The pre-emptive doctrine conjured up by Wolfowitz and Pearle in '92 was

filed under "R" for "ridiculous" at the time. But it was dusted off and

accepted by both major parties a few years ago (with little if any debate)

because we simply must have a constant supply of oil - PERIOD. Well

that does not explain the emergence of the recent, drastic changes in

"domestic policies" that we are seeing advocated of late, such as:

>1) the attempt at dismantling the Senate's ability to Filibuster,

>2) the dissecting of the Bill of Rights (such as illegal search

> protection, among others),

>3) the attempt to diminish the safety net for retirees,

>4) the changes in bankruptcy laws and attempts at tort reform,

>5) the wiping away of decades of environmental protection,

These have now, suddenly, been heavily pushed. And in the case of the Patriot

Act, it was passed with the help of democrats that hadn't even read the massive

bill. They quite possibly will have very long term effects on the average

American's life. The Filibuster fight had to do with judgeships in the

Appellate and Supreme Court which can have a major effect on American's

lives.

Some of us were under the impression that these flagrant attacks on the

American way of life and the Constitution were simply diversions to keep

people's minds off of the evidence surfacing of the secret desires and acts

of the neo-cons, and they have somewhat done just that with the help of our

abysmal corporate media. But the pace at which this Administration is

pursuing it's goals is better explained by realizing that they have, at this

time, a public which is asleep at the wheel and allowing the Bush

Administration almost everything they want since they have the bible in

their back pocket. That may change though, rather quickly, as the poles

are indicating diminishing support since the November Election. The point

here is that these drastic "domestic policy changes" have nothing at all to do

with America's need for oil.

There has been a scientific discovery within the past nine years that has

shaken global climatologists and may shed some light on the neo-con's

frightening agenda. In 1996 an oceanographer named Wally Broecker

connected the dots to many unanswered scientific questions about the

earth's climate, and explained how abrupt climate change happens. It has

to to with the melting of the ice caps, which we are just now learning is

happening at an accelerating rate. This very disturbing discovery (which

the corporate community is still trying to dismiss, unsuccessfully) of a

snap in the climate to "ice age conditions" which will diminish the growing

season to perhaps half it's current length (maybe less), is what the corporate

world is having our elected officials preparing for.

Try to imagine what just a three year period of crop failures (such as has

happened several times in the past 70,000 years) will be like in a time

when there are over 6 Billion people on Earth. These snaps have lasted several

years, to hundreds of thousands of years. It is irrefutable and unquestionable

scientific evidence, and the neo-cons are now very aware and concerned,

although mute about it. They are fully aware that very bad times are ahead

for the entire planet. Scientific evidence IS scientific evidence, after all,

and these people aren't idiots.

But the corporations are not willing to relinquish

profits to something they feel will not affect them, with their millions

in the bank. The New York Times reported, for example, that "about

nine out of 10 (new power plants) on the drawing board - will not use

integrated gasification combined-cycle technology"(2) which not only

makes coal 10% more efficient but also greatly reduces pollution.

One has to be completely appalled that at a time when scientific study

after study is proving that global warming is not just a theory, it is

actually happening right now and at increasing levels, that industry is

not changing it's polluting ways.

When you understand what is (not might be) in our future, the reasons

for this "abrupt change in domestic policies" will be obvious. The

scientists cannot say when this phenomenon will re-occur, only that it

definitely will. And with the recent scientific findings of Cambridge

University Professor Peter Wadhams, we can expect it in the not-so-

distant future.

>“Until recently we would find giant ‘chimneys’ in the

>sea where columns of cold, dense water were sinking from the surface

>to the seabed 3,000 metres below, but now they have almost disappeared,”

>he said.

>“In the past we could see nine to 12 giant columns forming under the

>shelf each year. In our latest cruise, we found only two and they were

>so weak that the sinking water could not reach the seabed,” said Wadhams,

>who disclosed the findings at a meeting of the European Geosciences

>Union in Vienna.(3)

Regardless of how soon these giant systems shut down, there is complete

consensus in the scientific community of what will be the result of global

warming - abrupt climate change. It's an incredible twist of fate that the

change will be to ice age conditions, and you can see why the rank and

file is and will be slow to accept such a radical concept. But you can be

sure that the neo-cons have accepted it, as exemplified more and more

with their radical policy changes. And, as evidenced by their "abrupt

change" on environmental policies in the past four years, they don't

intend to do anything about it. "More study is needed" they say.

D. Burbeck

(1) British Parliament Member the Hon. George Galloway in testimony

before the US Senate 5/17/05:

http://dc.indymedia.org/feature/display/122932/index.php

(2) New York Times, May 22, 2005, "Dirty Secret: Coal Plants could be

much Cleaner"

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/22/business/yourmoney/22coal.html?

(3) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1602579,00.html

If these links are not active, please simply check another IMC site.