Home > Why the Pentagon censors Soldiers’ access to the Internet

Why the Pentagon censors Soldiers’ access to the Internet

by Open-Publishing - Monday 21 May 2007
11 comments

Edito Internet Wars and conflicts USA

by St. Clair

The situation BOTH in Iraq and in Afghanistan is a lot more involved than mainstream media can fathom. And, if it could fathom what is going on, it would not be allowed to report it for obvious reasons, as this would further undermine the morale of the Western world.

Troops and their families at home used to be able to at least write emails to each other via blog spots and troops were also allowed to access certain parts of the internet. This is now no longer possible.

The truth here is multi-layered: Several troop elements (including higher ranking officers) have started to REFUSE to carry out certain missions because simply these missions are so dangerous that the loss of more troops would be the consequence. There are not enough protective elements to back up guards on forelorn outposts and there are in general not enough troops to hold down the territories of Iraq and of Afghanistan. This assessment was clear to this author going in during 2003.

Sources of this author who are on the ground in the Middle East, either embedded with media or with troops, or with state department security forces as private contractors, have seen that even holding order in the streets of Baghdad or Kabul is not possible, let alone holding the ambitious land grab that ranges in essence from Afghan mountain passes over Iran to Basra and the Kurds territories. it is strategically NOT doable, and this has also been pointed out by a plethora of highest ranking general officers. The Pentagon seems not to hear what the intelligence on the ground is saying, or, it seems not to care what is happening to the troops which are extended beyond their capacities.

People who were promised to return home after 12 months were told at the last moment that their tours were to be extended by up to 3-4 months, which for both officers and soldiers can take a huge physical and mental toll. This results then in fatigued and frustrated troops who see that what they are doing is pointless at best, or dangerous at worst. Levels of concentration are no longer there when sleep is deprived, logistics do not work, and command unity is not established.

Troops have begun to complain to their families and started to tell their loved ones while at home what is really going on. "MySpace.com" and many other hubs of the world wide web were used by families who created networks of their own, and they write about what their loved ones staying in the occupied lands tell them.

Independent observers at UN and in diplomatic circles confirm this: The situation in Iraq and Afghanistan is slowly but surely falling apart for the troop elements as well as for the occupied countries. History would show that after a while the occupied territories of the Roman empire knew how to answer to the occupation. They just WAITED. At times they waited hundreds of years. In this day and age and in the face of a militia type defense that is day by day learning how to defend its lands in a bigger and better organization the "waiting" can be as short as ten years. So far we are in to this situation since 2003, or a bit over four years.

It is very easy to predict the trend. The troops of the occupying forces are getting more and more tired, more and more frustrated, and more and more disillusioned with the mission itself, let alone with the day to day threats they face. Officers in the ranks of lieutenants to colonels, and their soldiers, see the reality both in Kabul and in Baghdad, and in Basra, and in the mountains and the deserts, and they figure out that in the long run it might not even be possible to defend the "green zone", let alone the connection routes of say Basra (oil terminals) and Baghdad.

These issues have been OPENLY discussed on the internet and in the homes of the troops families. The main stream media has so far been able to manage to hide all this or to make it look "manageable" or acceptable. This is why the Pentagon has to restrict the access of its troops to the internet. The troops are the best carriers of true intelligence, together with independent observers who have seen the corruption in both Kabul and Baghdad, and who have seen the infrastructure of the countries deteriorate over the years.

The job at hand is impossible for the troops. That is the fact we all see emerging and that is what the Pentagon is facing. The prognostic of this author is that the situation will deteriorate further until about 2009 when troop elements will begin to desert their missions. The fact that certain troops have refused to carry out certain tactical missions and that their own security had to be farmed out to private contractors is an indication the troops are actually very badly trained and poorly equipped.

Many retired Marines have offered their private help to the state department to help out on the ground. From what this author hears, these retired and superbly experienced Marines are appalled to see in what situations their military friends have to carry on this impossible mission to hold together countries which sooner or later will again go back to doing things their way, the Levantine and Byzantine way of the Middle East.

Meanwhile, the last essential non-NWO-aligned nation — Iran — negotiates itself into a super power position via very cleverly structured alliances ranging from South America all the way to China and Russia. People at the state department in Washington DC have also resigned after seeing who is actually in charge in London, and they admit that this thing has gone very bad for the USA and the UK and it will, if it continues in this manner, which it will, go even worse.

One of the only reasons we have not seen really huge death tolls on the troops is because the medics and medical system is now so good that wounds which would have killed a soldier 20-30 years ago can be handled in such a manner that the casualty goes later in to the category of very severely "wounded". If you take a look at Walter Reid hospital and at the stations in Germany, where the soldiers are flown in, you understand what severely wounded means. It means disabled for life.

The price the nation will pay for all this in the long run, in terms of post traumatic psychological counseling and victims assistance is beyond the scope of what the occupier nations can handle. The question is why is the Pentagon not seeing what many others on the ground have seen? Why does the Pentagon think that censoring troops and their families at home will have an impact? It will create the exact OPPOSITE effect to what pentagon intends, which is damage control. It will veer out of control once the families begin to use other means to be heard.

Think "Ron Paul" effect.

By the way, there are many more soldiers missing than just the "THREE" of which CNN and mass media talks about. Sources think we are looking at about 50 unaccounted disappearances. Is it possible that certain elements have deserted, or switched side, or simply gone fishing?

Peace

St.Clair with new blog and video at http://fore11seen.blogspot.com

Forum posts

  • Vote for Ron Paul in ’08 and this will be a thing of the past because we won’t be in Afghanistan or Iraq anymore.

