Let The Sun Set

The Patriot Act was renewed yesterday, this time without the sunset provision, despite a valiant attempt to keep it, from people like Dana Rohrabacher. He made the argument for it eloquently:

Rohrabacher said he supported the Patriot Act in 2001 because of the threat faced by the country after 9/11, but only under the belief that once the emergency was over, “the government would again return to a level consistent with a free society.”

“We should not be required to live in peacetime under the extraordinary laws that were passed during times of war and crisis. Emergency powers of investigation should not become the standard once the crisis has passed,” he said, drawing applause from his colleagues.

Exactly. And of course, this principle applies to much more than the Patriot Act. Almost every piece of legislation is put forth to address a “crisis” of one type or another–crises that often pass (if indeed they even ever existed at all), yet the legislation stays on the books forever absent explicit repeal. Sadly, it wasn’t to be, though:

House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin, who shepherded the bill through the House, said sunset provisions were not necessary because there was no evidence the Patriot Act was being misused and lawmakers could provide sufficient oversight.

He also said 13 of the 16 provisions up for renewal have not been controversial, including one allowing increased communication between the FBI and CIA.

“Why sunset legislation where there’s been no actual record of abuse and vigorous oversight?” Sensenbrenner said.

This seems like a weak argument to me. The fact that it hasn’t been abused in the past doesn’t mean that it can’t be in the future. Anyway, I think that every federal law should have a sunset provision.

I Love It When A Plan Comes Together

About a year and a half ago, in one of my occasional meandering rantswell-reasoned disquisitions against heavy lifters, I suggested that NASA use the Centennial Challenge prize to develop a better space suit glove. Well, per Alan Boyle, I find out today that they have:

The Astronaut Glove Challenge award will go to the team that can design and manufacture the best performing glove within competition parameters. The $250,000 purse will be awarded at a competition scheduled for November 2006, when competing teams test their glove designs against each other.

Cool.

They Make Their Demands

So much for help from the British Muslim community. Their supposed leadership has essentially told us to surrender if we want the bombs to stop:

“7/7, 21/7, and God knows what will happen afterwards, our lives are in real danger and it would seem, so long as we are in Iraq and so long as we are contributing to injustices around the world, we will continue to be in real danger.”

It was “contributing to injustices around the world” to remove a brutal dictator who murdered Muslims by the villageload?

“Tony Blair has to come out of his state of denial and listen to what the experts have been saying, that our involvement in Iraq is stupid.” His comments were echoed by the marketing manager for The Muslim Weekly newspaper.

Shahid Butt said he believed the threat to Britain would reduce if it pulled its troops out of Iraq. He said: “At the end of the day, these things [violent incidents] are going to happen if current British foreign policy continues. There’s a lot of rage, there’s a lot of anger in the Muslim community.

“Yes,” said Mr. Hitler, “those German bombers are going to continue to happen. There’s a lot of rage, a lot of anger in Germany. You need to change your foreign policy, and stop supporting efforts to overthrow the legitimate Petain regime in Paris.”

“We have got to get out of Iraq, it is the crux of the matter. I believe if Tony Blair and George Bush left Iraq and stopped propping up dictatorial regimes in the Muslim world, the threat rate to Britain would come down to nearly zero.”

You mean dictatorial regimes like the one in Afghanistan, one of the few democracies in the Muslim world, that became that way only because of British and American arms? Or the new democratic government in Iraq (again a result of British and American “foreign policy”), one that is being undermined by people who apparently love killing Muslims, for whom this man is making apologies and excuses?

Which specific “dictatorial regimes does he have in mind”? Egypt? Saudi Arabia? I’m all ears as to any suggestions he has to reform those places.

But sorry. John Howard had it exactly right. I’d suggest you listen to what he has to say, Dr. Tamimi.

[Update at 1 PM PDT]

It strikes me that this is classic good cop/bad cop, with Dr. Tanimi and his confederates playing good cop, and the thugs being the bad one. “You know, maybe you should listen to us and do what we say, wouldn’t want that other guy to get a hold of you–no telling what he might do.”

[Update at 1:55 PM PDT]

Here’s another one:

Speaking 15 days after bombers killed over 50 people in London and a day after a series of failed attacks on the city’s transport network, Sheikh Omar Bakri Mohammed said the British capital should expect more violence.

“What happened yesterday confirmed that as long as the cause and the root problem is still there … we will see the same effect we saw on July 7,” Bakri said.

“If the cause is still there the effect will happen again and again,” he said, adding he had no information about future attacks or contacts with people planning to carry out attacks.

Yeah, I’ll bet he has no information…

[One more update]

It occurred to me when discussing this on the phone with someone just now that of the three Anglosphere leaders, Bush is a straight (albeit occasionally stumbling over words) talker, Blair is eloquent and articulate (albeit slippery, which really stands out when he appears next to someone like John Howard), but what’s great about John Howard is that he combines these traits–eloquent, articulate, and straightforward. I occasionally wish that we could trade leaders with folks Down Under.

A Long Hot British Summer?

Fox News is now reporting that the police have cleared the streets in a London neighborhood and telling everyone to stay inside. There’s reportedly a remote-controlled vehicle looking for a bomb.

It sounds like they may be getting some good G2 from the guy they arrested, and the evidence that didn’t explode yesterday. I’d like to think that some of the British Muslim community may be coming forward, too, but I haven’t heard any specific evidence of it yet.

[Update a couple minutes later]

Via Instapundit, here’s more.

Still Getting It Wrong

I hate to keep beating on this drum, but it’s an error that many defenders of evolution make. Frederick Turner says:

…I did state flatly that the theory of evolution had been proved. I wanted it to be clear where I stood. Much of the mail I received protested about that statement. I hold to it, and hold to it not as my own opinion, but as a fact, like the existence of Australia, which is not my opinion but a fact. But I do know that there are many who sincerely, and given their range of knowledge, rationally, do not believe in the theory of evolution.

This ignores the (in my opinion, correct) position of one who believes in evolution, but doesn’t believe that it has been “proved.” This is because no scientific theory is ever “proved.” Proofs are for mathematics and the courtroom, not science. Scientific theories are useful in that they can be disproved, something that Creationism cannot.

I discussed this at length several months ago.

Questions

I don’t have time to answer this email query, but perhaps some of the other readers do, in comments:

I loved your article about the Hyper X 43 and scramjets in genral, it was amazingly informative. As an amatuer space enthusiast I try to keep up, some of the stuff is completely out of my league. I had some questions, even if a singlestage could be built, would it be able survive re-entry? Second, even though Rutan’s Spaceship one did in fact go to 62k up, didn’t all the x-15’s do the exact same thing? Could the feathering device that Spaceship one uses be applied to a space craft coming in from low-orbit or is that type of system restricted forever to sub-orbital manuevering? if not is the composite material shell of the Spaceship as effective or even in the same league as Shuttle’s tiles? and finally, with the weight of turbofans and some kind of orbital manuevering system and reaction control system, could the design or anything like the design of the Spaceship One work off taking us to the runway to low orbit system that we only dream of in science fiction.

Biting Commentary about Infinity…and Beyond!