“Wasting Breath” with US Bank Tower’s Security Team

As we previously posted, a group of NPRO members set out this past Sunday to photograph Los Angeles’s lovely downtown. This area is notorious for its excessively vigilant security personnel, and we wanted to see if we could exercise our constitutional rights and shoot the array of skyscrapers freely and openly. It turns out we couldn’t.

As we began photographing the US Bank Tower at 633 W. 5th Street, managed by Maguire Properties, we were approached almost immediately by a Universal Protective Services (UPS) security guard, and soon there were six (6!). We were told they would call the police and we would be arrested, that no pictures were allowed from their “private sidewalk,” that they actually owned the sidewalk,  and that we were idiots and jerks who should quit asking questions.

The kicker is that, when Angelo of Hollywood politely explained photographers’ rights to one of the UPS guards, he responded that that was just “differing points of view.” Yeah … except that one viewpoint is about the law, and one is not.

Please Voice Your Concerns:

US Bank Tower
633 W 5th St.
Los Angeles, CA 90071
(213) 615-6300

About these ads

67 Responses to ““Wasting Breath” with US Bank Tower’s Security Team”


  1. 1 Bryan Villarin January 21, 2009 at 8:15 am

    Nice work on the video! I hope something good comes out of this from their management.

  2. 2 Damon January 21, 2009 at 11:54 am

    I love where you stopped the video with the guard looking at the camera when the first title card comes. Thanks, not only for putting this together, but for taking the time on the subtle stuff! Nice job, shawn.

  3. 3 dave January 21, 2009 at 12:46 pm

    hopefully the more this is exposed they will rewrite their policy

  4. 4 Carlos Miller January 21, 2009 at 1:53 pm

    Excellent job on documenting everything. These types of actions need to happen more often.

  5. 5 Jeremy Brooks January 21, 2009 at 3:16 pm

    Good job documenting this, guys! If even one person sees this and decides to stand up for their rights one day, you’ve really accomplished something.

  6. 6 Chris January 21, 2009 at 8:39 pm

    Informative read, the big black guy reminds of me Forest Whitaker..

  7. 7 mark January 21, 2009 at 10:25 pm

    you guys are idiots…

    what are you trying to prove here??

    you give real photographers such a bad rap..

    get a life boys

  8. 8 Jeremy Brooks January 21, 2009 at 10:37 pm

    Ah yes, here they come….

  9. 9 NetDep January 21, 2009 at 11:02 pm

    Well done video. Seeing the actual interaction makes the point “louder” than the stills or audio recording. Really nice job.

  10. 10 xsorsburn January 22, 2009 at 2:21 am

    I wasnt able to be there on sunday but I did have a similar experience on the thursday before. I am glad that you were able to articulate the law as it is written and not sound like a bunch of crazed narcissists. thanks for documenting it great job on the video the timing is perfect.

    it sounds like Carlos had at least some comprehension of what you where telling him. I hope it can make a difference for the next group of photographers he encounters

  11. 11 discarted January 22, 2009 at 4:16 am

    mark-

    i’ve actually done work for NPR and have sold my images so you should do your research before saying anything

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92228439

    would really love to see some examples of your work though…from a real photographer i mean

    please share

  12. 12 Don January 22, 2009 at 7:40 am

    Howdy from Bellaire/Houston Texas,

    Exactly the same thing happened while conducting my night photography class in downtown Houston at the Enron (now Chevron) buildings. We were shooting one of the two buildings and a big guy from the management of the building comes out to stop us. We stood our ground, told him like it is and we just kept on shooting. He seemed to recognize that his instructions by his supervisor may well have been wrong. He turned and went back inside.

    He did say he’d call the police and we invited him to so do. No police arrived as we were all around the buildings for close to an hour.

    Don

  13. 13 Tom H. January 22, 2009 at 7:57 am

    It would be helpful to post the actual laws you’re talking about. That would be much more interesting than “this is legal”… “no its not”… “yes it is”… “no its not” stuff. You might as well just pick a random guy and do the “sticks and stones…” nursery rhyme crap.

