No Voice For The Troops
Tweet
The military is instituting new rules that would effectively silence soldier blogs. That makes no sense. I certainly trust the guys on the ground more than a lot of their commanders to tell the truth.
21 Responses to “No Voice For The Troops”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
The administration wants to cut off soldiers’ ability to make statements critical of what’s going on in Iraq and elsewhere in the world. Viewed in that light, these actions sadly make perfect sense.
I was wondering why we haven’t heard much from Smith lately. Maybe this is why.
Well, reading isn’t posting. I hope they’ll still allow that.
Come home safe, Smith, and holler at us when you do.
So, they are being told to suck it up and don’t complain, all the while they are being misled, poorly supplied, and having their tours extended. Might we expect some creative choices to express what will surely be even stronger disapproval?
Considering that the pro-war center-right blogosphere is having a fit from Instapundit on down, I think that the developing narrative here might be a touch “reality challenged”. The truth is that this regulation stinks and people who are normally very deferential of security are publicly linking and republishing a regulation prominently marked “for official use only”.
We’re not supposed to know this exists. We’re not supposed to read, link, or discuss it. This is civil disobedience and nobody so far has even given it a second thought because we support the troops including their right to tell the truth as they see it.
I strongly doubt that this administration at the civilian level is even aware of this new regulation nor do I think that this regulation will ultimately survive. The best media friends that this administration has is in the milblogger community and they’re getting silenced. Karl Rove is simply not that stupid.
I was wondering what was happening to “Oliver’s Army”…
The “soldiers who were complaining” were vastly outnumbered by the soldiers who support the war.
There is absolutely, positively no evidence for the fact that this is politically motivated. The final proof will come when TM Lutas’ prediction comes true, and this regulation dies a quick and quiet death.
that’s why they are banned. too much truth
fd10801 | May 2, 2007 11:13:59 PM
“There is absolutely, positively no evidence for the fact that this is politically motivated.”
God only knows why you aren’t The Decider/Commander Guy in charge of the invasion. You are not in a position to have the knowledge or information to be able to make this kind of sweeping statement.
Wait, that never stopped you before.
Frank, did you apply for the War Czar job yet? Want Oliver to forward your resume for you?
I’m sorry, duros. You mean there is evidence for politically motivated censorship of the blogs?
Well, far be it from me to ask where that evidence might be found. You and squirrel and the anencephalic merlallen can keep it your little secret.
“I certainly trust the guys on the ground more than a lot of their commanders to tell the truth.”
Um, isn’t that why they’re being banned?
You mean there is evidence for politically motivated censorship of the blogs?
Did I say that?
Using long medical terms doesn’t have any effect on someone already familiar with the Sixth Doctor. You microcephalic apostate.
Hey, squirrel,this just in:
The Army Backs Down on Blogging [Greg Pollowitz]
This just hit my inbox from a Capitol Hill friend:
Fact Sheet
Army Operations Security: Soldier Blogging Unchanged
Summary:
o America’s Army respects every Soldier’s First Amendment rights
while also adhering to Operations Security (OPSEC) considerations to
ensure their safety on the battlefield.
o Soldiers and Army family members agree that safety of our
Soldiers are of utmost importance.
o Soldiers, Civilians, contractors and Family Members all play an
integral role in maintaining Operations Security, just as in previous
wars.
Details:
* In no way will every blog post/update a Soldier makes on his or
her blog need to be monitored or first approved by an immediate
supervisor and Operations Security (OPSEC) officer. After receiving
guidance and awareness training from the appointed OPSEC officer, that
Soldier blogger is entrusted to practice OPSEC when posting in a public
forum.
* Army Regulation 350-1, “Operations Security,” was updated April
17, 2007 – but the wording and policies on blogging remain the same from
the July 2005 guidance first put out by the U.S. Army in Iraq for
battlefield blogging. Since not every post/update in a public forum can
be monitored, this regulation places trust in the Soldier, Civilian
Employee, Family Member and contractor that they will use proper
judgment to ensure OPSEC.
o Much of the information contained in the 2007 version of AR
530-1 already was included in the 2005 version of AR 530-1. For
example, Soldiers have been required since 2005 to report to their
immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer about their wishes to publish
military-related content in public forums.
o Army Regulation 530-1 simply lays out measures to help ensure
operations security issues are not published in public forums (i.e.,
blogs) by Army personnel.
