Whisky, Tango, Foxrot, Over

[pecunium]

I wish this weren't so believable.

A guy in Iraq has sent a couple of e-mails describing a pattern of what can only be called censorship on the network in Iraq.

This is the list of website he says are blocked, as well as some which aren't.

Unfortunately anonomizers don't work out here (never have). Anyway, I had a few minutes today and thought I'd look and see what else was banned on the Marine web here. I think the results speak for themselves:

* Wonkette – “Forbidden, this page (http://www.wonkette.com/) is categorized as: Forum/Bulletin Boards, Politics/Opinion.”
* Bill O’Reilly (www.billoreilly.com) – OK
* Air America (www.airamericaradio.com) – “Forbidden, this page (http://www.airamericaradio.com/) is categorized as: Internet Radio/TV, Politics/Opinion.”
* Rush Limbaugh (www.rushlimbaugh.com) – OK
* ABC News “The Note” – OK
* Website of the Al Franken Show (www.alfrankenshow.com) – “Forbidden, this page (http://www.airamericaradio.com/) is categorized as: Internet Radio/TV, Politics/Opinion.”
* G. Gordon Liddy Show (www.liddyshow.us) – OK
* Don & Mike Show (www.donandmikewebsite.com) – “Forbidden, this page (http://www.donandmikewebsite.com/) is categorized as: Profanity, Entertainment/Recreation/Hobbies.”

When we used our "mommy-note from hell" on the 1st BCT of the 101st to get a NIPRNet drop (real internet service, as oppose to just SIPRNet, which is secure, and so doesn't talk to the outside web. I could get EarlyBird, but nothing else. Thankfully the CIA thinks a wide variety of opinion and news is valuable in making decisions, so I was able to get a fairly rounded picture of the war, as well as things stateside) I discovered that I couldn't access Blogger, or Lj, or Blogspot, or any such site. Moveable Type pages were Ok so I could read Making Light and it's (now cojoined) Electorlite, and I could get e-mail. The explanation was that blogs used too much bandwidth. I thought it a tad specious, but as a class they were banned, it wasn't really censorship because no one was being preferentially allowed in.

The system was borked... they didn't know what other things, which were blogs (or so bloglike as to be undistinguishable) really were, and so I could (whimsically), shame poor pnh into sending me a galley proof of Sethra Lavode by skzbrust which was a great comfort to me in hospital, as well as let people who were worried about me know I was doing all right.

But things changed, and before the year was out people were getting blogs. Some of the access was controlled by KBR (and some of that access had to be paid for) but the web was the web.

Look at that list.

Air America is forbidden because it is, "Internet Radio/TV Politics Opinion" but Rush Limbaugh (who those who say the left is worse than they right and Limbaigh is a fringe player, not a real representative of the Right) is allowed. So is Bill O'Reilly, and G. Gordon Liddy (who once said people needed good gun control {i.e. being able to hit the target} because federal agents wear body armor, so you have make headshots, under pressure).

What
The
Fuck?

Or, as a comedian used to say, "That's not riight!"

Because it isn't. Thats pandering, it's propagandizing the troops. And if they keep it up, it'll backfire (or should) Because the troops (according to a recent poll) think things are screwd up. A lot (most, according to some reads, but not seeing the internals I can't say) think we ought to pull out now. It's going to be tough (well, looking at how easily some of the "core conservative values, like small government, distrust of federal authority, balanced budgets, minimal entitlement programs, reduced spending, clear measures of victory; with a defined exit strategy, and absolute avoidance of nation building, personal responsibilty, ethics in government, slavish adoration of the rule of law, and the like, have been tossed out the window, it may not be so hard) to claim that the poor morale of the troops is because they are being stabbed in the back by a defeatist press.

Comments

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

This surprises whom?

B

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

I wish it truly surprised me.

There seemed to be a thread of openess; for a time, so far as could be told, my friends in theater could get to any website they wanted (including stuff, like porn, which was court-martial material).

I know that in Korea, everything I wanted to read was available (which was only true if I was using an Army network, because there were place it seems the Korean servers were blocking).

So while I'm not surprised, I am annoyed.

TK

[crisavec.livejournal.com]

While is certainly possible its delibrate censorship, I'd find it alot more likely that its the default "most restrictive" settings on whatever censorware box they are using.

I'll admit I have nothing to base that statement on, other than working in the IT field and knowing how easy it is to throw something together because the higher-ups said "Do it, now", and to just accept whatever the defaults are.

[bifemmefatale.livejournal.com]

That doesn't make any sense in light of what was restricted and what was not.


I'd like to see if NPR.org is blocked.

[pnh.livejournal.com]

"Shame"?

[ckd]

boingboing has been covering censorware a lot lately since SmartFilter decided they were "nudity". I wonder if this is the same software/database.

[crisavec.livejournal.com]

The stuff that gets put on block lists is truely absurd. I recall a brief period where Websense blocked Livejournal as pornography at all sites that used its automatic updates. None of the sites that manualy updated had any issues with it.