    You end the video saying “I think we proved a point” and I’d ask what that point is? Which law was upheld? Where is it located in the LA City code? You don’t address any of the photography and filming permit issues in LA. How do those play into it?

    Sure, the guards were jerks but what did you expect from low-wage rent a cops? Witty banter and a cup of tea? Really, what did you expect when you showed up for this stunt? You went there with an attitude looking for an argument… its no surprise you found one. This looks like nothing more than wanting to antagonize someone.

    This is so adolescent.

  14. 14 Cato January 22, 2009 at 8:38 am

    Tom H.:

    It’s not in the L.A. City Code. [Permits are for commercial work, not amateur shoots.] The law governing the right to photograph whatever you can see from public property is called the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I’ll let Bert Krages, author of “Legal Handbook for Photographers” explain:

    http://books.google.com/books?id=rJHNqWYGJtIC&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=shopping+malls+photography+legal&source=bl&ots=USp9tjDySe&sig=pj4LmUNh67tzjg0ftpG1bMQmFj0&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA12,M1

  15. 15 Earle January 22, 2009 at 8:56 am

    I work in this building and I see this crap all the time and it infuriates me. Most of the security guards are nice guys in person but they all go berserk when they see a camera. They materialize in seconds, like flies in a stable, to harass German backpackers, Japanese tourists, anyone with a camera, and always with those ridiculous little spiral notepads. I personally try to always tell the tourists to ignore the guards and snap away, but mostly they are intimidated by the patch on the shoulder. It’s a f*ing shame. Keep up the good work.

  16. 16 jon golden January 22, 2009 at 11:19 am

    I find it easier in a commercial place to work from the top down, rather than the bottom up.. have you all ever approach management first before rushing in to make images?

    Regardless of whether you have published with NPR or not.. (That is a radio station isn’t it? is moot point.. your actions reflect on all of us. Have a look at the new Atlantic monthly contracts, which have (Jill) Greenberg clauses in them..

    I am all in favor of photographers rights, but there are better ways to approach the problem in my opinion that don’t put the problem on a confrontational level first.

    I have experienced this problem on many occasions once with US Capitol Police (not rent cops) during a night shoot with a class of 40 high school students. They told us we needed a tripod permit (which is a US Park service requirement) we asked if we could get a group permit , they said no.. so we marched all 40 students in to request a tripod permit.. common sense prevailed and a group permit was given. Same scenario in Arlington National cemetery with a class.. A military police officer converged on us and told us no shooting. I asked her to get her boss who showed up and explained to HER that we had a pre-arranged permit and then he apologized to all of us..

    I reiterate that preplanning and politeness have always worked for me.. and I have shot in nuclear power plants, airport runways (after 9/11), shipyards and other more sensitive areas than this tower area. Take the high road on the action, then you look professional not paparazzi like when a problem does occur.

    good luck

  17. 17 gdanmitchell January 22, 2009 at 12:00 pm

    The photographers obviously have the law on their sides. With that in mind, it wasn’t necessary to get into the insult match with any of the security guards. (e.g. – “why do so many idiots apply for security jobs.”)

    If I were accosted by security guards attempting to deny my rights under the law, would I resist? Almost certainly. Is there much to be gained by acting – as a few of the photographers in this group did – smug and insulting? Probably not.

  18. 18 Richard Coda January 22, 2009 at 12:54 pm

    I had a similar, but less confrontational, experience at Disney Music Hall in early November 2008.

    See my blog for details:

    http://rcodaphotography.blogspot.com/2008/11/halls-are-alive-with-sound-of-music.html

    Aerial view of property here:

    http://members.cox.net/rcoda/photodisney.html

  19. 19 discarted January 22, 2009 at 1:11 pm

    jon golden-

    please explain how jill greenberg and portraiture/studio photography applies to street photography and an invidiual’s right to shoot freely in public and not be harassed by people that don’t know the law

  20. 20 Dave January 22, 2009 at 5:19 pm

    For photographers in California, Law Tech Publishing puts out several publications covering the law. Amongst them is an abridged version of the California Penal Code and quick code books on penal and other areas of the law. They are generally available in shops that sell law enforcement items or online.

