Archive for the ‘Photography’ Category

Objection to New TSA Poster

Monday, September 27th, 2010

Letter to:

Secretary Janet Napolitano, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Department of Homeland Security

RE: OBJECTIONS TO A NEW TSA POSTER THAT INSINUATES THAT PHOTOGRAPHERS ARE TERRORISTS

Dear Secretary Napolitano:

I.
Purpose
I write to you to achieve these purposes: 1) to object–strenuously–to a new anti-photographer Transportation Security Administration [TSA] poster that is another in a long line of irrational, psychotic, paranoia, nonsense put out by TSA or the Department of Homeland Security [DHS] in the name of security; 2) to explain to you why this poster is a new low for TSA and DHS; 3) to communicate important concepts that need to be communicated; 4) to demand that TSA and DHS immediately withdraw these new anti-photographer posters, destroy them, and never again stoop to such a low level; 5) to assert rights against government’s usurpations under color of law; 6) to sensitize you, government officials, and citizens on the compelling need to function with absolute fidelity to our Constitution’s commands–which is the best way to achieve, and maintain, a meaningful level of security; 7) to demand that TSA andDHS stop violating those commands; and 8) if you refuse to withdraw and destroy these posters rebuke you in your official capacity as DHS’ department head and demand that you resign… (continued…)

>>Download Entire PDF Version of the Letter<<

Canon EOS 1D and 1DS Mark III AI Autofocus Tips

Friday, December 4th, 2009

Canon EOS 1D and 1DS Mark III AI Servo Autofocus Manual

Summarized from an article on Canon’s Digital Learning Center titled, “EOS-1D/1DS Mark III AI Servo Autofocus Manual”

>>Click here to download the tips manual (PDF)<<

Thoughts About the Flying Legends Air Show

Wednesday, October 14th, 2009
Introduction

I attended the July 11-12, 2009 Flying Legends Air Show at the Imperial War Museum Duxford, in England. When at that air show I was involved in unwanted conflict with air show fans who were official rule violators, who were rude, who were immature, who were inconsiderate, who were liars, who manifested mob mentality, and one fan functioned as a bully. This fan tried to intimidate me to yield to his encroachment upon my view of the air show. I also experienced conflict with Museum staff who refused to enforce Duxford’s official rules.

Some Internet aviation forums contain substantial, mean spirited, myopic, immature, absurd, illogical, self-serving, disingenuous, uninformed, misinformed, reckless, jump to conclusion, highly opinionated, libelous, Mancus-bashing arising from this conflict. Some of my critics refer to this conflict as “The Mancus Incident”. Goggle recognizes “Peter Mancus Duxford” as an established, popular, search term! Apparently, there have been many Goggle searches regarding my conduct at Duxford.  Malicious rumor mills spread vile and erroneous information at break-neck speed.

Facts are stubborn little critters. This little critter exists: when my critics point their disapproving finger at me, three fingers point back at them.

Albert Einstein, when asked, which is bigger–the universe or human stupidity, said human stupidity. I agree. I am supremely confident that when one reads the Mancus-bashing on Internet aviation forms and compares that bashing to the letters that I have written about what really happened–and why–during “The Mancus Incident”, most reasonably constituted persons will appreciate my critics for what they are.

“The Mancus Incident” raises serious questions about the thin veneer of civilization, air show crowd behavior, air show crowd control issues, public safety issues, and air show management issues at IWM Duxford and all public air shows.

Below are four letters that discuss my conduct at Flying Legends Air Show 2009 at Duxford. Some of these letters discuss my personal knowledge of what really happened and why, my evaluation of same, and my recommendations to make air shows safer and a more enjoyable experience for all. One of these letters is Roger Ashton’s reply letter to my complaint letter to him. Mr. Ashton is the Director, IWM Duxford. I am supremely confident that when Mr. Ashton’s reply letter is scrutinized, most reasonably constituted persons will have serious issues with Mr. Ashton’s reply, his judgment, and his leadership. Another letter is a complaint letter by me to Diane Lees, Director General , Imperial War Museum. So far, I have not received a response from Ms. Lees. When I do, I will post it in chronological order, below.

