Remember that wall that was supposed to be built in 2016?
As you might remember, the globalists in Congress threw a tantrum to stop it. And, amidst the government shutdown, only conceded to 1.6 billion of our tax dollars being used on the border, namely for refurbishing the porous fencing there. Under the circumstances, the drugs and gangs continue to pour into the country, and the cat-and-mouse game along the border continues unabated; each day, up to nearly 1,500 illegals are caught crossing into America - and processed - while others get through completely undetected.
The child-smuggling industry also remains intact, because America's “bring 1 kid, get in free” special continues to be exploited. And the burden on the American taxpayer due to the unsecured border just keeps expanding; a new report alleges that illegal immigrants may cost us $746 billion over their lifetime.
From CNN's view, none of this justifies a wall; something with a noted monetary impact below the cost of a mid-sized SUV, on the other hand...
CNN:
So CNN, opposed to a border wall that would save us $746 billion, wants to address the nuisance of $30,000 in water damage - a lifetime cost of $3 million - and CNN is calling this evidence of a "crisis" we must act on. What a lol-zy contrast.
Moreover, I am not seeing where the feasibility study concerning the wall even mentions a "climate crisis" - you know, the very thing that CNN proclaimed the whole seawall project was about. Note that, whereas a project based on "climate crisis" would look at predictive models concerning ice caps, water salinity, ocean currents and the jet stream, arguing what sort of weather New York might expect in result (and taking into account uncontrolled variables, like solar flares), the study instead focuses on the past, using records from the past to justify the extent of the wall.
In line with the study, instead of mentioning a climate "crisis" - that sea levels are rising and rare and extreme weather events are becoming normal in New York - the seawall project leader indicated the following:
CNN:
But that is only the tip of the iceberg (I know - bad pun, sorry). The very same thing CNN alleges the world is "racing to respond" to is, according to the project manager, not likely to happen in any of our lifetimes and, statistically, would have last happened before the U.S. was even established. This is what CNN is panicking about - something that, six years from now (by 2025), we will be completely prepared for now.
By contrast, we know exactly when and where this daily threat due to illegal immigration is coming from, as well as how much it costs per year, because the taxpayer is already paying it. And the threat posed is plainly measurable in real dollars. It tearing apart the United States in our lifetime. Tell me, where is the crisis: at the southern border, or out at sea?
Also, notice how tall New York's wall will be: taller than the highest storm surge during Hurricane Sandy. CNN is either stupid, or does not want you to know anything. Because the truth is that, once Hurricane Sandy happened, New York was put on notice about the possibility of a hurricane with those very features being possible again. That said, without taking preventative action to account for another Sandy, New York could very likely be sued for negligence if another Sandy occurred - and possibly liable for nuisance, with all of that garbage from Staten Island floating around and into homes, causing great health hazards and destruction. That is, of course, why the focus was to make the seawall at least high as the highest point of storm surge during Hurricane Sandy. And that, of course, does not fit CNN's narrative about why all this is being done. Ooops.
Meanwhile, Bill De Blasio, the mayor of New York City, gets a huge break. Because the population reads CNN and believes its theories, all this investment the State of New York is doing, to save its own ass legally, is something that is not going to make him any less popular. In fact, it might make him more popular.
Yet, when you think about it, nothing being done is actually preparing us for a "climate crisis". Because if water salinity really is decreasing because of melting ice, if the currents and jet stream really are changing, no city on earth knows what to prepare for, and how to prepare for it. New York might look like a snow cone, just like in that movie, The Day After Tomorrow:
Should a hypothetical category 5 hurricane and monsoon-like rains strike New York/New Jersey, on the other hand, the Hudson would become a brown sludge beachfront property - afloat in garbage from Staten Island anyway - and New York/New Jersey would become a swamp, which is what it already sits atop of, which is part of the problem in the first place. It goes without saying that most homes in the area are not supported by stilts, and thus in no way prepared for anything other than what normally happens in New York weather-wise.
Even those who believe in gradual and consistent climate change understand the bottom line:
CNN:
On the other hand, moving away like that sounds awfully intolerant of the flood, and a bit like the rationale that went through peoples' minds after the Watts riots and Detroit riots - not to mention the Los Angeles riots, the Ferguson riots, the Baltimore riots and all the other riots I did not mention.
Suspiciously, the seawall illustration plan showing how idyllic New York will be when the wall is finished seems to suggest that the city will also be cleansed of all filth, litter and degeneracy - and ethnically-cleansed - like the clock was just set back 100 years:
Come to think of it, why does this wall only insulate Staten Island, which is the last majority-white borough left in New York?
I'm calling racism.
As you might remember, the globalists in Congress threw a tantrum to stop it. And, amidst the government shutdown, only conceded to 1.6 billion of our tax dollars being used on the border, namely for refurbishing the porous fencing there. Under the circumstances, the drugs and gangs continue to pour into the country, and the cat-and-mouse game along the border continues unabated; each day, up to nearly 1,500 illegals are caught crossing into America - and processed - while others get through completely undetected.
The child-smuggling industry also remains intact, because America's “bring 1 kid, get in free” special continues to be exploited. And the burden on the American taxpayer due to the unsecured border just keeps expanding; a new report alleges that illegal immigrants may cost us $746 billion over their lifetime.