    At less then $20 or so they are relatively inexpensive, and can be a resource when you are told you are breaking the law. Simply pull the book out and ask “Which one?” Note that this technique is pretty much guaranteed to get you handcuffed, but likely not arrested, at the least if you try it on a sworn officer as opposed to a security guard.

  21. 21 E January 22, 2009 at 5:43 pm

    Like many I’ve been harassed here and to the north across from the YMCA (here: http://tinyurl.com/dfmqok).

    In the video it seemed like you were getting forced into the street and not standing your ground on the sidewalk, the legal public right-of-way.

    I went online (http://cityofla.org/lacity197.htm) to check out the property lines and what I found interesting was that it’s difficult to tell where the sidewalk is in relationship to the property line. Also, the current stairs used to be Hope street but was vacated (anyone remember the Sunkist Bldg and the great public stairs that used to be there?) and that Hope Place, that is directly behind the tower between Hope and Grand, isn’t a street–it’s a driveway on private property!

    Thanks: http://tinyurl.com/ccpepx

  22. 22 Andy January 22, 2009 at 9:23 pm

    I was taking an LA Conservancy tour on Saturday when we passed this building and I snapped a photo. It wasn’t two seconds before a security guard was in my face, and it really ticked me off! There’s something ironic about expecting people to not want to take a photo of the tallest building in the city.

    These same types of laws are enforced sometimes on the downtown metro, and it’s all scare tactics.

    I think for those commenters here that are critical of the activists here for “pulling a stunt” like this, you really need to appreciate the fact that these organizations are making up there own rules and then using title and intimidation to enforce them. That’s unAmerican in my book.

  23. 23 Carlos Miller January 22, 2009 at 11:00 pm

    Jon Golden,

    Ask management before rushing in to take a photo of a building from a public sidewalk?

    Do you still raise your hand to ask for permission to use the rest room?

  24. 24 discarted January 23, 2009 at 2:33 am

    carlos-

    i was gonna mention that earlier so thanks for bringing it up

  25. 25 luap777 January 23, 2009 at 11:31 am

    Great job guys, this kind of crap happens all too often and it needs to stop.

  26. 26 scottbourne January 23, 2009 at 11:40 am

    Congratulations for standing up for your rights and for running the big stupid thug off. And to those people who think this exercise has no merit, you’re just part of the problem. Thanks for this hard work and let us know at TWIPPHOTO.COM if we can help you in any way spread the word.

  27. 27 Jeremy Brooks January 23, 2009 at 12:08 pm

    “to those people who think this exercise has no merit, you’re just part of the problem”

    Well said, Scott!

    I didn’t see this story on Digg, so I submitted it. You can digg it here: http://digg.com/travel_places/Attention_US_Bank_Los_Angeles_Photography_Is_Not_A_Crime

  28. 28 Bryan Villarin January 23, 2009 at 12:12 pm

    @Scott Bourne: Thanks for the comment and support!

    @Jeremy Brooks: Wicked, thanks Jeremy!

  29. 29 discarted January 23, 2009 at 5:30 pm

    Tom-

    Maybe if you took the time and read through this site and clicked on the numerous links we provide here for people who don’t know the law or their rights, you could very easily find all of the information you wanted on the “actual laws” you’re requesting that we provide to you.

    The point that was made, is that the guards in downtown Los Angeles, particularly at the US Bank Tower have a history of harassing photographers and threatening them with arrest, and what the guards are doing is completely illegal.

    However, none of that was accomplished by them this time out.

    Permits are not required while shooting in public from public property in any part of this country. I am a documentary/street photography and I am well aware of the law, which is something you should look in to before posting on a blog dedicated to photographers’ rights.

