# 'I'm a Photographer not a terrorist!' demo



## cybertect (Jan 23, 2010)

Went along to Trafalgar Square today to help make up the numbers in the mass gathering in protest against (mostly) Section 44

Full gallery here and a few favs


Mass Photo Op








I'm pretty sure this was Simona Bonomo - the Italian student who was arrested at Paddington Basin back in October - being chased round the crowd by a PCSO intent on serving her with a Fixed Penalty Notice for something. At first I thought it was an agit-prop action, but the PCSO and his buddies were genuine.

The crowd, and then a regular police constable, talked him out of it.







'Freedom Warden'







I'm a dog not a terrorist







A bit of chat






Was anyone else from U75 there?


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jan 23, 2010)

The dog one is brilliant


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jan 23, 2010)

Oh dear a plastic policemen who just doesn't get it.  I wonder if there were any photographers there who were on duty but not part of the demonstration.


----------



## editor (Jan 23, 2010)

I was there. I think the world and his wife took a picture of that dog!


----------



## derf (Jan 24, 2010)

Nice photos.
Hope the dem serves to remind the government they are acting like silly sods and lets the general public see what is happening over there.

The more I read threads on the subject of photographers getting hit with terrorism laws, the more I cringe.


----------



## danski (Jan 24, 2010)

I was there. Saw Editor, was just about to say hello then he disappeared. 
Was fun and a little strange as the people who are normally behind the camera, all of a sudden, were the subject of photos and I think you could sense a kind of unease yet enjoyment at the situation, if that makes sense. It was like an orgy of people taking photos of people taking photos of people taking photos....
Obviously I realise it was about more than that


----------



## stowpirate (Jan 24, 2010)

Is the BBC sitting on the fence again? 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8476318.stm

Now I understand why the UK threat level has been raised.


----------



## GoneCoastal (Jan 24, 2010)

David Hoffmans photos are good http://www.photoshelter.com/c/hoffman/gallery/Im-A-Photographer-Not-A-Terrorist/G0000kv6heAyJukI/
Even the security guard trying to stop photographers trying to photograph each other  Rather illustrates the point


----------



## stowpirate (Jan 24, 2010)

GoneCoastal said:


> David Hoffmans photos are good http://www.photoshelter.com/c/hoffman/gallery/Im-A-Photographer-Not-A-Terrorist/G0000kv6heAyJukI/
> Even the security guard trying to stop photographers trying to photograph each other  Rather illustrates the point





Look how far they have come in recent years  with cameras that are forced to make loud noises to notify those in the vicinity. Next it will be camera exclusion zones with gps and wireless deactivating your camera.  Sounds like fantasy but give it a few more years of terrorist threat hype


----------



## Paul Russell (Jan 24, 2010)

Nice pictures. And yes, I've already seen quite a few pics of that dog!


----------



## derf (Jan 24, 2010)

stowpirate said:


> Look how far they have come in recent years  with cameras that are forced to make loud noises to notify those in the vicinity. Next it will be camera exclusion zones with gps and wireless deactivating your camera.  Sounds like fantasy but give it a few more years of *tourist* threat hype



Was it was Trafalgar Square.


----------



## dlx1 (Jan 24, 2010)

I didn't see a date for this only that it was going to happen. 

Didn't see anything in here 





> photography, graphics & art


----------



## cybertect (Jan 24, 2010)

editor said:


> I was there. I think the world and his wife took a picture of that dog!



I have to say that my wife was there too, but she didn't take a picture of the dog


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 24, 2010)

Nice photo's but...

I've typed many rants on many photography forums about this.

I have absolutely no problem having to show ID, or get permission to photograph inner-city places in present times.

I seriously can't see the problem. It's a red herring on the civil liberties issue. We (as a country and coalition with others) are bombing the fuck out of others whether we agree with it, or not. We should expect retaliation. We are a generation that enjoys liberties well beyond anything that previous generations have enjoyed. You may not be a terrorist threat. The terrorist threat may not be as great as the authorities claim, but it does undoubtedly exist and needs to be controlled. 

As a responsible photographer, if you want to photograph stuff that may be a bit sensitive - go get permission. What's the problem?

