It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pentagon Air Force Blocks Access to News Sites That Posted Wikileaks Documents Read more: http://w

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Pentagon Air Force Blocks Access to News Sites That Posted Wikileaks Documents Read more: www.foxnews.com...


www.foxnews.com

The U.S. Air Force has blocked access on its network to more than 25 media websites, including the New York Times, and the Guardian, that have posted the secret U.S. diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks.

Pentagon Spokesman Col. Dave Lapan told Fox News this is not a Pentagon-wide blockage of the media sites carrying WikiLeaks documents.

It could also be a decision that is reversed Lapan said. "It's not hard to reflip the switch," Pentagon spokesman Capt. Darryn James said.

Lapan and James said the reason the Air Force decided to do this is to protect what they called "spillage
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Just saw this come across the news and thought I'd post it. I think it's pretty fair to say most on this site know my stance in the wikileaks thing. And while I am not pleased with the way they have released things recently and the stink that follows what they are doing I have to say this is a new twist.

www.foxnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Hmm... so much for the freedom of speech.

Or are there still people think they can have it all on the internet?



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
The answer to blocking a leak is to block internal access to the rest of the internet in hopes of preventing the military from seeing what the rest of the world has seen.

Methinks this is because if the military personnel saw what they were helping to fight, they would all turn on their superiors.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 05:58 PM
link   
People will make a conspiracy out of anything.

The DoD owns their networks. They lock down many sites that could be of potential harm to the service members and or assets such as networks and computers.

This is also a good protection towards the individual member that decides to access documents that still have a classification of secret (and above, just not sure of there actual classification). If you have not the need to know, then your eyes do not get the privilege of reading the documents.

They are not tapping members home computers, smart phones or library usage to find out if they are reading newspapers that have republished the wikileaks junk. They are merely following protocol. Just like your place of employment might block Facebook because 90% of your time is spent on it.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Happyfeet
 


I don't know sure seems like flawed logic to me as just about everyone in this world is well aware of what goes on in the media and has lots of other ways to read the info out there. But this is dealing with the internal networks correct? So I guess it should come as no surprise they would restrict it just as an employer would restrict certain sites while at work?



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:02 PM
link   
Kinda like shuting the barn door after the horses are out....
Great thinking.

Now only the upper echelon of AF can see them.
yeah...right
And these guys fly airplanes?? Brilliant.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   
I bet they didn't block Fox News....



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   
i wonder how much pressure google, yahoo and all the rest of the search engines are getting to stop wikileaks.

really, if the internet was a newstand, google would be the newspaper and wikileaks the article.

so google, yahoo etc is more at fault for publishing the article than wikileaks is responsible for writing it.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   
reply to post by v1rtu0s0
 


Spot on..


FoxNews.com is not one of the blocked sites, she said Read more: www.foxnews.com...


www.foxnews.com...



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by jaynkeel
 

star & flag

good find

yep, military networks today

the rest of the world tomorrow

the internet kill switch just got
flipped on about half volume.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:20 PM
link   
What did Lapan mean by, "Not Pentagon wide" ? By that did he mean it's okay for us chaps sneak a peak, but not the minions. That's stupid and makes no sense.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Tim Turner won't allow this...

You have nothing to fear.

MM



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:58 PM
link   
And what the hell is "spillage"???

Is that bigger than "leakage"??

Are they starting a new classification system??

Lets see..

1 dribleage

2 dampness

2.5 seepage

3 drippage

4 leakage

5 spillage

6 drainage

7 gushage

8 floodage

9 Call Noah

This is an all time new low for the AF.

Pathetic.
edit on 14-12-2010 by Zeptepi because: I had to add 2.5 seepage



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   
There seems to be more confusion between military and government. The US Office of Management and Budget guidline is not to block websites like Wikileaks this quote, "The OMB said the guidance does not "advise agencies to block WikiLeaks or other websites on government computer systems." That's from 5th December and also Fox News,

www.foxnews.com...

So what happens if the children get naughty?



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 07:18 PM
link   
There's a label for this type of stupidity, the Streisand Effect:


The Streisand effect is a primarily online phenomenon in which an attempt to hide or remove a piece of information has the unintended consequence of causing the information to be publicized widely and to a greater extent than would have occurred if no contrary action had been attempted. It is named after American entertainer Barbra Streisand, following a 2003 incident in which her attempts to suppress photographs of her residence inadvertently generated further publicity.


src

brll



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zeptepi
And what the hell is "spillage"???

Is that bigger than "leakage"??

Are they starting a new classification system??

Lets see..

1 dribleage

2 dampness

2.5 seepage

3 drippage

4 leakage

5 spillage

6 drainage

7 gushage

8 floodage

9 Call Noah

This is an all time new low for the AF.

Pathetic.
edit on 14-12-2010 by Zeptepi because: I had to add 2.5 seepage

You left out highly excited particles,
plops,
wet,
moist,
mildy moist,
scitter and real bad er, stuff, as the Pentagon would say.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Happyfeet
 


Come on, you guys are'nt serious......

they have non-military friends, wives, girlfriends etc who will tell them......and SHOW them copies.

The superiors within the military know they can't escape from their men finding out!


Ex

posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


I am also proud to sign the petition and glad Micheal Moore is throwing his weight around!


Perhaps the next war won't be so easy because the tables have been turned -- and now it's Big Brother who's being watched ... by us! WikiLeaks deserves our thanks for shining a huge spotlight on all this. But some in the corporate-owned press have dismissed the importance of WikiLeaks ("they've released little that's new!") or have painted them as simple anarchists ("WikiLeaks just releases everything without any editorial control!"). WikiLeaks exists, in part, because the mainstream media has failed to live up to its responsibility. The corporate owners have decimated newsrooms, making it impossible for good journalists to do their job. There's no time or money anymore for investigative journalism. Simply put, investors don't want those stories exposed. They like their secrets kept ... as secrets.

Why I'm Posting Bail


Let's not kill the messenger, but think what might have happened
if we had Wikileaks before Bush went in Iraq!



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Ex
 


You are spot on there !!!



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join