    Do you realize you can photograph the White House and every other building in Washington DC without being harassed by arrogant security guards?

    Finally, we went to the US Bank Tower take photos of the buildings, which we are legally allowed to do, and we were enjoying doing that for about 30 seconds until we were accosted by US Bank Tower security guards on a public sidewalk, threatening to arrest us for doing something that is completely legal.

    They came to us.

  30. 30 Nathaniel Perales January 23, 2009 at 5:35 pm

    Thanks for this. I’ve been harassed a number of times. It’s so frustrating.

  31. 31 Dan January 23, 2009 at 6:37 pm

    “and what the guards are doing is completely illegal”

    If you honestly believed that, then why didn’t you call the police? That would have had a much bigger effect than the “no, I’m right” mindless banter that took place. Or, am I calling your bluff now?

    “to those people who think this exercise has no merit, you’re just part of the problem”

    So, what exactly did you accomplish? I’m at a loss to point to a single accomplishment from this action. Are the guards going to stop harassing photographers now? Do you think the bank will change its policies as a result of this protest (or any number of like protests)? Not likely.

    Though I strongly dislike what the bank is doing (the guards are just trying to make a living doing their jobs), I equally dislike efforts which do little more than antagonize. You might consider something a tad more effective than this sophomoric hit-and-run tactic.

  32. 32 David Markland January 23, 2009 at 10:06 pm

    Dan, what the cops did infringed on their rights, and, while I’m not certain as to applicable state laws, are most likely illegal. Just because the photogs didn’t call the cops, or because a cop doesn’t initiate an arrest wouldn’t change this.

    The security guard at one point is seen trying to grab a camera – that alone could be considered assault. Same guard is trying to intimidate the photogs physically, arguable, but it appeared to me he was trying to scare them into thinking he would hit them… illegal? Most likely.

    Arguing that the guards are just doing their jobs is the weakest, most cowardly argument that could be made. While employees will hide behind this argument, if your boss tells you to break the law, you can’t simply hide behind that. People do, because they’re cowards, and the likelihood someone will sue a lowly security guard who has little money is slim. And if these guards are so arrogant as to not know the law, what Discarted and company is doing will hopefully make them read up on the First Amendment, for starters.

    You also suggest these guys, “might consider something a tad more effective than this sophomoric hit-and-run tactic,” but fail completely to offer a single suggestion. Instead of offering a better idea, or backing up argument with a shred of evidence, you just look like a shill for United Protective Services.

  33. 33 David Markland January 23, 2009 at 10:25 pm

    Hey – found the law. You guys are due $25,000 from Patrick Silver:

    http://law.justia.com/california/codes/civ/43-53.html

    52.1. (a) If a person or persons, whether or not acting under color
    of law, interferes by threats, intimidation, or coercion, or
    attempts to interfere by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with the
    exercise or enjoyment by any individual or individuals of rights
    secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of the
    rights secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, the
    Attorney General, or any district attorney or city attorney may bring
    a civil action for injunctive and other appropriate equitable relief
    in the name of the people of the State of California, in order to
    protect the peaceable exercise or enjoyment of the right or rights
    secured. An action brought by the Attorney General, any district
    attorney, or any city attorney may also seek a civil penalty of
    twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). If this civil penalty is
    requested, it shall be assessed individually against each person who
    is determined to have violated this section and the penalty shall be
    awarded to each individual whose rights under this section are
    determined to have been violated.
    (b) Any individual whose exercise or enjoyment of rights secured
    by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or of rights
    secured by the Constitution or laws of this state, has been
    interfered with, or attempted to be interfered with, as described in
    subdivision (a), may institute and prosecute in his or her own name
    and on his or her own behalf a civil action for damages, including,
    but not limited to, damages under Section 52, injunctive relief, and
    other appropriate equitable relief to protect the peaceable exercise
    or enjoyment of the right or rights secured.

