|
Protect and Defend.... what was that last bit?
As I've discussed before, we have a web filtering program here at Camp Arifjan, Kuwait that blocks our access to various sites based on categories.
I don't like, but understand, the use of filtering technology on government computers. I understand that pornography is banned under both General Order #1 and considered unprofessional in a public setting. Similarly, I am only mildly annoyed by the fact that the Army has chosen a system that prevents me from viewing web sites that are “Tasteless” or contain "Adult Materials.” Keep in mind that "Adult Materials" does not mean pornographic, porn get its own category. “Adult”, in this case means, as best as I can tell, “naughty” materials like sex toys and swimsuits (sites featuring these are blocked). I will argue that all of the personnel using these computers are adults (or 17 year-olds enlisted and deployed), as they are all members of the US Military or DOD civilian employees. Perhaps they can handle seeing the Victoria’s Secret catalog.
The system, Fortigaurd, blocks all sorts of categories it feels might be controversial (view them all here). I am used to the Army, in circumstances such as this, thinking that I need to be protected from my own immature, prurient ways. As I said above, I don’t like it, but I can abide it. What I cannot abide is wholesale censorship of legitimate (and legally protected) political viewpoints.
And that is what it does. Fortigaurd blocks the Planned Parenthood site, among others I imagine, under the category, “Abortion.” The site for the organization Veterans Against The Iraq War is blocked under "Advocacy Organizations."
Advocacy.
I won’t address in, this post, DoD’s new blogging policy – that is a different beast entirely, involving Operations Security and classified information. This is about information – incoming information. Advocacy is banned. Perhaps they've never read the Constitution. (It is rather long - like four whole pages, five if you include the amendments.) You would think, though, that someone might have at least gotten around to reading the first part of that last page. Censorship, especially against those whose job it is to “protect freedom,” is the worst of hypocrisy. To prevent servicemembers from getting information that you disagree with it is both shameful and unconscionable.
In my mind, in a free nation, this kind of censorship is tantamount to treason.
|
8 Comments:
wow. all i can say is...wow.
there are definitely things i take for granted on a UC campus, like the privilege of seeing ten thousand different opinions, many of which i don't agree with. they might annoy me, but looked at in another light, they also have a valid right to be there.
come home soon.
What you say reminds me of the chaos here when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke in a panel discussion yesterday and there were masses and masses of protesters against him speaking. I may not like or agree with things he has said (for example, I believe the holocaust to be a real event and that there are probably gays in Iran), but given that he was invited to speak I am all for hearing what he has to say, if only to reinforce my own opinions. Why be purposefully ignorant and actively try to prevent others from hearing it if they are interested? I couldn't go, and after reading the transcripts I thought what he said was unfounded, but I still find something wrong with protesting a debate participant that you could potentially learn something from, especially when his speaking does not harm anyone else. Now, I don't want to censor the protesters because they have a right to freedom of speech too, but it seems weird that their freedom of speech is being used to inhibit the freedom of information to others. If you don't want to hear it, another entirely valid form of protest that doesn't affect anyone else is simply not going. I think censorship should be used for harmful or classified information, and protests should be used to show support for policy changes.
Perhaps the army didn't get the memo that things like getting an abortion and having viewpoints against the war are actually LEGAL here in the land of Freedom and Democracy (TM)? Shocker!! I can't believe they get away with "protecting" you from these "controversial" topics.
Reading a really interesting book right now on the catalysts for recuperation when a market or organization begins to "fail". The two options (not always, but often, exculusive of oneanother) are voice and exit. In the case of the Army, exit is rather impossible, and voice (protest) is rather frowned upon (or apparently ignored entirely - You've got to respect the devotion with which the Army takes on it's "La La La La We Can't Hear You!" approach to discontent). From a managerial standpoint, it's pretty much the ideal situation: you can suck as much as you want and there's nothing anyone can do about it (especially when electorate fails). From a consumer standpoint... well, I guess we're all fucked.
Also read a really interesting article the other day published in 1997 entiteld "Was Democracy Just a Notion?" on all the prerequisites for a stable democracy to take hold. It talks about why democracy is great for us but just an impossible pipedream for many parts of the world - listing places like Iraq and Rwanda as examples. There was a great sentence about appreciating what we have, all the while being "greatful for men such as King Hussein". I didn't know whether to laugh or cry...
I'll bring it when I come. You'd get a kick.
22 days!!!! How crazy is that?
Also, I know I was the one who pointed out that you should change it, but nonetheless no longer seeing "Washington DC" is a bit sad.
perhaps the government should spend some more taxpayer dollars and send the army loads of blinders and earplugs....
Could it be that the book was talking about King Hussein of Jordan? Jordan is monarchy, but a fairly liberal, constitutional one. He and his father, King Hussein, before him have rule fairly benevolently for a good bunch of decades now... Perhaps it refers to him in saying that a democracy might have failed in Jordan?
Your link to the DOD blogging policy failed. Maybe you want to check and report to your readers whether it was blocked or if it just didn't take when you revised your blog.
Post a Comment
<< Home