I will continue to post new developments about “The Mancus Incident” as they occur.

Readers–including my critics–and supporters, if any, are invited to post their candid, no-holds barred, rational, focused, commentary. Lengthy postings are welcomed.

All postings are subject to a delay for review and approval. Approval is not contingent on point of view content. I will approve material that I disagree with or loathe if it is civil and rational.

The delay in posting for review and approval is a prudent safeguard to maintain high standards and to bar such things as, but not limited to, spam, boorishness, undue profanity, vulgarity, nonsense, gibberish, and undue repetition.

I want this blog to be a healthy, stimulating, constructive, expansive, no-holds barred, informative, highly opinionated, “Free Speech Zone” on a wide variety of controversial, esoteric, and mundane topics.

I believe that the Market Place of Ideas has a wonderful socially beneficial power: when folks of widely divergent opinions, backgrounds, and experiences, with perceived grievances or special knowledge or leadership skills, express themselves candidly and constructively, with zest and logic, the best ideas survive intense scrutiny by well honed, aggressive, minds, and, those ideas, like cream in a bottle, rise to the top because they win public approval. Thus, I solicit strong opinions and candid exchanges that are rational, articulate, focused and civil.

I am supremely confident that my letters to senior Imperial War Museum officials about “The Mancus Incident” demonstrate well the socially beneficial power of the Market Place of Ideas. This is because, in my judgment, based on facts, rules, and logic, I have exposed my critics for what they are, I have begun the process to spur meaningful reforms, and I have called into question Roger Ashton’s leadership–or, arguably, more correctly, mis-leadership-as Director, Imperial War Museum Duxford.

No one transgresses against my legitimate interests in violation of excellent, official rules and/or maligns my name, my reputation, and my business interests without being held to account. Anyone who treads against me cannot reasonably expect to enjoy indefinitely sanctuary.

If “the life of the mind” or if “cerebral combat”, for lack of better terms, appeal to you, if you are unafraid to have your position or your reasoning or both scrutinized, if you love liberty–which you should, if you value your rights–which you should, if you are outspoken, if you are a leader, and/or if you do not function as a coward,  you are encouraged to post your thoughts on this blog. If, on the other hand, you are unduly docile, if you are willing to lay down on your rights, if you are willing to let others oppress you, if you do not place a high premium on liberty, and/or, if you know that your moral code, your judgment, and/or your core values cannot survive the spotlight of intense scrutiny, this blog will prove to be inhospitable. This is because human mimics of cockroaches flee from light.

Regards,

– Peter J. Mancus,

Owner, www.cloud9photography.us

pmancus@comcast.net


Please click on the following links to download each of the three letters I have referenced:

My August 17, 2009 twenty-two page complaint letter with attached exhibits addressed to the Chief Executive Officers and Board of Directors for The Fighter Collection and the Imperial War Museum Duxford.

A three page response letter dated September 17, 2009 addressed to me from Roger Ashton, Director, Imperial War Museum Duxford.

My October 12, 2009 six page complaint letter with a lengthy exhibit addressed to Diane Lees, General Director, Imperial War Museum, complaining to her about Mr. Ashton’s response to me.


Director General, Imperial War Museum Diane Lees’ October 14, 2009 email response to me regarding my October 12, 2009 letter that I emailed to her:

From: "Diane Lees" <DLees@IWM.ORG.UK>
To: pmancus@comcast.net
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 8:50:23 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Reply to e-mail 13.10.2009

Dear Mr Mancus,

I received your e-mail today, but I have been aware of your
correspondence with Duxford throughout.

I have reviewed the file and read our responses to you. I am satisfied
that this matter is now closed.

Yours sincerely,

Diane Lees

My October 14, 2009 response to Diane Lees’ October 14, 2009 email:

Dear Ms. Lees,

Even though you opine “this matter is now closed.”, I do not agree. It is my understanding, per the IWM’s official complaint procedures and policy, that I have a right to have this matter forwarded to the Board of Directors or Board of Trustees for their review and for their determination. I also have a right to pursue a legal remedy in British courts.