  34. 34 discarted January 24, 2009 at 12:15 am

    hey dan!

    we actually did call the cops and it’s in the video. maybe you should watch it again. it’s the part where the big white text comes up and says David is talking to an actual cop over the phone. And then Patrick Silver tells Dave he doesn’t care who he’s talking to because Dave doesn’t matter to him. None of us do.

    According to UPS, policy is being changed right now. So something was done.

    On top of all of that, my contact at the ACLU is working on this issue as well.

    I would suggest you watch the video again, do more research, and know your facts before you write something here.

    And don’t post anonymously here. You lose credibility.

  35. 35 discarted January 24, 2009 at 12:19 am

    David Markland-

    Thanks…that’s some great info.

  36. 36 Matt January 24, 2009 at 10:58 pm

    Why did you even bother discussing it with the security guards. Simply tell them you are on a public sidewalk and you will do as you please.

    While a noble effort, I have learned that it is pointless to try explain things to most people.

    If they batter you or obstruct your work then call the police, file a report and consider a civil action.

    Arguing with them and telling them you feel threatened by their body language just makes you look silly.

    Ignore stupid people, your life will be much happier. They will never get the point no matter how hard you try.

  37. 37 Sean January 24, 2009 at 11:47 pm

    Business…..ridiculous…can’t wait till they get bailed out too yay!!

  38. 38 Stupid Amerifag January 25, 2009 at 2:02 am

    Dear scared shitless Amerifags,

    So, tell them to call the fucking police. Then tell the police that you have just witnessed a flagrant waste of police time, and wish to file charges against the security guards and their employers.

    You spineless wankers.

  39. 39 discarted January 25, 2009 at 12:53 pm

    stupid amerifag-

    did you not listen to the first video? watch the second video? or read the follow up?

    i guess not because we called the cops…twice…and your SG buddies REFUSED to talk to the REAL COPS on both occasions.

    this is isn’t secondcitycop.blogspot.com so don’t post anonymous comments

    have some accountability for yourself.

  40. 40 Protestfag January 26, 2009 at 10:36 pm

    I think a mass protest, with everyone from professional photographers to kids on camera phones all flashing pics of said buildings, would be a great idea. This would be done from the public sidewalk, and during a weekday when you have all the office employees. It would send a great message. Smack dab in the middle of Bunker Hill, in front of many important skyscrapers. I, for one, am sick and tired of these rent-a-cops infringing on my rights.

  41. 41 Robert Aitchison January 27, 2009 at 8:14 am

    I used to work in that building and can attest to the fact that they building security is beyond overzealous.

    They will bring up 9/11 more often than Rudy Gullanni to justify their policies of oppression even of their own tenants.

    I honestly believe that some of the managers and supervisors in charge of security actually get some sick pleasure out of their ability to exert their influence over others, I’m sure that a psychiatrist could have a field day with these guys.

    During one “discussion” their security supervisor, when he wasn’t talking about 9/11 mentioned that he was “just doing his job” I reminded him that the same excuse was made by Nazi’s in the Nuremberg trials. They didn’t much like that and had reported to my HR department that I had called them Nazi’s. Luckily my boss was there during the whole exchange and could back up what was actually said.

  42. 42 thekushlife April 23, 2009 at 8:32 am

    I use to work here it’s horrible and they violate rights all the time…

  43. 43 John October 15, 2009 at 4:13 pm

    Actually, you probably aren’t aware, but since 9/11, the law has changed with DHS input (Dept. of Homeland Sec). It is a crime to photograph high rises and malls, believe it or not. This stems from Brookfield Properties, the property managment company of the World Trade Center properties in NY. Their security cameras show people (probably terrorists in the preparation stage) with hidden cameras wrapped up in newspapers, covertly filming the building one month before the attacks. Since then, the courts have held up convictions for filming buildings. Trust me, if you get convicted of this, you also get put into a database of potential terrorists. It’s not pretty and can ruin a person’s life. How do I know? I work for DHS.

