perfidy

RKK Energiya, the Russian space company, has announced plans to design a replacement for the venerable Soyuz capsule. Given sufficient funding, the company says that it can have the new capsule flying in five years.

The new capsule, dubbed "Clipper," will have twice the passenger capacity of the old Soyuz, and weigh twice as much. Further, it will be reusable up to 25 times, a significant improvement over the single use Soyuz. While the article does not specifically mention it, I presume that since they're calling it a capsule, the vehicle will not be winged, and will hard land (slowed by parachutes) on the ground like the current model.

At least someone's thinking ahead.

I've given up counting the number of things that I do that are haardous to my health and well being. But this one, I think I'll just have to ignore:

Aspartame Kills.

[wik] As an added bonus, not only is aspartame lethal, it's Don Rumsfeld's fault! Republican conspiracy! Worldviews confirmed! Nefariousness proved! Ack.

This Wall Street Journal editorial is well worth a read.

Steve Waite over at Commonsense and Wonder links to a Weekly Standard article by Stephen Hayes that lays out some evidence for a significant connection between Saddam's regime and bin Laden going back to the nineties.

OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda--perhaps even for Mohamed Atta--according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most determined and dangerous enemies.

According to the memo--which lays out the intelligence in 50 numbered points--Iraq-al Qaeda contacts began in 1990 and continued through mid-March 2003, days before the Iraq War began. Most of the numbered passages contain straight, fact-based intelligence reporting, which some cases includes an evaluation of the credibility of the source. This reporting is often followed by commentary and analysis.

Not that I needed additional justification, but this would be one more reason to feel good about what we've done. I think that over the next several months, we might begin to see increasingly rapid progress in the war on terror.

In the Belmont Club post I linked a while back, Viva Los Pepes, Wretchard talks about "tearing down the mountain" - a deliberate process of slowly destroying a network from the bottom up to get at the (presently) invulnerable bad guy at the top. We used this technique against the drug cartels in Columbia to get Pablo Escobar, and it looks as if it worked with Saddam, may pay off any moment with Zawahiri, and perhaps soon with bin Laden himself.

And one reason that we are able to do this is the intelligence information we are gaining from captured Iraqis.

[wik] From Kathy Kinsley at On the Third Hand (I got the blog name right this time! I'm not such a complete idiot as to get my blog hostess' blog wrong twice in one day.) we get a link to another story about Iraq-Al Qaida links, this one from the Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough at the Washington Times.

We have obtained a document discovered in Iraq from the files of the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS). The report provides new evidence of links between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

The 1993 document, in Arabic, bears the logo of the Iraqi intelligence agency and is labeled "top secret" on each of its 20 pages. The report is a list of IIS agents who are described as "collaborators."

On page 14, the report states that among the collaborators is "the Saudi Osama bin Laden." The document states that bin Laden is a "Saudi businessman and is in charge of the Saudi opposition in Afghanistan. And he is in good relationship with our section in Syria," the document states, under the signature "Jabar."

The document was obtained by the Iraqi National Congress and first disclosed on the CBS program "60 Minutes" by INC leader Ahmed Chalabi.

A U.S. official said the document appears authentic.

A while back, I posted a list of my top five, all-time favorite science fiction novels. A recent conversation made me realize that this needs revisiting. This list originated when my mom asked for a list of the best science fiction, so that she would not need to go through the oftimes perilous process of winnowing the wheat from the chaff.

As Ted Sturgeon pointed out, 95% of everything is crap. Here is the original list:

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, by Robert Heinlein
Starship Troopers, by Robert Heinlein
Player of Games, by Iain Banks
The Stars My Destination, by Alfred Bester
Mote in God's Eye, by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle
The Dosadi Experiment, by Frank Herbert
Dune, by Frank Herbert
A Fire Upon the Deep, by Vernor Vinge
A Deepness in the Sky, by Vernor Vinge
Ender's Game, by Orson Scott Card
Diamond Age, by Neil Stephenson
Cryptonomicon, by Neil Stephenson
Sundiver, by David Brin
Startide Rising, by David Brin
Lest Darkness Fall, by L. Sprague de Camp
American Gods, by Neil Gaiman
Good Omens, by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett
Mother of Storms, by John Barnes
Killing Star, by Charles Pellegrino and George Zebroski
Doorways in the Sand, by Roger Zelazny
The Greks Bring Gifts, by Murray Leinster
Pebble in the Sky, by Isaac Asimov
The City and the Stars, by Arthur C. Clark

I have never been able to narrow this list down I can only add to it. My top five list, it is large, it contains multitudes.