Pursuant to official IWM complaint procedure and policy, please confirm that you will–forthwith–forward all correspondence to the authority next above you [Board of Directors/Trustees] and you have done that. In the alternative, please email me their email address and I will communicate with them.

If it is your position that I do not have a right to have Mr. Ashton’s decision and/or yours reviewed by the Board of Directors/Trustees, please cite me to all official controlling authority, if any, that you rely upon for your position. Do that, convincingly, and I will adjust accordingly.

If it is your position that Museum staff acted within their authority when they ejected me and did not refund my admission ticket, please cite me to all official controlling authority, if any, that you rely upon for your position. Do that, convincingly, and I will again adjust accordingly.

IWM Duxford’s handling of crowd control issues is woefully pathetic and, per the facts, arguably, amounts to a racket.

What controlling published binding British law allows Museum staff to eject me and to keep my admission ticket money when I did nothing wrong?

What evidence do you have that I did anything that warranted being ejected? That warrants Museum staff keeping my money after they wrongfully ejected me?

You can answer these questions now, amicably, or you can risk answering these questions in the context of a lawsuit. Apparently, you have been complicit all along in Mr. Ashton’s reply to me. I am in the process of having all correspondence posted at www.cloud9photography.us. This email exchange between us will also be posted.

Once this material is posted links to it will be posted on Internet sites.

I predict this: your response to me will prove to be instrumental in contributing to a public relations disaster for the Imperial War Museum. I did not want that. I simply wanted the official rules, as written, to be enforced, I wanted meaningful reforms implemented, and I wanted reasonable compensation because Museum staff violated my rights.

Given your response, I will press forward to spur meaningful reforms and to obtain justice, which includes a refund of my admission ticket and reasonable compensation.

I  blind copied others. If you reply, please click on “Reply All”.

Kindest regards,

– Peter Mancus

Dear Ms. Lees,
Even though you opine “this matter is now closed.”, I do not agree. It is my understanding, per the IWM’s official complaint procedures and policy, that I have a right to have this matter forwarded to the Board of Directors or Board of Trustees for their review and for their determination. I also have a right to pursue a legal remedy in British courts.
Pursuant to official IWM complaint procedure and policy, please confirm that you will–forthwith–forward all correspondence to the authority next above you [Board of Directors/Trustees] and you have done that. In the alternative, please email me their email address and I will communicate with them.
If it is your position that I do not have a right to have Mr. Ashton’s decision and/or yours reviewed by the Board of Directors/Trustees, please cite me to all official controlling authority, if any, that you rely upon for your position. Do that, convincingly, and I will adjust accordingly.
If it is your position that Museum staff acted within their authority when they ejected me and did not refund my admission ticket, please cite me to all official controlling authority, if any, that you rely upon for your position. Do that, convincingly, and I will again adjust accordingly.
IWM Duxford’s handling of crowd control issues is woefully pathetic and, per the facts, arguably, amounts to a racket.
What controlling published binding British law allows Museum staff to eject me and to keep my admission ticket money when I did nothing wrong?
What evidence do you have that I did anything that warranted being ejected? That warrants Museum staff keeping my money after they wrongfully ejected me?
You can answer these questions now, amicably, or you can risk answering these questions in the context of a lawsuit. Apparently, you have been complicit all along in Mr. Ashton’s reply to me. I am in the process of having all correspondence posted at www.cloud9photography.us. This email exchange between us will also be posted.
Once this material is posted links to it will be posted on Internet sites.
I predict this: your response to me will prove to be instrumental in contributing to a public relations disaster for the Imperial War Museum. I did not want that. I simply wanted the official rules, as written, to be enforced, I wanted meaningful reforms implemented, and I wanted reasonable compensation because Museum staff violated my rights.
Given your response, I will press forward to spur meaningful reforms and to obtain justice, which includes a refund of my admission ticket and reasonable compensation.
I  blind copied others. If you reply, please click on “Reply All”.
Kindest regards,
– Peter

Director General, Imperial War Museum Diane Lees’ October 15, 2009 email response to me regarding my October 14, 2009 letter that I emailed to her:

From: “Diane Lees” <DLees@IWM.ORG.UK>
To: pmancus@comcast.net
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 3:37:05 AM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
Subject: Re: Reply to e-mail 13.10.2009

Dear Mr Mancus,

I am in no way obstructing your right to request a review by the Trustees.  I have taken this response as your formal request to start this process and will forward all details to the Chairman for allocation to a review panel.

