No more military blogs, emails must be reviewed

[AnnInLa]

“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.” 10:32 am | Comment (0)

www.thinkprogress.org (no permalink yet)

[AndyA]

1. Censorship. It's the American way in Bush's America.

Taking cues from the Nazi play book.

[Nickster]

2. Ok, I can maybe understand the blog thing, but personal emails? WTF?

How the hell are soldiers supposed to keep in touch with their families??

[SammyWinstonJack]

10. Haven't soldiers ALWAYS been encourage to write letters to their families? Until now that is.

What is the Army afraid of? Reading and approving their personal correspondence, just like prisoners. Why not, they aren't allowed to leave when their commitment is up. Even prisoners are allowed to leave when they've completed their sentence. Who in their right mind would join the military under the current regime? You'd have too be :crazy:

[TahitiNut]

48. Nothing new. Military personnel in combat zones have always been censored.

In Viet Nam, both our mail and our telephone calls home (AT&T "long lines") were subject to censorship. In WW2, all correspondence was subject to censorship. It has, afaik, always been this way. Issues of troop locations, movements, readiness, and even morale have always been regarded as 'sensitive' and subject to censorship.

I'm a bit surprised that this isn't common knowledge.
(The general DU ignorance on military life is a bit disturbing.)

[Heidi]

3. Kick.

:kick:

[Richard Steele]

4. If we let our troops have Free Speech, pretty soon everyone would want it.

And we can't have that, now can we?

[Justyce]

5. What a shame! So now the soldiers

can't even email their families??

[AnnInLa]

42. I'm sure all emails will not be stopped, only

that they will be run thru a word or phrase sensitive email filter, run by the superior officers. There are similiar email checkers everywhere, probably on your own email filter at your personal level or at the ISP level.

[babylonsister]

6. Infuriating for the soldiers, I'm sure; is this even legal? nt

[displacedtexan]

7. Here's the permalink

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/02/the-end-of-military-blogs/#comments

[MOD]

8. The troops signed up and

once you do that accept restrictions on your rights. The troops in WW2 had their letters censored, so what else is new?

[Horse with no Name]

11. That isn't exactly true...but YOU know that

:eyes:

[MOD]

12. Which part, isn't

exactly true? If you facts to rebut my statement then please present them.

[Squatch]

13. Just looking over my oath of office...

Would you care to point out the clause where it says that I have to "accept restrictions on my rights"?

"I, Squatch, having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."

[MOD]

15. That is your oath not

your contract. Apples and oranges, but I'm sure you know it.

[Squatch]

19. I am beyond my contractural obligation to the Army.

My contract ended over 2 years ago.

The only obligation I now have to the Army is my solemn oath, which I gave to UPHOLD Constitutional rights (including my own) and NOT restrict them.

So, you know where to cram your apples and oranges, friend.

[MOD]

21. So now you admit that

you oath and contract are two entirely different things?

[Squatch]

24. I admit that the truth and the BS you're spewing are two different things

[in_cog_ni_to]

17. "United States Military Oath of Allegiance" READ THIS. Where does it say you lose your right to FREE

SPEECH?


United States Military Oath of Allegiance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The United States Military Oath of Allegiance is a solemn oath taken by members of the United States Armed Services on commissioning. It differs slightly from that of the oath of enlistment that enlisted members recite when they enter the service.

Text of the Oath

I, {insert name here}, do solemnly swear, (or affirm), that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. (Note that the last sentence is not required to be said if the speaker has a personal or moral objection)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Military_Oath_of_Allegiance

[MOD]

28. Sorry, the oath is not the same thing

as the contract itself. When you contract with the gov't you agree to be bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice and accept other constraints.

[Squatch]

30. Are you having problems reading?

The OATH binds you to the UCMJ, NOT your contract.

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

[Zywiec]

46. Welcome to DU - MOD

Please don't dispute anything anyone says, or ask for facts. That will only be a buzz kill and stop a good rant.

Welcome again.

http://www.fsu.edu/~ww2/marks.htm - Here you can see the marking of censored mail in WW 2.

[Horse with no Name]

23. Many of the troops signed up because they wanted to fight for our country

They did NOT sign up to become pawns in a global fight for oil that had nothing to do with our country.

[Horse with no Name]

9. They can't have the soldiers telling their families that they are miserable under

these extended tours, or females telling their families that they are being sexually abused during their tours, or any other such non-essential information being leaked to the public sector.
This fucking makes me sick.
This used to be SOP in the run-up to military operations so that nothing was inadvertently leaked.
Makes you wonder about Iran....

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. CONTROL THE FLOW OF INFORMATION. Keep the troops in the dark and keep the public

uninformed about what's actually going down in the hell hole, Iraq. Don't the troops have FREE SPEECH RIGHTS? Once you join the military....the First Amendment doesn't apply to you?


About the First Amendment


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
— The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

[Lobster Martini]

16. Can't see how this doesn't violate the first amendment

Reviewing soldiers' blogs and e-mails would be bad enough, especially since it seems to be discretionary, but extending it to civilians just has to be unconstitional.

