Pentagon blocks access to Southern Baptist Convention's website over 'hostile content'?

[sailingaway]

Would the Pentagon really block access to the web site of the nation’s largest Protestant denomination? According to a new report from Fox News’ Todd Starnes: Yes.

The U.S. Military reportedly blocked access to SBC.net, the Southern Baptist Convention’s (SBC) website on an unknown number of military bases. The reason? “Hostile content,” according to Starnes. The discovery was apparently made after an Army officer who tried to log onto the website received an error message. Chaplains, too, reported being greeted by a warning message.

“The site you have requested has been blocked by Team CONUS (C-TNOSC/RCERT-CONUS) due to hostile content,” the warning allegedly reads (CONUS is the group that monitors and protects the Dept. of Defense computer network).

At first, it was unclear what on the SBC.net website would have been flagged as “hostile content.” Starnes noted that the denomination is pro-life and pro-traditional marriage — but there’s no indication that this is at the root of the scenario.

A spokesperson for the SBC expressed concerns over the blockage of the web site, calling it “deeply disturbing,” although it is unclear whether the crackdown was intentional....

“If the government blocked any portion of the … [website] for any purpose, that would be an unconscionable breach of trust with the American public. The First Amendment exists to protect the church from governmental censorship of or infringement upon religious speech and the free exercise of religion,” he added.

more: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/25/did-the-pentagon-really-block-access-to-the-southern-baptist-conventions-website-over-hostile-content/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=Share%20Buttons

I'm bookmarking this for CISPA and other internet policy debates.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BIqvJopCYAEW_TU.png:large

[Origanalist]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=57-x5IRf2L8

[paulbot24]

Is this sort of site block imposed by a bot or some automatic censoring mechanism in place by the government, or was this just really poor judgement? If this was not automatic, how did they not realize the absolute shitstorm this would create?

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

topic title makes it sound like they blocked the website from ANYONE viewing it. All they did was filter it at base, big deal.

[paulbot24]

topic title makes it sound like they blocked the website from ANYONE viewing it. All they did was filter it at base, big deal.

Big deal? If I was a part of our voluntary armed forces, defending the civilians and this country, and I found out my internet and access to religious teaching was being censored by the very government I am supposedly defending........well, Warrior_of_Freedom, shouldn't that piss you off?

[sailingaway]

topic title makes it sound like they blocked the website from ANYONE viewing it. All they did was filter it at base, big deal.

Some religions and not others? they plan to pick the religions service men can be exposed to?

The point is that this was at baseES, and it sounds like it was an actual call made, and for those who are of that religion, some of the most troop supporting people who would usually think censoring was only of terror sites, this could drive home the type of censoring that could occur were any of the considered cyber bills to become law.

Just as the MO fusion center 'potential terrorist' list shocked many on the right who couldn't believe government would spy on or stigmatize 'their' sort of people.

[Constitutional Paulicy]

This seems relevant to a post I made yesterday, so I'm posting it in this thread.

Don't be surprised if they start blocking access to this forum in the future. Remember how many military personnel supported Ron Paul in the last election cycle? I can guarantee they are monitoring activity here on a regular basis.

Here is the documentary I posted.....


Many of you most likely saw this documentary. If not you should watch it. Interestingly, as Ron Paul supporters, we have been on a watch list of potential terrorists since the early 90's. You can jump forward in the video to the 27 minute mark to hear these assertions.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=WxOAK7iOlVk


Recent legislation attempting to legitimize the use of internment camps to detain U.S. citizens in the event of an uprising or civil unrest has many people asking what nation they live in.

In a country born out of political dissent, we watch our leaders in Washington slowly pass bills that label ordinary Americans as thought criminals and potential domestic terrorists for simply questioning the actions of their government. We see third party candidates and their impassioned supporters listed in secret government reports that call their allegiance into question and brand them as fanatics and extremists.

Senate committee hearings and official FBI documents further illustrate the mindset of our elected officials as they classify homeschoolers, gun rights activists and anti-abortionists as threats against the existing social and political order; by default creating an entire nation of radicals and revolutionaries - where everyone is a suspect equally guilty until proven otherwise.

How has our government shown that they will deal with these people? The same way as every other totalitarian regime throughout history - marginalize their activities then lock them up. Prisons are being built; internment camps constructed and laws passed that deal severely with anyone who dares to step out of line or ask too many questions.

Who are the potential domestic terrorists that will end up in these camps?

Read the documentation for yourself and hear what our experts have to say. States rights take a front row seat in this new political thriller that is guaranteed to send shivers up your spine. Find out where the true power of the people rests in halting these treasonous activities NOW!

