Overstepping

In recent weeks, there has been an interesting exchange.

The NSA has been caught spying on US citizens.  Their mission statement:

The National Security Agency/Central Security Service (NSA/CSS) leads the U.S. Government in cryptology that encompasses both Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) and Information Assurance (IA) products and services, and enables Computer Network Operations (CNO) in order to gain a decision advantage for the Nation and our allies under all circumstances.

and original charter:

The COMINT mission of the National Security Agency (NSA) shall be to provide an effective, unified organization and control of the communications intelligence activities of the United States conducted against foreign governments, to provide for integrated operational policies and procedures pertaining thereto. As used in this directive, the terms "communications intelligence" or "COMINT" shall be construed to mean all procedures and methods used in the interception of communications other than foreign press and propaganda broadcasts and the obtaining of information from such communications by other than intended recipients, but shall exclude censorship and the production and dissemination of finished intelligence.

both fail to mention "collection of data on US citizens on US soil."

So this guy decides to out the NSA for doing things outside of its given purview.  Good for him.  This is why we have whistle blower laws.

And if we could have just stopped there, I'd have been happy.  Well, not with the NSA, but with Snowden.

Instead, he then went and did this.

Guess what, Mr. Snowden, spying on the Chinese is the NSA's job.  What part of "conducted against foreign governments" did you not understand?

So, to recap for the NSA:

Spying on foreign governments:  Good

Spying on your own countrymen:  Bad

And for Mr. Snowden:

Ratting out illegal spying:  Patriotism

Ratting out legal spying:  Treason.

Of course, the root of the issue is this (also from the original charter):

The special nature of COMINT actives requires that they be treated in all respects as being outside the framework of other or general intelligence activities. Order, directives, policies, or recommendations of any authority of the Executive Branch relating to the collection, production, security, handling, dissemination, or utilization of intelligence, and/or classified material, shall not be applicable to COMINT actives, unless specifically so stated and issued by competent departmental of agency authority represented on the Board. Other National Security Council Intelligence Directive to the Director of Central Intelligence and related implementing directives issued by the Director of Central Intelligence shall be construed as non-applicable to COMINT activities, unless the National Security Council has made its directive specifically applicable to COMINT.

Yes, with one stroke of a pen, Harry S Truman managed to create a government agency with almost zero formal oversight.  One more thing to put on his list of bad ideas.

City planning

There's a joke in the world of laboratories that you know a microbiologist because he washes his hands before and after.

Which is why this sort of headline makes no sense to me in light of this sort of headline.

Notice that the second headline is from February of this year.  Four months ago, epidemiologists estimated a 46% increase in deaths this year than last from food borne illnesses.  And yet, Los Angeles thinks that doing the same thing will have different results.

It will.

San Fransisco Population: 812,000.

Los Angeles Population: 3,820,000.

I'm no mathematician, but it seems pretty reasonable that if there are 5 extra unnecessary deaths in a city of .8 million, there will be a correspondingly increased number of extra unnecessary deaths in a city of 3.8 million.

Especially since LA's waste management has never been regarded as exemplary, and isn't getting any better.

So, to recap, San Fransisco's planners trade 5 people's lives for a 0.6% decrease in litter, and now we all get to hope that Los Angeles is making a better deal.

V for Shenanigans

In college, the TTU RUF went to see the opening night of V for Vendetta. 

**Spoiler alert**

At the end of the movie, the protagonist has built up so much support that the thousands  turn out in support.

Flash mob!!!

Facing off against them is the UK ground forces.

Yes, the future British army issues off-the-rack paintball masks.  Budget cuts, what can you do?

Despite the dystopian start of the movie, the soldiers are unable to pull the trigger on the brave, unarmed civilians.  Everyone walks out of the theater feeling happy.

Except me.  I felt insulted.  Because I am an armchair historian, and the showdown depicted isn't a theoretical future conflict.  Oh, no, it has happened over and over again throughout history.  And guess what?  The soldiers always pull the trigger.

Yesterday marked the 24^th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre. Starting in April, thousands and thousands of pro-democracy protesters occupied the square for a month and a half.  Estimates are that by the end, one million people were in the square.

The photo above was circulated around the world.  The entire Western world was rooting for them.  But then, something happened.

The cameras went away.

Once the Chinese government had suppressed international media access, the soldiers arrived.  300,000 of them.

Now, I make no secret that I hate hippies.  "Student protester" automatically makes me think, "Get a job."  But there's a difference between the gutsy protesters of Tiananmen Square and the Occupiers of Wall Street.  Zuccotti Park was covered in trash at the end.

Tiananmen Square was covered in bodies.

Over a thousand demonstrators were gunned down over the course of two days.  More would be hunted down in the days to follow.

No one knows what happened to the man who stared down the tank.

This blog post will not be available in China.  Not that anyone actually reads this, least of all in China, but the inclusion of the picture above will make it filtered out by the Chinese government's search filters.  The cameras left in 1989, and they're still not allowed.  

