Your email address:


Powered by FeedBlitz

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    « Miltiary's explanation of blocking casualty sites | Main | Pentagon Blocking Update: Defining legitimate »

    September 17, 2004

    Pentagon Acknowledges Blocking Casualty Sites

    CORRECTION:
    I spoke to a journalist-colleague earlier today who expressed some doubts that the Army would blocking of casualty sites actual policy (rather than leave the call to individual units). So I called Capt. Karns, the Centcom spokesman I had spoken to last week. He said I had misconstrued his earlier statements. (He had written earlier: "If a web site is not an official DoD web site or if it is not required to perform official government functions it can be blocked. In this case, it is important to ensure consistency and accuracy when dealing with causalities.")

    While the sites were blocked at some local levels (as are other some other unrelated, sites), Capt. Karns said there is "no policy on casualty sites. The only policy is that sites allowed not be offensive in nature." Implementing that guideline is left to the “discretion of installation commanders.”

    My apologies to Capt. Karns--and to readers.
    ====


    Last week, I received an email from a marine in Iraq who said his network was blocking him from visiting icasualties.org, a site that compiles casualty figures for Americans Iraq, as well as CNN’s page on servicemembers killed in the war. That was the second time I’d read of the military censoring a casualty-related site. Memoryhole.org, the site that first showed photos of flag-draped coffins being shipped back from Iraq, said in June that one of its readers had a similar experience. GIs trying to visit that site were greeted with:


    Access Denied (content_filter_denied)

    Your request was denied because of its content categorization: "Extreme;Politics/Religion"


    I assumed this wasn’t policy, but rather an overzealous sys-admin with too much time on his hands. I was wrong. An Army spokesman has now explained to me that it is indeed the Army’s intention to block service-members from viewing non-Pentagon casualty sites. (Other services apparently have similar policies and do use filtering software.) Captain Chris Karns, a spokesman with Centcom, explained:

    If a web site is not an official DoD web site or if it is not required to perform official government functions it can be blocked. In this case, it is important to ensure consistency and accuracy when dealing with causalities.

    The Armed Forces takes great care to ensure whenever there is a casualty the family receives the information first. Non-DoD sites reporting casualty figures can lead to inaccurate information being distributed. [Note: I've put Capt. Karns’ full response is the previous post.]


    Karns’ concerns are understandable—and irrelevant: Icasualties.org and CNN compile their figures from the Pentagon’s own press releases. Nor are names attached to them—unless it’s a link to a previously published article. And even if the problem did exist, isn’t the purported solution just a wee heavy-handed?

    P.S. To its credit, the military has started to do the job it once left to icasualties.org: It now posts daily casualty tallies.


    UPDATE
    Since most people seem to be accessing this post directly, here's some further detail from other posts:

    In case it's not already clear, there are other sites blocked besides casualty count sites. Karns goes into more detail in another email: "Certain sites are blocked if access is not required to perform the individuals official duties. Components may be more strict if they deem it appropriate." When I asked what qualifies as an appropriate site, he said, "If it’s tied in to be able to have a greater understanding of world events and it’s a legitimate news source than chances are service-members will have a chance of seeing it." Of course, as I mentioned, icasualties.org and CNN rely on the Pentagon's own announcements. In fact, icasualties.org does such a thorough job that active duty officers have written in praising it.

    TrackBack

    TrackBack URL for this entry:
    http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/24107/1137856

    Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Pentagon Acknowledges Blocking Casualty Sites:

    » Free Press in Iraq from Political Animal
    FREE PRESS IN IRAQ....Should soldiers in Iraq have access to websites that list the number of casualties suffered in the war so far? The Pentagon doesn't think so and blocks access to all such sites. Eric Umansky has the details.... [Read More]

    » Pentagon learns from the CCP from The Peking Duck
    Interesting. It seems the Pentagon blocks US soldiers in Iraq from accessing Web sites that list US casualties in our glorious war. Why? What are they worried about? Bush says freedom and democracy are spreading like wildfire. What's a few... [Read More]

    » Fighting for Freedom from Snow World
    Pentagon Acknowledges Censoring Casualty Sites Our soldiers fight for freedom, but the Defense Department doesn't trust them with it. Nice example to set for the Iraqis. Next thing you know, they'll put Baghdad Bob back on the air, telling everyone [Read More]

    » September 18: Today's Reason to Not Elect George W. Bush from Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal: A Weblog
    Today's shrill critic of George W. Bush is Eric Umansky: Eric Umansky: Pentagon Acknowledges Censoring Casualty Sites: Last week, I received an email from a marine in Iraq who said his network was blocking him from visiting icasualties.org, a site that... [Read More]

    » Military censors icasualties.org, CNN casualty page from Infothought
    In war, truth is the first casuality [Read More]

    » Pentagon Acknowledges Censoring Casualty Sites from vowe dot net
    Eric Umansky reports:Last week, I received an email from a marine in Iraq who said his network was blocking him from visiting icasualties.org, a site that compiles casualty figures for Americans Iraq, as well as CNN’s page on servicemembers killed in t... [Read More]

    » Ask About That from Ask About That
    Ask About That [Read More]

    » Time is not on my side from Uranus
    Talk is going on about... [Read More]

    Comments

    DoD's daily casualty tallies are nothing new. They have had them available for months now. For example, GlobalSecurity.org keeps an archive of them going back to November 2003.

    Hi; Perhaps of interest:
    I compile this weekly datasheet on military fatalities. http://www.dissidentvoice.org/DeRooij_Iraq-Coalition-Toll.htm

    About two weeks ago my access to DefenseLink was blocked, and now I must use another account to view that website...

    Kind rgds
    Paul

    Please note that there are 43 casualties from South Carolina listed on our website, which is more than the 29 listed on http://icasualties.org/oif/ByState.aspx website. We are searching info. to learn if there are more SC citizens that have died from wounds in hospitals.

    I would like to know the names of the military casualties from Montana since 9/11 2002.

    If you want do delete your site from our spam bases - just email us with domain of your site:

    abuse-here@inbox.ru

    thank you!

    I'm not sure what the hold-up is... maybe they have re-thought their stance on how this is going to actually make the company any money. Or perhaps their lawyers pointed out the liability of providing agents a platform to stick their feet in their mouth. Whatever it is, it's hardly something I'd claim as being "Well done".
    www.jebshouse.com

    Post a comment

    If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In