Pentagon Blocks Access to Southern Baptist Website

[GISMYS]

OPEN YOUR EYES,WE ARE LIVING IN THE LAST DAYS!!! John 16:2 ►

They will put you out of the synagogue; in fact, the time is coming when anyone who kills you will think they are offering a service to God.

===http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/military-blocks-access-to-southern-baptist-website.html

 

[The Irish Ram]

Gis, that verse refers to Jews being killed en masse Hitler/Muslim style. And you are right, we are in the end of days, and we will see that atrocity soon. Those responsible will be the UN/Arab Spring connection we see taking shape today.

And as crazy as those Baptists are, the Gov. deciding what we can see and what we can't is a violation of civil right. We can decide that they are nuts without gov. intervention.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Gis, that verse refers to Jews being killed en masse Hitler/Muslim style. And you are right, we are in the end of days, and we will see that atrocity soon. Those responsible will be the UN/Arab Spring connection we see taking shape today.

And as crazy as those Baptists are, the Gov. deciding what we can see and what we can't is a violation of civil right. We can decide that they are nuts without gov. intervention.

#1 It is NOT the government making this decision but the military.

#2 Civil rights in the military are subject to the Code of Military Justice.

Free Speech, the Military, and the National Interest

In a military context, that standard forces us to ask whether or not free expression represents an imminent threat to the national interest. The national interest can take many forms, but for our purposes here it is generally synonymous with the ability of the armed forces to perform their wartime military mission. Senior officials, both military and civilian, agree that unlimited free speech is inconsistent with command, control, and military authority on which the armed forces are based and, therefore, must be restricted in some degree if the military is to maintain its capability for immediate and unified action.6 An army or navy whose members are allowed to spread internal dissension and disorder constitutes a hazard with perhaps as great a potential for danger to the country as a hostile foreign power.7 Thus, as an early legal commentator on military free speech states, "The national defense brooks no opposition and overrides many freedoms. . . even in peace time the military must act as if war were imminent, for new habits cannot be established on the day the balloon goes up. ..."8 It is a true paradox that the soldier, under certain circumstances, must sacrifice some of the liberties that he is called on to protect.

 

[Jimmy_Jam]

Gis, that verse refers to Jews being killed en masse Hitler/Muslim style. And you are right, we are in the end of days, and we will see that atrocity soon. Those responsible will be the UN/Arab Spring connection we see taking shape today.

And as crazy as those Baptists are, the Gov. deciding what we can see and what we can't is a violation of civil right. We can decide that they are nuts without gov. intervention.

#1 It is NOT the government making this decision but the military.

#2 Civil rights in the military are subject to the Code of Military Justice.

Free Speech, the Military, and the National Interest

In a military context, that standard forces us to ask whether or not free expression represents an imminent threat to the national interest. The national interest can take many forms, but for our purposes here it is generally synonymous with the ability of the armed forces to perform their wartime military mission. Senior officials, both military and civilian, agree that unlimited free speech is inconsistent with command, control, and military authority on which the armed forces are based and, therefore, must be restricted in some degree if the military is to maintain its capability for immediate and unified action.6 An army or navy whose members are allowed to spread internal dissension and disorder constitutes a hazard with perhaps as great a potential for danger to the country as a hostile foreign power.7 Thus, as an early legal commentator on military free speech states, "The national defense brooks no opposition and overrides many freedoms. . . even in peace time the military must act as if war were imminent, for new habits cannot be established on the day the balloon goes up. ..."8 It is a true paradox that the soldier, under certain circumstances, must sacrifice some of the liberties that he is called on to protect.

You are correct. Any prior service member can easily understand this. Service members are subject to the UCMJ, and are not entitled to a full set of rights as non-service citizens are until they terminate service. Civil rights has nothing to do with it.

That said, the military blocks a wide variety of sites on base and shipboard networks. I know because I was a shipboard network administrator during my time in the Navy. They do indeed block sites with content that is deemed subversive, have done for some time, and will continue to do so. One shows up that has Christian content and here comes the religious right with yet another knee-jerk claim of persecution, with little attention paid to the actual content of the story. The U.S. military has been, and continues to be, extremely supportive of religious access by our men and women who serve.