    • 44 discarted October 16, 2009 at 4:10 pm

      And this is from someone who works for DHS…how ironic.

      If your statements are true and the footage that you claim exists does actually exist, which I highly doubt it, how come we have never seen that footage, nor has the media ever reported on your supposed claims.

      As a DHS employee, it is your responsibility to know the actual law and to follow it, rather than spread false information regarding public photography.

      No wonder this country is in a constant state of disrepair because it is constantly being managed by morons who don’t know what they’re doing.

      The best and the brightest should be running this country, not Sarah Palin and Joe the Plumber types, which are ubiquitous throughout our government.

      You my friend are the perfect example of the peter principle in full effect.

    • 45 discarted October 16, 2009 at 4:40 pm

      john-

      a few questions:

      is it illegal to photograph the white house?

      an oil refinery?

      an FBI building?

      the pentagon?

      federal buildings?

      the hoover dam?

      nuclear power facilities?

  44. 46 Bryan Villarin October 15, 2009 at 5:46 pm

    John: Can you give us some links to back this up?

  45. 47 Jeremy Brooks October 16, 2009 at 1:45 pm

    Sorry John, but I do not think you have a clue about what you are saying.

    Taking photographs of buildings from a public place is not against the law. In fact, it is not even a crime to take photographs of federal buildings (http://carlosmiller.com/2009/09/02/so-now-the-feds-say-it-is-not-illegal-to-photograph-federal-buildings/), and attorney Bert P. Krages notes that “Note that neither the Patriot Act nor the Homeland Security Act have any provisions that restrict photography.” (http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm).

    If you are going to make a public statement about what you believe to be true, be prepared to back it up. As it stands, you are just making broad statements that are clearly incorrect.

  46. 48 Kyle Mullan November 7, 2010 at 2:47 pm

    Very interesting. The laws surrounding photography have forever been shrouded in grey because photography is applicable to so many different solutions and problems that it is hard to isolate the reason for taking photographs.

    I carried out a photographic study in the UK, mostly in Belfast, Northern Ireland where I tested the public reaction to unsolicited photographs. This included taking pictures of private property while on public property. The law is very similar in the UK to what is shown by this video.

    See here for some photographs from my study: http://nightmarepixel.com/photo/unsolicited.html

    I was threatened by many people whose photograph I took, sometimes that the police would be called. It is indeed a bluff, and makes me think that other things these people tell you may also be a bluff.

    If you’re interested in following this up, research the power of security guards against shoplifters. You will be surprised.

  47. 49 Kevin April 7, 2011 at 8:08 pm

    let the stupid rent a cop thugs call the cops. One the cops come we will see whos right and wrong. I would go to the city hall and find out if the bank owns the sidewalk. If they don’t then next time tell them I have proof the sidewalks not yours so go pound sand. fight fire with fire. Enough with the rent a cops who are not good enough to be real cops telling us what we can’t do. Screw them.

  48. 50 Zionists Are Evil Scum April 10, 2011 at 5:14 pm

    The area around Library Tower is an occult site. Occult symbols are abundant. Beneath the Library Tower is a pyramid with a sun symbol on it. The pyramid points up to the bank. The pyramid caps the actual Central Libary that sits beneath US Bank. You can see the pyramid pointing to the bank the four main streets that lead to the bank. The bank is designed to look like a Phoenix with its wings down at its sides. From the distance the top of the bank looks like a Phoenix’s head, or rather a bird’s heads. This symbolism suggests that this bank stands as the supreme power of California, or rather the occult powers behind it are.

    Their idea to build the tallest building in California where earthquakes are seasonal shows that these people who are behind building it are not considerate, to put it nicely. It’s not a matter of their level of intelligence, they plan to cause mass destruction. Citizens will financially and physically pay for the rebulding of US Bank and citizens propably paid for the construction of the bank. The contruction of the bank was paid for by the citizens who were taxed to pay for the building of the central libary. Those who built and will destroy the US Bank have made citizens pay for the fun of the scoundrels who enjoy their financial power over us, power they have only by stealing from taxpayers out of the state’s piggy bank.