From CNN's view, none of this justifies a wall; something with a noted monetary impact below the cost of a mid-sized SUV, on the other hand...
CNN:
By 2025, New York's Staten Island will be fortified by a towering seawall running 5.3 miles along the coast, an engineering feat designed to ward off a growing threat.
The climate crisis is predicted to create more powerful and extreme weather systems all over the world, and coastal engineers are racing to respond with structures to reduce their impact.
According to the final feasibility study, the wall will prevent $30,000 in flood damage each year. But it won't prevent all flooding, and in the case of severe storms residents will still need to follow orders to evacuate.
So CNN, opposed to a border wall that would save us $746 billion, wants to address the nuisance of $30,000 in water damage - a lifetime cost of $3 million - and CNN is calling this evidence of a "crisis" we must act on. What a lol-zy contrast.
Moreover, I am not seeing where the feasibility study concerning the wall even mentions a "climate crisis" - you know, the very thing that CNN proclaimed the whole seawall project was about. Note that, whereas a project based on "climate crisis" would look at predictive models concerning ice caps, water salinity, ocean currents and the jet stream, arguing what sort of weather New York might expect in result (and taking into account uncontrolled variables, like solar flares), the study instead focuses on the past, using records from the past to justify the extent of the wall.
In line with the study, instead of mentioning a climate "crisis" - that sea levels are rising and rare and extreme weather events are becoming normal in New York - the seawall project leader indicated the following:
CNN:
The seawall will be built to withstand a 300-year flood event -- a water height two feet above the highest levels recorded during Hurricane Sandy, said Frank Verga, a project manager at the New York District of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).
"The project is a proven engineering solution to withstand multiple storms, with adaptability to be modified in future to address sea level rise, if required," said Verga in an email.
But that is only the tip of the iceberg (I know - bad pun, sorry). The very same thing CNN alleges the world is "racing to respond" to is, according to the project manager, not likely to happen in any of our lifetimes and, statistically, would have last happened before the U.S. was even established. This is what CNN is panicking about - something that, six years from now (by 2025), we will be completely prepared for now.
By contrast, we know exactly when and where this daily threat due to illegal immigration is coming from, as well as how much it costs per year, because the taxpayer is already paying it. And the threat posed is plainly measurable in real dollars. It tearing apart the United States in our lifetime. Tell me, where is the crisis: at the southern border, or out at sea?
Also, notice how tall New York's wall will be: taller than the highest storm surge during Hurricane Sandy. CNN is either stupid, or does not want you to know anything. Because the truth is that, once Hurricane Sandy happened, New York was put on notice about the possibility of a hurricane with those very features being possible again. That said, without taking preventative action to account for another Sandy, New York could very likely be sued for negligence if another Sandy occurred - and possibly liable for nuisance, with all of that garbage from Staten Island floating around and into homes, causing great health hazards and destruction. That is, of course, why the focus was to make the seawall at least high as the highest point of storm surge during Hurricane Sandy. And that, of course, does not fit CNN's narrative about why all this is being done. Ooops.
Meanwhile, Bill De Blasio, the mayor of New York City, gets a huge break. Because the population reads CNN and believes its theories, all this investment the State of New York is doing, to save its own ass legally, is something that is not going to make him any less popular. In fact, it might make him more popular.
Yet, when you think about it, nothing being done is actually preparing us for a "climate crisis". Because if water salinity really is decreasing because of melting ice, if the currents and jet stream really are changing, no city on earth knows what to prepare for, and how to prepare for it. New York might look like a snow cone, just like in that movie, The Day After Tomorrow:
Should a hypothetical category 5 hurricane and monsoon-like rains strike New York/New Jersey, on the other hand, the Hudson would become a brown sludge beachfront property - afloat in garbage from Staten Island anyway - and New York/New Jersey would become a swamp, which is what it already sits atop of, which is part of the problem in the first place. It goes without saying that most homes in the area are not supported by stilts, and thus in no way prepared for anything other than what normally happens in New York weather-wise.
Even those who believe in gradual and consistent climate change understand the bottom line:
CNN:
"Where you have these public and private interests colliding in a contested space, like the coast, that faces ordinary weather events being compounded by climate change, people will look for a solution that gives them as much security as they can hope to achieve," said Tayanah O'Donnell, a senior lecturer at the Australian National University (ANU).
[...]
"Human beings cannot engineer nature forever, either positively or negatively. People will push back, particularly those with private property interests ...but eventually a decision will need to be made, which will be: you can't live here anymore," O'Donnell said.
On the other hand, moving away like that sounds awfully intolerant of the flood, and a bit like the rationale that went through peoples' minds after the Watts riots and Detroit riots - not to mention the Los Angeles riots, the Ferguson riots, the Baltimore riots and all the other riots I did not mention.
Suspiciously, the seawall illustration plan showing how idyllic New York will be when the wall is finished seems to suggest that the city will also be cleansed of all filth, litter and degeneracy - and ethnically-cleansed - like the clock was just set back 100 years:
Come to think of it, why does this wall only insulate Staten Island, which is the last majority-white borough left in New York?
I'm calling racism.
