Why can't America find peace?

It is not going to happen if the USA leadership is stuck on war. Federal spending is the easiest economic fix any Republican boasts as 'necessary' spending. But, Republicans don't spend federal monies the same way as Democrats. They don't seek to elevate anyone out of poverty, they blame them for their own failings. It is always the victim of Republican policies that is at fault.

Republicans spend money on war. They like military hardware and they don't care if trillions upon trillions is spent on worthless projects such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. It is federal dollars after all and where best to waste it? If money has to be pork and wasteful at least when it is done with the military it looks legitimate and honorable.

Article by: DINA CAPPIELLO
Associated Press
Updated: September 16, 2008 - 8:00 PM

...The finding, (click here) from a $4.8 million, five-year study of grizzly bear DNA mocked by Republican presidential candidate John McCain as pork barrel spending, could ease restrictions on oil and gas drilling, logging and other development....

So while Republicans dump trillion after trillion into useless military projects, which most generals and commanders don't want anyway, Senator McCain during his 2008 presidential run mocked DNA in Grizzly Bears. A whopping $4.8 million. The best part is that it also made him look "Anti-Big Oil" too.

I'll let Tim take is from here. He is magnificently sane. He is empowering. People need to listen to Tim. Seriously. 
 

Hm. Where did I hear that before?

Ah, yes. 1997, "The Four Principles" 

05/01/14 09:26 AM 
Updated 05/02/14 01:13 PM
By Steve Benen
 
Former Vice President Cheney (click here) (R) spoke to a large group of House conservatives at the Capitol on Wednesday, denouncing President Obama’s foreign policy and urging them to resist a rising tide of isolationism.

Cheney attended the weekly meeting of the Republican Study Committee, a group of conservatives on which he served as a member of the House in the 1980s.

The former vice president focused on foreign policy, touting the importance of U.S. leadership in the world while criticizing proposed cuts to the Pentagon budget. He received multiple ovations during a private discussion that lasted more than 90 minutes in the Capitol basement.

Where are the great Americans, like Senator Byrd? Where are the Americans that restore confidence in the USA on a global scale? How do the people of the USA fall into such political disrepair? 

When President Kennedy, Jackie and their children were in the White House, Americans were politically entrenched. They were happy. Their homes were happy. They also took much of the civil unrest in their stride and accepted their responsibility to build a better, fair and equitable country. When President Kennedy proved himself a great American, we all were great Americans.

What happened to the USA? After President Clinton, the country was lost to fear and extremism. 

What troubled me more than anything else about the "W" Administration was the fact a half generation in time passed with indoctrination into anti-Americanism. It has proved to be a penetrating factor in our electorate. 

June 10, 1964

Civil Rights Filibuster Ended (click here)

At 9:51 on the morning of June 10, 1964, Senator Robert C. Byrd completed an address that he had begun 14 hours and 13 minutes earlier. The subject was the pending Civil Rights Act of 1964, a measure that occupied the Senate for 60 working days, including seven Saturdays. A day earlier, Democratic Whip Hubert Humphrey, the bill's manager, concluded he had the 67 votes required at that time to end the debate....   

By Eugene Robinson

Tuesday, June 29, 2010 

Sen. Robert Byrd (click here) had long since repented, of course. The West Virginian, who died Monday at 92, deeply regretted his segregationist past, which included a year as a member of the Ku Klux Klan and at least several more years as a Klan sympathizer. He eventually became a passionate advocate for civil rights, and he was one of the most vocal supporters of legislation making the birthday of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. a national holiday....

Poor Dick. His disappointment in any President of his time has made him psychotically power obsessed.

8/14//92

Defense Secretary Dick Cheney (click here) declares President Bush Sr. wise not to invade Baghdad and "get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq."

1/26/98

Project for a New American Century (PNAC)—founded by Cheney, Scooter Libby, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush, Paul Wolfowitz, and other top neocons—demands President Clinton undertake the "removal of Saddam Hussein's regime."

6/23/98

"The good Lord didn't see fit to put oil and gas only where there are democratically elected regimes friendly to the United States."—Halliburton CEO Cheney.

8/27/00 (Previous to 2000 Election)

America must not act as "an imperialist power, willy-nilly moving into capitals in that part of the world, taking down governments."—VP candidate Cheney

11/6/00

Congress doubles funding for Iraqi opposition groups to more than $25 million; $18 million is earmarked for Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress, which then pays defectors for anti-Iraq tales. (Curveball)

Why $25 million? Probably a random number, one dollar for each Iraqi citizen. That was the population of Iraq when Bush/Cheney invaded the country in 2003.

