What is Digg?Sponsored by GE
What Are The Most Shared Ideas for Healthy Living Right Now? view!
healthymagination.com - From imaginative approaches to proven solutions, the answers might surprise you.
46 Comments
- MaddDog, on 10/12/2007, -3/+30Canada did the same for troops serving in Afghanistan.
Some soldiers were providing detailed reports of their patrols, and some even included photos and videos of soldiers on patrol, demonstrating tactics, etc. Eventually, the military had no choice but to shut it down.
What happens when soldiers are killed, and the enemy is found with copies of troop tactics on them? - Kiel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18if you weren't aware, we Australians have NO freedom of speech like the USA. Its is an assumed right, not a constitutional one..
- Paroparo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13I wonder how much of it is protecting the military from idiots who accidentaly reveal critical information and how much is protecting the home front from depressing news. =/
- Yez70, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Providing details of your activities could be treason and is obviously dangerous. That is already illegal, banned and very severely punishable. (unless you work for FOX news, of course - bah)
Supressing any citizens normal speech in a democratic society is fascism. It's unethical, illegal and should also be punished severely - in my opinion. - rubored, on 10/12/2007, -8/+17***** that!
What happened to freedom of speech?!? - WallyAnti, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9"What happened to freedom of speech?!?"
It brings to mind the "you can't yell FIRE! in a crowded theater" argument. In reality there is no such thing as freedom of speech. There are laws to keep you from saying certain slanderous things, there are laws to keep you from divulging information pertaining to a pending court case.
Freedom of speech is limited, but that's an oxymoron isn't it? Anytime you hear the word freedom it can be assumed that the word "reletive" precedes. it.
Also this is Australia and I'm not sure how they feel about freedom of speech. - WallyAnti, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Yep, the power of propaganda cannot be underestimated. It's how wars are won without as much bloodshed. Of course it is also the method by which wars are started in the first place. A bit of a double edged blade.
- greekgoat91, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8this sucks, imagine that you're an Australian vegemite-loving blogger. If you choose to live in Australia... no blog. If you choose to live in the US... no vegemite!
What has this world come to! - zhulien, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6no, it was about oil
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I'm not sure which comment you are referring to, 0x0000ff, but both comments seem to apply to all of the world's military organizations.
- XandraX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The ADF has had quite a successful campaign in Iraq, so it wouldn't be filtering news about them. I suppose they don't want the full grim situation in Iraq getting out to people.
- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4It's not the power of propaganda you moron. Battlefield information is how wars are won these days. During the first invasion of Iraq in Desert Storm the Iraqi military was cripple and useless because the allied forces controlled all of the battlefield information. You do not want to take the risk that someone leaks information and gets a bunch of people killed.
You can yell conspiracy all you want but there are valid reasons for wanting to monitor the information that goes in and out. Even if you worked at a military base that had no sensitive information and wasn't even doing anything. Your internet access is restricted because they don't want you to post up something that could embarass or damage the agency. We just had our emails and internet access closed down even tighter because they discovered that some asian folks (from a certain large country) had managed to create accounts on our email system and I don't work for any frontline military unit... I'm not even in the military. 3rd party email, no. YouTube, no. MySpace, hell no. - newbietheatre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4That's *****. People here fight for their freedoms just like anywhere else.
- scott1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@WallyAnti
The biggest one would be the lack of a bill of rights. - The_Decryptor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"What happened to freedom of speech?!?"
I'm sorry, did you assume we had a right to freedom of speech in Australia? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6The military doesn't like news from the frontline it has not vetted. Partly it's due to a fear that troop movements might be revealed, but mainly it's because the army (and government) wants to keep control of the newsfeed, to avoid losing the war in the media.
- MackPrime, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3it's because the government here is pretty much genociding any dissenting media parties it can get it's hands on.
I.E ABC's Television Roster "Changes". I'd be surprised if there was any more "Chaser's War", if "The Glass House" was cut. - Khemikl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Wasn't this war supposed to be about democracy and the spread of freedom? How much freedom did we shoot today?
- jiggawoot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm guessing there aren't a lot of digg readers out there in the Aus military.
Firstly, we do have a constitution. However most Australians wouldn't have a clue what's in it. Our civil liberties aren't encroached on very often, so you don't hear people quoting sections of it in general conversation.