[Ranger29860]

Big deal? If I was a part of our voluntary armed forces, defending the civilians and this country, and I found out my internet and access to religious teaching was being censored by the very government I am supposedly defending........well, Warrior_of_Freedom, shouldn't that piss you off?

They don't block this on personal computers they do it on the niprnet. This would only be on government networks designed for work and not for personal use. Also "hostile content" can be all sorts of things including virus's malware bots and so forth. Or they may have found a security hole in the site that opens up the network for intrusion attempts.

[Christian Liberty]

Big deal? If I was a part of our voluntary armed forces, defending the civilians and this country, and I found out my internet and access to religious teaching was being censored by the very government I am supposedly defending........well, Warrior_of_Freedom, shouldn't that piss you off?

Then you'd live in 1812. You wouldn't have internet access:)

[tod evans]

How is limiting access to information any different than providing misinformation?

Both approaches are implemented with some desired outcome.

Personally I'd rather have fully informed soldiers supposedly protecting our nation than the product of dis/misinformation..

[jmdrake]

topic title makes it sound like they blocked the website from ANYONE viewing it. All they did was filter it at base, big deal.

We paid for that base with out tax dollars. So yeah IT IS A BIG DEAL! Imagine if any Ron Paul oriented websites were blocked by the Pentagon?

[Ranger29860]

We paid for that base with out tax dollars. So yeah IT IS A BIG DEAL! Imagine if any Ron Paul oriented websites were blocked by the Pentagon?

Your right! My taxes do go towards those systems! I would think having people work when there on work computers instead of browsing would be a positive thing here? Again they are not limiting personal computers at the base just the NIPRNET computers.

[TonySutton]

Hey how about we talk about the facts and not assume too much...


The Pentagon blocked access to the Southern Baptist Convention’s website recently because it contained “hostile content” that was later determined to be malware, a military spokesman said Thursday.

“We determined that our web filters recently detected malware at the SBC website, which resulted in the block for some service members,” Lt. Col. Damien Pickart said in a prepared statement. “The department has verified that the Southern Baptist Convention website no longer contains malware that may pose a threat to our networks and will be unblocked today.”

http://www.redstate.com/toddstarnes/2013/04/25/pentagon-says-they-will-unblock-southern-baptist-website/

[Ranger29860]

Hey how about we talk about the facts and not assume too much...



http://www.redstate.com/toddstarnes/2013/04/25/pentagon-says-they-will-unblock-southern-baptist-website/

Lol called it! People are waaaayyy to eager on these forums lately to just flip out about everything.

[TonySutton]

Lol called it! People are waaaayyy to eager on these forums lately to just flip out about everything.

The software where I work often blocks pages on RPF because it says it contains links to "Hacking" so I have to wait until I get home to read some threads :(

[CPUd]

Lol called it! People are waaaayyy to eager on these forums lately to just flip out about everything.

LOL, post an Onion article and watch what happens...

[ClydeCoulter]

It's still good exercise, even if it was misunderstood (the OP that is).
The misunderstanding, as it stood, was discussed.
If you believe X is happening, you can discuss the ramifications, even if X is found, later, to be not the case.
Love you guys :)

[paulbot24]

Your right! My taxes do go towards those systems! I would think having people work when there on work computers instead of browsing would be a positive thing here? Again they are not limiting personal computers at the base just the NIPRNET computers.

Explain that to a Southern Baptist Chaplain on a military base seeking clarification through forums or collaboration to do his job. Good luck with that. Every time I attempt to explain something to a Southern Baptist, it doesn't go well. Okay, now I'm kind of joking, but I think you know what I'm getting at. Also, if there is anything that we have learned over the years about change and loss of liberty is that it is an intentionally incrementally slow chipping process. So when you read about people "freaking out" over what seems like something innocuous, remember it is the accumulation of all this nudging and gently pushing that has caused this critical mass to take place. If people had been freaking out over the years, as they saw changes occur, like in 1913, or when Ron Paul had started warning America, we would not find ourselves squeezed together into frisson, with all this built up friction and this overwhelming sense of urgency.

[sailingaway]

Your right! My taxes do go towards those systems! I would think having people work when there on work computers instead of browsing would be a positive thing here? Again they are not limiting personal computers at the base just the NIPRNET computers.

It said on the base. I doubt two troops would have objected if it had been on work time. Troops LIVE on the base.

[sailingaway]

Hey how about we talk about the facts and not assume too much...



http://www.redstate.com/toddstarnes/2013/04/25/pentagon-says-they-will-unblock-southern-baptist-website/

Well, that does make it different, but that wasn't in the original article.