There was a time when all Pro's knew when they needed to get permission. I don't agree with that, and don't agree with many things happening today, but I have only once been asked questions when photographing 'possible terroist targets' and the police were perfectly happy with my explanation. I didn't even have to provide ID. Forget about knowing *YOU'RE RIGHTS* and give a little bit of thought to the rights of the people in Afghanistan, or Iraq for example. Or, be so fucking bold and courageous that you actually take on the bollocks it requires to be a real war photographer rather than moan about the fucking liberal times we live in here. We're fucking lucky. What's the hassle? Where's the problem?

Protect your rights - sure. But, recognise why you have those rights and why the state we live in needs to protect your rights.



Go on then - knock me down


----------



## editor (Jan 24, 2010)

Stanley Edwards said:


> Nice photo's but...
> 
> I've typed many rants on many photography forums about this.
> 
> I have absolutely no problem having to show ID, or get permission to photograph inner-city places in present times.


I have. A *big* problem. And you're woefully missing the point.

The cops aren't harassing people scaling up trees to take pictures of nuclear installations through massive telephone lens. They're harassing normal people taking ordinary tourist photos, or documenting architecture, or capturing police misconduct (G20) or taking the kind of street scenes that has produced some of the greatest photography.

Things are bad enough already - giving the law even more reason to harass people exercising their right to take pictures of whatever they like will result in massive restrictions on photography, more hassles from cops - and lots of photos of police abuse being censored. 

Anyway, here's a few pics from the demo: 



























http://www.urban75.org/london/photographer-not-a-terrorist.html


----------



## stowpirate (Jan 25, 2010)

editor said:


> The cops aren't harassing people scaling up trees to take pictures of nuclear installations through massive telephone lens. They're harassing normal people taking ordinary tourist photos, or documenting architecture, or capturing police misconduct (G20) or taking the kind of street scenes that has produced some of the greatest photography.



Been there done that today at Sizewell albeit not from a tree but from an adjacent public footpath on the beach side of the site using a digital compact and 35mm rangefinder camera. 

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4049/4301341788_ce1289e823_o.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4072/4300346747_48fffe7925_o.jpg

Sizewell used to have a visitors center and a few years ago I went on a guided tour and managed to take several photos inside the site with a Russian Cosmic Symbol camera. Now stupidly this center has been closed for security reasons however at Sellafield the visitors center is still open and no doubt they still do tours and have no issue with photography unless anybody knows otherwise?  There appears to be no logic to any of this anti terrorist rubbish and what is the point of stopping anybody with a camera unless they have other evidence?


----------



## editor (Jan 25, 2010)

When I was in New York this burly oaf of a cop insisted that I stop taking pictures of the Midtown tunnelr (which was some 500 yards away and I was using a small digital camera without a zoom). He lectured me about 9/11 and how terrorists might make use of photos of the tunnel.

I didn't have the heart to tell him that his own government provided a 24/7 photo and video webcam of both sides of the tunnel.


----------



## 19sixtysix (Jan 25, 2010)

I was thinking how absurd all this has become today.
I was looking at the camera disguised as a pen being sold by easyjet in their onboard catalogue for taking discrete photographs


----------



## yardbird (Jan 25, 2010)

I wasn't really aware of all this bollocks.
I have spent all my life taking (often crappy) photographs. 
Loads of ones of coppers too I guess.
Shall I start carrying a photocopy of my art degree with me?

The whole thing is totally nuts.


----------



## stowpirate (Jan 25, 2010)

editor said:


> I didn't have the heart to tell him that his own government provided 24/7 photo and video webcam of both sides of the tunnel.



Not forgetting GoogleEarth providing worldwide information on nearly every location including a few photos. You also have gps tagged stuff on flickr. So why would any potential terrorist feel the need to visit a location with a camera?


----------



## abe11825 (Jan 25, 2010)

Excellent thread... photos of the protest are remarkable. I wish I were there! I was in TRafalgar Square back in June (with frogwoman), so if only I were there this time, I'd be taking photos along with everyone... things like this are the most memorable... being part of a "positive" protest!





yardbird said:


> I wasn't really aware of all this bollocks.
> I have spent all my life taking (often crappy) photographs.
> Loads of ones of coppers too I guess.
> Shall I start carrying a photocopy of my art degree with me?
> ...



