many cases, after all would you want to be blamed for the deaths of a
few hundred people due to lack of diligence?
Mark Roberts wrote:
graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
First let me say I am against the idea of passing laws against maybes.
Having said that, it does not take much imagination to see the glorious
leader pointing out to his paradise bound disciples, "You want to place
your explosives here, and here, and here", pointing to the places on the
photograph. Such photos can be a great help planning attacks.
Sorry but I don't buy it.
Photographs of the WTC were of no help in this manner!
For suicide belt bombers, a hand-drawn sketch on the back of a napkin
is more than sufficient.
For attacks between these two extremes, published photos in books,
magazines,the Internet would be sufficient.
It's just a desire on the part of "the authorities" to appear as if
they're doing *something*.
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
