subscribe to this page
June 05, 2008
The War on Photography
What is it with photographers these days? Are they really all terrorists, or does everyone just think they are? Since 9/11, there has been an increasing war on photography. Photographers have been harrassed, questioned, detained, arrested or worse, and declared to be unwelcome. We've been repeatedly told to watch out for photographers, especially suspicious ones. Clearly any terrorist is going to first photograph his target, so vigilance is required.
Except that it's nonsense. The 9/11 terrorists didn't photograph anything. Nor did the London transport bombers, the Madrid subway bombers, or the liquid bombers arrested in 2006. Timothy McVeigh didn't photograph the Oklahoma City Federal Building. The Unabomber didn't photograph anything; neither did shoe-bomber Richard Reid. Photographs aren't being found amongst the papers of Palestinian suicide bombers. The IRA wasn't known for its photography. Even those manufactured terrorist plots that the US government likes to talk about -- the Ft. Dix terrorists, the JFK airport bombers, the Miami 7, the Lackawanna 6 -- no photography.
Given that real terrorists, and even wannabe terrorists, don't seem to photograph anything, why is it such pervasive conventional wisdom that terrorists photograph their targets? Why are our fears so great that we have no choice but to be suspicious of any photographer?
Because it's a movie-plot threat.
A movie-plot threat is a specific threat, vivid in our minds like the plot of a movie. You remember them from the months after the 9/11 attacks: anthrax spread from crop dusters, a contaminated milk supply, terrorist scuba divers armed with almanacs. Our imaginations run wild with detailed and specific threats, from the news, and from actual movies and television shows. These movie plots resonate in our minds and in the minds of others we talk to. And many of us get scared.
...
Charters, David. The British Army and Jewish Insurgency in Palestine 1945-47. London: Basingstoke : Macmillan P, 1989. 12-42.
In the book "The British Army and Jewish Insurgency in Palestine 1945-47", Charters charts and documents the political setting of British mandated Palestine. After taking over Palestine and Trans-Jordan from the Ottomans, the British wrote the Balfour Declaration in 1920, establishing Britain’s support to create a Jewish state in part of Palestine. Though nothing was definite, this was a huge victory for Zionism as they finally received international recognition for a state of their own. “The British government accepted responsibility for generating the social, political and economic conditions conducive to establishment of the national home and for facilitating Jewish immigration and settlement in Palestine” However, in 1939 when the white paper declared heavy restrictions on Jewish immigration, Jewish extremists regarded this as “connivance and complicity in genocide.” Jewish extremists soon decided that British rule had to be undermined after the completion of World War II.
The book demonstrates the deep history and backdrop for Exodus. Though certain issues are mentioned in the movie, this book goes into detail on the inner workings of the British mandated government in Palestine. The Balfour Declaration gave not only Jewish residents of Palestine hope, but also refugees stranded in the Jewish Diaspora (outside of Israel). The restrictive immigration of Holocaust survivors, which was enacted through the white paper, was a huge turn of events that ended in a violent conflict between the British and the Jews. Throughout the movie, one can see the historical significance of each event and understand the conflict in the area. Though many do not know the background for legislation passed by the British mandated government in Palestine, the movie continually references these laws to make it easier to follow. Visually displaying a deep commitment to force Britain out of Palestine, the movie shows typical activities, where the book provides much needed background information to truly understand the movie’s nuances.
Daniel, Clifton. "IRGUN BLASTS WALL :Jews and Arabs Flee Prison as Terrorists Battle British ASSAULT AT HANGING SITE Five Jews Killed in Attack on Troops Near By -- Six Bombs Hurled at Army Camp Bombing Frees 251 in Palestine; 15 Killed in Irgun Attack on Jail . " New York Times (1857-Current File) [New York, N.Y.] 5 May 1947,1-2. ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2004). ProQuest. University of Pennsylvania Library, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 9 Apr. 2008
Clifton Daniels article, "Irgun Blasts Wall: Jews and Arabs flee Prison as Terrorists Battle British", describes in details the planning and events that unfolded in the acre prison break. The prison break, completed by the Irgun, was one of the greatest attacks against the British in the 1940’s. Daniels describes the massive gunfights that erupted in the prison break along with several exploding grenades. An unbelievable fight against the British, the Irgun pulled off an extensive operation and did so leaving very few casualties. Both sides suffered very few casualties, though the British suffered immense public relations problems and several deaths from the attack. This attack was not typical of the Irgun and seems to be their greatest "accomplishment" aside from the King David bombing. The british responded with full force raiding several places accused of housing weapons and rounded up more prisoners found guilty of possesion.
