Thu Jun 27, 2013, 08:56 PM
Hissyspit (45,783 posts)
Restricted Web Access to The Guardian is Armywide, Officials Say
Source: Monterey Herald
Restricted web access to The Guardian is Armywide, officials say By PHILLIP MOLNAR Herald Staff Writer Posted: 06/27/2013 03:12:16 PM PDT Updated: 06/27/2013 06:00:12 PM The Army admitted Thursday to not only restricting access to The Guardian news website at the Presidio of Monterey, as reported in Thursday's Herald, but Armywide. Presidio employees said the site had been blocked since The Guardian broke several stories on data collection by the National Security Agency. Gordon Van Vleet, an Arizona-based spokesman for the Army Network Enterprise Technology Command, or NETCOM, said in an email the Army is filtering "some access to press coverage and online content about the NSA leaks." He wrote it is routine for the Department of Defense to take preventative "network hygiene" measures to mitigate unauthorized disclosures of classified information. Read more: http://www.montereyherald.com/local/ci_23554739/restricted-web-access-guardian-is-army-wide-officials
|
47 replies, 7396 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
Hissyspit | Jun 2013 | OP |
Crowman1979 | Jun 2013 | #1 | |
L0oniX | Jun 2013 | #4 | |
movonne | Jun 2013 | #11 | |
Iliyah | Jun 2013 | #39 | |
L0oniX | Jun 2013 | #43 | |
L0oniX | Jun 2013 | #2 | |
Art_from_Ark | Jun 2013 | #10 | |
Ash_F | Jun 2013 | #3 | |
leveymg | Jun 2013 | #5 | |
Jack Rabbit | Jun 2013 | #6 | |
wtmusic | Jun 2013 | #19 | |
bemildred | Jun 2013 | #40 | |
giftedgirl77 | Jun 2013 | #7 | |
Kurovski | Jun 2013 | #9 | |
L0oniX | Jun 2013 | #12 | |
Iliyah | Jun 2013 | #20 | |
L0oniX | Jun 2013 | #44 | |
giftedgirl77 | Jun 2013 | #13 | |
leveymg | Jun 2013 | #17 | |
giftedgirl77 | Jun 2013 | #18 | |
leveymg | Jun 2013 | #21 | |
giftedgirl77 | Jun 2013 | #27 | |
bemildred | Jun 2013 | #41 | |
RILib | Jun 2013 | #46 | |
giftedgirl77 | Jun 2013 | #47 | |
Kurovski | Jun 2013 | #8 | |
Bonhomme Richard | Jun 2013 | #14 | |
alittlelark | Jun 2013 | #15 | |
Iliyah | Jun 2013 | #16 | |
jeff47 | Jun 2013 | #22 | |
davidpdx | Jun 2013 | #24 | |
jeff47 | Jun 2013 | #26 | |
davidpdx | Jun 2013 | #28 | |
jeff47 | Jun 2013 | #30 | |
davidpdx | Jun 2013 | #34 | |
davidpdx | Jun 2013 | #23 | |
Psephos | Jun 2013 | #25 | |
eaglesclaw | Jun 2013 | #29 | |
jtuck004 | Jun 2013 | #38 | |
Iliyah | Jun 2013 | #31 | |
DeSwiss | Jun 2013 | #32 | |
Iliyah | Jun 2013 | #36 | |
Iliyah | Jun 2013 | #33 | |
DemoTex | Jun 2013 | #35 | |
Iliyah | Jun 2013 | #37 | |
askeptic | Jun 2013 | #42 | |
pmorlan1 | Jun 2013 | #45 |
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 08:59 PM
Crowman1979 (3,844 posts)
1. Well if the government hates it, then I gotta have it!
Response to Crowman1979 (Reply #1)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:05 PM
L0oniX (31,493 posts)
4. "unauthorized disclosures of classified information" from The Guardian ...geee
so our news media is the only authorized info source?
|
Response to L0oniX (Reply #4)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:14 PM
movonne (9,623 posts)
11. but, but , can they have access to Rush???
Response to L0oniX (Reply #4)
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 12:07 AM
Iliyah (24,984 posts)
39. And India?
Many died. Where is the eff of compassion?
|
Response to Iliyah (Reply #39)
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 09:57 AM
L0oniX (31,493 posts)
43. ??? Did you post in the wrong thread?
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:01 PM
L0oniX (31,493 posts)
2. Must be some truth telling going on over there. We can't be having that in our military.
Hey ...is that slime ball Rush still getting air time on military radio?
|
Response to L0oniX (Reply #2)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:13 PM
Art_from_Ark (27,247 posts)
10. The last time I checked (about 2 months ago), Slimeball Rush
was still getting air time on military radio (Eagle 810, Tokyo)
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:02 PM
Ash_F (5,861 posts)
3. "Guys China is aweful and undemocrtic"
As they proceed to censor the news.
"argle bargle" they added |
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:08 PM
leveymg (36,418 posts)
5. Dumbing down the officer corps' access to information. That's a recipe for success.
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:11 PM
Jack Rabbit (45,984 posts)
6. How stupid are these people
Sure, censor it at work. The employees can read it when they go home at night.
I beginning to think that the Bushies never left power. Why the fuck is this program still in place? And if this is a solution to the problem of informed citizens (as if that were a problem), then it is so idiotic as to be worthy of the Frat Boy himself. Informed citizens are only a problem to authoritarian "leaders." |
Response to Jack Rabbit (Reply #6)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:06 PM
wtmusic (39,166 posts)
19. No fucking kidding.
Listening to Feinstein and even Obama go on and on about Snowden without even acknowledging surveillance abuses is sickening.
When do the grownups arrive? |
Response to Jack Rabbit (Reply #6)
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 06:13 AM
bemildred (90,061 posts)
40. Very very stupid. In fact they can be thrown in jail if they don't act stupid.
I.e. don't continue to lie to us as they are instructed according to the daily government line.
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:11 PM
giftedgirl77 (4,713 posts)
7. It's been that way for
well over 2 weeks. It happens fairly regularly but in this situation it is because the documents on the site are still considered classified & therefore can't take the chance of having them downloaded onto our unclassified networks. That ladies & gentlemen is called spillage and causes the systems effected to be pulled of the network, wiped, & reclassified.
Not to mention we don't know if there are any viruses attached to them that could further compromise the systems. |
Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #7)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:13 PM
Kurovski (34,652 posts)
9. Sounds official and professional. (nt)
Response to Kurovski (Reply #9)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:18 PM
L0oniX (31,493 posts)
12. Joseph Goebbels would be proud.
Response to L0oniX (Reply #12)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:07 PM
Iliyah (24,984 posts)
20. Now I guess you know that Rush Limbaugh
is on the military airwaves alongwith other "Conservatives" talk shows. Liberals, a no no. Tell me otherwise.
|
Response to Iliyah (Reply #20)
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 09:59 AM
L0oniX (31,493 posts)
44. See post #4 ...and get some coffee soon. You're not making much sense.
Response to Kurovski (Reply #9)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:21 PM
giftedgirl77 (4,713 posts)
13. That's the way it is
I only found out about it because I tried to click the link to the article but have enough sense not to get anywhere near the classified docs. Unfortunately there are many in the military that don't have any type of clearances don't get the repeated training on spillage as often as they should.
It's not a restriction thing but a security issue.I just thought some professional insight might be helpful. ![]() |
Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #13)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:45 PM
leveymg (36,418 posts)
17. Sounds like security issues become restriction things. A lot in that institution.
How does the Army expect to think itself out of the mess it's in if personnel are averse to reading unauthorized sites that might contain "spilled" classified information? What's next to declared off-limits: The Washington Post?
|
Response to leveymg (Reply #17)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:58 PM
giftedgirl77 (4,713 posts)
18. If they contain the classified
material then yes. The docs in question can't be downloaded onto our unsecure networks because they are still considered classified & in doing so causes the systems that were used to download the info to now be contaminated. Once contaminated they have to be pulled & wiped & all sorts of crap. If 1000s of Soldiers are downloading these items, then all of those systems have to be pulled.