* Soldiers do not have to seek permission from a supervisor to
send personal E-mails. Personal E-mails are considered private
communication. However, AR 530-1 does mention if someone later posts an
E-mail in a public forum containing information sensitive to OPSEC
considerations, an issue may then arise.
* Soldiers may also have a blog without needing to consult with
their immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer if the following conditions
are met:
1. The blog’s topic is not military-related (i.e., Sgt. Doe
publishes a blog about his favorite basketball team).
2. The Soldier doesn’t represent or act on behalf of the Army in
any way.
3. The Soldier doesn’t use government equipment when on his or her
personal blog.
* Army Family Members are not mandated by commanders to practice
OPSEC. Commanders cannot order military Family Members to adhere to
OPSEC. AR 530-1 simply says Family Members need to be aware of OPSEC to
help safeguard potentially critical and sensitive information. This
helps to ensure Soldiers’ safety, technologies and present and future
operations will not be compromised.
* Just as in 2005 and 2006, a Soldier should inform his or her
OPSEC officer and immediate supervisor when establishing a blog for two
primary reasons:
1. To provide the command situational awareness.
2. To allow the OPSEC officer an opportunity to explain to the
Soldier matters to be aware of when posting military-related content in
a public, global forum.
* A Soldier who already has a military-related blog that has not
yet consulted with his or her immediate supervisor and OPSEC officer
should do so.
* Commands have the authority to enact local regulations in
addition to what AR 530-1 stipulates on this topic.
05/03 03:36 PM
You make me want to LOL out loud!
Using long medical terms doesn’t have any effect on someone already familiar with the Sixth Doctor. You microcephalic apostate.
The Sixth Doctor,indeed!
Tom Baker was the ONLY Doctor!
Thank goodness for Frank’s contacts and their unbiased, from the horse’s mouth information! I don’t know why OW doesn’t simply accept your guest editor status.
Yes, squirrel, your doubting me was so essential to the smooth and rapid flow of information.
I don’t doubt you, Frank.
You’re a deluded, narrow minded old man anytime your fingers are hitting the keyboard in support of The Decider/Commander Guy.
If any other political leader described him/herself as ‘The Decider’ or ‘Commander Guy’, the vitriol that you would spew would make even Pedro and Dugger blush.
You’re wrong, squirrel. If the Prez is having a good time every once in a while, dissociating from the reality of his incredibly hard job — and believe me, Pres. Clinton didn’t have it a whole lot easier (without a war going on) — I’m not got going to deny him.
So stop telling what I would do, and might do, and all this other silly shit. And I am not a deluded narrow minded old man.
In the first place, judging by the humorlessness of most of you, I’m younger at heart than most of you.
99% of you are anything but open minded, and ALL of you liberals believe whatever today’s meme is.
So save your foolish criticisms. It takes a lot more out of me to tolerate all of than it does for you to tolerate me.
Obvious you lefties have precious little experience in the military, so I’ll let you in on a little saying we had when I was in the Navy:
“We protect the Constitution, we don’t practice it”
You lose a bunch of your rights when you sign up for the military kids, sad fact of life.
LoL!
Posted by: fd10801 | May 4, 2007 4:42:23 PM
” … dissociating from the reality of his incredibly hard job … ”
A man who is the President of the United States of America and Commander in Chief who can barely utter a complete, grammatically correct sentence and refers to himself as “The Decider” and superhero “Commander Guy” is merely dissociating himself from the reality of an incredibly hard job …?
I’m sure this is as comforting to the families of all soldiers serving in Iraq as it is to you.
wcezthld xskulr cbwv ietugqxol xskn gxjoaruf zdpfbqh