Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Hissyspit

(45,788 posts)
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 09:56 PM Jun 2013

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 = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Restricted Web Access to The Guardian is Armywide, Officials Say (Original Post) Hissyspit Jun 2013 OP
Well if the government hates it, then I gotta have it! Crowman1979 Jun 2013 #1
"unauthorized disclosures of classified information" from The Guardian ...geee L0oniX Jun 2013 #4
but, but , can they have access to Rush??? movonne Jun 2013 #11
And India? Iliyah Jun 2013 #39
??? Did you post in the wrong thread? L0oniX Jun 2013 #43
Must be some truth telling going on over there. We can't be having that in our military. L0oniX Jun 2013 #2
The last time I checked (about 2 months ago), Slimeball Rush Art_from_Ark Jun 2013 #10
"Guys China is aweful and undemocrtic" Ash_F Jun 2013 #3
Dumbing down the officer corps' access to information. That's a recipe for success. leveymg Jun 2013 #5
How stupid are these people Jack Rabbit Jun 2013 #6
No fucking kidding. wtmusic Jun 2013 #19
Very very stupid. In fact they can be thrown in jail if they don't act stupid. bemildred Jun 2013 #40
It's been that way for giftedgirl77 Jun 2013 #7
Sounds official and professional. (nt) Kurovski Jun 2013 #9
Joseph Goebbels would be proud. L0oniX Jun 2013 #12
Now I guess you know that Rush Limbaugh Iliyah Jun 2013 #20
See post #4 ...and get some coffee soon. You're not making much sense. L0oniX Jun 2013 #44
That's the way it is giftedgirl77 Jun 2013 #13
Sounds like security issues become restriction things. A lot in that institution. leveymg Jun 2013 #17
If they contain the classified giftedgirl77 Jun 2013 #18
I understand the reason being given, but it strikes one as unnecessary, rigid, and restrictive. In leveymg Jun 2013 #21
It sucks but such as life at times giftedgirl77 Jun 2013 #27
Thank you for your service. bemildred Jun 2013 #41
why is PBS never on the tvs in waiting rooms RILib Jun 2013 #46
I don't know but it's giftedgirl77 Jun 2013 #47
Do they still allow Plush Lintball's braying to be heard on their bases? Kurovski Jun 2013 #8
Childish. n/t Bonhomme Richard Jun 2013 #14
Of Course !!! We can't have them knowing what they're defending !! alittlelark Jun 2013 #15
Rand Paul has the hook up! Iliyah Jun 2013 #16
To copy my answer from another thread, they actually have a point. jeff47 Jun 2013 #22
The funny thing is people are going to claim the "Orwellian" element davidpdx Jun 2013 #24
Being accessible off-base doesn't fix the problem. jeff47 Jun 2013 #26
The government really can't stop them from having access to the website off base davidpdx Jun 2013 #28
Not really, but the costs of doing it are way too large. jeff47 Jun 2013 #30
True, I guess most do have to go through polygraphs davidpdx Jun 2013 #34
They have a right to block sites on computers within the base davidpdx Jun 2013 #23
They can die for their country, but they can't read a newspaper. Psephos Jun 2013 #25
Nothing Unusual about it, You are in the Military not the Boy Scouts eaglesclaw Jun 2013 #29
And it was wrong and stupid and useless then too. n/t jtuck004 Jun 2013 #38
Uh Huh Iliyah Jun 2013 #31
Who's army is this again? DeSwiss Jun 2013 #32
I'm asking again Iliyah Jun 2013 #36
Where the eff where you Iliyah Jun 2013 #33
But Limbaugh still pollutes Armed Forces Radio. DemoTex Jun 2013 #35
Correct. Iliyah Jun 2013 #37
Well, just more evidence we live in a fascist country askeptic Jun 2013 #42
Censorship pmorlan1 Jun 2013 #45
 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
4. "unauthorized disclosures of classified information" from The Guardian ...geee
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:05 PM
Jun 2013

so our news media is the only authorized info source?