    They built the central library to be several stories deep underground. Wells Fargo is a name that infers wells-go-far-below-ground or it infers an abyss. They planned to demolish US Bank, per the 9/11 Commission. They’re plan is likely new and improved because now that the Central Library has an abyss beneath it, they can trap citizens in the abyss and play that up on tv to make us all forget about the financial scams they are pulling off.

    US Bank is the parent company of Zion’s bank. Zion’s symbols are a pyramid and a phoenix.

  49. 51 Zionists Are Evil Scum April 10, 2011 at 5:17 pm

    You can see the pyramid pointing to the bank from the four main streets that lead to the bank.

  50. 52 Zionists Are Evil Scum April 10, 2011 at 5:30 pm

    If no one does business around Library Tower then the terrorists will lose money and they’ll have to find a new target.

    Citizens should petition to have all of the books moved away to a safe area, away from the parent company Zion’s Bank that is known as Libray Tower/US Bank. Citizens are being lured by the books to an area targeted by financial swindlers who plan to kill those entering the central libarary. The central library is filled inside with occult symbols, that are seen in the art that hangs from its ceilings. The windows have pyramid-shaped patterns built into them to show that it is a target of Zionists. The symbols are speaking a hidden language that tell you, if you go into that area you will die.

    Anyone in local buildings should move far away from Libary Tower.

    Don’t feed them and they will go find what they are looking for somewhere else.

  51. 53 Zionists Are Evil Scum April 10, 2011 at 5:32 pm

    Citizens should petition to have all of the books moved away to a safe area, away from the parent company of Zion’s Bank that is known as Libray Tower/US Bank.

  52. 54 Zionists Are Evil Scum April 10, 2011 at 5:37 pm

    The only thing Libary Tower is missing are feathers on the exterior of it.

    Put feathers on it and then it will look like what it really is, a symbolf of the Phoenix, an occult symbol. A bird looking for prey on the streets surrounding it.

    Go inside it or near it and you are its next meal. What do you want to be, it’s breakfast, lunch or dinner?

  53. 55 peliculas online May 9, 2014 at 8:25 am

    Nice weblog right here! Also your web site quite a
    bit up very fast! What host are you the use of? Can I am getting
    your associate link for your host? I desire my website loaded up as quickly as yours lol

  54. 56 remodeling projects that can really pay off September 8, 2014 at 4:23 pm

    Wonderful, what a blog it is! This blig provides helpful facts to us,
    keep it up.


  1. 1 Encounters at the Photographers’ Rights Protest in LA - All Narfed Up Trackback on January 21, 2009 at 8:02 am
  2. 2 “Wasting Breath” with US Bank Tower’s Security Team - All Narfed Up Trackback on January 21, 2009 at 8:14 am
  3. 3 US Bank Tower challenges photographers on a public sidewalk | Los Angeles Metblogs Trackback on January 22, 2009 at 6:28 pm
  4. 4 Jeremy Brooks » Photographers Rights in LA Trackback on January 23, 2009 at 12:21 pm
  5. 5 Second Image Cafe » Blog Archive » Public’s right to photograph buildings Trackback on January 24, 2009 at 8:14 am
  6. 6 throw like a girl Trackback on January 25, 2009 at 6:04 pm
  7. 7 Rights of Photographers Trackback on January 27, 2009 at 8:02 am
  8. 8 “Maguire Properties” Threatens Me on YouTube « Trackback on February 1, 2009 at 11:41 pm
  9. 9 Photographers Effect Change at US Bank Tower « Trackback on June 7, 2009 at 9:38 pm
  10. 10 Wackenhut/G4S Guard and Photographer Face Off « Trackback on September 24, 2010 at 1:36 pm
  11. 11 patrick attorney Trackback on August 5, 2014 at 11:02 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s





Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 110 other followers

%d bloggers like this: