US Army bans soldiers from viewing The Guardian website

reply to post by crazyewok


Quite wrong, sad to say. The material remains classified secret until it is explicitly declassed. The rank and file service critter can read it to their hearts' delight off base. You just can't have it on your machine on base. Or if you have clearance and are subject to random checks at home.

You'd think it hitting the press would remove the classification but it does not. Very occasionally you will do something S level where your NDA releases you if the material becomes public, but that's only happened with me twice.

reply to post by Bedlam


I understand on base computers. That DOD hardware and it there computers to do what they like with.
No diffrent than a company blocking FB.

But off base its all pointless. What if it comes on the news? Are you meant to turn your home TV off?
What if a family members starts telling you? You meant to kill them before they tell you

Its not going to stop soldiers from viewing The Guardian, the smarter ones just won't do it from a government computer. When I was in the Navy, the network blocked many sites, but many got around those blocks by using proxys, most of them originated in China(i think it is safe to say that is a security risk).

Just like when you tell the military that they can not go to certain clubs(usually certain strip clubs known for drugs, prostitution and fights), many will still go to those clubs. Some will do it just because they are banned and can't resist the temptation.

reply to post by crazyewok


They don't care really off base. This article is about it being blocked from NIPRNET if I recall. The DOD doesn't want it on the base network or systems.

Scary how easy the american public accept all this from the spying to the drones

reply to post by surfin4


It's the DOD's network, if they want to block it I don't see the issue. They block other sites, too.

reply to post by chebob


The Army is banning the website on their computer network, Niprnet, but not banning soldiers from viewing the website on their own free time, ie their home PC, cell phones, Xbox, etc.

That said, down with the US politicians who think they are running the show.

As others have noted, it's banned from Army and some other Government computers for their network connections and scanners, not to somehow think they can keep hundreds of thousands of people in the dark who, often, were chosen specifically for their intelligence and training potential to start with. Not a very logical thing for them to think they could accomplish, IMO. It's needs to be that way to save their butts from endless headaches.

Others have also noted that a Classified document doesn't stop being Classified just because a newspaper carries it. Until it's been run through the process of declassification, it's STILL classified. Why should that matter?

Well, these army guys have careers. Those networks have scanners that don't think, they just react. Classified documents ARE marked in a variety of very subtle ways for tracking which copy source a leak or other thing comes from ...among other reasons. So scanners looking for classified documents which shouldn't be somewhere (Like Top Secret information on a Secret Network or something) won't care that 'guardian.uk' was the source. IT just sees the signature of a classified level or document it shouldn't be seeing and sends off the alarm bells.

I'll bet the IT security guys really don't want to be chasing Snowden geese all over creation for people pulling up copied documents that way all over their network in news stories.

reply to post by Bedlam

This is SOP and has happened many times.

Just because it's standard and has happened many times before doesn't mean that it's right.

If we don't challenge these type's of wrongs just because 'it's always been like that' how will we ever change for the better?

Blind acceptance is just one sign of a deeper malaise that run's deep in our societies - question everything.

ETA
Ooops - I understand now, just on base military owned machines, nothing stopping military personnel viewing on their own computers etc.
Would this be because of the potential security threat / virus threat to the machine rather than supression of information?

These soldiers having their supposed freedoms taken away from them is nothing more than they should have happen. There's nothing noble about being a soldier. There's no reason to support a man or woman with a gun that is willing to end life. Soldiers are slaves to the corporate political machine and any ill-motion that befalls them is nothing more than what they had coming their way. Warriors are disgusting.

reply to post by bigyin


"This is the freedom the US army is tasked with bringing to the rest of the planet."

Brilliant observation and so sad a fact!

Originally posted by Freeborn

Ooops - I understand now, just on base military owned machines, nothing stopping military personnel viewing on their own computers etc.
Would this be because of the potential security threat / virus threat to the machine rather than supression of information?

Nah, it's more of a zero tolerance-ish approach to classified documents and information. The appearance of the info in the news doesn't declassify the info. So, technically, it's still secret. It'll stay secret until they declassify it, which they likely won't, so in order to follow the rules, they can't possess a copy of it.

This sometimes extends to books you can't have on base and the like. Doesn't happen a lot. But it happens. They're very single minded about classified info. Navy is the worst and can carry stupidity to an art form. SOCOM, you're likely to find stuff in the crapper as light reading material (yeah it happened).

And again, you see this security kabuki dance over something you can pick up on the news stand, or over General Cartwright. Why do they not react to these people in the CT community who are going to 'reveal all'? (but somehow don't)

ETA
Ooops - I understand now, just on base military owned machines, nothing stopping military personnel viewing on their own computers etc.
Would this be because of the potential security threat / virus threat to the machine rather than supression of information?

edit on 28/6/13 by Freeborn because: Add ETA

Because the DOD frowns upon classified material being introduced onto its unclassified DOD computer system. Then that unclassified machine has to be taken offline and purged/cleaned of the classified info.

I don't get why everyone freaks out. It's the DOD's computer network, they run it how they want.

Originally posted by Dystopiaphiliac
These soldiers having their supposed freedoms taken away from them is nothing more than they should have happen.

Know how I can tell you didn't read the article?

Warriors are disgusting.

You don't know the half of it. I once mailed a pair of socks I'd had on FTX for about six weeks to my Mom, who didn't believe what I smelled like after six weeks in the field with limited water and light gear. Those cammies were going through their own evolution and at night would crawl around eating bugs.

Then you've got Rick's Lounge, which is a whole other story. But yes, disgusting was involved there too.

Originally posted by Bedlam

This sometimes extends to books you can't have on base and the like. Doesn't happen a lot. But it happens. They're very single minded about classified info. Navy is the worst and can carry stupidity to an art form. SOCOM, you're likely to find stuff in the crapper as light reading material (yeah it happened).

24 yrs in the Navy...i'll vouch for that! At one duty station there'd be a TS/SCI reading board in one stall on a regular basis. Get caught up on days events while dropping a deuce.

Also like when James Bamford's "The Puzzle Palace" came out...talk about a serious pucker factor. GMT's, instructions on to "neither confirm, nor deny", don't buy it, don't read it, etc.

reply to post by Xcathdra

Actually its the same reason given when wikileaks was dumping classified documents. People tend to forget military law is very different from civilian law. Even though the documents were released to the public, they are still classified. A military person accessing those documents would constitute a crime.

Any person accessing the Guardian website doesn't actually have access to the files.

Personally I'd like to have the armed forces of my country be able to think for themselves and make their own judgement - but then perhaps that goes against the entire ethos of what the military is...

China censors their internet and I'm sure you'd be sure quick to condemn China for doing so. However it seems to me from your past posts that your viewpoint (which you are certainly entitled to) always rests upon the foundation that the government (that being the U.S. government) is inherently good and does not deserve scrutiny or criticism in the slightest.

There are many similar members on ATS (mostly American) who are usually ex-military or in the military currently who will come into threads and for want of a better phrase, just parrot the government line or go through all sorts of strange illogical thought processes to justify government or mainly military actions. It's a sort of blind obedience. These members are often all friends with each other on ATS, but their reasoning and thoughts are always the same. In fact in some cases their posts seem very similar. Any criticism towards U.S. policy is termed "anti-American" in an attempt to stifle any debate or discussion. Any criticism of the U.S. government is seen as personal criticism of them, as if they are one and the same.

It makes me wonder how far up their backsides does Uncle Sam have to have his d**k before Americans realise they are being f***ed?

Originally posted by bg_socalif

Also like when James Bamford's "The Puzzle Palace" came out...talk about a serious pucker factor. GMT's, instructions on to "neither confirm, nor deny", don't buy it, don't read it, etc.

Yeah, that's one that came to mind when I was referring to books you couldn't buy or have on base. Also for a while "No Easy Day" and "Operation Dark Heart", seems like there were a few others.

On the flip side, there are books you can have even when you're not supposed to have reading material, some training schools explicitly spell out books you can bring if you need crapper entertainment - IIRC "That Others May Live" was a real popular one with the Army even though it's PJ puke material .

Originally posted by Kram09
Personally I'd like to have the armed forces of my country be able to think for themselves and make their own judgement - but then perhaps that goes against the entire ethos of what the military is...