November 2000

Future Chief Justice John Roberts flies to Florida to advise Jeb Bush during recount.

Old Friends and Old Promises

Early 2001

Enron CEO Ken Lay named to Bush Energy Department transition team. Jack Abramoff appointed to Interior Department transition team.

August 6, 2001

On vacation in Crawford, Bush receives a Presidential Daily Briefing warning, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US." FBI highlights Al Qaeda activities consistent with hijacking preparations, as well as surveillance of federal buildings. [Date the public knew: 5/18/02]

CIA officer flies to Crawford to call Bush's attention to document. Bush replies, "All right, you've covered your ass now." [Date the public knew: 6/20/06]

The rest is history. Ask Cindy Sheehan.

This stuff is not rhetorical. This is their desire with a history that goes back decades.

By William Boardman, Reader Supported News

29 October (20) 13

Let's go make war on Iran!" (click here) said Republican Dick Cheney in somewhat different words on one of those silly Sunday shows October 26th.

This wasn't the first time Cheney had advocated for war on Iran. Or for torture. Or for assassination by drone. Or for any other war crime for which he is unlikely ever to be held accountable.

But in all fairness to the former vice president, this time he really only implied that war on Iran was inevitable. Looking at the record, however, it's hard to find any war Cheney hasn't found "inevitable," even if he had to lie to get it started, as he did with Iraq.

And Cheney's fondness for "inevitable" wars relies not merely on dishonesty, but more importantly, on personal detachment. Cheney has wanted all these wars to be inevitable for other people, not for anyone in his circle. That's the way it's been for Cheney since he copped out on the war of his generation, getting five deferments from Viet Nam because he had "other priorities" that included cheering on the warmakers who were sending more and more of other people's children to suffer and die in Southeast Asia.

On the other hand, Cheney didn't call for attacking Iran with nuclear weapons the way Republican billionaire Sheldon Adelson did a few days earlier at Yeshiva University. Cheney did not object to nuking Iran either. And he hasn't publicly disagreed with the octogenarian gambling mogul, so one suspects Cheney would be happy enough to see this particular smoking gun turn into a mushroom cloud....

...What makes the Cheneys and Adelsons of this world crazier than ever these days is the possibility - the mere possibility - that the Obama administration might somehow restore the slightest normalization with an Islamic nation of 77 million people that hasn't attacked another sovereign state in more than a hundred years under a variety of regimes.

For Iranophobes, more than a century of nonaggression is not enough to offset the fevered dream that Iran might attack somebody, primarily Israel, despite lacking significant means or motivation to do so. Remember Senator John McCain invoking the Beach Boys during his 2008 presidential campaign - "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran?" Did he ever say why, exactly? No, he said he was joking.

Cheney isn't joking. He's talked about bombing Iran for years, so much so that the mystery is that he didn't get President Bush to do it....

Inconsistent Leadership. The political right wing has never acknowledged the US Constitution as a benevolent document. They view it as a threat.

William Kristol, one of the founders and leaders in PNAC. (Source: Public domain)

June 3, 1997: PNAC Think Tank Issues 
Statement of Principles (click here)

PNAC (Project for a New American Century)

Statement of Principles (click here)

We aim to make the case and rally support 
for American global leadership.

As the 20th century draws to a close, the 
United States stands as the world's 
preeminent power. Havingled the West to 
victory in the Cold War, America faces an 

opportunity and a challenge:... 

...Cuts in foreign affairs and defense spending, inattention to the 
tools of statecraft, and inconstant leadership are making it 

increasingly difficult to sustain American influence around the world. 

And the promise of short-term commercial benefits threatens to 

override strategic considerations. As a consequence, we are

jeopardizing the nation's ability to meet present threats and to deal 

with potentially greater challenges thatlie ahead....

...Our aim is to remind Americans of these lessons and to draw 
their consequences for today. 

Here are four consequences: (There is that number four again. Just
thought I'd point that out.)

• We need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to 

carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed 

forces for the future;

• We need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge 
 regimes hostile to our interests and values;

• We need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom 

abroad;

• We need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in 

preserving and extending an international order friendly to our 

security, our prosperity, and our principles

...Such a Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity may not 

be fashionable today. But it is necessary if the United States is to build 

on the successes of this past century and to ensure our security and our 
greatness in the next. 

Signators 

Elliott Abrams

Gary Bauer 

William J. Bennett 

Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney 

Eliot A. Cohen 

Midge Decter 

Paula Dobriansky 

Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg

Francis Fukuyama

Frank Gaffney

Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan

Zalmay Khalilzad

I. Lewis Libby 

Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle

Peter W. Rodman 

Stephen P. Rosen 

Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld  

Vin Weber

George Weigel

Paul Wolfowitz

One of the first acts of the 2010 House was to weaken the federal government beyond the States Rights provision in the US Constitution.

Sunday, May 26, 2013

Sunday, May 26, 2013

...Back in 2010, (click here) after taking over the House of Representatives, the Tea Party faction of the GOP proposed a "states' rights" change in the Constitution. Sponsored by Utah's Rob Bishop, the proposal was called the Repeal Amendment. It was designed to give states the authority to veto federal laws and regulations. Under this proposed amendment, supporters aimed “to push back the federal government's encroachment on sovereign states rights." 

Any federal law, like healthcare, abortion or gun control laws and even civil rights legislation, would be up for a vote in state legislatures. The resolution read:

 

 “Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed.”...

“Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed.” - See more at: http://nomadicpolitics.blogspot.com/2013/05/how-alec-koch-brothers-and-tea-party.html#sthash.S4jD84wS.dpuf

ack in 2010, after taking over the House of Representatives, the Tea Party faction of the GOP proposed a "states' rights" change in the Constitution. Sponsored by Utah's Rob Bishop, the proposal was called the Repeal Amendment. It was designed to give states the authority to veto federal laws and regulations. Under this proposed amendment, supporters aimed “to push back the federal government's encroachment on sovereign states rights." 

Any federal law, like healthcare, abortion or gun control laws and even civil rights legislation, would be up for a vote in state legislatures. The resolution read:

- See more at: http://nomadicpolitics.blogspot.com/2013/05/how-alec-koch-brothers-and-tea-party.html#sthash.S4jD84wS.dpuf

The Kochs have been entangling federal government officals for a long time and using their money to support those willing to violate the US Constitution.

By: Rmuse

Wednesday, January, 26th, 2011, 10:00 am
...One of the first acts of the 112^th Congress (click here) was to read the entire Constitution aloud. The problem with the Constitution the Republicans read was that it omitted parts that did not fit into the narrative the conservatives are promoting; that is where part of the danger lies. The revisionist American history the Tea Party and Republicans are selling does not represent the Founders intent when they wrote the Constitution. Scalia and his Tea Party partner Justice Clarence Thomas, earlier this month challenged the scope of the Commerce Clause to set the stage for doing the Tea Party’s bidding and overturning the Affordable Health Care Act.

Thomas’s wife, Ginny, was the leader of a Tea Party lobbying group that benefited from the Citizen’s United decision that gave corporations “person” status allowing them to donate as much money to campaigns as they like. The decision guarantees that corporations will control the government, and based on the increased corporatism Republicans are promoting, Scalia, Thomas, and other conservatives on the high court achieved their goal. Justice Thomas is being accused of not reporting income his wife earned between 2003 and 2007 from the Heritage Foundation. Heritage is an ultra-conservative think-tank that controls Republican policy and is associated with the Koch Brothers and their Cato Institute. The Koch’s have financed Tea Party efforts at stopping health care reform and global climate change initiatives. The Koch brothers are also supporters of Scalia and Thomas’s reinterpretation of the Constitution, and they hosted a secretive gathering of elite conservative industrialists that both justices attended....

Think this is a joke? Think again.

Cheney was litigating Bush's Executive Orders in that the Vice President was more powerful and contained more power than the President. Richard Cheney has been dismantling ANY other power of the government while elevating his to supremacy.

If you think the Vice President's abuse of power is scary now, consider what might happen when he counts Electoral College votes in a divisive 2008 election.

Aziz Huq
June 26, 2007 

 If it weren't so frightening, the irony would be delicious: A Vice President who has done more than any other to push the envelope on executive privilege at the expense of the courts and Congress takes the position that his office has both legislative and executive functions so as to avoid accounting for the use of classified materials. 

Any veneer of intellectual legitimacy that executive power defenders have caked on their vision of a monarchical executive evaporates in the glare of this naked opportunism. And the scope and nature of today's constitutional crisis comes into clearer focus. 

The term "constitutional crisis" is much abused, invoked generally whenever Congress shows some life. Confrontations on war funding and Congressional subpoenas, to cite recent examples, are in fact as old as the Republic. They are but healthy sparks from a constitutional confrontation of "ambition against ambition," precisely as the Framers intended. 


But the true crisis is hidden in plain sight--the existence of an office in the Constitution--the Vice President's--with no real remit and no real limits, open to exploitation and abuse. 

Consider as symptom number one Cheney's claim to be neither lawmaker nor executive--and thus exempt from any scrutiny of his handling of classified documents. In 2003 President Bush signed an Executive Order 12958 requiring agencies and "any other entity" within the executive branch to report to a division of the National Archives on their classification and declassification activities. But since 2003 Cheney's office has pointed to his position as president of the Senate to justify a refusal to comply. In May 2006 a Cheney spokesperson told Mark Silva of the Chicago Tribune that the legal question had been "thoroughly reviewed." And that was the end of the matter. Only now has Representative Henry Waxman's House Oversight Committee begun to examine the Vice President's failure to comply....

Article V would be the law within the US Constitution that would carry out a Second Constitutional Congress.

It would be the same process as adding an Amendment to the USA Constitution.


Article V

The Congress, (click here) whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

Scholars argue the very first Constitutional Convention sets precedent for the Second.

November 29, 2011
By Gregory Korte
USA Today

...And they're already halfway to their goal. (click here) At least 17 of the 34 states necessary have petitioned Congress for a convention to propose a balanced budget amendment. States that have done it this year include Alabama, Louisiana, North Dakota, Texas and Utah....

The argument goes like this, " The original 1787 Convention, itself, was the first precedent, since it had only been authorized to amend the original 1787 Convention had only been authorized to amend the Articles of Confederation and not to draw up an entirely original.

Eventually there would be a completely new US Constitution, however, scholars believe the precedent exists regardless of the folly it was.

The Continental Congress (click here) adopted the Articles of Confederation, the first constitution of the United States, on November 15, 1777. However, ratification of the Articles of Confederation by all thirteen states did not occur until March 1, 1781. The Articles created a loose confederation of sovereign states and a weak central government, leaving most of the power with the state governments. The need for a stronger Federal government soon became apparent and eventually led to the Constitutional Convention in 1787. The present United States Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation on March 4, 1789.

As the First President of the USA, the late President George Washington felt a great responsibility to address uncertainty.

In his farewell address, President George Washington said: (click here)

If in the opinion of the People the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation [to seize and hold (as office, place, or powers) ]; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit which the use can at any time yield.

Do the Republicans have the appetite to destroy the country and start over again?

Monday, December 12, 2011

By James O'Toole, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

 

The Constitution of the United States (click here) is studied throughout the world as a model blueprint for governing a free people, its framers revered for achieving what Catherine Drinker Bowen famously labeled the "Miracle at Philadelphia."

But concern over a seemingly dysfunctional climate in Washington and issues ranging from the national debt to the overwhelming influence of money in politics have spawned calls for fundamental change in the document that guides the nation's government. From the left and the right, a small but seemingly growing cadre of scholars and activists is calling for a new constitutional convention to respond to the changes and excesses of current politics.

Such a convention is envisioned in the text of the founding 1787 document but has never been employed. The amendments that, among other things, ended slavery, enfranchised women and established, then ended, Prohibition were adopted through two-thirds votes in Congress and ratified by three-quarters of the states. Article V of the Constitution, however, in the same section that set up that procedure, set forth the legal possibility for the legislatures of two-thirds of the states to instruct Congress to call a constitutional convention, a mechanism, in the view of some government critics, whose time has come....

It's Sunday Night

The Republicans want to reverse the 2012 election in 2014.

Take your pick, one will be President of the USA by April 15, 2015.

One of the first acts of the majority Republican House and Senate will be to impeach President Obama. They don't care about the facts, they only care about the votes. The Chief Justice will proceed over a 'meeting' and not a hearing. He'll quantify procedure so it looks legit but will not mitigate facts. Once President Obama is out of the way, President Biden will begin his two years in office. He will remain there until the US House and Senate does the same thing to President Biden as they did with Obama and Boehner is now President Boehner. If they don't want Boehner they will replace him before they impeach President Obama. It will be a bloodless coup and the USA will be in political turmoil for two years with potential to enter war before 2016.

