But it must be applied equally. The author of the article you cite regarding sea ice purposely picks a particular low point in global sea ice in 1979 and uses that to make a slanted comparison. He has an anti-climate change bias.

Here's an objective analysis of Arctic ice conditions:

Overview of conditions (December 2008)

Average Arctic sea ice extent for the month of December was 12.53 million square kilometers (4.84 million square miles). This was 140,000 square kilometers (54,000 square miles) greater than for December 2007 and 830,000 square kilometers (320,000 square miles) less than the 1979 to 2000 December average.

from:

http://www.nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

From:

http://www.citizen.org/congress/govtaccount/articles.cfm?ID=18027

211 Public Interest Organizations Support Swift Action to Restore Strong, Comprehensive Whistleblower Rights

September 8, 2008

To: Sen. Joseph Lieberman; Sen. Susan Collins; Sen. Daniel Akaka; Sen. George Voinovich; Rep. Henry Waxman; Rep. Tom Davis; Rep. Todd Platts; Rep. Chris Van Hollen

The undersigned organizations, representing millions of Americans, write to support the completion of the landmark, eight-year legislative effort to restore a credible Whistleblower Protection Act. We offer our support to expeditiously conclude the process of reconciling House and Senate passed versions of this vital good government legislation, H.R. 985 and S. 274.

Unfortunately, every month that passes has very tangible consequences for scores of whistleblowers who still lack viable legal rights. In just the first three months of this year, since both chambers passed their versions of the legislation, whistleblowers have a 2-49 win-loss record in initial decisions from administrative hearings at the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). For final rulings by the MSPB, the record is 2-53 under the current Chair. Since January, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, which has a monopoly on appellate review, has ruled against whistleblowers in another thirteen consecutive decisions on the merits, leaving a track record of 2-203 since October 1994 when Congress last strengthened the law!

We stand ready to provide any information that would help expedite the process, and to help you come to agreement on any unresolved issues. Any compromise should protect several critical provisions, which have already passed with overwhelming support. It is crucial that the final bill:

•Grant employees the right to a jury trial in federal court;

•Specifically protect federal scientists who report efforts to alter, misrepresent, or suppress federal research;

•Extend meaningful protections to FBI and intelligence agency whistleblowers;

•Strengthen protections for federal contractors, as strong as those provided to DoD contractors and grantees in last year’s defense authorization legislation;

•Extend meaningful protections to Transportation Security Officers (screeners);

•Neutralize the government’s use of the “state secrets” privilege;

•Bar the MSPB from ruling for an agency before whistleblowers have the opportunity to

present evidence of retaliation;

•Provide whistleblowers the right to be made whole, including compensatory damages;

•Grant comparable due process rights to employees who blow the whistle in the course of a government investigation or who refuse to violate the law; and

•Remove the Federal Circuit’s monopoly on precedent-setting cases.

We know that your offices share the commitment of every group signing the letter below and we deeply appreciate the years of effort to create more accountability in government. Please let us know how we can participate to expeditiously complete this badly needed good government reform. Once the reconciled version becomes law, the real winners will be the public!

Sincerely,

211 Public Interest Organizations (to see the list, follow the URL at top of post)

"But it is only a matter of time before a non-state entity acquires one, possibly from an aforementioned state

Why? In 50 years of cold war and proxy war between the Soviets and the west the soviets managed to keep their nuclear weapons out of the hands to their non state clients. Other nuclear armed states would have every incentive to do the same."

The days of only two players (Soviets & the West) kept in detente by mutual assured destruction are over. Pakistan's top nuclear scientist sold information and materials to Iran and Libya. North Korea was helping Syria build an alleged nuclear reactor. Nuke know-how is spreading to more states with reactionary leaders and overt ties to extreme groups.

It is a big gamble for Israel to assume fear of reprisal or precise military strikes will stave off the nuke threat indefinitely. Especially when Israel's unquestioned military supremacy has been unable to squelch militant groups who fervently employ asymmetric warfare.

I see better security and stability in seeking a single integrated state.

"it doesn't matter how many STATES have nuclear weapons, they can never use them against Israel

the only real risk that nuclear weapons pose is that someone who is not, or who believes that they are not, subject to retaliation will acquire one."

Perhaps I didn't state it clearly enough, but that is exactly my point: Libya, Syria, Iran and Pakistan are all states that had no nuclear programs in the recent past. All have made significant progress with Pakistan actually building a small arsenal.

I agree no state would nuke Israel for fear of reprisal. But it is only a matter of time before a non-state entity acquires one, possibly from an aforementioned state. I would add that military pounding of Gaza, regardless of justification, hastens this process by agitating radical elements.

In my mind, Israel's best and only longterm defense is to integrate.