On further reflection, and by recommendation from Johno, I added these:

Canticle for Liebowitz, by Walter Miller
Hyperion, by Dan Simmons
The Earth Abides, by George R. Stuart
Shockwave Rider, by John Brunner
Voice of the Whirlwind, by Walter Jon Williams
Pattern Recognition, by William Gibson
The Man In The High Castle, by Philip K. Dick
Schismatrix, by Bruce Sterling
Snow Crash, by Neal Stephenson

Here are some new ones:

Norstrilia, by Cordwainer Smith
Bring the Jubilee, by Ward Moore
The Lensman Series, by E.E. "Doc" Smith
Cities in Flight, by James Blish
Tactics of Mistake, by Gordon R. Dickson

And as an added bonus, and actual list of five, for fantasy:

Lord of the Rings, by some guy, think his name begins with "D"
Freedom and Necessity, by Emma Bull and Steven Brust
American Gods, by Neil Gaiman
Age of Unreason series, by J. Gregory Keyes
The Earthsea Trilogy, by Ursula K. Le Guin (and I do mean trilogy)

[wik] Here's a link to another page with a good top 100 list.

[alsø wik] Ted points out that Orson Scott Card's Pastwatch: The Redemption of Christopher Columbus is a damn fine novel, and I agree that it is an oversight. He also gave me a couple new titles to hunt down. If anyone has any suggestions for the list, please leave them in the comments, and I will make additions to the list as needed.

He handed over the book. It was more than I could have ever dreamed. A 3-ring binder, reeking of cigarettes, bursting with over 500 pages of sweet, sweet schizo goodness.

The front page reads, in giant letters:

THIS IS ONLY 1/4 OF THE WRITTEN MATERIAL I HAVE BEEN SENDING YOU AND OTHER LAW AGENCIES

...and from there, it descends into madness.

Policy wonks and political geeks worldwide are celebrating the 25th Anniversary of C-Span's first broadcast on March 19, 1979. That day, the inaugural broadcast was a speech by Al Gore, described in this article as "characteristically wooden."

C-SPAN, happy birthday. You have brought joy to my life, and sleep when I needed it.

Just a note to all the desperate people who keep emailing me - I am not this buckethead:

I will however autograph pictures if you enclose a stamped, self-addressed envelope.

I've run across two interesting comments on the US Congress, neither of which are very flattering. The first is from John Derbyshire of the National Review:

"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."

(My italics.) So in a Case not "affecting Ambassadors" etc. — let's say, oh, a case in which some citizens have chosen to dispute the ancient and customary definition of marriage — the Supreme Court has jurisdiction only if the Congress has not declared that particular Case an Exception under the aforementioned Article, and if Congress has made explicit Regulations declaring that the Court does indeed have such jurisdiction. Hmmm. So this issue I have been reading so much about, of renegade federal judges legislating from the bench, is really not an issue at all, since Congress could just forbid them to take the relevant Cases! Does anyone in Congress know this? Why don't they act on it?

The second is from Marginal Revolution, where Tyler excerpts from this Washington Post article:

In fundamental ways that have gone largely unrecognized, Congress has become less vigilant, less proud and protective of its own prerogatives, and less important to the conduct of American government than at any time in decades. "Congress has abdicated much of its responsibility," Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel said in a recent conversation. "It could become an adjunct to the executive branch."

...Though it occasionally resists an executive-branch proposal, Congress today rarely initiates its own policies. Few members speak up for the institutional interests of Congress. "The idea that they have an independent institutional responsibility, that the institution itself is bigger than the individuals or the parties, doesn't occur to the bulk of [members] for a nanosecond," said an exasperated Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute, a longtime student of Congress.

