Well, here I am checking the news at the end of a weekend away from the internet.
Lo and behold, I find this: Cameras banned on US bases in Iraq
A couple weeks ago I was whooshed (sadly, the search function won’t turn up the correct thread for me) about cameras being banned from US military bases.
Well, looks like that’s now happening.
So…it was a whoosh then, but now it’s actually true. Is it stil a whoosh?
-Joe, not at all embarassed for falling for it weeks ago
Well, it really didn’t say anything about regular cameras.
I’d say that digital cameras are pretty much regular cameras now.
:d
Well, torture was supposed to be banned too, and we know how well that was enforced.
-Sheesh!
Good to know. 
(I almost did a small d grin the other day)
(And the main point of your post was in the title so anyone reading this post isolated would think Lobsang has lost it ← but for this note)
:duBious: (test)
Weird thing was, I put in the smilie by clicking on the “Big Grin” button, and it generated a lower case d.
I want to get this right. THe linked article basicaly says that Rumsfeld is concerned that camera phones brought these images of some of our troops breaking the law to our attention. He wants to ban the cameras so that we wont be able to learn of abuses in the future? Sounds like shooting the messenger to me. We need more cameras everywhere so that more people wont be tempted to step over the line again. (OF course that smacks of BIG BROTHER. damned if don’t, damned if you do.)
I just find it worriesome that the defalt reaction by this administration is to limit the information that the citizens are entitled to.
PS. I beleive that it is no longer a whoosh.
John 3:20 says it all.
Except the exhibitionist.
But let’s remember they were following orders.
I guess my big ol’ brain was seeing into the future.
What you said was pretty much my point and the cause of my outrage. I can’t believe taht I was the only person to notice that the administrations primary anger was about the pictures, not the abuse.
-Joe, prescient
Sure, in a mainstream way. I guess I meant to say analog? As in 35mm cameras.
Just a thought:
Maybe the reason film cameras haven’t been banned is you can’t “sneak” out the photos via the internet. Military censors can stop a roll of film or a package of prints a lot easier than they can a JPG file.
Or maybe they banned film years ago, and are just now catching up to reality on the newer stuff.
This is one of those squishy issues. There are perfectly good national security reasons for such a ban. There are also perfectly lousy political reasons for such a ban.
Okay…pardon my ignorance…been wondering this for a couple months now, and have been a reader of the boards for a couple years…what exactly does “whoosh” mean? Seen it mentioned in a few posts, but the one’s I read tend to be whoosh-free. Have tried to pick up on the definition from context, but don’t think I have it down…
There were perfectly good national security reasons to ban them years ago - like when they were first becoming widely available. There were perfectly good reasons to ban camera phones when they first showed up.
Banning them now is just idiotic. There’s only one possible reason for the timing, and everyone who doesn’t have their head planted firmly between Bushco’s cheeks knows it.
Lockseer - “whoosh” is the noise something makes when it goes over your head - because, for example, you missed the joke…or on occasion, even a valid non-joke point.
-Joe
WHOOSH: The sound the air makes when something goes over your head.
Like, for example, posting a definition of a word 7 hours after it’s already been posted. :o
That’s more of a “Giant Sucking Sound” than a whoosh.
I’ve always* known that the military was run by a bunch of people with bone for brains, but even a total moron can see that the CAMERAS were not the problem here! Military intelligence indeed.
*well I only suspected until I actually signed up