But more to the point. I would think this is to stop people publishing information with no authorisation. It is the same if they approach the media with information about any of their activities. Unless you have clearance to speak with the media, you aren't allowed to. The average soldier/sailor/aircraftman(or woman) doesn't know what information the public should be privy to. As a matter of fact, almost all information regarding their activities is staff-in-confidence. So they shouldn't really be telling anyone outside their chain of command.
It's the damn military for *****'s sake. You don't go home and blog about how you had to shoot across the bow of an illegal immigrant vessel to get them to stop. It's not like having a rant about the bastard teacher that gave you a bad mark on your report in school. - WallyAnti, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4@Kiel
Interesting, I'm not knocking you, but I am curious. Aside from the parchment what is the difference between their assumed right and our constitutional one? - migs87, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The military in America does not have freedom of speech. Never has. When you sign the contract it states that you MAY NOT become insubordinate towards GOV'T, Officers or the President. You can critize thesse groups if not in uniform. Most don't aren't punished but it is in the paperwork. I signed it and couldn't forget it. Its like saying "if I sign this I have no right to choose my war, my home, my language, and actions. I do get to hold my religious beliefs, Only because the Army doesn't issue a standard religion." IF it did you couldn't choose that either. Sexual preference is also not permitted. Not saying I would do a dude but if you can't go home on leave and do what you want then, huh, maybe typing up a military blog isn't going to happen either. PLUS, it only takes one idiot to type in his GPS location to his friends to show where he is on Google map to get into the wrong hands and have a crap storm follow. also the American Military DOES review some emails. I have had friends send me 2-3-4 emails just to make sure I get the whole story and sometimes they are edited or never recieved.
- pirotess, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Nothing wrong here. A soldier is first and foremost a tool for war and no different from a tank or gun. They're the government's property.
- kazuhima, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2why was zhulien dugg down?
anyways. why do we (Americans) have to be responsible for spreading freedom in the world? let the countries deal with their own problems. - taitacakes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I was sad to see the Glass House go too, I'm guessing it might have been Wil's comment about "leaning slightly to the left" that may have pushed Aunty over the edge.
But just like Good News Week moving to channel ten, I'm sure the Glass House will pick up a new spot any where. Same with Chaser if that gets canned. - 0x0000ff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1oops, I misunderstood the parent comment.
- Protonz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wow so many of you are brainwashed. So there are a few Geraldo-like troops and you are saying punish all of them for the idiocy of a few?
Grow the ***** up. - WallyAnti, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@noahhoward
I don't disagree with you in the least little bit. Troop movements should be secret and giving troops blogging privileges undermines this necessity. Not to mention that soldiers give up certain rights by signing up for service.
However, I think it would be a stretch to say that the "image" we are trying to convey does not also suffer from such a free passage of information.
Sorry you think I'm a moron. Perhaps I should have made myself more clear. I think you're alright just the same. - ahuxley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This is to stop equipment complaints - difference in field use vs training.
Photo/video clips that show insensitive/stupid behaviour.
Its all about political control and spin. - zc_au, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1freedom of speech
that went out of the windows or got rule out about 4 or so years ago
welcome to the new world
but its crap that the gov is telling them what they cant do in there free time
i guess its a way to stop any BAD news or really bad news from getting out into the press
when its happens or close to it
.... but its soo wrong to do this - ybisme, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2yes we do, its mainly made up of the boomerang brigade
- noahhoward, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sorry that stayed in there, it cn certainly be used to stop propaganda from being revealed and I had no reason to cal you a moron other than venting. Truce?
- jmcv, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Are you kidding? We don't have our government wire tapping our phones or getting rid of Habeas corpus. Anyway. the point of the ban is not to restrict freedom of speech(which I've never seen repressed here), but to avoid a situation where a soldier posts details that could compromise the soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan. Freedom of speech in Australia is, like Kiel said, an assumed right. We don't have people being forced to take down peace signs, we have hundreds of anti-war protestors in our citys every day.
- RoboPimp3000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I can't believe what I'm hearing!
Australia has a military??? - gracamac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Op-Sec is very important within the military, if it could save the lives of a few diggers than I say shut the bloggers up.
Every soldier signs a contract when they join the ADF (Australian Defense Force), essentially making them the governments property for a minimum of four years, they can do what they want with them. It is not like they are censoring regular citizens, from what I have seen we (Australians) enjoy a very free society. - Enroth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@stw2k2k
You No what, ***** you.
I don’t know about the other Australians reading this, but this is the first time I have herd about this, and I’m dam pissed of. - 0x0000ff, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2That comment would be relevant if it weren't for the fact that this is about the Australian military, not USA.
