Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Dr. Willie Soon – University of East Anglia alumni Ben “Beat the cr*p out of him” Santer offering President Trump lessons on fostering international cooperation, shared humanity, mutual understanding and the need to focus on climate action rather than building physical walls.
Ultima Thule, the Cold War and Trump’s Wall
As I learned during my youth in Germany, exploring frontiers beats hiding behind barriers
By Ben Santer on January 11, 2019
…
[snip – a minute of my life I will never get back]
…
Today, we are told, Americans need a wall on our southern border. We are told that we need the wall to keep us safe from rapists and terrorists; from those who are not like us, who speak differently, or do not look like we do.
Back in Cornwall School in 1966, I was “the other.” I was different in my nationality, in my speech and in my religion. For that younger me, safety and security did not come from building metaphorical walls between myself and my peers. Security came from listening, from learning, from seeking understanding of a world that was new to me.
Those lessons seem relevant today.
True security for our country does not come from building a wall on our southern border, or from asking Canada to pay for a wall on our northern border, or from withdrawing into our own little national cocoon. National security in a complex and rapidly changing world is best guaranteed by strong alliances, shared humanity and an accurate understanding of how and why political, economic and environmental changes are occurring. Keeping our country safe from harm requires awareness of the reality and seriousness of human effects on global climate. It requires a willingness to work with the rest of the world in finding innovative clean-energy solutions to the existential threat of human-caused climate change. No physical wall can fully protect us from that threat.
Read more: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/ultima-thule-the-cold-war-and-trumps-wall/
Ben Santer has an interesting background for a climate peacemaker.
Aside from his bizarre physical threat against Pat Michaels, Ben Santer wrote emails describing being audited by Steve McIntyre as the 21st century equivalent of public hanging (Climategate email 3356.txt), and complained about “scientific competitors” using FOIA requests to access datasets before he was finished with them (Climategate email 1231257056.txt).
Santer expressed concern about intentional or unintentional “misuse” of datasets by scientists who disagreed with his position (Climategate email 1229468467.txt). He wrote an apology to colleagues when McIntyre forced him to publish some of his data (Climategate email 1229468467.txt).
Ben Santer put his foot in it when he said in 2011, that periods of 17 years or more are required to identify the human footprint in the climate record. When 17 years came and went without any rise in temperature. Santer in 2015 tried to explain the pause as being due to lots of small volcanoes suppressing the anthropogenic signal.
But I guess anyone can grow and learn.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Quote from Santer.
Keeping our country safe from harm requires awareness of the reality and seriousness of human effects on global climate.
——-
That has to be the most ridiculous example yet, of someone so fixated with climate change it has removed their ability to think logically, or see reality.
True security would include telling people like Santer to sit down and shut up.
Re: Asking Canada to pay for a border wall, actually, using Donald Trump’s logic, we Canadians should be asking the Americans to pay for a border wall to stop the flow of pass-through migrants coming into our country from the US.
Canada and the US have a “Safe Third Country Agreement” to deal with this.
To be fair, we’ll need the wall to keep the liberal refugees out of Canada when Civil War 2 comes. We have more than enough of them already.
To be fair, half of Canadian liberals take refuge in the southern USA each winter, deliberately seeking a warmer climate change.
Did it occur to you, Trebla, that Trump would be more than happy to see the back of US LibTards?
About 2/3rds of America would.
Besides they are just friends Canadians haven’t met yet.
Did it occur to you, Trebla, that Trump would be more than happy to see the back of US LibTards?
Didn’t Canada recently sign on to the UN Migration Pact? If so, then there are many people who would migrate to Canada so they could slip across Canada’s southern border into the land of Oppression and Welfare.
Lol good point
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-justin-trudeau-canada-immigration-ban-muslim-countries-a7552186.html
Canada’s generous offer was accepted en masse, but no apparent rush to move North by US Citizens.
“True security for our country does not come from building a wall on our southern border”
Yes it does, a wall is part of true security, and they work.
Just ask Israel about it’s US taxpayers funded massive wall with gun mounts, which Ben Santer is no doubt aware of.
Just ask the wealthy elite who have walls around their mansions.
And no doubt Ben Santer has locks on his doors, because they work.
The guy is as fake as a 3 dollar bill.
A really simple example of how walls build security is to look at Santer’s home. I bet he is completely surrounded by walls, which he will call “fences”.
Ask the Pope if walls are immoral, if he says yes then ask him why the Vatican has one.
… requires that people grow up and learn to cope with the world as it presents itself. Demanding to be protected from everything is pathological.
commieBob
Pathological, or immature? Children come to expect their parents to protect them. Some never grow out of that mindset and demand that society or social services, such as police, fill the role that their parents formerly provided.
Good on both of you. Pathologically immature makes sense to me.
All 3 of you are right, this is the Daniel Pearl syndrome.
He’s a chief steward of Mother Gaia and a High Priest in the Church of Omnipotent Greenhouse In Carbon.
His religion supercedes critical thinking, only faith in Mann and digital prophecy form his version of reality.
Oh that’s what he meant about his religion being different.