The movie dramatizes this scene in several ways by misrepresenting the true event. Exodus does not show the immense gunfire that erupted on both sides, but rather shows the heroism and seemingly superior Irgun fighting off the British. Additionally, the movie shows haganah involvement as Ari helps to complete the prison break. However, in reality the prison break had no Haganah involvement and was not condoned by the Jewish Agency. Also, the movie avoids any reference to Jewish casualties, but the Irgun suffered several deaths and injuries. The movies misrepresentation of some basic facts places extreme bias on the situation. Trying to evoke characteristics of heroism, the director avoids some of the simple facts. An unbelievable prison break, the Irgun initiated a daring plan to try and combat several British executions of Irgun members.
Grigg. "ZIONISTS WARNED AGAINST TERRORISM :Grigg Says It Will Cost Them Christian World's Help-- Palestine Debated. " New York Times (1857-Current file) [New York, N.Y.] 4 Jan. 1945,11-11. ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2004). ProQuest. University of Pennsylvania Library, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 8 Apr. 2008
In this New York Times Article, Grigg establishes how important public relations is in the Palestinian turmoil. In order for the Jews to gain independence and establish a state of their own, he recognizes that they will need the support of the British community and especially the world’s Christian community. Additionally, he believes that the Irgun is ruining this support with every attack and soon will lose any help from Christians. The Irgun’s attacks detract from the Jewish cause and the identity as “underdogs” and a decimated people. The terror of the holocaust loses its impact when, as Grigg puts it, the Irgun acts with a “regular type of Nazi gangsterism.” The article goes on to discuss a proposed 1 million-person immigration into Palestine. Though the United States supports the proposal, it seems the British will not accept this plan. Continuing, the article seems to admit that the situation will eventually become too difficult for the British to handle and must be turned over to international hands at the United Nations.
In discussing this article, one must realize the relationship between the Irgun and Haganah in the movie. Exodus portrays the Haganah in a favorable light, bringing positive publicity and trying to build a State of Israel by social and peaceful means. On the other hand, throughout the movie, Haganah leaders constantly blame the Irgun for ruining the Jewish cause and hampering their ability to successfully establish a state. They believe that the Irgun is destroying relations with the British and adding to their conflict, which is already on the edge. While the Haganah tries to enhance their cause diplomatically, the Irgun continues to damage public relations. However, the Irgun also creates a very interesting issue as their acts, though violent, intensify media attention. Every violent act against the British brings more attention and it becomes clearer every day that the British cannot handle the Irgun and will have to leave Palestine.
New Operation to Put Heavily Armed Officers in Subways
By AL BAKER
In the first counterterrorism strategy of its kind in the nation, roving teams of New York City police officers armed with automatic rifles and accompanied by bomb-sniffing dogs will patrol the city's subway system daily, beginning next month, officials said on Friday.
Under a tactical plan called Operation Torch, the officers will board trains and patrol platforms, focusing on sites like Pennsylvania Station, Herald Square, Columbus Circle, Rockefeller Center and Times Square in Manhattan, and Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn.
Officials said the operation would begin in March.
Financing for the program will be funneled to the Police Department and will come from a pool of up to $30 million taken from $153.2 million in new federal transit grants to the state.
Michael Chertoff, the secretary of homeland security, and Gov. Eliot Spitzer announced the grants at a news conference on Friday at Grand Central Terminal, where Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly outlined his plans to add a layer of security to the city's 24-hour transit system.