Army Forbids Troops From Blogging

[Extend a Hand]

http://www.wired.com/politics/onlinerights/news/2007/05/army_bloggers

The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages, without first clearing the content with a superior officer, Wired News has learned. The directive, issued April 19, is the sharpest restriction on troops' online activities since the start of the Iraq war. And it could mean the end of military blogs, observers say.

Military officials have been wrestling for years with how to handle troops who publish blogs. Officers have weighed the need for wartime secrecy against the opportunities for the public to personally connect with some of the most effective advocates for the operations in Afghanistan and Iraq -- the troops themselves. The secret-keepers have generally won the argument, and the once-permissive atmosphere has slowly grown more tightly regulated. Soldier-bloggers have dropped offline as a result.

The new rules (.pdf) obtained by Wired News require a commander be consulted before every blog update.

[Iwasthere]

1. Next the soldiers won't be allowed to call their wifes and familes

[BlooInBloo]

2. Oh god - what atrocity are they committing now? Sigh.

[EFerrari]

3. What are they afraid of? Cowards.

[Breeze54]

4. They're running scared...

I don't think it'll stop them though. Just a hunch.

[Tom Joad]

5. I suspect the need the military sees is to quash growing dissent.

They don't want a repeat of this:


Go here to see full size image:
http://tomjoad.org/sirmymen_large.htm

And here to see some of the public military resisters
http://tomjoad.org/WarHeroes.htm

[lvx35]

8. I suspect exactly the same.

A lot of good people over there who have expressed dissent have gotten dead, but now the dissent is growing to an extent where they can't look at it as a small group of "traitors" but now as a growing phenomenon.

[Roland99]

19. Yeah, because all those negative ninnies are emboldening the enemy.

Damn commie-lib soldiers.





:sarcasm:

[DaveJ]

6. Way to spread freedom

:sarcasm:

[Botany]

7. Ben Franklin would be so proud n/t

[gipper66]

10. truth

We wouldn't want the truth unfiltered by the whore media?

[Botany]

12. These are not republicans

Dwight Eisenhower, Abe Lincoln, and Barry Goldwater were repubs ....

These are fascist thugs who have taken over our country.

[Lasher]

14. Right, these are Reaganite neocon fascists

Ike was actually a good president - a great one by today's standards.

[uppityperson]

9. Can't send personal e-mail messages without censoring first?

[Madspirit]

11. k&r and this sucks...n/t

[MazeRat7]

13. When you sign a contract they kind-of have you by the short hairs don't they -nt

[fed-up]

15. this is one way for friends/family to check loved ones-if permission needed 1st they may not post nt

[militaryspouse]

16. ..

i can understand blogging, but personal emails? If someone has to read what my husband tells me before I actually read it, they are no longer private. Just how long would it take to be approved, then sent...a week..a day? I don't really see this being too enforced.

[bdamomma]

17. are they holding them hostage????

[wicket]

18. K & R

:kick:

[electron_blue]

20. Frankly I'm surprised they allowed this for the last 4 yrs

[genie_weenie]

21. It's about time we shut up those disloyal troops!

How dare they try and influence the political process, we have a civilian controlled Imperial military. The troops are cogs, who are indentured to servivtude for a minimum of 8 years. Half of which should be spent defending AMERICA'S interests overseas...

[halobeam]

22. kick and rec

[xxqqqzme]

23. my dad told me once

that when mail was censored w/ scissors during WWII, guys would have contests to see which letter would come back in the most little pieces.

But this is much worse - this is censorship of opinion.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

24. I couldn't help but notice this passage in the original article:

Active-duty troops aren't the only ones affected by the new guidelines. Civilians working for the military, Army contractors -- even soldiers' families -- are all subject to the directive as well.

How can a military FAMILY member, if they are not a uniformed soldier, possibly be subject to Army regulations? What penalty can the Army impose on such a person?

We've had that issue come up here on DU where wingnut soldier wives have tried to get DUer soldier wives into "trouble" with the base command. There's no jurisdiction there.

[bouwob1]

25. good to know

that those who fight for our freedom are not allowed any freedoms themselves.