I've noted many times in the past that it is most fascinating to me that a fascist organization such as the U.S. military protects the greatest land of freedom on earth. Now, bear in mind the definition of fascist when I say this. Webster defines it as: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control. Note that this is the second, non-capitalized version of the word. I am not attempting to put the military down, of course, just being factual about how it operates. On some levels, that degree of control is necessary in order for the military to do its mission. For example, we can't stop in the battlefield to have vote and find out how everyone feels about the objective; personnel do as they are told most often.
However, this article describes something almost mind-boggling. Army personnel may be banned by their commands from blogging. I was pretty stunned. No ability to express yourself? No means to exercise your free speech via the internet? You have simply GOT to be kidding me.
The founding fathers thought enough of your ability to speak freely that it was the first amendment...your first right guaranteed by the Constitution. It was intended, in part, to be sure that all Americans can speak out against their government and express their rage at what they perceive to be injustice and wrong. The Constitution does not say "unless you are in the Army".
Socially, we accept some forms to limitations on this (No screaming "Fire!" in a crowded theater, for example). This is because you can only push your own rights so far before you infringe upon the rights of others. As a general rule, however, one's ability to speak freely should be as expansive as possible.
See, there are already laws and regulations about not spreading military secrets that should provide proper incentive to not reveal military secrets, whether intentional or not. Outlawing the medium itself if ludicrous. Why not outlaw telephones? You're just a likely to spit out secrets on a phone or at the local mall as you are on the web. Why not monitor all their communication via e-mail, too? Why not snail mail? This is an illogical step that will ultimately serve little or no purpose. Many military members will likely continue to blog regardless of the rules, I suspect. All this is likely to do it make already tired military members angry. There were already procedures in place to allow the military member to blog, but be "audited" occasionally. What was wrong with this process? Why the heavy-handed approach?
At a time when the military is having a tough time recruiting, another freedom enjoyed by the protected citizen is stripped from the protector. It's just a shame. Ok, I'm done.....