It's a comprehensive report patom, but I am not inclined, at this point anyway, to change my opinion based on facts released to the Glasgow Herald. I agree only several charachters are described in this report but it is interesting some of the things they are described as doing. Tourist buses did it say, Landmarks. That will be the open top double decker bus variety in London. Cameras, perhaps?

So much material found it took 14 days, was it. Was any of it photographs perhaps.

I think we are developing off topic here though. I can't provide evidence to prove you wrong in this case and I don't think whatever happened here is the rule of thumb for all cases

....and still they come, with no sense of objectivity and willingness to reasonably discuss. I now know what it must have felt like at Rourkes Drift!

I will say this though. Being objective and fair with your statement (despite it's obtuse overtone) I agree that many measures are probably pointless and probably an exercise in public re-assurance. For example I have no idea what putting tanks in place at an airport during times of elevated concern achieves in a practical sense as a deterrent. Paranoia. 'Just because you are paranoid does not mean they are not out to get you'. I could say the same, in any case, about many of the posts I've seen on here.

Heres a scenario for you

Lets say it involves an individual, or number of individuals and your house, thus:

Whilst driving past your nice house the local fuzz see someone taking pictures of said house from a vehicle (including your security system /alarm) and that nice new BMW / Lexus in your drive

scenario 1.

Cops pull up and ask whats occurring

Individual(s) state their business as realtors involved in house sale and appear to be able to attain credibility in this respect (by whatever means) and cops drive away, suspicions abated

or

Individuals refuse to assist cops in enquiries stating its a free country and they can do as they please in terms of taking pictures. Cops either push it, or they don't (judgement call)

or

Cops see pictures being taken and whilst thinking, thats a little odd they drive on thinking its none of their business as no crime is [apparently] being committed and the person(s) is 'obviously' exercising their right to photograph in a public place and it's not suspicious at all because they have 'a right' to do it.

next night


Nothing at all happens

or

Your security system is disabled and your house is violently entered, your family held at knife point while the keys are demanded and your stolen to order car (complete with vanity plates) is never seen again, except on another continent having been shipped out on a sea container within 24hrs and your loved ones are traumatised to boot.


then


You become aware that there was unusual activity in the neighbourhood (actually outside your house) unacted upon by the Police who could have put in a challenge and thus detterred the crims. What would be your feeling. 'Don'y worry, you upheld their rights in doing nothing to be curious and challenge'? Or, would you file suit for neglect (not sure how it works over there).

Different when it's closer to home, perhaps

In the case of your house and someone perhaps 'casing the joint', what would you, have the officers do?

A. Approach and clear suspicions via checks e.g. ID, DMV, car search, question credibility

B. Nothing, drive on

Now we are not at the airport here, but I believe the principle is the same. Forgetting the fact that the OP could have used his photos for any horrible and nasty purpose, he might e.g. have been a reporter for a local rag who sensationalised the fact that he was allowed to wander freely around taking pictures of the security operation without any intervention at all. Where would the poor guy in the picture have been then? Carpeted! I don't suppose I have convinced the hard core but maybe just maybe, food for thought.

OK, I'm out, it's been a blast!