If This Were a Blog

It Would Be Banned By The United States Air Force.

If the word "Blog" appeared in the URL it would be banned.
Of course none of the sites operated by the "Traditional Media" are banned because they are "legitimate sources of news and information."

To think that Fox News is now considered a legitimate news organization right along with the Washington Times, National Review On Line and UPI. Isn't that wonderful.

As everyone knows those awful "Blogs" are just septic tank pools of misinformation and lies and they aren't the Traditional Media. Which makes them illegitimate sources of information.

Until recently, each major command of the Air Force had some control over what sites their troops could visit, the Air Force Times reports. Then the Air Force Network Operations Center, under the service's new "Cyber Command," took over.

AFNOC has imposed bans on all sites with "blog" in their URLs, thus cutting off any sites hosted by Blogspot. Other blogs, and sites in general, are blocked based on content reviews performed at the base, command and AFNOC level ...

The idea isn't to keep airmen in the dark -- they can still access news sources that are "primary, official-use sources," said Maj. Henry Schott, A5 for Air Force Network Operations. "Basically ... if it's a place like The New York Times, an established, reputable media outlet, then it's fairly cut and dry that that's a good source, an authorized source," he said ...

AFNOC blocks sites by using Blue Coat software, which categorizes sites based on their content and allows users to block sub-categories as they choose.

"Often, we block first and then review exceptions," said Tech. Sgt. Christopher DeWitt, a Cyber Command spokesman.

As a result, airmen posting online have cited instances of seemingly innocuous sites -- such as educational databases and some work-related sites -- getting wrapped up in broad proxy filters.

No votes yet


is stunning. The younger news folks are less elitist, but here's an example of the older so-called professionals' distain for their readers' intelligence. It is distain that seems to pervade many in traditional news organizations:

Yesterday, in the print edition of the Wall Street Journal, columnist Lee Gomes reports:

Like most writers online, Rick Klein, who covers politics on the ABC News Web site, invites reader comment. The posts he gets tend toward predictable red vs. blue harangues. But one commenter, "Henry," stood out for his unusually insightful analyses of campaign strategies, exit polls and other election esoterica.

Curious about Henry's identity, Mr. Klein wrote him and asked: Are you a midlevel staffer at some big presidential campaign? Or perhaps a K Street lobbyist, whose livelihood will be affected by November?

Henry turned out to be a high-school teacher in California, whose only connection to the Beltway was a broadband one.

What struck me immediately is that ABC News's Rick Kein automatically assumed that if one wrote insightful analysis, then one had to be an insider... what a shocker that one could possibly be an average joe, educated in the public schools, of reasonable intelligence. And it turns out that Henry is really all of that, and a blogger to boot.

The horror!

In his weekly column Robert Scheer writes, What the Times Didn’t Tell About McCain. This is a shocker. According to Scheer, the Timesommitted to report that McCain opposed Vicki Iseman's clients on the telecom issue and voted against the media barons.

Vicki Iseman, the lobbyist in question, is praised on her company’s Web site for her “extensive experience in telecommunications, representing corporations before the House and Senate Commerce Committees,” and for “her work on the landmark 1992 and 1996 communications bills.” Now that’s a biggie, because the 1996 legislation, although you would never have learned this from the mainstream media at the time, opened the floodgates for massive media consolidation, thus rewarding media moguls for their many millions in campaign contributions. McCain was a big player on that Commerce Committee at the time, and I expected a Times revelation as to just how Iseman got McCain to help gift the media barons with their dream legislation.

The revelation never came, because the annoying reality is that McCain was one of the rare Senate opponents of the telecom bill that Iseman was pushing—as opposed to The New York Times, which like every other major media outlet pushed for the legislation (in the case of the Times, without ever conceding its own corporation’s financial bias in the matter). McCain was one of five senators (and the sole Republican) who, along with Democrats Russ Feingold, Patrick Leahy, Paul Simon and the great Paul Wellstone, voted against the atrocious legislation, which President Bill Clinton signed into law.


Thanks for the heads up...just little blurbs in the article jump out at me..."secret Air Force plan to prepare for war against China" or "Unified Command, Single Commander.....
The important thing, the Air Force says, is that under a unified command, decisions about how to use all the pieces -- and control of the budget, more than $2 billion the first year will be in the hands of a single commander instead of being spread out as they are now."

Major General Wm. Lord...I know I've seen this guys name before.....might have been involved with the Nukes on a Plane debacle.

via regroce at BuzzFlash

ePMedia ... get the scoop with us!
If it's true that our species is alone in the universe, then I'd have to say that the universe aimed rather low and settled for very little. ~ George Carlin