I think we all need to start carrying our art degrees with us!





stowpirate said:


> Not forgetting GoogleEarth providing worldwide information on nearly every location including a few photos. You also have gps tagged stuff on flickr. So why would any potential terrorist feel the need to visit a location with a camera?



the scary part of Google is you can map your street. The US is more susceptible (i've "googled" my neighbourhood) to be able to walk the street ... any street that a Google van has been down to map out the area. I could see the air freshener hanging from the rear view mirror in my car, the exact make and model of my neighbour's car, and a friend's license plate number... in clear view. If that's not disturbing, then what is?

I love taking pictures. My camera used to go with me everywhere, before i started my current job. My only problem is, I have an SLR, so I have to scrounge around to find film (as frogwoman can attest when i made her go with me to buy some). everything is digital these days and i refuse to buy a digital / digital slr camera... i'm quite content with knowing exactly what i can zoom in on myself and where my boundaries lie.


----------



## stowpirate (Jan 25, 2010)

19sixtysix said:


> I was thinking how absurd all this has become today.
> I was looking at the camera disguised as a pen being sold by easyjet in their onboard catalogue for taking discrete photographs



How much I want one what is the output resolution and maximum iso rating? Does it also record sound so when you are stopped you can get some mug shots of the police and detailed record of any conversation come confrontation.



abe11825 said:


> I think we all need to start carrying our art degrees with us!



Metropolitan Police could not have made it more simple to understand.

"Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing incidents or police personnel."

http://www.met.police.uk/about/photography.htm

So why has society turned on itself? I think the issue goes far deeper than fears about terrorism. Dumbing down of the general population might be the real problem with George Orwell overtones, yes that can of worms 




abe11825 said:


> the scary part of Google is you can map your street. The US is more susceptible (i've "googled" my neighbourhood) to be able to walk the street ... any street that a Google van has been down to map out the area. I could see the air freshener hanging from the rear view mirror in my car, the exact make and model of my neighbour's car, and a friend's license plate number... in clear view. If that's not disturbing, then what is?



There is money to be made. I find the whole idea interesting but at odds with what is happening in the real world. 



abe11825 said:


> I love taking pictures. My camera used to go with me everywhere, before i started my current job. My only problem is, I have an SLR, so I have to scrounge around to find film (as frogwoman can attest when i made her go with me to buy some). everything is digital these days and i refuse to buy a digital / digital slr camera... i'm quite content with knowing exactly what i can zoom in on myself and where my boundaries lie.



It is more difficult for them to deal with film if you are stopped


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 25, 2010)

editor said:


> I have. A *big* problem. And you're woefully missing the point.
> 
> ...



In all the time I have spent on the streets taking photographs (and, that has been quite literally Thousands of hours) I have only ever once been questioned by police. That was taking a picture under a by-pass, next to an LDR station, close to Canary Wharf, with large camera back-pack by my feet shortly after the bus bombings. When I explained it was for a personal art project documenting London they were happy and let me be.

There is a civil rights issue. I recognise that, but I think the issue is getting lost in the fuss being kicked up by people who just want to get a bit of 'anti state' agro for no good reason. My concern is that the real issue is being forgotten whilst people make a fashionable issue about nothing.

Far from woefully missing the point, I'm actually focussing my view on the real point. Police are people just like us. Some of them are going to make an issue over nothing also whilst not seeing the real concern. I do get lots of hassle from police when sketching on the streets. Most often that happens on Monday and Tuesday when there is fuck else for them to do.

Whilst I appreciate the threat to civil liberties I also recognise that the police and authorities do actually protect our civil liberties. We are living in very liberal times. Possibly the most liberal times history in the western world has ever known. A bit of respect to those who are protecting our liberties is as important as us being aware that we need to protect our liberties also.


----------



## derf (Jan 25, 2010)

Stanley Edwards said:


> Whilst I appreciate the threat to civil liberties I also recognise that the police and authorities do actually protect our civil liberties. We are living in very liberal times. Possibly the most liberal times history in the western world has ever known. A bit of respect to those who are protecting our liberties is as important as us being aware that we need to protect our liberties also.



In most cases I generally come down on the side of the police but not on this issue.
People have been taking photos for years all over the place and I can get live webcam pics of half the UK from out here.
No bloody terrorist is going to sod about with a big fuck off camera exposing himself to the attentions of the cops. Why the fuck bother when pics are so easy to get on the net?











