Article

2007-07-06 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by ryuge 2007-07-06 07:26|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [11130 views ] Top

#1 Jihad Watch readers telling me that they had been accustomed to reading the site at work, but now their employer had blocked access to the Jihad Watch site on company computers.

I guess the employees will just have to wait until the buildings fall to get a sense that something is going on.

Posted by JohnQC 2007-07-06 08:22|| 2007-07-06 08:22|| Front Page Top

#2 CAIR was not blocked--astounding!

Posted by JohnQC 2007-07-06 08:23|| 2007-07-06 08:23|| Front Page Top

#3 Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil.

Posted by Jonathan 2007-07-06 10:05|| 2007-07-06 10:05|| Front Page Top

#4 It depends on who the sys-admin is.

Posted by Pappy 2007-07-06 10:13|| 2007-07-06 10:13|| Front Page Top

#5 Generally big corporations subscribe to a web filtering company, and select categories to have blocked. They tend to be pretty broad categories, and they tend to be rather inconsistently populated (as would be expected given the massive number of sites to be categorized.)
I find that if I have a work reason to go to a blocked site I can contact my sys-admin and get access. But the truth is, there is almost never a work-related site that is blocked. I figure that any non-blocked, un-work-related site I get access to on the company system (even during lunch) is a 'free' bonus to me.

Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore 2007-07-06 10:23|| 2007-07-06 10:23|| Front Page Top

#6 I blocked Move-on.org at my work. No one noticed.

Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader 2007-07-06 11:29|| 2007-07-06 11:29|| Front Page Top

#7 Glenmore is on the money here. Despicable as censorship is, especially selective censorship, employers are under no obligation whatsoever to provide non-work related Internet content to their employees. We all can be grateful that Freedom of Speech permits us to view whatever we want during off hours.

However, to tar all such initiatives as hatred is a tried and true tactic of the Left.

Spencer left out "Muslims", but he works up to it.

Intellectually bankrupt as it is, it silences its critics rather than dealing with them on the level of ideas.

That's because the Left gave up on original thought a long time ago. It's dangerous, ya know. People might get ideas instead of toeing the party line.

They cant answer us, so they try to shut us up and discredit us.

Simultaneously discrediting themselves in the eyes of all free-thinking people.

Leftists, as well as apologists for Islamic jihad terrorism, label their opponents hatemongers and bigots, hoping thereby to make people of good will turn away from their message.

Any ability to "make people of good will turn away" is often dramatically offset by the next terrorist atrocity which usually follows soon enough.

And the politicized nature of this Internet censorship will come as a surprise to no one.

Surprisingly, least of all to the liberal Left amidst their strident cries of "Free Speech". Curious, that. I seem to recall them having rallies, demonstrations and riots over "Free Speech" several decades ago? What changed?

Committed Leftist ideologues have for many decades waged a war to gain control of the portals of communication.

And they succeded. They just weren't counting on the Internet showing up.

Their stranglehold was broken with the demise of the Fairness Doctrine and the advent of talk radio and the Internet. The Internet, for all its faults, has delivered the coup de grace to the control the politically correct media have long had on the news.

Despite whatever environmental damage technology has wrought upon our planet, just the Internet alone absolves it of that wrongdoing. Electronic text transmission and display has saved entire Amazonian rainforests from the pulp mills. No combustion engines need pollute the skies to deliver content to our doors and workplace productivity is enhanced immesurably.

Neither liberal or conservative news outlets dare to face the truth about the global jihad in any thoroughgoing or realistic way, but you can get it at Jihad Watch.

When Islam is finally defeatedand it will be defeatedRobert Spencer should receive a medal of honor for his erudite and unflagging deconstruction of Islam's treacherous façade as the Religion of Peace [spit].

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-07-06 13:43|| 2007-07-06 13:43|| Front Page Top

#8 Despicable as censorship is, especially selective censorship, employers are under no obligation whatsoever to provide non-work related Internet content to their employees.

It's not censorship. Censorship is what governments do. When an employer limits access to the web for its employees during work hours, that's just a work rule. Employers are under no obligation to provide the entire web to employees on their intranets.

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2007-07-06 14:22|| 2007-07-06 14:22|| Front Page Top

#9 It's not censorship.

In the workplace example, it is not. Agreed.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-07-06 14:42|| 2007-07-06 14:42|| Front Page Top

#10 All good points, but Pappy has an excellent point as well. You can subscribe to a service, but what ultimately gets blocked, or not, is up to the SysAdmin. And a lot of those folks are Barking Mad Lefties.

Posted by Natural Law 2007-07-06 15:44|| 2007-07-06 15:44|| Front Page Top

#11 Spencer points out that if JW is blocked, so CAIR should be.

But it's not.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2007-07-06 16:33|| 2007-07-06 16:33|| Front Page Top

#12 so CAIR should be.

By rights, CAIR shouldn't even exist on American soil. I think it's safe to say that the same applies to all of their members.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-07-06 16:46|| 2007-07-06 16:46|| Front Page Top

#13 It points out a glaring problem with democracy and capitalism. In reality democracy is only effective (enabled) after work and on weekends. For the rest of the time you are in the baron's or syndic's keep. Said keep by its nature being a MidEvil and undemocratic setting.

Posted by 3dc 2007-07-06 16:55|| 2007-07-06 16:55|| Front Page Top

#14 Karen Hughes attacked Robert Spencer by name, 2 weeks ago. She would have the leverage. She also owns a Muslim veil, which she wears with dhimmi pride.

Posted by McZoid 2007-07-06 18:04|| 2007-07-06 18:04|| Front Page Top

#15 This sounds like maybe the proxy filtering provider may be a managed service provider. LGF ran into this not that long ago. The url filtering providers have periodic updates to the filters. We ran into this where I work, one day a business supply site and FoxNews was blocked. The provider we used just changed the whitelist. True, in a corporate enterprise, (I work in IT security) internet access is a privelage. If it is the corporate IT depts doing this it is one thing but if it it is the url filter provider it is something else entirely.

Posted by djh_usmc 2007-07-06 19:27|| 2007-07-06 19:27|| Front Page Top

#16 I think I would feel extra secure knowing that a Marine was handling my security. I hope your corporation appreciates what they've got, djh_usmc.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-07-06 19:46|| 2007-07-06 19:46|| Front Page Top

23:51 Eric Jablow
23:12 Anguper Hupomosing9418
23:10 Captain America
23:07 Captain America
22:35 trailing wife
22:33 trailing wife
22:28 McZoid
22:27 GK
22:23 3dc
22:22 mojo
22:05 Mike N.
22:03 Asymmetrical T
21:50 lotp
21:49 lotp
21:44 Gomez Unineng1927
21:37 Sock Puppet of Doom
21:34 trailing wife
21:19 gromgoru
21:18 twobyfour
21:16 Zenster
20:56 ed
20:51 ed
20:42 Glenmore
20:38 gorb
Merry-Go-Blog