As for the oddities, when you accept the default most restrictive, but then have a handful of higherups that want their site unblocked...well, they get whatever they want.

yeh, it sounds like i'm just justifying it, but I've been on active duty running networks, and I've also done big corp projects as a civilian, and I've seen these EXACT things happen so often I can't even count them anymore.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Well, no, probably not, and certainly I wasn't trying for that (to shame you

Lessee... the exchange went,

terry.karney ::: (view all by) ::: June 11, 2003, 10:13 AM:


And I a poor soul stuck here in the heath of northern Iraq (not being so far North as to compare it to any parts of Utah) with the first of the Adrilankha novels, knowing there were very slim odds of getting the second, have read you commenting on the third. TANJ!

You have my deepest, and most cordial envy. Right now I would I were in your shoes.

Your response (in e-mail) of "Great googly mooglies!" was touching in ways I can't describe. More than the book, in fact. Contact with real people, whom I didn't see in their skivvies seven days a week was more boon than the odd gifts (and some of them were very odd).

TK

[bifemmefatale.livejournal.com]

Yeah, up until recently Panera, which has free but filtered wi-fi, was blocking LJ as "adult content". At least around here, a quick email from one of my friends fixed that.

Why Panera feels it necessary to filter their access, I don't know. To me, porn, coffee and baked goods are a good combo. :P

[crisavec.livejournal.com]

That was pretty much my point right there :-)

Prolly to avoid little timmy getting an eyefull as he walks past...but for the rest of us, sounds good to me! :-)

[wcg.livejournal.com]

For what it's worth, I get the same results when trying to connect to the various places from work. Given that Honeywell is a defense contractor (as well as a NASA contractor) it might just be that we're using the same lists.

[sunfell.livejournal.com]

May I crosspost this?

Also, we should make up a list of sites (like NPR, for instance) for folks we're in contact with over there to try out. I see a distinctly right wing bias developing here. Rush is OK and Air America isn't?

And we should check the religious links. Would Americans United be allowed? How about SPLC? Would the major right wing religious sites (focus on the family, global harvest church) be permitted? How about Pagan sites like The Witches Voice? Or Atheists or liberal churches?

This is very interesting- and potentially explosive. We need to do our homework and explore this more deeply. It would be horrible if our soldiers are being deliberately 'shaped' and targeted by right wing interests.

[neadods.livejournal.com]

"Would be"? Take a look at what is or isn't allowed on the Armed Forces Network and Armed Forces radio sometimes. I'm not even remotely surprised that they've censored the internet to fall in line with the one-sided propaganda already being foisted on the troops in the name of news and entertainment.

[sunfell.livejournal.com]

The letter quoted has made BoingBOing.

The crap is going to hit the fan now... I wonder when Kos is going to grab it?

News for Nerds

[royeh.livejournal.com]

http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/03/07/1613236&threshold=-1

[don-fitch.livejournal.com]

Yes, we need (I think) lotsa homework -- on-the-ground lists of blocked and unblocked sites, by numerous relatively-unbiased sources. My own inclination is to ascribe the situation to incompetence (hey, I was in the Army fifty-some years ago, and observed some monumental snafus during those two years) -- it could easily be due to installing an overly-enthusiastic-algorithm blocker. (Why anything should be blocked is another, though important, question.) But it _could_ be an attempt at political censhorship and psychological manipulation. If the latter, I think Terry is right -- it would probably backfire. Indeed, that's the one ray of hope I can see. The American public are sometimes not especially bright, and might fall for the heating the water gradually until the frog dies approach, but I rather think the NeoCons are operating just a wee bit too fast, and that we (as a large majority) are soon going to get our hackles up. Americans have always been pretty good at that, and I think we still are, even though we're sometimes a mite slow about it.

Excuse me, but may I ask?

[killslowly.livejournal.com]

Since when, is the fact that military personnel are right leaning a break in the news?

Most webservers in the military (especially overseas) where bandwith is at a premium, will block most access, with the exception to mission related websites (that includes most .mil, .gov, etc).

Then, General Snuffy comes upon a site that he wanted to read (ie. General Snuffy is quoted in a letter written to Rush Limbaugh). He wants to read it, he asks for access, and guess what. He is a general and he gets it.

SGT Doe, wants to read a rant posted on lets say, Wonkette. He asks for access, and he does not get it, because it is not related to mission accomplishment nor does it contribute to the good order and morale of the military. He is only a Sergeant, and his pull is not as great as that of a General (or Colonel for that matter).

So guess what. Most generals are right leaning. And if they are left leaning, they keep their mouths shut, because they have a career to take care off.

The left leaning Sergeant probably does not have to worry about his career to much. He can bitch and whine about the current administration, and he will have a couple of ears who will listen, but the majority of his unit will not give a crap about his opinion. And if they do, they probably will make fun of him, ask him why he is still in, blah blah blah.

