The only mention of photography in that example was of a military base. There aren't likely to be publicly available photos of a military base, so I can see why you'd want photos for planning.
This is completely different from a public landmark in the US which for which you will easily be able to find hundreds or thousands of photos from every conceivable angle.
I've still yet to see any evidence that overt photography or a public landmark would be useful to a terrorist, or any evidence that this has actually happened with enough frequency to classify photographing landmarks as suspicious behavior, or for that matter ever happened at all.
I'm not denying that terrorists conduct surveillance. What I'd like to see is evidence that they do so through overt photography of public landmarks and buildings.
This is completely different from a public landmark in the US which for which you will easily be able to find hundreds or thousands of photos from every conceivable angle.
I've still yet to see any evidence that overt photography or a public landmark would be useful to a terrorist, or any evidence that this has actually happened with enough frequency to classify photographing landmarks as suspicious behavior, or for that matter ever happened at all.
I'm not denying that terrorists conduct surveillance. What I'd like to see is evidence that they do so through overt photography of public landmarks and buildings.