The US State Department issued the following statement:

"We renew our call for the Chinese government to end harassment of those who participated in the protests and fully account for those killed, detained or missing."

The Chinese replied:

Foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said the US should "stop interfering in China's internal affairs"

There’s no doubt that a demand by a US government agency to explain Tianamen is just as offensive as an equivalent Chinese agency taking the US to task for the Trail of Tears.  Or the Philippines.  Or Hoover's bonus army.  The US State Department has no business decrying another country's internal decisions and just needs to shut up.

But, the people of the world do need to remember.

Confession time:  I just now got around to watching Scream.  For a horror buff, that's pathetic.  However, it got me to thinking about the possibility of my daughters babysitting some day.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Me:  "Okay, The Dot, big day.  Your first baby-sitting gig.  You ready?"

The Dot:  "Yes, Daddy."

Me:  "You sure?  You have everything?"

The Dot:  "Yes, Daddy."

Me:  "Cell phone?"

The Dot:  "Check."

Me:  "First aid kit?"

The Dot:  "Check."

Me:  "AED?"

The Dot:  "Check."

Me:  "Fire extinguisher?

The Dot:  "Check."

Me:  "Shotgun?"

The Dot:  "Check."

Me:  "Slugs and buck?"

The Dot:  "Check."

Me:  "Silver crucifix?"

The Dot:  "Check."

Me:  "Ash stakes?"

The Dot:  "Ash stakes, mirror, Molatovs, chainsaw, and Kevlar.  Check, check, check, check, and check."

Me:  "Trauma plates in that vest?"

The Dot:  "Daaaddddyyyyy."

Me:  "Okay, now remember what we went over."

The Dot (rolling eyes and sighing):  "No drinking, no boyfriend, zombie in the brain, vampire in the heart."

Me:  "And?"

The Dot:  "And if the slasher goes down, press the attack."

Me:  "And no matter what shows up?"

The Dot:  "Perforate, decapitate, and incinerate."

Me (kissing her forehead): "Good girl.  Have fun!" 

Taken: Movie Review...Sort of

This might be considered behind the times, but it's not so much a movie review as it is a personal observation.  And since Taken is currently playing on TV, now's as good a time as any.

During my time at Tennessee Tech, the campus ministry I was a member of went to the movies.  When A Stranger Calls was playing, as was a kidnapping movie.  I do not recall the name of that film, because we did not go see it.  Over the vociferous objections of the entire group, we watched the former film.  Why?  Because our campus minister said he can't watch kidnapping movies.

He said as soon as I had children, I would understand.

Of the many things that he said, the majority of them were profound, wise, and/or knowledgeable.  But when he missed the mark, he missed it by a mile.

And in a side note, we did at least get to see Camilla Belle with a wet shirt, so all was not lost.  And while her character may have been jail bait, she was, in fact, 20 at the time, so there was no need to feel creepy about it.

Admit it, any college guy would go to jail for this.

Taken is in my top ten movie list, and has only gotten more firmly planted since the births of my two girls.  In a related note, I think my Die Hard collection would stop at III if I wasn't a father.

To some extent, Taken is a recounting of the same story any given responsible father will face a kerjillion times starting around...oh...three months after the birth of a daughter.

Act I:  Father tells Daughter not to do something stupid.

Act II:  Daughter does it anyway.

Act III:  Father bails Daughter out.

This real-life formula is combined with another potent story archetype that every boy who does not get beaten into a effeminate weakling with the cudgel known as "civilization" holds dear to his heart:

Act I:  Once upon a time...blah, blah, blah.

Act II:  Danger looms.

Act III:  Danger gets a face-full of righteous anger in the shape of something pointy.

Lian Neeson's character, Bryan Mills, is the most single-minded character I've seen.  Once his daughter gets grabbed, he has one goal:  find her.  He's not out to rid the world of sex traffickers, not out to rid the world of corrupt officials, not out to save the all the girls, not even really out for vengeance.

He's single-minded to the extent that you find yourself almost disgusted at times.

***Spoiler alert***

First, when his daughter and friend are being kidnapped, Mills only threatens the kidnapper to get his own daughter released, not her friend.

Next, he tracks his daughter's trail to a prostitution ring that drug girls up and cram them into a trailer on a construction site for whoever happens to feel the need.  Being consumed with a simple goal of finding his daughter, he has no qualms about leaving the drugged-out girls behind, saving only one who he believes has information about his daughters whereabouts.

After a little more digging, Mills ends up in the traffickers' apartment building where he engages in some decidedly un-white-hat-ish combat, backshooting and bushwhacking guys in a totally ruthless manner.

After taking one captive, Mills spends a few minutes torturing him until he coughs up what he knows.  Then Mills kills the guy in cold blood, mostly because that's what he told the guy he would do if they didn't let his daughter go.

Finally, when he finds a trail of corruption leading to an old friend, Mills quite coldly shoots his (ex-)friend's completely innocent wife in the arm to get the last bit of information he needs to find his girl.