A new political consulting firm (click here) with deep ties to the Koch brothers has quietly set up shop in Arlington, Virginia. Its mission: to prevent future Todd Akins and Richard Mourdocks from tanking the Republican Party's electoral prospects. The firm, named Aegis Strategic, is run by a former top executive at Charles and David Koch's flagship advocacy group, Americans for Prosperity, and it was founded with the blessing of the brothers' political advisers, three Republican operatives tell Mother Jones.

The defacto president of the USA after the November elections of 2014 will be The Koch Brothers.

All the frustrated billionaires that haven't oppressed the Middle Class as much as they want to. They could not relate to the importance of the Middle Class in any country no matter how they tried.

Oh. Yeah. Ahhhh. Canada and possibly Mexico need to be prepared for American refugees. Seriously. Does anyone realize how hate filled these people are? 

Eventually, the people will realize what has been done to them and their only recourse is to stop paying taxes (and there are methods to do that), take them money and leave the country in whatever method they decide. 

If Nevada is a reflection of the political movement of these characters, the country is in sincere trouble and the people have a right to know their well being is in danger and they need to act on that knowledge. 

People like David and what's his name Koch have been excoriating people out of wealth for decades. They are among the most immoral men this world has ever witnessed. They, along with the Waltons, the most maniacal people ever to this Earth. Walmart is everywhere in the world. Where have they relieved suffering and raised people out of poverty? When one thinks of these people one has to view them in their entirety, not just the suit they wear on Sunday or at Shabbat.

Speaking of oppression and murder, there are still deaths occurring in Albuquerque.

Hey! It is the same damn department murdering citizens.

By RUSSELL CONTRERAS  Associated Press
May 04, 2014 - 1:55 am EDT

ALBUQUERQUE, New Mexico — Albuquerque police (click here) said a man died Saturday after an officer fired shots at him during a long SWAT standoff.
The shooting comes with police facing pending U.S. Justice Department reforms over excessive force.
Deputy Chief Eric Garcia told reporters that the man died at an Albuquerque home after the man walked out of the home and fired handguns. "At 6:16 p.m. the suspect exited the house and fired shots from two handguns. An APD officer discharged his weapon at that time. The subject is deceased," Garcia said.
He did not say if the man died from gunshot wounds.
Authorities did not release any information on the suspect nor the name of the officer who fired.

According to police, the man barricaded himself inside his house...

I would, too.

...following a domestic dispute. Authorities said the man contacted local media outlets...

I would, too.

...during the nearly eight-hour standoff and police asked reporters not to take the man's calls...

Really!

...over fears the interaction may interfere with negotiations for him to surrender....

LIARS!

We know what happens when citizens surrender to Albequerque's Swat Team. We've seen it before. 

Eden needs to be fired! 

NOW! 

The Swat Team disbanded.

NOW! 

The members of the Swat Team fired! 

NOW!

The militias are being replaced by the current government in Ukraine. That is a good thing.

Why is that a good thing? Because there is a central authority that can enact a peace within the country through strength. When militias exist there is no determining the outcome of the guns.

What was seen by Americans in Nevada with actions of a militia. The escalation to the point of threatening the government's employees was anarchy. There was no controlling it. It was every man for himself or herself. If an innocent citizen got in the way of the militias aggression it would be collateral damage for the sake of the ideology.

That has been occurring across Ukraine with new flash points as others are being reclaimed by the central government. There were schools closed and people threatened to achieve a desired behavior, journalists kidnapped and threatened with their lives. The militias were instituted by the former President Yanukovych in cooperation with oligarchs to enforce a certain political outcome under the thumb of oppression.

Ukrainian soldiers take part in a training exercise at a military base in Donetsk on Saturday, March 2

By Tim Lister, CNN

April 24, 2014

Updated 0748 GMT (1548 HKT)

...Just one month (click here) before the Ukrainian presidential election, constitutional reforms that might mollify the pro-Russian protesters are still being thrashed out. 

The Geneva agreement called on the protesters to relinquish the buildings they hold and promised amnesty for those who do. But the immediate answer from behind the barricades was defiant.

As one of the leaders of the occupation in Donetsk put it to CNN, "We have not come this far just to leave without our demands being met. It is the Kiev government that is illegitimate. They have to give up the buildings they have seized." There was a similar response from protest leaders in the southern city of Mariupol....