So the terrorist can see the location and have know what the cops are armed with without going near the place until they want to bomb the shit out of it.


----------



## editor (Jan 25, 2010)

Stanley Edwards said:


> Whilst I appreciate the threat to civil liberties I also recognise that the police and authorities do actually protect our civil liberties. We are living in very liberal times. Possibly the most liberal times history in the western world has ever known. A bit of respect to those who are protecting our liberties is as important as us being aware that we need to protect our liberties also.


You really are talking shit. How is hassling visitors for taking pictures of tourist attractions - the same kind of pictures that are freely available through untold sources online -  'protecting our liberties'?


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 25, 2010)

editor said:


> You really are talking shit. How is hassling visitors for taking pictures of tourist attractions - the same kind of pictures that are freely available through untold sources online -  'protecting our liberties'?



It isn't, but if that is all the issue is about I suspect you wouldn't be so bothered about it.


----------



## Paul Russell (Jan 25, 2010)

Stanley Edwards said:


> In all the time I have spent on the streets taking photographs (and, that has been quite literally Thousands of hours) I have only ever once been questioned by police. That was taking a picture under a by-pass, next to an LDR station, close to Canary Wharf, with large camera back-pack by my feet shortly after the bus bombings. When I explained it was for a personal art project documenting London they were happy and let me be.
> 
> There is a civil rights issue. I recognise that, but I think the issue is getting lost in the fuss being kicked up by people who just want to get a bit of 'anti state' agro for no good reason. My concern is that the real issue is being forgotten whilst people make a fashionable issue about nothing.



I take your point Stanley. Up to a point. I think a few high profile cases could have been handled better by the photographer. Instead of immediately getting arsey with the police, a simple explanation of what you are doing would probably diffuse the situation. 

But you haven't been in England for a few years now. I think the common perception is that the police, or more usually PCSOs, are generally taking the piss quite a lot. I mean, stopping people taking photos of Christmas lights in Burgess Hill High Street, or a sunset over St Paul's. Bonkers.


----------



## derf (Jan 25, 2010)

editor said:


> You really are talking shit. How is hassling visitors for taking pictures of tourist attractions - the same kind of pictures that are freely available through untold sources online -  'protecting our liberties'?



They are protecting the great British public from train spotters just in case they are terrorists or kiddie fiddlers.
We take our 2 year old to a play area in a shopping centre every week.
Loads of mums and dads have cameras with them as take photos of their kids.
No bugger bats an eyelid as there is no fucking stupid paranoia her about terrorist and people messing with kids at the slightest chance.
All that crap in the UK is press and government created.


----------



## fogbat (Jan 25, 2010)

Stanley Edwards said:


> In all the time I have spent on the streets taking photographs (and, that has been quite literally Thousands of hours) I have only ever once been questioned by police. That was taking a picture under a by-pass, next to an LDR station, close to Canary Wharf, with large camera back-pack by my feet shortly after the bus bombings. When I explained it was for a personal art project documenting London they were happy and let me be.
> 
> There is a civil rights issue. I recognise that, but I think the issue is getting lost in the fuss being kicked up by people who just want to get a bit of 'anti state' agro for no good reason. My concern is that the real issue is being forgotten whilst people make a fashionable issue about nothing.
> 
> ...



"I've not experienced it, so it doesn't happen"


----------



## editor (Jan 25, 2010)

Stanley Edwards said:


> It isn't, but if that is all the issue is about I suspect you wouldn't be so bothered about it.


But that kind of harassment of innocent photographers is *exactly what is happening. *

That's why hundreds of them turned up on Saturday and why it's becoming a growing civil rights issue. 

Photographers should not need permission from the state to take pictures, neither should they be expected to carry around ID or be harassed and forced to explain themselves when they're taking photos in the street.

Perhaps you're a bit out of the loop on this, but the situation is getting fucking ridiculous in the UK. 

http://www.urban75.org/photos/photography-case-studies.html



> Police harass bloke filming a station/"planning an al Qaeda attack"  (urban75, Dec 2009)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Stanley Edwards (Jan 25, 2010)

editor said:


> But that kind of harassment of innocent photographers is *exactly what is happening. *
> 
> That's why hundreds of them turned up on Saturday and why it's becoming a growing civil rights issue.
> ...




