Because We’re Not Being Spied on Enough

The Justice Department has acknowledged constructing a database to track the movements of millions of vehicles across the U.S. in real time.

And

A Justice Department spokesman told Fox News that the tracking program is compliant with federal [law]… claiming it “includes protocols that limit who can access the database and all of the license plate information is deleted after 90 days.”

Perhaps (although with this Justice Department or this administration, that’s hard to see), but that doesn’t make it right, or consistent with the precepts of our Constitution. And how do we know the information is “deleted after 90 days?” We don’t know when it was collected, starting that clock. We have only the Eric Holder DoJ’s word that the data are deleted. We know from experience with IRS “lost emails” that “deleted” doesn’t necessarily mean deleted.

Another kicker:

It is not clear whether the tracking is overseen or approved by any court.

The Wall Street Journal had this from its original tale:

The primary goal of the license-plate tracking program, run by the Drug Enforcement Administration, is to seize cars, cash and other assets to combat drug trafficking, according to one government document. But the database’s use has expanded to hunt for vehicles associated with numerous other potential crimes, from kidnappings to killings to rape suspects, say people familiar with the matter.

The program’s current scope is this:

[It] collects data about vehicle movements, including time, direction and location, from high-tech cameras placed strategically on major highways. Many devices also record visual images of drivers and passengers, which are sometimes clear enough for investigators to confirm identities, according to DEA documents and people familiar with the program.

The documents show that the DEA also uses license-plate readers operated by state, local, and federal law-enforcement agencies to feed into its own network and create a far-reaching, constantly updating database of electronic eyes scanning traffic on the roads….

That’s the problem with a government program—it grows, it never shrinks, it never is eliminated. When the program is a secret one, its expansion is hard to discern, and the program is even harder for a free people to control. When the program is used to spy on the citizens, it’s extremely dangerous to our liberty.

What will happen when the program is further expanded—because anonymous donations to this or that political organization is viewed, by government, to be inimical? What will happen when the program is used to harass groups of Americans of whom the men in government disapprove, or of whom the men in government especially favor? Think that can’t happen? Look no further than this Justice Department and white voter intimidation by New Black Panthers and this DoJ’s avowed policy of not going after voter crimes involving white victims and black perpetrators. Look no further than this administration’s use of the IRS to go after political groups the White House doesn’t like.

Expansion of Ukraine Occupation

The Russian-backed (with 9,000 of their own) rebels in Ukraine and Ukraine signed a cease fire agreement in September, including an agreement to withdraw their respective artillery units from that cease fire line.

Having done that,

a rebel rocket attack early Saturday morning (24 Jan) killed 29 people [at least 30 according to Reuters] in the port city of Mariupol[]

which Russia has been trying to seize for some months pursuant to their effort to open a land route to Russian-occupied Crimea. The day before,

[T]he rebels rejected a [renewed] peace deal and said they were going on a multi-prong offensive against the government in Kiev to vastly increase their territory.

Alexander Zakharchenko, leader of the Russian-backed Donetsk People’s Republic said this of the Russian/separatist forces’ plans:

Today an offensive was launched on Mariupol. This will be the best possible monument to all our dead because we will avenge them all[.]

So much for the value of a Russian commitment.

Wrong People Punished?

A Southern California high school basketball coach has been suspended and faces accusations of mercilessly running up the score after his team won a game 161-2, one of the most lopsided scores in state history.

Based on what misbehavior, exactly?

The coach, Michael Anderson of Arroyo Valley High School’s girls’ basketball team had some comments.

I didn’t play any starters in the second half. I didn’t expect them to be that bad.

And on any do-over, perhaps

I wouldn’t play the game at all.

But what would that teach his girls? What would such an insult teach the opposing team’s girls?

The losing coach, Dale Chung of Bloomington High, also had some remarks.

He’s a great X’s and O’s coach. Ethically? Not so much. He knows what he did was wrong.

What about you, Ace? Where are your ethics in your lack of preparation of your team? You set them up for this loss. Where are your ethics with your “They’re victims” nonsense instead of your teaching them to play the game, or even (gasp!) to compete?

I have some questions.

Why must the girls on the winning team’s bench, who are trying to earn a starting position on their team, be held back from doing their best during their chance on the floor?

What about the opposing team’s girls, who offended the game with their apparent lack of effort on the court?

What about the opposing team’s girls’ parents, who didn’t bother to teach their children how to compete?

What is California trying to do to the children in its schools’ care?

An Intolerance from Anti-Discrimination

Atlanta Fire Department Chief Kelvin Cochran has been fired from the Department altogether by Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed. Cochran’s reprehensible crime? He wrote a book, Who Told You That You Were Naked?, about morality from the Bible’s perspective. He also wrote about his views of homosexuality as informed by the Bible.

Reed suspended Cochran for a month over that book, and then on the day Cochran was to return to duty, Reed fired him. Reed said he did it because

I profoundly disagree with and am deeply disturbed by the sentiments expressed in the paperback regarding the LGBT community. I will not tolerate discrimination of any kind within my administration.

And yet, Reed is committing exactly that bit of miscreancy. He’s discriminating against a Christian man for his Christian beliefs. Reed’s willingness to be tolerant, and his claim to be anti-discrimination, are to be extended only to those who agree with him. To those who don’t think like he does, he gives the back of his hand, and he tells them to hit the bricks.

This is a textbook example of what the Bible is describing when it talks about hypocrisy.

Free Speech, Images of Muhammed, and the American Press

In the wake of the Islamic terrorist attack, sponsored, if not directed by the al Qaeda network, Charlie Hebdo (their site is down or overwhelmed as I write this) printed their next issue with an image of Muhammed on its cover.CharlieHebdoCover

Even as they cover the news of this story, though, as Howard Kurtz pointed out in his recent column, American “news” outlets refuse to print the image that is the center of this news story: Charlie Hebdo‘s cover. CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, and the New York Times are among those refusing to complete their news stories by showing what it is they claim to be talking about. Kurtz wrote this about that decision:

[N]ews executives had to weigh the safety of their employees, as well as their usual practice of not running images that are gratuitously offensive to religion. (Yes, I know that some have run anti-Christian images in the past but seem to be more skittish about offending Muslims.)

The parenthetical in that cite gives the game away. News…executives…aren’t worried about safety, and they’re not concerned about gratuitous religious offense (they’re not worried about gratuitous offense at all—see the slurs and degrading stories they publish about Tea Partiers, conservative women, conservative blacks, anyone who doesn’t think like they do).

American news executives are cowards, plain and simple. And they’ve surrendered their erstwhile freedom to speak to Islamic terrorists in their cowardice.