It occurs to Rep. David Obey of Wisconsin, the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee. He said that the House has given up the meaningful exercise of its powers by largely forfeiting its oversight role and abandoning all discipline on the federal budget.

These two comments take the same problem from different sides. The Post article points out, correctly, that the relative strength of the three branches of government have waxed and waned over the last two centuries. The Supreme Court was almost non-existent until Marshall became Chief Justice. Congress was far more important than the President at the beginning and end of the 19th Century. But over the last quarter century and more, Congress has been on the wane and not so much due to encroachment from the other two branches, but because Congress has willingly surrendered its constitutionally granted powers.

Both liberals and conservatives have pilloried the Supreme Court for its intrusions into politics. Judicial activism and federalism have been rallying cries for the right, and the left has advanced many of its goals through court rulings. That the courts are able to do this, though, is only because the Congress allows it. A pernicious trend over the last half-century is Congress’ increasing unwillingness to consider the constitutionality of its own legislation. Rather than think difficult thoughts like, “Does the Constitution allow us to pass this law?” the Congress passes anything that passes through its airy head, confident that the Supreme Court will sort it all out. Over a long enough stretch of time, this becomes habit – and the SC comes to believe that these sorts of rulings are its primary focus.

And as Derbyshire pointed out, the Congress has important and wide-ranging powers to regulate the courts, and to decide what matters are for political consideration by the elected legislature, and which are appropriate for judicial review. Most of the recent conflicts on the big issues have been between the executive and the judicial branch, with Congress playing dead in the middle, hoping that no one will notice that they are doing nothing to help solve the problem.

By passing whatever laws they see fit, and leaving all considerations of constitutionality to the courts (the best recent example is campaign finance reform) Congress has departed significantly from the letter and intent of the constitution. Aside from the departments of defense, state, and the treasury; how many of the activities of the executive branch are authorized by the constitution, beyond vague handwaving at the commerce clause?

Which brings us to an even greater abdication of responsibility. Congress is granted the exclusive power by the constitution to pass laws, levy taxes, declare war, and so on. However, most of the laws that affect our day-to-day lives are not actual laws passed by Congress, but rather federal regulations written by bureaucrats in the executive agencies and departments. Congress has ceded a large part of its lawmaking power to the executive branch, and it has done so consciously.

Similarly, the War Powers Act in large part cedes the constitutional responsibility to declare war to the executive. While the President has traditionally (and rightfully) had a fair degree of leeway in this regard, explicitly giving up the right to in effect declare war is troublesome.

Congress no longer performs the kind of oversight that is their primary responsibility. The President and the executive branch exist in large part to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” The most notably, the Congress has failed to exert proper oversight in budgetary matters. But this laxity spreads over pretty much every area that the Constitution puts in their care. And as the Post article notes, rarely do we see any initiative arising from Congress – almost every major issue comes from the President or the courts.

If we have an imperial presidency, it is in large part because we have a weak and vacillating Congress. If we have overreaching activist courts, it is a natural result of Congressional abdication of power. And this state of affairs seems unlikely to change in the near future.

As an addendum to Johno's post on the Scopes Monkey Trial for the new millennium, here is a picture of the Right Honorable County Commissioner J.C. Fugate, image courtesy of our good friend Norbizness:

And to think, some people thought the movie Joe Dirt was a parody. Sheesh.
 

A 100 foot asteroid will pass within 26,500 miles of the Earth this evening. That distance is just beyond the geosynchronous orbit occupied by communications satellites. NASA says that there is no chance the rock will hit the Earth, this the closest recorded near miss we've seen. Asteroids about this size are estimated to pass this close on average once every two years, but this is the first time we've detected one ahead of time.

We really, really need to expand the Spacewatch Project so we can get a little more warning shold a bigger asteroid come a little closer.

By way of Andrew Ian Dodge, we find another gay online quiz. Not that there's anything wrong with that. This quiz is very similar to the traditional two-axis political scheme often used by Libertarians to trick the unwary into thinking they're libertarian. But it has one advantage: they give you a cool, pirate style map instead of a boring graph.