I accept that. Some police are just twats. The huge rise in the popularity of photography due to digital cameras has just given arsey, or stupid police more opportunities.

As for Fogbat's response; I have experienced it. One single time during Thousands of hours. I also accept (as Paul points out) I haven't been photographing on the streets in the UK for several years now. Photography has become far more popular in that time, therefore the occurence of police intervention will have increased relatively.


----------



## sim667 (Jan 25, 2010)

you know the links/pics aint working OP?


----------



## cybertect (Jan 25, 2010)

I just found out. My server's gone offline for reasons unknown at the moment.


----------



## stowpirate (Jan 25, 2010)

cybertect said:


> I just found out. My server's gone offline for reasons unknown at the moment.



I told you so, those Bus photos were your undoing


----------



## derf (Jan 25, 2010)

How many terrorists have actually been nabbed while taking photos?

Fuck all I expect.


----------



## derf (Jan 25, 2010)

I will correct myself, one that I can find but I don't know if he was actually an extremist.
Wonder how many people have been accused using this case as an excuse.


----------



## stowpirate (Jan 25, 2010)

derf said:


> I will correct myself, one that I can find but I don't know if he was actually an extremist.
> Wonder how many people have been accused using this case as an excuse.




"City of London Police have released chilling footage recorded on one man's mobile phone as he travelled around the capital."

Not even a real photographer as it was mobile footage.

What does that work out as a percentage of the total number of mobile phones in the UK?


----------



## 19sixtysix (Jan 25, 2010)

stowpirate said:


> How much I want one what is the output resolution and maximum iso rating? Does it also record sound so when you are stopped you can get some mug shots of the police and detailed record of any conversation come confrontation.



It was an easyjet catalogue. Not a photography magazine. No details at all. I think you need to look on the internet.


----------



## bemused (Jan 25, 2010)

I actually saw a guy sitting taking pictures of buses get questioned by a PCSO about taking pictures. The Bus spotter got sufficiently arsy about it until the PSCO just wandered off. It was funny to watch but a bit worrying.


----------



## e19896 (Jan 26, 2010)

Stanley Edwards said:


> It isn't, but if that is all the issue is about I suspect you wouldn't be so bothered about it.



Stan I understand where you coming from, but this is not a fuss over nothing the Police are taking the piss, and I know those involved very well not the kind of people to kick up a fuss for nothing, in my case I can understand why the Police might stop me as an urban explorer I do take photography to another level, this said a lot of people being stoped are just taking snaps and a ITN crew was stoped of late.


----------



## abe11825 (Jan 26, 2010)

i understand everyone's points about PSCO and Police taking the piss out of photography, but they're just doing a job.

Then again, nothing in history wouldn't be documented if no one would take a photo. Think about how many times you read a history book or watch a documentary, and a random picture gets brought up about a memorable moment in time? if that wasn't snapped, we'd not learn from it. one man's "souvenir" is another's history. sounds stupid i know. but how many times do we take pictures of our surroundings, and years later, look back on it and remember exactly what we were thinking that day? 

we can learn alot from pictures. it's like they say, "a picture is worth a thousand words". and it's true. so if the fuzz want to destroy it, then i think we need to find a better way to protect our civil liberties.

I've got albums of protests, public / governmental buildings, houses, offices, life, etc. I'm using them as keepsakes for that point in my life. and if the government or police think i'm acting on terrorism, then something's wrong cos there's larger shit to deal with then me snapping film in front of the war building...


----------



## bemused (Jan 26, 2010)

abe11825 said:


> i understand everyone's points about PSCO and Police taking the piss out of photography, but they're just doing a job.



I'm normally pro-Police but when you see some examples where they use these powers which they know where brought in as anti-terrorist measures I have to question their judgement. For example of Gemma Atkinson who was detained and searched under the anti terrorism act because she filmed her boyfriends stop and search.


----------



## toggy (Jan 26, 2010)

Stanley Edwards said:


> I accept that. Some police are just twats. The huge rise in the popularity of photography due to digital cameras has just given arsey, or stupid police more opportunities.



