Superguy

I'd argue that as this is an official TSA blog operated by the federal government and that the constitution applies to the federal government, that the constitution DOES apply as does free speech.

If it were someone like HSVTSO Dean or some other private TSO doing a private blog, sure, I'd agree. Not this time.

studentff

If Blogger Bob had stated in his OP that the thread was not to be used to debate our issues with TSA and if he had at the same time acknowledged that there are serious flaws/imperfections in TSA that can be discussed elsewhere, instead of guilt-tripping passengers for feeling the restrictions are burdensome, then I would have waited or posted elsewhere. Censorship isn't good, but neither are OT posts in threads (though TSA's blog format make it virtually impossible to post anywhere other than a few active threads, making OT posts unavoidable).

But he did not, and his comments about hollowed-out shrews, everyday items like drinks being used in IEDs, TSOs arbitrarily deciding certain people might be "bad" instead of following their statutory mission to look for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries, and guilt-tripping pax for feeling the rules and enforcement by benevolent TSOs are burdensome invite criticism and comment.

And I think 9/11 is the perfect day to sit down and think about how we are dishonoring the memory of those who died on 9/11/01 by trashing the Constitution, liberty, and common sense.

TheCrackedJack

It's doesn't matter whether it's owned by the government, another private citizen or an alien from the planet Krypton.

The operator/owner of any webpage has the right to censor, edit disallow any post they like for any reason. That's the freedom they have whether anyone likes it or not. Just like you can start an Anti-TSA blog and block and posts they try to make.

Spiff

The government is spending the citizens' money on this website. Censorship should not be happening.

TheCrackedJack

Like I've said, I don't agree with it. But they do have the right.

That's the very thing about freedom. Having the ability to do both wrong or right. You can't have freedom without both. For better or worse.

Superguy

I think it's also a CYA slogan. No one wants to be responsible if something does happen.

doober

Hear, hear!

Superguy

I can because I'm a private citizen. I can't infringe on someone's rights. The government can.

The government can't simply toss away the rules because it doesn't like it and are using a blog. So what if they "own" the page. While they might control the content per se that they create, the fact that they're allowing comments that anyone can post puts them in constitutional territory and they have to be careful there.

To their credit, they've posted a lot of scathing posts that disagree with them and haven't changed much unless things got vulgar. I think common standards of decorum are appropriate as long as the message, pro or anti, isn't squelched. I think they could even post stuff and just delete explitives as well.

I have a problem with Blogdad Bob having a heavy hand simply because people see 9/11 in a different and nonpropagandic way than TSA does. And because he's working as a government actor, he's still bound by the constitution and I think he's starting to infringe upon free speech by deeming it not appropriate. 9/11 isn't a constitution free day.

Superguy

I'll drink to that.

I've tried posting a couple posts that hit the deletometer. I'm probably one of those people he referred to.

TheCrackedJack

I'm sorry, but your getting way too caught up in the fact that this is the gov. Forget about it for a minute. It's immaterial. It doesn't matter and the rules as you put it don't apply in cyberspace.

Straight from the blog: Those are the terms and they have the right to them (Again, I don't agree with them either)

This is a moderated blog, and TSA retains the discretion to determine which comments it will post and which it will not.

pmocek

To be clear, in the case of today's post, I have attempted to post comments that are on-topic -- about the 9/11 Commission chair and vice-chair saying that they were set up to fail, that they were mislead, and that their report was flawed and incomplete, about the opinions of survivors of the WTC disaster, and about a man who was in one of the towers when it fell, then went back in and rescued 15 people.

I'm very familiar with the comment policy there, and I'm quite certain that my posts did not violate it. They did reference information that might make people think twice about the justification for formation of TSA.

Superguy

Of course they apply and it's not immaterial If there weren't rules or laws, there'd be no such thing as computer crimes. Can't selectively have it when it's convenient.

But of course, when has TSA cared about law anyway?

TheCrackedJack

The rules of free speech is what I was referring to of course. And I suppose I should have said the rules aren't the same, instead. Obviously there are laws and rules governing the internet as well.

And again, I'm simply stating the have the right. I've never said I agreed with them.

The final fact remains that there is no rule, law or otherwise prohibiting them from "moderating" or removing comments as they see fit while online. It is immaterial that they are the government in this case. It simply doesn't matter when it comes to the law in this matter

Boggie Dog

Disagree, the government website "Evolution of Security" is prohibited from engaging in censorship. The constitution limits the govenment from infringing on ones right to free speech. There is no question the "EOS" is a govenment site.

If it was a personal or business site not funded by taxpayer monies then you point would be correct.

Now if Blogdad Bob wants to run a site from his home that he funds then he can censor anyway he wishes.

TSA Bob

Hey all. Whenever I need to feel loved, I stop by Flyer Talk. I've been reading for years by the way...

First off, for those familiar with how blogs work, comments are an option. We don't have to give you a forum. But, that would be pretty silly since we want to hear from you.

You folks know as well as anybody else (since you read and comment on the blog frequently) that we allow you to stick it to us on a regular basis. Obviously, we're fine with most of it as you can tell by reading our blog.

I got together with a couple of folks and we decided the 9/11 thread should just be about remembrance and moving forward. We agreed that it was not the proper forum for snarky posts and 9/11 controversies/conspiracy theories.

By the way, I'm taking the second half of my paternity leave over the next two weeks, so do me a favor and don't accuse me of ducking and running.

Blogger Bob