 

L0oniX

(31,493 posts)
2. Must be some truth telling going on over there. We can't be having that in our military.
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:01 PM
Jun 2013

Hey ...is that slime ball Rush still getting air time on military radio?

Art_from_Ark

(27,247 posts)
10. The last time I checked (about 2 months ago), Slimeball Rush
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:13 PM
Jun 2013

was still getting air time on military radio (Eagle 810, Tokyo)

Jack Rabbit

(45,984 posts)
6. How stupid are these people
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:11 PM
Jun 2013

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."

wtmusic

(39,166 posts)
19. No fucking kidding.
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:06 PM
Jun 2013

Listening to Feinstein and even Obama go on and on about Snowden without even acknowledging surveillance abuses is sickening.

When do the grownups arrive?

bemildred

(90,061 posts)
40. Very very stupid. In fact they can be thrown in jail if they don't act stupid.
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 07:13 AM
Jun 2013

I.e. don't continue to lie to us as they are instructed according to the daily government line.

 

giftedgirl77

(4,713 posts)
7. It's been that way for
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:11 PM
Jun 2013

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.

Iliyah

(25,111 posts)
20. Now I guess you know that Rush Limbaugh
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:07 PM
Jun 2013

is on the military airwaves alongwith other "Conservatives" talk shows. Liberals, a no no. Tell me otherwise.

 

giftedgirl77

(4,713 posts)
13. That's the way it is
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:21 PM
Jun 2013

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.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
17. Sounds like security issues become restriction things. A lot in that institution.
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:45 PM
Jun 2013

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?

 

giftedgirl77

(4,713 posts)
18. If they contain the classified
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:58 PM
Jun 2013

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.

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
21. I understand the reason being given, but it strikes one as unnecessary, rigid, and restrictive. In
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:09 PM
Jun 2013

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.

 

giftedgirl77

(4,713 posts)
27. It sucks but such as life at times
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:40 PM
Jun 2013

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.

 

RILib

(862 posts)
46. why is PBS never on the tvs in waiting rooms
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 12:11 PM
Jun 2013

or videos of dolphins or something? It's always idiot blathering morons or Faux.

Kurovski

(34,655 posts)
8. Do they still allow Plush Lintball's braying to be heard on their bases?
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:11 PM
Jun 2013

Is there anything surprising about anything anymore?

alittlelark

(18,890 posts)
15. Of Course !!! We can't have them knowing what they're defending !!
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 10:30 PM
Jun 2013

Cuz they might THINK ABOUT IT..........

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
22. To copy my answer from another thread, they actually have a point.
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:14 PM
Jun 2013

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.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
24. The funny thing is people are going to claim the "Orwellian" element
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:30 PM
Jun 2013

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.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
26. Being accessible off-base doesn't fix the problem.
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:35 PM
Jun 2013

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.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
28. The government really can't stop them from having access to the website off base
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:42 PM
Jun 2013

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).

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
30. Not really, but the costs of doing it are way too large.
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:45 PM
Jun 2013

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.

davidpdx

(22,000 posts)
23. They have a right to block sites on computers within the base
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:27 PM
Jun 2013

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.

Psephos

(8,032 posts)
25. They can die for their country, but they can't read a newspaper.
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:33 PM
Jun 2013

WTF are they willing to die protecting, again?

 

eaglesclaw

(15 posts)
29. Nothing Unusual about it, You are in the Military not the Boy Scouts
Thu Jun 27, 2013, 11:43 PM
Jun 2013

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.

askeptic

(478 posts)
42. Well, just more evidence we live in a fascist country
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 09:35 AM
Jun 2013

especially when ppl like Limbaugh are allowed to propagandize our troops with their venomous rhetoric

pmorlan1

(2,096 posts)
45. Censorship
Fri Jun 28, 2013, 11:50 AM
Jun 2013

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.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Restricted Web Access to ...