Quote Originally Posted by Dave Parker
I can't see how it is Fascist, they own the property hence they have the rights to govern what is done on that property...

Not saying I agree or disagree, but if you don't own it, which in this case we don't, then you can't dictate what goes on...far from being fascist when a company decides what can and can not be done on their private property!

To me - attempting to control public behaviour beyond what is considered 'appropriate' (okay - that's a real loaded word, but I'm talking about spitting, defacing property, attacking people, etc. etc.. just acting reasonably...) is fascist to some degree. Something like banning photography just really smacks of paranoia, self-importance (possible implied wrongdoings) and just seems absurd.

But we're not even talking about private property here - are we? I thought it was the adjacent public spaces we're talking about - they didn't want pictures being taken OF their property/equipment - and that's just plain against the law to try to enforce...! And - let's get real here...! do you think any self-respecting 'terrorist' (if any actually exist) are going to attack a form of transportation after 9/11?? No way. You'd have to be a real imbecile.