I have to point out that in my experience over the last 20 years the abundance of twat coppers, hobby bobbies, security guards, CSOs, PCSOs SIA dickheads , has increased exponentially and can be directly correlated to the privatisation of policing in general and the lowering of entry requirements  into all of those industries; and they are industries, not services.

I've been toe to toe with constables, sergeants and inspectors over my right to take photographs in a public place - at news events - and I've been threatened with arrest on numerous occasions, sometimes for merely standing on the road and not the pavement 4" behind me, under the auspices that the non existent cars on the empty roads - empty because they have been closed by the police -might run me over and the police officer may be held responsible for my injuries. 

My quip that the officer would be making history went down like the proverbial lead balloon.

I don't know you from Adam, Stanley Edwards, but on this subject you're not only out of touch you're also wrong.


----------



## stowpirate (Jan 26, 2010)

http://lbc.co.uk/childrens-tv-stars-face-anti-terror-quiz--19344

interesting news story


----------



## abe11825 (Jan 27, 2010)

stowpirate said:


> http://lbc.co.uk/childrens-tv-stars-face-anti-terror-quiz--19344
> 
> interesting news story



holy shit... that's fucked up.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Jan 27, 2010)

What do you expect.  It is a _terrestrial_ programme. PC Plod won't Know the difference.



> The morning programme, which provides light-hearted links in between cartoons such as Ben 10: Alien Force and Dork Hunters From Outer Space, attracts around 616,000 viewers each weekend morning, making it the most popular *terrestrial *programme of its kind.



Beware of _terrestrialists_.  It is worse in America. As a result of George Bushes way of speaking they are nervous of _tourists_.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2010)

toggy said:


> I don't know you from Adam, Stanley Edwards, but on this subject you're not only out of touch you're also wrong.


and not only on this subject


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2010)

abe11825 said:


> i understand everyone's points about PSCO and Police taking the piss out of photography, but they're just doing a job








he was just doing his job.

are all jobs worth doing?


----------



## stowpirate (Jan 27, 2010)

Can the kids go out and play cowboys and Indians with their toy cap guns and bows and arrows? Will the cavalry then turn up in force and take them into custardy?


----------



## Paul Russell (Jan 27, 2010)

stowpirate said:


> http://lbc.co.uk/childrens-tv-stars-face-anti-terror-quiz--19344
> 
> interesting news story



Good link. Sounds like a good programme as well -- might check that out.


----------



## stowpirate (Jan 27, 2010)

The whole issue is turning into a Monty Pyhon farce. Mr String's TV ads just about sums up the situation for all involved and I would guess that they will get a few complaints about terrorist overtones at the advertising standards..... 

http://cheestrings.co.uk/parents-info/TV-adverts.html


----------



## abe11825 (Jan 27, 2010)

Pickman's model said:


> he was just doing his job.
> 
> are all jobs worth doing?




In this case, no. It all depends on the situation, IMO. 

Photography is an art form. It should not be banned or frowned upon. If people want to make an honest living taking film, or even doing it as a keepsake, then do it. The Fuzz should be focused on more important issues then someone taking an image of something.


----------



## stowpirate (Jan 29, 2010)

abe11825 said:


> In this case, no. It all depends on the situation, IMO.
> 
> Photography is an art form. It should not be banned or frowned upon. If people want to make an honest living taking film, or even doing it as a keepsake, then do it. The Fuzz should be focused on more important issues then someone taking an image of something.



It depends on if they have supporting evidence that the individual is up to no good. This recent swing to we are guilty of some crime culture does not sit well in a democracy. That freak Margaret Thatcher started the slide towards a totalitarian style democracy. However some people in particular George Orwell had identified the danger signs far earlier but unfortunately very few listened then or do now. Then throw in social changes like a society sinking into a virtual  world controlled by mass media and entertainment . With a form of government that embraces the power of the media and flows with the ebbing tide of mass hysteria. I think you get my drift


----------



## the_fonz (Mar 3, 2010)

*Your Right to Film*

Here's a short film about how photographers' and cinematographers' are interrupted without cause when filming in public, 'Freedom to Film', http://www.worldbytes.org/programmes/013/013_003.html


----------



## toggy (Mar 3, 2010)

Tidy film, sums it up nicely.


----------

