IHTM bids fond farewell to TSA employees: Napolitano to block websites with “controversial opinions”

by editor on July 6, 2010

Can you imagine the din that would have arisen if Bush Director of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff had issued an order banning “controversial websites”?

Yet that’s exactly what happened when Director of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano issued new censorship rules late on Friday afternoon, hoping her edict would slip through unnoticed over the long holiday weekend. Looks like that ploy didn’t work, Jan.

CBS News risks being banned, we assume, by reporting the news:

janet-napolitano-censors-websites

We're waiting for the ACLU to file suit against Janet Napolitano. Still waiting.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is blocking certain websites from the federal agency’s computers, including halting access by staffers to any Internet pages that contain a “controversial opinion,” according to an internal email obtained by CBS News.

The email was sent to all TSA employees from the Office of Information Technology on Friday afternoon.

It states that as of July 1, TSA employees will no longer be allowed to access five categories of websites that have been deemed “inappropriate for government access.”

The categories include:

• Chat/Messaging
• Controversial opinion
• Criminal activity
• Extreme violence (including cartoon violence) and gruesome content
• Gaming

The email does not specify how the TSA will determine if a website expresses a “controversial opinion.”

Janet Napolitano is a moron.

At first we thought that statement might be enough to get us banned, but then we realized there’s nothing controversial about it.

Source:CBS News

32
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
24 Comment threads
8 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
23 Comment authors
Austin PowersKimmyQueentracycoloradodrbgrayjohn Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
Notify of
Austin Powers
Guest
Austin Powers

It’s a MAN, baby!
LOLOL

tracycolorado
Guest
tracycolorado

The s#*t is going to hit the fan , only the strong will survive

matthew s harrison
Guest
matthew s harrison

I can’t wait until the civil war is over-and barry and all of his scumbags are sitting in the very boxes in the hague where other dictators and their henchmen have sat in the past. I just hope the civil war isn’t as bad as I think it is going to be. If the dems use the chicago machine, in consort with the SEIU, ACORN, et al, they will steal all of the congressional elections, causing instant and bloody revolt. I’m just sayin……………………

drb
Member
drb

MSH, you have voiced my concerns. I’m afraid this is going to get very ugly very fast.

grayjohn
Member
grayjohn

P.S. the best thing about libs is they can’t understand that they will go to the camps and to the wall before the conservatives and patriots. Thus has it every been with tyrants.

grayjohn
Member
grayjohn

Is there anyone working for the TSA that can read well enough to be frequenting this site? Just sayin…

Vic
Member
Vic

“Napolitano is a moron”. It doesn’t get any truer than that.

WordEmUp
Guest
WordEmUp

Add a monocle, shave her head, and she’s Colonel Klink.

CO2Insanity
Admin

I was looking again (Argh! My eyes!!) but I think she needs to trade the glasses in for a monocle.

Paden
Member
Paden

“That photo of Janet would be perfect if she had an SS uniform on.”

Holy cow your right! Field Marshal Napolitano

Shang Kwon
Member
Shang Kwon

Keep adding guns and bullets to the arsenal…

CO2Insanity
Admin

Kafkaesque also comes to mind.

Paden
Member
Paden

This is the same bitch that put U.S VETERANS on the terrorist watch list.

matthew s harrison
Guest
matthew s harrison

CO2-it has an SS quality to it-which is why she has it on. The collar is very reminiscent of a kraut uni from WWII-good call!

CO2Insanity
Admin

That photo of Janet would be perfect if she had an SS uniform on.

RKae
Member
RKae

And does she really need those glasses? Because I think she’d look good with a monocle!

Paden
Member
Paden

We warned the libs long ago, but they dismissed every warning as “fear mongering”.

Yup I’m afraid

Hoffmom
Guest
Hoffmom

So where’s Whitehouse.gov on the list?

matthew s harrison
Guest
matthew s harrison

Brice-
The argument here is not that they are filtering content-it is that they are only filtering content of a “conservative” nature. The point is, that if they are going to selectively filter content that is politically opposed to that of the administration, then they are violating the first amendment-no matter what.

Brice
Guest
Brice

It doesn’t matter what is considered controversial because the network that the TSA employees are using doesn’t belong to them. This means that the owners, (the Government), can block what ever sites they want to. As long as this ruling doesn’t directly affect the content that private ISPs offer customers, then there is no problem. Hell, even private companies can filter what users can and can not access, so where is the problem?!

matthew s harrison
Guest
matthew s harrison

I don’t know when the last time any of you guys went through an airport was, but lets be honest-most of these idiots can’t read! Any chance of them hitting this site, or any other site that you have to read the contents of, is nil, zip, zero, NADA. If it doesn’t have a lot of pictures, they weren’t hitting it anyway. No danger of them even understanding what “controversial opinion” even means.

JJJRO
Guest
JJJRO

But it’s not about the end users here – this is more about opening the door to overt rules of censorship. It might be imposed on people who can’t read now, but once the precedence is set, it’s easier to move to a “fairness in the media” doctrine which could eventually affect us all.

jim9101
Member
jim9101

In my tech job I work with the Feds from time to time and some locations are so constrained they can’t get to legitimate sites to download program fixes so I end up mailing the fixes on a CD via snail mail.

JJJRO
Guest
JJJRO

It’s that “Controversial opinion” statement that should raise the red flag (hmm.)

ocmadam
Member
ocmadam

This site should be safe from federal censorship — the feds hate the media too.

Drunken Monkey
Guest
Drunken Monkey

Government employees that are supposed to be at work, working, should not be wasting their day, and my tax dollars, browsing around sites that have nothing to do with their job, nor chatting on yahoo or aim with their buddies. They are there to work. What you see as censorship is simply an employer trying to get their employees to stop wasting the taxpayers money and focus on their job. There is a concept.

Ruben
Member
Ruben

Drunken Monkey, I agree with your point about working instead of wasting taxpayers dollars; however, this edict is suspect concerning the identification of sites with ‘controversial opinion.’ Why would Mr. Napolitano identify them? Is it because they do not wish to have anyone influenced on company time by ideas other than hers? I suspect so. Who is the arbiter of ‘controversial’?

KimmyQueen
Member

True, true. On my dime do not use the internet UNLESS it is something specific about your job. However the problem is the banning of sites for ideas, talk and opinions that she (and the government) deems controversial. That is a bit odd. What stops her (or other parts of the government) to widen that net to other areas? Why do it during the weekend? Why not be more specific?

Elizabeth Brown
Guest
Elizabeth Brown

I don’t see porn sites included on this list?

Mistella
Guest
Mistella

I agree. However, if the guvmint banned ALL such sites (ABC, CBS, Huffthemuff, etc) I have no problem. The friggin’ public servants need to be working.

danybhoy
Member
danybhoy

Of course not, people who are on the clock, on the taxpayers dime, should be able to fire up some porn from time to time to help relieve stress during the work day. Happy employees are productive employees.