The military blocks all kinds of crap at one point last year they blocked ESPN for a while because of something stupid, there is many sites blocked at any given time. Not to mention these are gov computers so technically they can block whatever they want since technically we aren't supposed to use them for personal stuff anyways. |
Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #18)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:09 PM
leveymg (36,418 posts)
21. I understand the reason being given, but it strikes one as unnecessary, rigid, and restrictive. In
other words, military.
Once something is in the public domain, it should simply be treated as declassified. But, that would spoil all the nice straight lines and boxes that have been created. "There's the right way, the wrong way, and the Army Way" - looks like that still applies. ![]() |
Response to leveymg (Reply #21)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:40 PM
giftedgirl77 (4,713 posts)
27. It sucks but such as life at times
there is never an easy way to go about things in the military. I stopped trying to figure out most of th bs a long time ago.
I would be much happier if they would block Faux News on the TVs. The docs think my blood pressure is terrible & I'm a bit crazy because it spikes when I'm stuck listening to that crap in their waiting rooms. |
Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #27)
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 06:17 AM
bemildred (90,061 posts)
41. Thank you for your service.
![]() |
Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #27)
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 11:11 AM
RILib (862 posts)
46. why is PBS never on the tvs in waiting rooms
or videos of dolphins or something? It's always idiot blathering morons or Faux.
|
Response to RILib (Reply #46)
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 12:27 PM
giftedgirl77 (4,713 posts)
47. I don't know but it's
annoying as hell.
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:11 PM
Kurovski (34,652 posts)
8. Do they still allow Plush Lintball's braying to be heard on their bases?
Is there anything surprising about anything anymore?
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:21 PM
Bonhomme Richard (8,870 posts)
14. Childish. n/t
This is the DU member formerly known as Bonhomme Richard.
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:30 PM
alittlelark (17,986 posts)
15. Of Course !!! We can't have them knowing what they're defending !!
Cuz they might THINK ABOUT IT..........
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:37 PM
Iliyah (24,984 posts)
16. Rand Paul has the hook up!
smiles
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:14 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
22. To copy my answer from another thread, they actually have a point.
Leaking isn't declassification.
So if someone with a clearance pulls up a Guardian story that contains the leaked memos, that person will now be having a very, very bad day. Because they just put classified information on an unclassified computer. Now, that person with a clearance can read a story discussing the documents without causing a problem. But the documents themselves on an unclassified computer are a big no-no. In addition to the shit they will have to personally endure, all the computer and network hardware between the classified person and the Internet has to be scrubbed. Blocking the Guardian probably saves the taxpayers a pile of cash, since the Guardian folks love to put the actual classified documents in their stories without any warning. If the Guardian doesn't want that, they should put the actual documents behind a "Click here to see the documents" link. That way, everyone who wants to read them can, and everyone who can't read them won't be entering an expensive shitstorm. This is what happened with Manning's leaks - the actual documents were behind links, so people with clearances could read the stories without hitting the documents. OTOH, that would really interfere with all the "Look how Orwellian they are!!" charges. |
Response to jeff47 (Reply #22)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:30 PM
davidpdx (22,000 posts)
24. The funny thing is people are going to claim the "Orwellian" element
which is a complete falsehood as at the same time they are also pointing out that the website is accessible off base. Now if the US Government banned the site anywhere in the country that would be completely different.
|
Response to davidpdx (Reply #24)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:35 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
26. Being accessible off-base doesn't fix the problem.
If the person with a clearance downloads the documents on their home computer, they're still in deep trouble.