Don't try to say it's the same, because it most definitely is not. - darthmdh, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The Glass House is a poor excuse for a left-wing propaganda machine. I actually counted the number of political jibes during one of the final episodes this year and there were two soft ones at Labor and seven nasties at Liberal just in one segment. I laughed once and sniggered once the entire show, the rest was all left-wing BS. I suppose its all hilariously funny to the dwindling minority of Australians who lean that way politically however that doesn't give them an automatic right to use public funds to spread their propaganda in the guise of comedy. The fact that my tax dollars goes towards spreading these ideals I do not believe in is offensive and arguably fraudulent.
- Savage680, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Hay me name is. You don't need to know Sry lol... Well I'm going for a JOE'S day tomorrow to see if i can get into the Army. I hope to god they let me it's all I've wanted to do all my life... I stumbled across this sit and read every single blog... I think it's funny Americans thinking there the police of the world. GET OVER YOUR SELVES... But back to the point if i was to get this position in the army and got sent over to Iraq... I would be so pissed of if some dumb muther ***** posted in a god damn blog like this one and it led to some one in the ADF to get hurt... Dint worry about punishment most the people in his regiment would bash him... Just think about it if they didn't stop people from bloging and didn't edit it would get out of control. So i say Put up or STFU....
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I can't see the big deal. Of course you can't have military personnel passing on battlefield information to the world at large. Everything a soldier writes about that environment has the potential to yield information which insurgents could use against them, even as obscure a detail as what he had for breakfast could identify, for example, a food supply to target fo poisoning. Not ignoring the very obvious potential for critical operational info to be posted by some soldier ignorant of the potential consequences.
Most importantly of all, the miliary has a job to win the war - anything which detracts from that goal should be stopped if it can be. One of the main reasons this war is going to ***** is because the propaganda battle has been won by the insurgents with the willing support of the media in the US and Aus and the internet community in general. The glee with which images and stories that potray the war and our countries in a bad light are jumped on, such as Abu Ghraib, British troops beating Iraqi youth, "massacres" of "innocent civilians" by US air raids etc, shows how damaging any information can be to our chances of victory. The article itself refers to the damaging photos of Aussie troops clowning with guns (which is exactly how our only war death, of Private Jake Kovco, occurred) and displaying racist attitudes to Arabs. Personally, I don't want to see that sort of ***** in the public arena as it will only lead to more dead Aussies and I for damn sure don't want to see it come from our own military members.
When a big part of victory in the war is achieved by winning the minds and support of the non-fundamentalist Arab community, I find it disgraceful that we actively undermine that support through our media. Yes, lots of the bad news stories are "newsworthy", but you have to accept the fact that reporting it directly results in deaths of our soliders by providing fuel for the insurgency. - cikal61, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0it's strange that australian govt do that.......
- iamcristian, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0U.S. Army Soldiers in Iraq are required to tell their Chain of Command if they have a blog. I think there's a form you fill out. In my unit we were yelled at when one of our soldiers posted a myspace blog with pictures of a rollover accident and names of the injured. This is a little harsh, but I agree. If an Australian soldier in a combat zone has a blog, at least he'll make sure it's a private one.
- stw2k2k, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Australians are more concerned with getting off our faces.. then to worry about a solider writing a personal blog for friends & family.
Australia simply uses the US as a "rule of thumb" with regards to freedom laws... but when push comes to shove, the gov will change these laws any time they see fit. There is no constitution to protect them.. and we have NO leadership in this country to defend them.
We'd be ***** terrorists attacked Australia. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2I just KNEW some idiot would comaplkin about Freedom f Speech.
It is COMMON SENSE! The average solider doesn't know exactly what should nad should not be made widely available. He may accidentally, casually, mention something that hurts his own men, or our men.
I also think it is better that the Australian army doesn't look like it is made up of a bunch of 12 year old girls writing their diaries online. - nipuL, on 10/12/2007, -9/+5I guess you lose most of your rights, except to die, when you sign your arse to the military.
Some should teach these guys how to use encrypted tunnels. - stw2k2k, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1The Australian public don't seem to give a ***** about personal freedoms.. they'll bend over and take anything the gov dishes out.
Thank god for the US & it's vast list of human rights organizations leading the way. Also.. gotta love the US libertarian orgs.. we need some here down under. - pahoehoe, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2So, does the military read mail that is sent from the front lines to families at home? I don't know anything about past or current military policy on this kind of correspondence, but one could write the blog, mail it to dad, and let dad post it.
