Jesus Phil I am not. I am merely asking Ryan to clarify something in his post. If you are going to post something. Especially something as confusing as that well people are going to ask questions.You're making the assumption that the guard was complaining about av photography
Well if two people are talking about a certain topic and something comes up wouldn't someone infer it has something to do with it?Those details weren't mentioned because there was no problem there. Things come up in conversation millions of ways, but yo need ot overanalyze and find problems to bring up out of nowhere.
Phil give me a break, all I did was point out that av-photo in no way causes any problems in aviation security. Something that (If you read Ryan's post) you could take the USNG for saying. All I asked Ryan for is any examples that were given. Which still I have heard none. All I got out of his post is that he spent some period of time explaining to someone what we do which IMO is not needed. They know damn well what is going on and don't need Ryan, or you or your post cards to educate them about it.you brought up a sensitive topic of Law Enforcement with aviation photography in a negative light when there wasn't any reason for it,
Not exactly but any drama would be better than the low quality posts that have become prevelant here. I actually agree with you at this point. I am sorry I read this post because not only do I not believe it happened but even if it did it served no purpose.Aviation enthusiasm is a hobby that has so many different ways of enjoying and practicing it. However, as expansive as it is, you still seem to be so bored as to nitpick posts and find unnecessary debate where there shouldn't be any. It is most unfortunate that you've become the cat lady of the boards, hopelessly trying to create drama wherever you can for no apparent reason.
Bookmarks