Deep Politics Forum

decora writes
"An SAIC analyst has written a paper [PDF] calling for the 'stigmatization' of the 'unattractive' types who tend to discuss government secrets in public. The plan, described in the Naval Postgraduate School Homeland Security Affairs journal, is to promote self-censorship as a 'civic duty'. Who needs to censor themselves? Amateur enthusiasts who describe satellite orbits, scientists who describe threats to the food supply, graduate students mapping the internet, the Government Accountability Office, which publishes failure reports on the TSA, the US Geologic Survey, which publishes surface water information, newspapers (the New York Times), TV shows, journalism websites, anti-secrecy websites, and even security author Bruce Schneier, to name a few."

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/05/27/2...and-Stigma

The paper is here: http://www.hsaj.org/?fullarticle=7.1.10

Dowload the paper here: http://www.hsaj.org/?download&mode=dl&h&w&drm=resources%2Fvolume7%2Fissue1%2Fpdfs%2F&f=7.1.10.pdf&altf=7.1.10.pdf

Quote:An SAIC analyst has written a paper [PDF] calling for the 'stigmatization' of the 'unattractive' types who tend to discuss government secrets in public. The plan, described in the Naval Postgraduate School Homeland Security Affairs journal, is to promote self-censorship as a 'civic duty'.

If the student officer wishes to graduate with flying colours, perhaps an MSc or PhD, then they need to praise the wisdom of this proposal.

If the student officer wishes to display the independence and orginality of thought usually demanded at PhD level, and challenge this "stigmatization" of whistleblowers, then they shouldn't waste their time studying at the Naval Postgraduate School of Homeland Security Affairs.

This crap is precisely how a corrupt, decaying, system desperately tries to maintain its hold on power.