When I started my career, I was a bit on the crazy side. Punk Rocker, wanna be anarchist with an attitude. But I never got an Article 15, nor a bad counseling statement (well, I actually got one for not shaving). And my access to whatever I wanted to read was never blocked, because I took it upon myself to keeping informed.

My political attitudes did not interfere with the morale and good order of my unit. I worked my ass off and nobody could complain. My first sergeant would make fun of my 20 hole Doc Martens, but that is about the extent of the harrasment.

So what am I getting at? The military is mostly composed of right wing people. You add that with a bit of machismo, put a spoonful of southern redneck, a tad of rank pulling, people laughing at the left wing whiner, and you get the internet access policy we have in place today.

When more left leaning generals get some cojones, then maybe you can read wonkette, Al Franken, and many more bitchy whinny left wing "contributors".

But as of today, all that stuff is just bandwith waste for the majority of military personnel in theater.

I need three cents back. I gave .05 instead of .02. LOL

By the way, I am posting this from a government network. Nobody censoring me here.

Re: Excuse me, but may I ask?

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

The problems are at least twofold, one of which directly addresses your belief the military is, very right wing.

The most compelling point is that, should the Marine Corps (or the Army, or the Dept. of Forestry, be restricting access to anything based on content, not mere bandwidth, it's illegal. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that restrictions which are not content neutral are unfair inhibitions on speech.

The Court has consistently held the only reasons which are acceptable on the part of a Gov't entity in the restriction of speech, esp. political speech, are those restrictions which are content neutral. Thomas v. Chicago Park Dist., No. 00-1249 (U.S. 01/15/2002), The CDA, Reno v ACLU.

The EEO is issue is similar, accepting, arguendo the more right wing aspect of the army, then not allowing those who aren't of that stripe access to things they want to read, while supporting those who wish to read things of a different opinion, would be creating a hostile work environment, sort of like hanging the cenerfold from Hustler behind the desk, or telling anti-Catholic jokes in formation.

If the bandwidth is that precious (and free access to blogger, and Lj, in theater, give a bit of lie to that sort of complaint about things like Wonkette, or Talking Points Memo) then a balanced access, to viewpoints across the spectrum is still possible. But, though the sample size is small) that doesn't seem to be the case.

TK

Re: Excuse me, but may I ask?

[killslowly.livejournal.com]

I am not justifying the lack of access due to the military's right wing leanings. That is not the point I tried to make.

The point was that all access is limited (all of it, right wing, left wing, fringe, porno, etc.)

You get a high ranking person asking for access, he gets it. You get a low level person asking for access he does not get it.

High ranking people tend to be more political (read: worried about their pension, read: right wing).

Lower ranking people tend to be less political (read: not worried about their pensions that much, less worried about the status quo).

Then, we get the internet access we now have. I wonder what job that marine has. Because when I was working over there, my internet access was not an issue. I was to busy to be compiling a list of "accessible" sites. I was more concerned with SIPERNET access and when I was going to get some sleep.

Net access is also usually regulated at Brigade and above levels. So some people get more access than others. Look at me right now. I get all the access I want and more. Granted that there were some sites I wanted to read that were blocked, but now they are not.

Should J6 and net control NCOs and Officers be more "politically balanced"? Should we now create a "politically sensitive training" class? We already waste time with "Sensitive to Others" training, the politically correct monster being force fed to us by regulation.

Common Terry. What you just answered ignores all the experience you have with the military and how the system works. For you to ignore your knowledge and leave the issue murky in order for it to be copacetic with your reading audience is just dishonest.

What I am also saying is that, in order for the access to be more balanced, people who are in charge of us that are more moderate or left leaning should voice out their opinion, ask for the access and then... guess what, we get it. The military is not a democracy, but it tends to work out in very democratic ways (sometimes).

Have fun in Hangul Land.

Mr. Jerry

P.S.: you better be bringing some awesome photos from Europe you mofo. I want one with you wearing a kilt. For some reason, I figure you are about the only person that can pull it off nicely. Me? Think fat bastard with a bad hair day.

Re: Excuse me, but may I ask?

[killslowly.livejournal.com]

Just to prove a point:

I went to all the above mentioned sites. This is what I got:

http://www.wonkette.com Accessible
www.billoreilly.com Accessible
www.airamericaradio.com Accessible
www.rushlimbaugh.com Accessible
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/ Accessible
www.alfrankenshow.com This Page Cannot Be Displayed

but I went to the following Al Franken related pages:

http://www.alfrankenweb.com/forum/
http://www.ohthethingsiknow.com/ (official webpage)
http://www.lyingliar.com/ (official website)
you get the point

www.liddyshow.us Accessible
www.donandmikewebsite.com Accessible

If anybody has any questions, or would like to check the accessibility of websites from my military network, just ask.

Much love,

Mr. Jerry

P.S.: I get all the access I want. Would this be because I am based in the US? Maybe I am in California (more liberal state?), maybe the military is not trying to censor my access? I dunno. I am just a brainwashed low level soldier. LOL.