Yeah.  He goes there.

He finally kills his way to the man who purchased his daughter.  When the man, holding her in front of him at knife point, offers to negotiate, Mills shoots him between the eyes.

I just killed your entire security team.  Why should I negotiate?

***End spoilers***

Movie body counts, a website I never knew but always hoped existed, puts the body count at 35, but they note that they only count stabs, gunshots, and clear broken necks.  I'd put the number closer to 40-45.

Anybody with a little knowledge of human anatomy and physiology know that getting hit in the throat with enough force to render one unconscious would also kill the person unless they received prompt medical intervention.  A little more medical knowledge would also let a person know that getting bludgeoned hard enough to render one unconscious is also hard enough to likely cause death by intercranial hemorrhage, again, assuming that the victim did not make it to the ER within an hour.  Given that everybody who might call 911 is also dead, this is doubtful.

Plus, any idiot knows that stunned/unconscious people do not swim well, so pitching an uncoordinated guy into a river counts as a kill.

Sure, dirty cops get outed, a human trafficking ring is decimated and a lot of girls are implied to be freed, but at the end of the day, Mills doesn't care about that.  Taken 2* does not see him investigating who knew about what, or going out to finish off the cartel or become a grief counselor for his daughter's fellow captives.  If the guy at the start had let his daughter go and only taken her friend, Mills would have just sat on his side of the pond and not slaughtered his way through Paris.

He's not a hero.  He's a daddy.

He just happens to be a highly trained daddy.

*A "meh" film, by the way.  Entertaining, but without the heart of the original.

Parking Wars

While I truly miss, and always will miss The Flying Dodgeman, since purchasing her replacement, the as-of-yet-unnamed Toyota 4Runner has proven to have a distinct advantage.

I would never have been able to pull this off with The Flying Dodgeman.  While the rear of the 1999 Dodge Intrepid was not nearly as large as that of the 1993 Dodge Intrepid that I learned to drive in, she still had a sizable trunk.

And then, yesterday:

Now, the resolution on this image is pretty atrocious.  The double-parked SUV there on the left is a Porsche Cayenne.  No, I do not know who owns it.  The important part, however, is that there is plenty of room between it and the SUV on the left of it.  There was no reason he needed to park that wide.

So, in case the owner is reading this, I have two observations.

#1.  Ownership of a Porsche does not entitle you to two parking spaces.  Incidentally, neither does ownership of a Bentley, BMV, or Lamborghini.

#2.  Even if it did, the Cayenne is not even a real Porsche anyway.  It is a CRV with a cooler logo.  I do not care what the dealer told you, real Porsches start with "9."

22 in a 55

Or, “Get your [redacted] [redacted] scooter off the [redacted] road, you [redacted] [redacted].”

Anyone who has spent any amount of time with me knows that I hate scooters.  Really, really, hate scooters.

A little history, first.  In 1928, the RNC ran a campaign promising, “A chicken in every pot.  And a car in every backyard, to boot.”  While Black Tuesday the following year made this particular promise a tad bit harder to live up to, politicians the world over continued to tout universal mobility as the mark of prosperity.

Enter the fascists.

When you nationalize the automotive industry in a nation, you can go a long way to providing cheap vehicles.  Of course, it’s only cheap because your neighbor is helping pay for it, but those thoughts are far away when you look at the sticker price.  Here, however, is the difference between German engineering, and Italian engineering:

Hitler’s family car:

Mussolini’s family car:

Somehow, through the wonders of advertising, the Vespa scooter has survived in some form for the last 70 years.

Blame it on the Vespa girl:

On a side note, the ad raises an interesting question.  Does anyone really think a Vespa could climb the Italian Alps?  And does anyone really think you can ice skate outside in shorts like that?

Now, a woman that good-looking can drive a Vespa if she wants.  If you are a man riding one, you are pretty much missing some equipment.

And if you are if you are a bloody 250-pound man on a 25cc scooter, going 20 mph up a hill on a 55 mph highway with 5 vehicles stuck behind you, you are a traffic hazard as well as sub-optimally equipped.  And if I am one of those vehicles, I can assure you that you are not only a unequipped traffic hazard, but a much maligned one, as well.

A coworker once told me that in some states, scooters can be used without license, and are therefore the go-to vehicle for people with suspended licenses due to DUI's.  That would explain a lot.  Presumably, the thought process is that an irresponsible driver is far less of a danger to others on a 150-pound vehicle than he is in a 2000-pound one.  Either that, or they figure if he's too drunk to drive, he'll just fall over with only 2 wheels.

However, given that swerving for dogs is known to cause fatalities, I'm pretty sure a guy falling down on a scooter is at least as dangerous.

So, from now on, I will assume that scooter drivers are all drunken hazards to the well-being of all drivers.

Now to decide, does that mean I need to avoid them, or do my best to remove them from the pool of drivers?