Google Pulls Map Images At Pentagon's Request
Stony Stevenson alerts us to a little mixup in which a Google Street View crew requested and was granted access to a US military base. Images from inside the base (which was not identified in press reports) showed up online, and the Pentagon requested that they be pulled. Google complied within 24 hours. The military has now issued a blanket order to deny such photography requests in the future; for its part Google says the filming crew should never have asked.
...how or why this is a bad thing.
Do we think there should be street level maps inside military installations on Google Street View?
Whether someone "screwed up" in the meantime, at Google, the installation, or both, is beside the point of whether the imagery should be removed.
The issue of how/why the crew was granted access, whether it was a gated or "open" installation, etc., are all unanswered.
You've obviously never worked in any supervisory position or for a large organization.
.1% of the time is trivial.
Picture this. You're a gate guard at on a military base. Your instructions are to allow people in with the proper credentials, deny those without, salute officers and be on the lookout for questionable activity. You do this 10-12 hours a day and get absolutely no respect. You see an odd looking contraption in a car that, through the mind-numbing tedium of your job, you may point out to the guy you're working with, but probably aren't going to do any more. Of course, you're supposed to say something, but at this point, you don't give a shit.
Now you're the colonel in charge of security on your base. You never know this happened. You continually tell people they are supposed to report or investigate this kind of thing, but they don't listen to you because their job is 100% useless 99.9% of the time, and identifying the remaining
Whale
After billions are spent on homeland security, the general public inconvenienced to hell, some of our freedom taken away in the name of security..and something like this is allowed to happen? Well, I sure do feel safe.
Why can't I censor my address "for security reasons"?
I consider it a threat that anyone can scout my home for robbery (ie. the best approach and exit) without even driving by.
I suggest you read Slashdot
US Military Bases are small towns. They have Burger Kings, Shopping areas, Pools, Golf Courses, Snack Bars and Grills, picnic areas, fishing lakes, child care centers, housing areas....etc. For most of the Base the security is fairly low level. They screen people coming in but it can be evaded if you are determined. Once inside they have areas that are high security. Don't try your luck with those. They've got 19 year olds with automatic weapons that have been brainwashed to the max and are very serious about security. I used to work on perimeter security equipment....those cops are scary. More than one person I know has found themselves in the wrong area....face down on concrete with a locked and loaded M16 to the back of the head. It's not any fun.
. . . and here in America, the military, just like the rest of the government, belongs to the people. In theory, at least. In practice I understand it's quite different, but it shouldn't be. All aspects of government ought to be 100% accountable to the people.
The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
From what I gather from the article is that the film crew just pulled up to a military base and asked if they could shoot some film/pictures in there.
It sounds to me that the guys that were filming just wanted a challenge, see how far they can get waving a "google-film-crew" badge. Or just try for giggles, who knows.
Anyway, it seems to me the military is the erroneous party involved here, if you just let a citizen drive up your base and let them film, something is definatly wrong with your security
Life starts at the end of your comfort zone.
It's a little different when you're _in_ the military though. you are no longer a private citizen. they can order you to go take that hill, they can order you to go halfway around the world, they can order you to STFU.
I spent 4 years active duty and you are right about the amenities on the base. However, those 19 year olds with automatic weapons are not brainwashed by any means. Most of them dont want to be on duty and dont want to be there. They are strict about certain areas such as flight lines....if you step over the yellow line then you are on your face. Don't be fooled by speculation based on what the military is advertised to be.....its not.
Doubt it. It's never been that way before, why would that change all of the sudden now? There's probably things from WW2 that are still classified. And not like it's the military - do you think you can waltz into an IRS office and demand to know everything they are doing? Of course not, you cannot view other people's tax information! Just as you wouldn't be allowed to attend a high level meeting between Generals... Some information is private, and if you think about it, often it's for good reason.
Big installations like Fort Sill or Fort Bragg control access along the roads, but they also extend far into the wilderness where it's hard to completely control access. Go to Fort Irwin or White Sands Missile range, and it's impossible.
In a democracy, everything paid for by taxpayer dollars should be open
While I agree with that statement, it implies that in non-democracies things should be something other than open.
But your last paragraph is really bad logic. You say that every scandal in the last 7 years of exposure to incompetence, corruption, or illegality has been decried as giving aid and comfort, which is largely true. That's because exposure of bad things does give aid and comfort to our enemies. The argument for exposing them anyway is that it's worth the price. It is incorrect and self-deluding to claim that there is no price to be paid.
But it is not "obvious" that covering for the people who made the mistakes is the real desire for secrecy, since that lumps all three of your categories together. The real desire for secrecy is in fact to hide our inner workings from our foes. Hiding them from ourselves is just a bad side effect that secrecy proponents are willing to accept, while you are not. And it's not the case that all revelations are met with equal cries of disdain from the Right nor glee from the Left. Lumping them all together is useful for creation of a bogeyman, but it's not an accurate picture.
sigs, as if you care.
Dover never had bombers based there. It is/was a Mac (military airlift command) base, not a SAC (strategic air command) base.
Dover AFB has always been C-5 focused. The C141s have been/are being put out to pasture, replaced by C17s.
- dj