"Civilians working for the military, Army contractors -- even soldiers' families -- are all subject to the directive as well."

[MOD]

20. Repeat after me,

civilian contractors sign a contract with the gov't says what they can and cannot do. If they don't like the terms they don't have to sign up.

[Squatch]

22. Man, are you completely talking from your ass, or what?

Contracting companies develop a statement of work, which outlines their requirement to perform some project. Contracts entered into between the government and contracting companies DO NOT extend to the individual behavior of a company's employees.

[Horse with no Name]

26. More likely he is just "concerned"

I wonder if he was paid to spew the propaganda or just indulges in Faux noise?

[Squatch]

27. More likely *another* goosestepping RW automaton

who believes that the military is composed entirely of mindless kill-bots.

[MOD]

32. That's a good one

I live next to a major air force base and have talked with many of my neighbors about Iraq. Many don't like the Iraq conflict but are willing to go do the job b/c their country asks them to and are willing to accept restrictions on their rights as a consequence of their service.

[Squatch]

33. Aha. So you really are an expert because you live *near* an AFB.

That explains it all.

[MOD]

36. Atleast I know the difference

between the oath and the contract. I almost joined and I made sure to read the contract very carefully.

[Horse with no Name]

39. Very telling, "I 'ALMOST' joined"

Please tell us why your ass isn't on the front line for this administration that you support?

[MOD]

40. Ten years ago

was when I almost joined as I was just out of college. And for your info I don't support the war in Iraq.

[in_cog_ni_to]

25. Reading Comprehension problem?

FROM THE OP......The U.S. Army has ordered soldiers to stop posting to blogs or sending personal e-mail messages

NOWHERE in this oath does it say you lose all rights to FREE SPEECH when you join the military!

United States Military Oath of Allegiance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The United States Military Oath of Allegiance is a solemn oath taken by members of the United States Armed Services on commissioning. It differs slightly from that of the oath of enlistment that enlisted members recite when they enter the service.

Text of the Oath

I, {insert name here}, do solemnly swear, (or affirm), that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. (Note that the last sentence is not required to be said if the speaker has a personal or moral objection)

[Old and In the Way]

31. So they get to defend the Constitution...they just don't get to have the benefits derived therefrom.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alarimer]

47. the Constitution still fucking applies

good right--wing bullshit you are spewing.

[Frustratedlady]

18. Well, unfortunately, this shows the military what they are fighting for.

I could see it if they were posting their positions and future raids or procedures, but it sounds like they are trying to cut down on criticism or unrest. I would hope not.

Democracy in action, it ain't.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Old and In the Way]

34. Soon they will need political officers attached to each company.

MOD would make a fine political officer. He would gladly serve the Maximum Leader's agenda.

[htuttle]

38. They already have them

Though I think they call them something innocuous like 'public affairs officers' instead of the old Soviet 'Zampolit', they fulfill the same functions.

[frogcycle]

35. Now, to the point....

Yes, the military has the right to censor for security reasons. They read all the mail in WWII. My dad told stories of finding Japanese ears included in letters (those weren't allowed to go through, although it was not a security issue...).

Whether they have the right or not is immaterial. And "free speech", despite rants here there and everywhere that think that means you get to say or write whatever you want wherever you want whenever you want and demand that someone else pay to publicize it, does not apply.

The right to freedom of speech says the government can't arrest you for voicing an opinion. It does NOT say they can't constrain an employee from doing so.

Those are the facts. Keep them in mind as you rail against this latest crackdown. It is atrocious, and I guarantee it will have a negative backlash - "big time". Not because of hairsplitting one way or the other about its legality, but because the already burned-out troops and families will see it as more "piling on." The attitude of the freeper earlier in this thread has to be demoralizing them a whole lot more than any efforts to get them out of there. The unrest must be getting fairly visible, or the neonazis making this decision wouldn't have seen the need. Much like the National Guard at Kent State, this will blow up in their faces.

[MOD]

37. We say the same thing but

I'm a freeper?

[AnnInLa]

41. This will hit the RW harder than progressives

I like to peruse the RW blogs to see what is being said in their bubble, as opposed to our bubble. They highlight and feature many military blogs, as well as emails from RWers in the military. They will probably be just as upset about this censorship as we are.

[Nikki Stone1]

43. So Congress must have used these blogs and emails as support for pulling the troops out

....

[Matariki]

45. Haven't soldiers in war usually had their correspondence screened?

Of course I only know this from reading Catch 22 but I thought that there were people in the military that had to read outgoing mail and black out anything that might be giving sensitive information away, like location of troops or whatnot.

I imagine that in the information age it's been much harder to keep on top of that.

[Zywiec]

49. Of course military mailed has always been censored.

Check this link for pictures and information:

http://www.fsu.edu/~ww2/mail.htm

[TahitiNut]

50. Yes, they/we have.

My mail and telephone calls home were BOTH censored when I was in Viet Nam. The mail from my father and uncles during WW2 was censored. It's normal.

[AnnInLa]

51. Update: Interview with the bozo in the mil who wrote this new regulation

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2007/05/the_army_has_is.html