I will contact you again when the panel is in place.

Diane Lees


Your complaint has been elevated from the Director General, Ms Diane Lee, to me as Chairman of Trustees…

To read a PDF of the entire one-page letter from Sir Peter Squire, dated November 4, 2009, CLICK HERE.


Here is a PDF copy of the refund check I received from the Imperial War Museum. The refund was issued at the request of Sir Peter Squire, as explained above.


December 17, 2009

All,

I have access to a behind the scenes statistics counter that tells me a lot about the www.cloud9photography.us Internet site.

This morning, while checking the search terms used for that site and the “landing pages”, etc., I noticed something for the first time [and I do this check frequently]. What I noticed is this: There were about 20 “peter mancus duxford” searches, all from the U.K.

I suppose Google and some of the other search engines finally picked up what is posted on the C9P blog and folks are now finding out that it exists. If so, my side of the Duxford dispute will finally be available to the masses.

It remains to be decided if, over time, in the court of public opinion and in the opinion of Duxford air show fans, I am a “goat” [the loud, rude, American] or a fan with the gumption to stand up to a damn bully and for the official rules and if the Imperial War Museum General Director and if the Imperial War Museum, Duxford, Director, are museum directors who are doing a good job, or, in the alternative, if their handling of crowd control issues and my complaints to them amounts to them “directing” a public relations train wreck in the making.

It also remains to be decided if the Mancus-bashers will get smart, smell the coffee, figure out where their best interests lie, stop railing against me, and join me and support the recommendations I made to these Directors so everyone, except the bullies, etc., can enjoy a better Duxford airshow without rude people blocking their view and without people standing on step-ladders.

I am NOT optimistic. I believe that most Brits and most Duxford airshow fans of all nationalities will not do anything constructive or effective because most people want benefits without burdens. Most people suffer from a horrible case of inertia, fear four words ["What will others think?"], are lazy, will not take the time to write anything, do not think critically, and succumb to peer group pressure. Most people are, at best, cheer leaders or fans, not crusaders or reformers or hard chargers.

While watching a re-run of the movie “Patton”, I had a big laugh when Patton, toward the end of the movie, told a group of British women, in the UK, something to this effect, “. . . we are all good people joined together in pursuit of a great, noble, worthy cause, separated by a common language.”, whereby all the British ladies broke into laughter over “separated by a common language.” I laughed hard over that line and instantly involuntarily recalled how these Directors responded to my complaints and recommendations and interpreted away what, on its face, appears to be an absolute, categorical, unequivocal, clear, bright line, namely the IWM’s and Duxford Flying Legends’ rule, “No stepladders are allowed except for media . . .”, or words to that effect. I seriously doubt if the British dictionary defines “no” differently from American dictionaries.

Even if there is no great ground swell from other air show fans demanding that my suggested reforms be implemented, my conscience is clear, and I remain convinced that my recommendations to the IWM’s senior leadership are excellent and would make Flying Legends a much better airshow, namely, more enjoyable and safer. I also know that I communicated the truth as I know it, I invested my time and mental energy to be constructive to spur reforms because I give a damn [oops, I used that forbidden word--"damn",] and I do intend to pursue this matter further with the British Parliamentary Ombudsman. Hence, this fight is not over.

Sir Peter Squire will not have the final word.

If that Ombudsman is any good, a big “if”, the odds are decent that my recommendations will be implemented and the remaining two items of my proposal for an amicable settlement will be finally accepted by the IWM: first, an unequivocal formal apology and second, reasonable compensation beyond the reimbursement of one day’s admission fee.

– Peter Mancus