Commonsense and Wonder links to the mounting evidence of France's corrupt and nefarious involvement in the Iraq's oil industry.

the French interest in maintaining Saddam Hussein in power was spelled out in excruciating detail. The price tag: close to $100 billion. That was what French oil companies stood to profit in the first seven years of their exclusive oil arrangements - had Saddam remained in power.

Read the whole thing, as they say.

A while back, Ross posted a graph taken from a Paul Krugman article, and used this as a stick to beat up on the Bush administration. I have nothing in principle against beating up on the administration, but at the time I read Ross' post, it didn't seem quite right to me. Not being a super economic wiz, I couldn't put my finger on it, nor did I have to hand the references that would have helped. But, coming belatedly to the rescue are the economic genii at Marginal Revolution. (Of course, the belatedness of the rescue is entirely my fault for falling behind on my blog reading.)

This is the original graph, from Krugman:

Ross claimed that this must be evidence of gross incompetance, or of lying. There is a third option, though. Marginal Revolution gives another chart, with a larger timeframe:

MR contributor Alex Tabarrok says:

With this graph it becomes clear that the CEA has in essence been predicting a return to trend. Obviously, the CEA has been wrong, employment has not returned to trend, but that surely tells us more about the peculiar nature of this recession than it does about corruption at the CEA.

Has political progaganda taken the place of professional analysis? Indeed.

Remember to go to Marginal Revolution for all your economic needs.

Ace of Spades provides this link to a news page covering the Iranian protests. Instapundit of course has a post with more links.

As a sort of follow-up to Johno's I, Excrement post, slashdot is saying that the sci-fi channel has greenlighted a miniseries based on Ursula K. LeGuin's Wizard of Earthsea trilogy/tetralogy whatever.

That series is on the very short list of fantasy that I like. It is probably too much to hope that the TV version will not be excrement.

[wik] Spielberg and Tom Cruise are going to make a movie version of War of the Worlds. Its a total crapfest!

[alsø wik] After a closer reading of the article I linked above, I noticed that Paramount has tapped Robert Rodriguez to make a movie out of Edgar Rice Burroughs' classic novel A Princess of Mars. It really is a crapfest - though of all these projects, this one has the best chance of not being a steaming pile of poop.

By way of Interested Participant, it comes to our ears that we have another Kennedy Family/dead woman/car in the water thingy going. Hope Sheridan, is the former mother-in-law of Michael Skakel, a cousin of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Skakel, you will recall, is doing a long stretch for the murder of Martha Moxley.

Divers found Sheridan's car Monday afternoon after a sheriff's helicopter noted two faint parallel marks at the end of a retention pond.

The car was submerged in about 15 feet of water 75 feet from shore. Sheridan's body was found on the passenger side, Detective Keith Harmon said. He said there were no skid marks on the grassy area going into the water.

As the Interested Participant noted:

I personally have found my driving expertise is seriously impacted when I sit in the passenger seat. There's probably $ome way to convince the authoritie$ that Hope $heridan accidentally drove 75 feet into the ocean while $eated in the pa$$enger seat.

Police do not suspect foul play, and are considering this an accidental death.

It's just dangerous to be related to, to date, or now even be related to someone who marries a Kennedy. American Royalty, my lily white ass. From bootleggers to Nazi sympathizers to mob bought elections to fat drunken senators to date raping scions to pilot error; this family is a vomit stain on our national necktie.

Here's a gem from Randall Robinson, link via marcland, who was kind enough to link us the other day, and has a good post on the Iran situation. (Follow the link to see the story.)

In this fascinating Hollywood Reporter article, Martin Grove discusses how Mel Gibson defied to conventional Hollywood wisdom in the development and marketing of his film, The Passion. And more to the point, how defying that wisdom will earn him between a third and a half billion dollars.

Minister Ross sends word from the dreary depths of the code mines, informing me that work is sucking the life out of him. He has no time for blogging, he doesn't even sleep! He begs anyone who sees him toiling away in a noisome cubicle to simply put him out of his misery.

He also sends this cryptic diagram, saying that it explains what his satanic masters have forced him to do:

Ross says that this is a diagram of an optimized query graph for service performance computation. To me, it looks like a high tech pentagram, suited only for summmoning denizens of the deepest pits of hell. Either that, or my company's org chart.