The FBI released a statement denying the charges brought forth by Matthew Rothschild in Progressive magazine a few weeks ago. However, based on a new article Rothschild has published in response, I am more convinced that the FBI released nothing but a confirmatory denial. What I mean is that they deny the language that the reporter used but don't refute the substance of the claims.
Click here for Rothschild new article.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Nonsense about Denying the Existence of Global Warming
So Exxon-Mobil, the largest oil refiner in the world, held a conference today at which skeptics of global warming were able to stand atop their soapboxes. Many skeptics are using the current winter season as proof that global warming is not happening.
Well, let's think about this...
A company that is entirely dependent on environment harming processes and is one of the largest produces of the greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming is hosting this conference. There seems to be a vested interest at play here.
Let's also consider that, as far as I know, an overwhelming majority of the scientific community has shown that global warming is indeed happening. Moreover, a body of scientists put together solely for the study of global warming came out within the past year saying that they are very confident that humans are the main contributors to global warming.
Trying to use one season as irrevocable proof of a trend is like looking at the price of a stock on one day and determining where it will be in three weeks based solely on that bit of information. In truth, this winter has been average and this past December was one of the warmer ones on record. Nevermind the fact that something like eight of the warmest years on record have been since 1990.
Most of the people who deny global warming are non-scientific amateurs (or morons, e.g. Glenn Beck) who have no better idea than anyone else on the street or they are members of an industry that would be hindered by policies to alleviate global warming.
Another thing: it really seems that the only anti-global warming sentiment is coming from America (I, of course, could be entirely wrong but I have heard of no strong opposition from elsewhere in the world). To me, that just screams that the corporate interests of those who would be held back by measures to ameliorate the effects of global warming are so pervasive that they have a foothold across the country. It also suggests that a sizable chunk of the country does not pay attention to science.
(You'll have to forgive me if any of that information is incorrect. I wrote this from memory, so I may have misquoted. However, I am confident that most of the information I refer to is valid.)
Well, let's think about this...
A company that is entirely dependent on environment harming processes and is one of the largest produces of the greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming is hosting this conference. There seems to be a vested interest at play here.
Let's also consider that, as far as I know, an overwhelming majority of the scientific community has shown that global warming is indeed happening. Moreover, a body of scientists put together solely for the study of global warming came out within the past year saying that they are very confident that humans are the main contributors to global warming.
Trying to use one season as irrevocable proof of a trend is like looking at the price of a stock on one day and determining where it will be in three weeks based solely on that bit of information. In truth, this winter has been average and this past December was one of the warmer ones on record. Nevermind the fact that something like eight of the warmest years on record have been since 1990.
Most of the people who deny global warming are non-scientific amateurs (or morons, e.g. Glenn Beck) who have no better idea than anyone else on the street or they are members of an industry that would be hindered by policies to alleviate global warming.
Another thing: it really seems that the only anti-global warming sentiment is coming from America (I, of course, could be entirely wrong but I have heard of no strong opposition from elsewhere in the world). To me, that just screams that the corporate interests of those who would be held back by measures to ameliorate the effects of global warming are so pervasive that they have a foothold across the country. It also suggests that a sizable chunk of the country does not pay attention to science.
(You'll have to forgive me if any of that information is incorrect. I wrote this from memory, so I may have misquoted. However, I am confident that most of the information I refer to is valid.)
Dictator Much
So, I was reading a blog by Naomi Wolf (author of The Beauty Myth and The End of America) in which she was detailing in her decision to vote for Obama.
In that blog, which you can find here, she mentioned the "National Security Presidential Directive" (also know as Presidental Directive 51). It was signed by the President George W. Bush on May 4, 2007.
Essentially, this directive gives the president the ability to act as all three branches of government should a catastrophic emergency occur. However, the definition of such an emergency is quite broad, so who knows what really qualifies as a catastrophic emergency.
Even worse is that part of the directive is still classified, so the public can't know what all it entails. Even Peter DeFazio, member of the Homeland Security Committee in the House of Representatives, was denied access to the whole document.
There has been in a law in place in 1976 that essentially does the same thing as this directive, but that law allows for Congressional oversight. As far as my sources can tell, there is no such provision in the presidential directive. For fairness sake, it is important to note that past presidents have also signed similar orders in secret without providing any knowledge to the public.
In my mind, the fact that this order was made public is more alarming because it serves to remind the public to watch our collective ass because Daddy is gonna git you.
Hopefully, an order like this gives you some slight chills. At the same time though, I am not too surprised by Presidential Directive 51 because this is the same administration that fought to get an abomination like the Military Commissions Act passed. (For those not in the know, the MCA allows the government to declare anyone, citizen or not, an "enemy combatant" and hold you without trial or charges indefinitely.)
When a democracy (or republic or whatever you want to call it) has laws and a mentality like this, you can be sure that something is breaking within the system. Paranoia, fascism, empirial rule: these are some of the things that come to mind when I consider laws like those mentioned above. Hopefully, we can get someone into office who will not stand for such abuses of power and degradations of human (and Constitutional) rights. In the meantime, we should still be taking proactive measures like writing Congresspeople to let them know that we are in extreme opposition to measures like the MCA and Presidential Directive 51.
Information on:
Presidential Directive 51
Military Commissions Act
Contact your Senator or Representative:
The U.S. Senate (look at the top right to locate your senator)
The U.S. House of Representatives (look to the top left to find your representative)
In that blog, which you can find here, she mentioned the "National Security Presidential Directive" (also know as Presidental Directive 51). It was signed by the President George W. Bush on May 4, 2007.
Essentially, this directive gives the president the ability to act as all three branches of government should a catastrophic emergency occur. However, the definition of such an emergency is quite broad, so who knows what really qualifies as a catastrophic emergency.
Even worse is that part of the directive is still classified, so the public can't know what all it entails. Even Peter DeFazio, member of the Homeland Security Committee in the House of Representatives, was denied access to the whole document.
There has been in a law in place in 1976 that essentially does the same thing as this directive, but that law allows for Congressional oversight. As far as my sources can tell, there is no such provision in the presidential directive. For fairness sake, it is important to note that past presidents have also signed similar orders in secret without providing any knowledge to the public.
In my mind, the fact that this order was made public is more alarming because it serves to remind the public to watch our collective ass because Daddy is gonna git you.
Hopefully, an order like this gives you some slight chills. At the same time though, I am not too surprised by Presidential Directive 51 because this is the same administration that fought to get an abomination like the Military Commissions Act passed. (For those not in the know, the MCA allows the government to declare anyone, citizen or not, an "enemy combatant" and hold you without trial or charges indefinitely.)
When a democracy (or republic or whatever you want to call it) has laws and a mentality like this, you can be sure that something is breaking within the system. Paranoia, fascism, empirial rule: these are some of the things that come to mind when I consider laws like those mentioned above. Hopefully, we can get someone into office who will not stand for such abuses of power and degradations of human (and Constitutional) rights. In the meantime, we should still be taking proactive measures like writing Congresspeople to let them know that we are in extreme opposition to measures like the MCA and Presidential Directive 51.
Information on:
Presidential Directive 51
Military Commissions Act
Contact your Senator or Representative:
The U.S. Senate (look at the top right to locate your senator)
The U.S. House of Representatives (look to the top left to find your representative)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)