This does not count as ex post facto. They would not be punished for their actions prior to this law, but would be for not complying with it going forward.

To go off the license example. You would be fine if you drove without a license prior to them being required. But if you continued to drive without one after they became required, then you would get in trouble.

Sounds just like the F-35

It pisses me off that we are still burning money over this jet. It's a really cool design, but is way too complicated and cost ineffective for any kind of real use. We already have jets that work and have worked great for a long time, and using these would gain us nothing on the battlefield. The only reason the damn thing is still being researched is because someone (or many ones) are greedy and not thinking about the interests of others or the greater good. I'll have a smile on my face the day this waste of a program gets shut down.

Hussain Husein Make up your mind, and if you're going to post about a person the least you could do is get their name right.

How can Congress do their job anyways? Most of what they do is controlled by people who give giant campaign donations.

The funny part is that the very next article, which is linked on the bottom of the page, talks about how one sided and overall terrible the interview of the NSA was. On top of that, the guy who did the interview used to be an FBI spokesperson.

Obviously if you have enough of an excess you might as well use it, which is why I only mentioned fracking. However, if we are going to use natural gas for cars then there is no doubt we will resort to fracking, because as is we already frack, creating more demand will simply create more fracking.

I know nothing of propane fuel cells, but I do know that the method which is used to extract natural gas is absolutely horrendous for the environment; it destroys huge swaths of land and makes taking drinking water from anywhere around it completely unusable.

http://www.nrdc.org/energy/gasdrilling/
freaking fracking

If you don't believe he could be arrested go look up the definition of extradition and then check out Australia's laws on it.

"the pilot would have walked away" is worded terribly and unnervingly the actual article states "a 'pilot would have walked away'" which is written better, but still in an extremely confusing manner What they meant to say is that there was no pilot on the flight (as it was unmanned), but had there been, he or she would have walked away from the crash-landing.