Tweet
Let’s see…given the security of the online survey of service members was crap, would you use this new Pentagon offering? One hopes taxpayer-pickpocketing well-paid contractor Westat wasn’t in the mix. (Army.Mil):
The Army launches today a Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell online inbox specifically available to Soldiers worldwide to share comments and opinions.The inbox is accessible via the Army Knowledge Online homepage. The intent of the inbox is to help the Army assess and consider the impacts, if any, a change in Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell law would have on operations, readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, recruiting and retention, and family readiness. Complete instructions can be found on the inbox entry page on AKO. The inbox will remain open until Sept. 30, 2010, or until leadership decides the inbox has fulfilled its purpose.
The Army Chief of Staff wants all Soldiers to have the opportunity to share comments and opinions. What is learned from inbox comments will be shared with the DoD Comprehensive Review Working Group to assist in the development of an action plan to support effective implementation, if repeal of current law occurs. The more comments and opinions provided, the better the Army can gage Soldier opinion and perception of the potential impact of a repeal.
Additionally, inbox comments could provide insight on how to best manage such impacts during implementation.
To safeguard identity of respondents, the Army will employ control measures. Inbox users are reminded that current Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell law remains in effect.
So let’s see. Absent more details, I have a few questions:
-
What constitutes “control measures” in this case? We just have to take their word for it that it’s secure? I have zero confidence in this inbox system after what occurred with the DADT survey, when a PIN could be used to take it multiple times.
-
What is to stop “ballot stuffing? If it’s completely anonymous and untraceable for security, wtf?
-
If each response is tied to an IP or other identifying information of the workstation, then a service member could be outed. Adding the time stamp of the inbox receipt could narrow ID further.
-
Now that the survey’s data has been compromised, is this the fallback way to receive feedback? Why is this needed to supplement the survey when there’s already one for service members and spouses? How is this going to be a more accurate representation of matters?
10 Comments
SECURE INBOXWe live in Maryland and have a lot of National Guard around so almost daily I ask one about the survey. Many of the fine youg people I have questioned have done at least one tour of duty. Generally, they are all too busy to take the time to fill out the many surveys that are sent. Most did not know about the one being sent to spouses and there was a general sense that it is a waste of time. There have even been a few snickers.
You ask some good questions but I think the only ones who will respond are those few that have the time and have something to say (probably negitive). I can almost bet that not one gay service member will touch it.
3..2..1So the countdown begins until this online inbox gets hacked. Because the Army doesn’t just want to look like Fools. They want to look like Homophobic Fools.
Inbox Part DeuxI just checked the site out. The Army inbox mentioned here is almost identical to the DoD online inbox that was launched earlier this year. The key difference is that the Army inbox only allows people to select an Army branch of service (Active, Reserve, Guard) if they are a uniformed member. The other option to provide input is as a family member. Just like the DoD online inbox, this is not a survey but a comment box limited to 1,000 characters of input (about 7 tweets for the tweeps out there). You have to have a Common Access Card to reach the website and there does not appear to be any option at the end for a confidential chat like what was available with the DoD online inbox. This Army inbox is 100% attributable to the ID card used to access it.
The Army is now officially grasping at straws. Since gays and lesbians have no protections in using this comment mechanism, the only benefactors of this new inbox to communicate with the Pentagon are the straight soldiers out there.
They’ll keep coming up withcrap like this till somehow, someday, they find the raw material to fabricate a plausible excuse for retaining DADT. Not a legitimate excuse, mind you, but one that will appear sufficiently plausible to get some play in our “both sides of the story” media–and to provide cover for Obama, Gates, and the Joint Chiefs’ Christian bigotry.
If the Pentagon was putting this much serious effort into Afghanistan we’d have won and come home years ago.
“if repeal of current law occurs”The consistent and repeated use of that phrase throughout all of these “fact gathering tools” tells me all I need to know about how this will ultimately play out.
If Obama means for DADT to be repealed (and I am confident he doesn’t) he would direct the necessary people/organizations to stop using this phrase and others like it.
If this wasn’t so serious,it would just be bad comedy. I am so completely fed up with this whole farce. Can’t decide if the “authors” of these plans are stupid, naive, desperate, or all of the above. My guess is the latter.
WE HAVE A WINNER!!!
Congratulations, Sheryl! Casey and his boss, Secretary of the Army McHugh, have repeatedly shown that they ARE:
STUPID
NAIVE
DESPERATE!
So stupid, in fact, that every American, gay and nongay…in fact, the world….should tremble at the fact such men have nuclear weapons to play with.
1. After their two superiors, Gates and Obama, said ending the ban was okay [even "when we're fighting two wars" BUT not before "The Study"], Casey and his boss, Secretary of the Army McHugh, told the Senate in February it wasn’t…regardless of any “study.” [That they were allowed to is just a part of Gates' strategy of chaos , read: kill real repeal.]
2. The first week in April, McHugh had to publicly retract his statement that there is a freeze on discharges pending repeal. Ask Dan Choi.
3. The last week in May, Casey and Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz wrote Congress protesting the automatic “repeal” of DADT that would happen with the new bill they were voting on. Problem: automatic “repeal” would NOT come with it. In fact, it doesn’t REQUIRE “repeal” EVER.
4. Dumb and Dumber, excuse me, McHugh and Casey were at it again Memorial Day weekend, sending a letter to everyone in the Army not to worry because “repeal” “is not a done deal.”
5. On top of the announcement’s kind reminder that DADT can still get your ass shitcanned, the standard warnings on the Army Knowledge Online Website homepage practically guarantee anyone posting on it that his/her name is going in a special file.
BUT, as much as I encourage every kind of brick being thrown at these endless Pentagon card tricks, I urge everyone still harboring any belief that the announced “results” of “the study” will be anything but what Gates WANTS them to “be” to abandon such trust in the man who was accused on ALTERING THE RESULTS OF STUDIES FOR THE REAGAN ADMINISTRATION when he was at the CIA, being involved in the Iran-Contra coverup, and helped bring us Iraq and Afghanistan.
For the record…
Casey, thank Goddess, has no “operational authority,” so nuclear winter is apparently still a ways off….
Hoot, Michael…. you would have to remind us about their NUC toys.Wendy, this linked to this yesterday…such a CROCK!! Now, they have jumped all the way ahead and call it 'potential repeal' in this one!GAAAAAAAHHHH!
STUPID NAIVE DESPERATE! And we need to remember that they are also fundamentalist Christian fanatics. You know, the kind of dimwits who think spending millions of dollars to inscribe Bible verses on bullets is a good use of public money and will accomplish something positive. Our government is constantly warning us of the catastrophe that would ensue should Muslim fanatics get nuclear weapons. But apparently putting them in the hands of the Timothy McVeigh clones who run the Pentagon is just absolutely swell.