Doesn't matter where they find the classified document, they still have to treat it as classified. If they found a document laying on the floor of a supermarket while they were on vacation in Canada, they still have to treat it as classified. |
Response to jeff47 (Reply #26)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:42 PM
davidpdx (22,000 posts)
28. The government really can't stop them from having access to the website off base
I'm not defending or supporting their access off-base, but stating that it's not something they can easily control. My main point is that on base (or in a Defense Department Building) an employer has the right to block a site. That's what people are pissing and moaning about. Instead of the government, use a bank and whether employees have access to porn sites (which could have viruses).
|
Response to davidpdx (Reply #28)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:45 PM
jeff47 (26,549 posts)
30. Not really, but the costs of doing it are way too large.
If the person with a clearance reads the documents at home, it is unlikely that the security people at work will find out about it.
But that person is supposed to report it to the people at work. And failing to report it is a monumental, colossal, gigantic, there-are-not-big-enough-adjectives no-no. So the person might get away with it. Or their next polygraph may end with handcuffs. |
Response to jeff47 (Reply #30)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:57 PM
davidpdx (22,000 posts)
34. True, I guess most do have to go through polygraphs
Never thought of that, good point.
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:27 PM
davidpdx (22,000 posts)
23. They have a right to block sites on computers within the base
Outside the base is another thing. The military is an employer. Obviously they can't stop people from accessing it outside the base. There are plenty of employers who block websites. My mom works for a hospital in the business office and several people spent time on Facebook, etc so they had to block it.
Am I for censorship? No. Employers do have a right to block websites with content that is objectionable. As for Rush Limpballs, I wish they'd get rid of that crap as well. |
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:33 PM
Psephos (8,032 posts)
25. They can die for their country, but they can't read a newspaper.
WTF are they willing to die protecting, again?
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:43 PM
eaglesclaw (15 posts)
29. Nothing Unusual about it, You are in the Military not the Boy Scouts
Any body who served in nam knows the AFVN radio Saigon was censored, and didn't allow heavy rock music. Hanoi Hanna played it, but we were also forbidden to listen to her enemy radio station. The third alternative was defiance radio from the base camp troops, and that was called the Bullchit band, and each battalion & division basecamps had their own radio station playing the heavy music the troops in the field enjoyed as well as delivering out news, etc. So there was Radio Bear Cat, Radio lai Kai, Bien Hoa, for all the Division camps, because the prc radios had a limited braodcast distance.
The bullchit band took a prc field radio set to an unused band, keyed open, and set next to a record player speaker. Some times these base camp radios were under the elevated tents, in a tent, in a bunker or cook shack, etc. There was kind of a game played out as the MPs attempted to locate these base radio stations and close them down by using tri- angulation methods. Meanwhile the night patrols could set up to that band and have the forbidden music. In short - the radio was censored in nam to the troops. |
Response to eaglesclaw (Reply #29)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:35 PM
jtuck004 (15,882 posts)
38. And it was wrong and stupid and useless then too. n/t
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:56 PM
DeSwiss (27,137 posts)
32. Who's army is this again?
![]() |
Response to DeSwiss (Reply #32)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:12 PM
Iliyah (24,984 posts)
36. I'm asking again
where were you? The military gave radio to people like Rush.
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:56 PM
Iliyah (24,984 posts)
33. Where the eff where you
Liberal.
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:09 PM
DemoTex (24,377 posts)
35. But Limbaugh still pollutes Armed Forces Radio.
What is wrong with this picture?
This is the DU member formerly known as DemoTex.
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:29 PM
Iliyah (24,984 posts)
37. Correct.
Misinformation, but oh no the P word.
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 08:35 AM
askeptic (478 posts)
42. Well, just more evidence we live in a fascist country
especially when ppl like Limbaugh are allowed to propagandize our troops with their venomous rhetoric
|
Response to Hissyspit (Original post)
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 10:50 AM
pmorlan1 (2,096 posts)
45. Censorship
The censorship is because they don't want our troops to know that the government is violating the Constitution that the military is sworn to protect and defend.
|