  • There is nothing sinister about this. It should have been thus from the start. This was allowing important, strategic information to be available to our enemies. This is not even censoring it is common sense. A soldier’s duty is to follow orders and perform his job with honor.
    Pilatus in Austin, TX

    • A soldier’s duty is also to uphold the Constitution. That’s a hard thing to discern when the CIC says it’s just a ... piece of paper. Following orders wasn’t a good enough explanation at Nuremberg.

  • What I mostly did while reading this was laugh my ass off. Soldiers are banned from Email and the internet? Really... my father, who was in Afghanistan and has recently been shipped off to Kosovo (yes, we’re still there, too) not only has been able to send me email since he got shipped out, recently got a SkypeIn number. Meaning that we can now CALL each other. I’d really like to know where you got your info, I actually asked him about it, and he was laughing nearly as hard as I did.

    • I’ve actually heard about this in the news. But they put a different spin on it, saying it was because soldiers were using high-bandwidth sites & overloading the network capacity of the system. Which I find highly doubtful, after all you’d think that the US military would have very high bandwidth connections.

      Even then, there are some things most people don’t realize, governments always censor bad news, its what there good at.
      As was said in the previous comment the soldier in Kosovo isn’t been censored, but then Kosovo isn’t headline news these days, its a war thats already been "won". The fighting may not have completely ended as everyones been lead to believe but its not a losing war, the US forces there aren’t on the defensive, and they aren’t been pushed to win an unwinnable war. Iraq and Afghanistan though, they are different, the war is far from won in either country, and short of an act of genocide it never will be.

      The "resistance" forces in Afghanistan could possibly be called the best in the world at what they do, they’ve been fighting in one war after another for the best part of a century, and they don’t look like they plan to stop any time soon. They are well armed, well trained, and have a massive tactical advantage in their knowledge of the terrain & their ability to blend in with the civilian population.
      Most of the same is true for the "insurgents" in Iraq, who don’t see themselves as insurgents or terrorists, they are freedom fighters, fighting against an oppressive invading force. And the problem with fighting a war like this is for every 1 insurgent you capture or kill, you’ve just made 2 more.

      The only way either of these wars can be won is by winning hearts and minds, and if that means leaving them alone to kill each other through infighting (yes i know it sounds brutal) we should probably let them, or at least leave in a way were some form of peace, no matter how fragile it is, can be created. That way, we are respecting their wishes, and their right to self govern. I know there is every possibility that they may one day come looking for revenge, but the longer we stick around the greater the chances that the small minority who have already taken to using extreme measures is going to do something we may all regret.

      Glum
      Manchester, England

    • I agree...

      I have a 2 friends in Iraq right now. One is a Lt. Col. and the othe is a Sgt. both have access to the internet and emails... I dont know where this crap came from. Maybe you got this info from one battalion or one platoon who was caught downloading porn or somthing. Far as I know most of this report is just not true. By the way, the pic is NOT an american soldier. Maybe british or somthing... we do NOT have helmets like that. Typical America now a’ days... you dont like somthing, lie your ass off and watch every idiot follow you where ever you go.

    • "By the way, the pic is NOT an american soldier. Maybe british or somthing... we do NOT have helmets like that."

      Yes, it looks like a British helmet. I noticed that too. But what does it matter? Both Bush and the Brits are up to their neck in this war crime to the extent that many now refer to the USUK. Or as Geoffrey Meyer, ex-UK ambassador to the US said, "the purpose of UK foreign policy is to get as far up the ass of the US as possible and to stay there.

      They’re both guilty, Bushco and Blairco.

  • I don’t think that they would limit ranking officers internet access. That isn’t needed. But troops, They don’t give a $h!t about the troops internet. I to have friends in Iraq. Seven to be exact. Use to be eight but one got blown up. Two have internet. Two can only use a phone about once a month. Even then it’s monitored through a relay station. It deppends on where you are stationed. If they are close to the green zone, then you will be ok on communication. Most any where else it’s pretty limited, for alot of different reasons. This could be a contributing factor. Don’t totally discount everything in this article. It is happening, but to who? Well thats classified.

    And by the way, the author is from Switzerland.

  • All you non believers and people who cant read... read the article careuflly, it says the military limits access to sites like myspace.com and other netwoking sites, AIM, MSN Messenger, etc..

    Im in the military, and as you see I have internet but its very limited as far as access to certain sites, and if you try to go arround the censorship you will be sent to CO’s NJP (Non-Judicial Punishment).

    Emails are always screened, and any new networking site gets blocked as soon as it gets popular with the military.

    The saying in the military goes "You protect the Constitution, but it doesnt apply to you".

    They also block these sites because of Operational Security. they dont want information about upcoming operations and such to get out.

    I cant speak for the people in Iraq but military as a whole limits the way you communicate while you are on deployment for various reasons, some wrong some neccessary, and depending on which end of it you are you see them in a different light.

    E-5 in the US Navy

  • Your article is bogus and a sham. If you can’t even show a real American soldier, how can we believe anything you assert.

    Your picture isn’t even an American . The uniform is wrong. All US forces have digicammies. Those aren’t even the previous issue cammie.

    We have been censoring all comm. from soldiers since before the Civil War for very obvious reasons.

    • Hey hey, you know it. EVERYBODY censors don’t they. Everyone from the U.S. military, through the New York Times "discussion" boards even right here to goood Ol Bellaciao. No offense pals just stating the truth. Our Supreme court is leading the way to a "free" world showing how slogans like "Bong Hits for Jesus" must be censored from the delicate eyes of poor little Sheeple Americans. If you can’t get your ideas out in a fair way and have them hold up against criticism and debate then censor, censor, censor. Let’s make commie China and the Ol Stainist Russia proud, shall we??? All together now, don’t like this message, Censor, Censor, Censor and let’s show the world how we promote ’freedom’!