It is snowing at the 45 th parrallel and the farmers haven't been out on their fields yet.

UNISYS Infrared Midwest Satellite (click here for 12 hour loop)
May 4, 2014
10:31:47z

Sunday, May 4, 2014 @ 7:21 AM

Latitude 44.9767° N

Longitude 85.6506° W

Large, fluffy snow flakes

Wind 3 mph

35F 

Humidity 94%

Prediction states rain. It isn't rain.

Yesterday was the first day the bay received waves.

UNISYS Water Vapor North and West Hemisphere Satellite (click here for 12 hour loop - thank you)
May 4, 2014
1030.18z

intellicast North Pole Satellite
May 4, 2014
0600 gmt

Arctic sea ice (click here) reached its annual maximum extent on March 21, after a brief surge in extent mid-month. Overall the 2014 Arctic maximum was the fifth lowest in the 1978 to 2014 record. 

The sea ice is greater in Antarctica because of the ice fields melting on the continent. There is more cold entering the circumpolar circulation. We have witnessed enormous shelf collapse and icebergs this year.

Antarctic sea ice reached its annual minimum on February 23, and was the fourth highest Antarctic minimum in the satellite record. While this continues a strong pattern of greater-than-average sea ice extent in Antarctica for the past two years, Antarctic sea ice remains more variable year-to-year than the Arctic.

Warmer ocean circulation.

Arctic sea ice extent for March 2014 averaged 14.80 million square kilometers (5.70 million square miles). This is 730,000 square kilometers (282,000 square miles) below the 1981 to 2010 average extent, and 330,000 square kilometers (127,000 square miles) above the record March monthly low, which happened in 2006. Extent remains slightly below average in the Barents Sea and the Sea of Okhotsk, but is at near-average levels elsewhere.

Arctic Ocean Sea Ice Graph Average from 1979-2000

The average up to this point was very predictable. It didn't meander to far from the same averge, ie: the gray areas.

 
This is the same graph as above, but, with the average of 2001 added to it. Consistent, right?

This is the same graph as above without 2001, but, with the average of 2002. It's different, isn't it? The average in 2002 wanders outside 'the norm' that has been consistent from 1979-2001. What happened? Does anyone remember what happened? I do.

One October 4, 2002 the first two vortexes appeared in the northern hemisphere with one in the North Atlantic and one in the North Pacific. Simultaneously, in Antarctica an alert was published that "C Zero" had reversed it's flow. C Zero was an ice river in Antarctica. At the time the scientists stated they were uncertain what occurred simply because they hadn't analyzed data yet. But, what I recorded in my notes for that day was that C Zero was no longer completely ice and was floating on melt water (similar to the Greenland Icesheet) and was now flowing toward the circumpolar circulation rather than continually expanding in ice content. 

When the vortexes showed up and there were only two at the time (eventually there would be a maximum of seven major vortexes in the northern hemisphere over time) the equation of the climate crisis changed. We were no longer looking at a linear equation, it was now exponential which means the crisis was not contracting into a tighter and tighter time frame. The estimations went from 100 years to 50 years and today it's even shorter. 

This is the graph of the Arctic Ocean sea ice extent from the years 1981 - 2010 with the 2002 average. The 2002 line is no longer outside the 'normal', is it? As a matter of fact it is well within that average. What happened?

This is a comparison of the Arctic Ocean sea ice extent of both charts, 1979-2000 and 1981-2010 plus 2002. What happened to the solidly average 'normal' sea ice extent in just a few year? 

The dynamics of Earth's troposphere changed. It reached a tipping point. The Arctic Ocean average sea ice extent was no longer consistent and was exhibiting qualities never witnessed before. It was becoming far less predictable and this was validated by countries like Iceland which in 2003 was reporting there was open water passage across the Arctic Ocean/Arctic Sea.

Now, the Polar Vortex which provided consistent Arctic Ocean sea ice extent averages for historic consistency is now unhinged.

The snow at the 45th parrallel at Latitude 44.9767° N and Longitude 85.6506° W changed from large, fluffy windless snow to very light flurries without wind at 8:05AM EST and has now stopped as of 8:07AM EST. It isn't as though it still isn't precipitating, but, it is that the precipitation isn't reaching the ground because the sun's light and infrared heat from Earth is now greater.