They don't want the material on their network, for reasons I've pointed out. It's not up to the IT guys to decide what classified material is ok to have and what not over on NIPRNET. But it's always safer just to not have it there.

Along the same lines, most bases block Facebook, Wikileaks, craigslist, -----project, ------------------------- and others. Oddly they don't block ATS, or Fark. Go figure.

Do you work for an employer that blocks social sites or porn? Are they making sure you don't think for themselves? Or just keeping the non-work material off their servers?

China censors their internet and I'm sure you'd be sure quick to condemn China for doing so. However it seems to me from your past posts that your viewpoint (which you are certainly entitled to) always rests upon the foundation that the government (that being the U.S. government) is inherently good and does not deserve scrutiny or criticism in the slightest.

The government isn't censoring the networks here. Just DISA following protocol keeping what is still classified material off of NIPRNET.

OTOH, if you've got SIPRNET or JWICS, there is plenty of stuff YOU won't get to look at and we do. So, how does your argument work then? Some percentage of servicecritters are MORE informed than you.

There are many similar members on ATS (mostly American) who are usually ex-military or in the military currently who will come into threads and for want of a better phrase, just parrot the government line or go through all sorts of strange illogical thought processes to justify government or mainly military actions. It's a sort of blind obedience.

Or maybe it's that they understand how the system works and agree with the rationale in general, if not in particular. It's a sort of BTDT.

eta: HAHA ATS "censors" the very name of --------------------------. So, they are keeping you in the dark by blocking my reference to violence porn. OMG. Rebel! To arms!

etaa: clipped out some of one of those site names, if you go there you'll pick up something faster than than you would in a Phenix City strip joint

reply to post by Bedlam

They don't want the material on their network, for reasons I've pointed out. It's not up to the IT guys to decide what classified material is ok to have and what not over on NIPRNET. But it's always safer just to not have it there.

As I pointed out if you go on the Guardian website it has news reports not access to actual classified documents.

Do you work for an employer that blocks social sites or porn?

I've no doubt they'd block porn sites but they don't block social sites.

Are they making sure you don't think for themselves? Or just keeping the non-work material off their servers?

If that was the case why not just block the internet entirely for soldiers? What constitutes non-work material and what doesn't? I'm betting they can access other newspaper websites, but apparently the ones that exposes what the U.S. government and it's intelligence agencies have really been up to is blocked. Yes I call that keeping people uninformed and not being able to look at articles and judge things for themselves.

The government isn't censoring the networks here. Just DISA following protocol keeping what is still classified material off of NIPRNET.

But as I mentioned the files aren't available on the Guardian website. What exactly would you consider to be censoring networks?

Or maybe it's that they understand how the system works and agree with the rationale in general, if not in particular.

I wasn't just strictly referring to this recent case regarding NSA leaks. I'm talking about say episodes that have occurred in Afghanistan or Iraq (just for example). So when innocent people have been killed it doesn't matter because military personnel understand "how the system works and agree with the rationale in general"?

As I said above:

There are many similar members on ATS (mostly American) who are usually ex-military or in the military currently who will come into threads and for want of a better phrase, just parrot the government line or go through all sorts of strange illogical thought processes to justify government or mainly military actions. It's a sort of blind obedience.

Originally posted by Kram09

As I pointed out if you go on the Guardian website it has news reports not access to actual classified documents.

Seems like I saw a few powerpoints on there. If they're from a classified document, then it's easier to block Guardian for a bit.

I've no doubt they'd block porn sites but they don't block social sites.

Censorship!

If that was the case why not just block the internet entirely for soldiers? What constitutes non-work material and what doesn't?

Yet, they can go home and see all of it they want. Just not on NIPRNET. And you'll note other news agency reports aren't being blocked.

So when innocent people have been killed it doesn't matter because military personnel understand "how the system works and agree with the rationale in general"?

It would be nice to have magic weapons that only kill people who are not innocent, so as a general case, yes, I do understand it. I can't comment on every thread you've read on ATS, but yes I understand that innocent people are killed in areas where military action is ongoing. It's not that it doesn't matter, but it's understandable that it happens.

As I said above:

As I said below it.