Saturday, January 14, 2006

Loose lips sink ships

That used to be a catch phrase in World War II warning people that the enemy could learn valuable intelligence from accidental talking. I am not talking earth shattering information like the New York Times publishing shipping schedules during the Civil War that CSS Alabama's captain read. I am talking things like 'Oh Joe's ship has left again but they were in such a rush he left half his kit home.'

Bloggers have been all over the New York Times because of them exposing the National Security Agency's efforts to intercept terrorist telecommunications. Well the bloggers themselves are leaking like a sieve with specualtions about possible scenarios. I must ask bloggers and posters to blogs to watch what they say, your one little tid-bit might be the final piece of datum the terrorists or rogue nation-state needs to divine some plan the Pentagon has been striving to carry out in secrecy. Be mindful of what is typed, in this era this is more important than idle chat between two people since what is posted can be potentially read by thousands or millions of people.


The MaryHunter said...

Awww, Anna, you really think that the random bloviatings of us wee lil' pajama pundits could amount to a hill of beans to the baddies? I'm not being flippant necessarily... I just can't imagine that the baddies really would take the b'sphere seriously as an intel source. Such a messy place full of rightwing wackos like us. ;-)

Then again, I'm not much of an intel source.

Myrtus said...

haha TMH I believe you've just sidetracked the baddies with that statement....ooops! Did I just blow your cover? (;

Anna, as usual I think you're making an excellent point.

Sirc_Valence said...

There is at least going to be an airstrike in Iran, like National Review suggested in Breaking The Chain (Jan. 17, 2006). Ooops - I said too much!!!

We can't help it Anna, sorry we Americans -especially neo-con Americans- are just big mouths and we have to ask questions and spoil the surprise for everyone all the time by making reliable statements and such.

Sirc_Valence said...

With that said, I must ask:

Why should the potential victims of Iranian nuclear weapons (anywhere in the world) depend on whether or not a hypothetical post-nucleaer Iran ends its repeated pre-nuclear terrorist activities?

Civilization must not, as Reagan would put it, "suit weakness [or cowardice] in the coat of virtue."

Anna said...

Sir Valence, Iran has always been a terror state since day one of the 444 days of shame Carter inflicted upon the US.

In this information age the US military can no longer hope for strategic surprise [Desert Storm flashback - 'we know somethig is going on because pizza orders to the Pentagon has gone up.'] and can only hope for tactical surprise. But even that is tentative because good nations like to deleiver ultimatums while dastardly nations launch sneak attacks.

Because of this information age with countless scrupulous and unscrupulous sources of information, a pretty accurate picture of capabilities has been laid bare along with possible strategies for dealing with Iran.

But if we truly value the lives of those who serve and are going into harms way then it behooves us as citizens to watch what we say or type.

omar said...

i hope i'm adding something beneficial to this perhaps old discussion.

this is all ridiculous. stop censoring yourselves. well, i doubt you are, it's a hard thing to do, and it seems there's no good reason.

actually, after studying china for while, this is exactly what they do. at first, they have their citizen censors suggest online the direction of discussion, and then the government takes the next step, a step i wouldn't be surprised if the bush government one day took against bloggers, namely to ban certain topics from discussion and to shut down certain blogs arbitrarily.

i want to note that i find this discussion fascinating. i found this blog via google blog search. what a wonderful tool. i really feel like the blogosphere is polarized. it's nice to find a place like this where i can read other opinions and think about where i stand. it's healthy!


Anna said...

Omar, McCain-Feingold is already an attempt to silence by legalism bloggers from talking politics, which is in contravention of the First Amendment.

And yes the PRC is an ever vigilant guardian of what its citizens see because they have learned that a citizenry that can learn without PRC filters on the news is a dangerous concept. The traditional media outlets in the West have been learning this same lesson what with the Rather/Mapes manufactured Bush documents being a glaring example. In both cases, large entities are trying to rule over people by manipulating the information people see.

I am not advocating any such thing with this post. What I am talking about is the leaking of sensitive information that can cost lives or cause a military operation to fail. That is what bloggers have to watch out for.