Another quote from: Ben Santer on January 11, 2019
I betcha no amount of money could convince Ben Santer to take a 3-month sabbatical to go “camping” among those hordes of US-bound immigrants amassed on the Mexican side of the Border and spending his awake hours preaching his “Kumbaya” message of ….. “Security comes from listening, from learning, from seeking understanding”.
“YUP”, Ben Santer wouldn’t do it because he knows that his “preaching” wouldn’t convert any of the rapists, terrorists, health-care-seekers, public-parasites, criminals, smugglers, drug dealers, prostitutes, pimps, etc., etc., who are desperate to get across the Border where “the-living-is-easy” for non-US citizens.
Notice here Santer is using the phrase, “human effects on global climate.”
That is a much less arguable position than the “Climate Change” as defined by the IPCC. His description goes beyond the now unsupportable CO2 catastrophism that underlies carbon tax and trading schemes by those looking to cash in on “green” carbon credit trading and tax monies.
And as an aside, I wonder why it is we can’t grow our own Climate Rentseekers here in the US?
Except for Mann, most of the notable rentseekers are from our English speaking friends.
Hayhoe – Canada
Santer – England
Trenberth – Kiwi
Schmidt – England.
And I suspect Mann is an alien too — extraterrestrial that is.
Yup, he’s a slitheen.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=unORPOtavqM
In literal terms what he says is correct.
It’s just that “awareness of the reality and seriousness of human effects on global climate” would lead rationally and sensibly to doing nothing but getting in with our lives.
Yes, because the reality is the “seriousness of human effects on global climate” is nonexistent.
Is this the Ben Santer who rewrote the conclusions of an IPCC committee off his own bat when the others in his group had gone home?
Do we all need to join hands and sing Kumbaya now?
I’m only here for the chocolate and marshmallows. *
*you all can keep the graham crackers*
Settled scence that walls work. Jim Acosta just found out for himself in McAllister Texas.
Shut her down Pelosi until the wall funding is forth coming.
Santer’s 17 year attribution threshold analysis was published in 2011, with a pause then ~10 years old. He obviously believed temperature would eventually rise as modeled. When they didn’t, he waffled rather than accept the conclusion consequences of his own paper. The volcanoes excuse is bogus, as shown in essay Blowing Smoke in eponius ebook of same title.
Trump wants only $5 billion, that’s nowhere near enough. To build this wall he needs $100 billion at least.
Not true. Where the steel slat/bollard designs 20 foot to 30 foot high are currently being installed, the total cost per mile is about $3.2-3.5million. Trump is asking for $5.6 billion. That pays for about (5600/3.4) 1650 miles. He only wants about 1000 more. The surplus pays for land acquisition, monitoring remote cameras, and the like. Plus, he already has $1.6 plus $1.6 billion already appropriated and used per his tweets and statements for renovation, land acquisition, and new wall.
The $25 billion was more a left media talking point than anything remotely realistic.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/test-steel-prototype-border-wall-showed-it-could-be-sawed-n956856
The people working on the border “FOR YEARS” say that is what they want. Even the head of the border patrol under the Obama administration says this is required and effective!
Do you think nbcnews knows more about securing the border, than the people that work there do??? Might as well ask Jim Acosta for advice on what works best to secure an insecure border.
Walls will not stop visa overstays, the main source of illegal immigration.
Any wall can be breached. The question is: how long and how hard? A guy showing up with a diamond saw or a plasma torch is going to be rather conspicuous, and will take long enough that the Border Patrol will get there before he’s through.
David,
With Visa overstays, the US State Department has a record of the overstayer. We have a photo, DOB, name, country of origin, and fingerprints. Plus they’ve been checked against Interpol and US criminal records and warrant searches prior to Visa issue, especially from origin nationality/countries of concern.
Those are not the real security concern that an unknown, undocumented illegal immigrant presents as they cross into the US with no record of who they are.
Joel, with photos, DOBs, names, country of origin, fingerprints, checks against Interpol, checks for US criminal records and warrant searches, visa overstays account for more illegal immigrants than border crossings outside of ports of entry.
…
Walls won’t stop visa overstays.
Oh certainly, just stopping illegal border crossings is not the complete solution. Actual ID, enforcement of Simpson-Mazzoli on employment, and changes to birthright citizenship are needed too, but doing all those things at once is difficult, but doing steps is a more usual tactic.
Unless, of course, you are arguing for “comprehensive immigration reform”, meaning an amnesty now, and no enforcement later.
Joel, walls won’t stop a pregnant lady from visiting here just before her due date, and bestowing citizenship on her newborn, delivered on US soil.
Joel, one of the reasons that people who are illegal immigrants commit less crime than natural born citizens is because with photos, DOBs, names, country of origin, fingerprints, checks against Interpol, checks for US criminal records and warrant searches, they know one single arrest will get them deported.
Halla, if the enforcement of Simpson-Mazzoli on employment was to become common, a lot of farmer’s crops would rot in the field, roofs on people’s homes would not get installed, landscaping would go to hell, and nobody would change the sheets on beds in hotel/motels.
You mean, if employers actually had to negotiate wages in a fair market, prices would go up.
The Democratic Party used much the same argument to defend slavery.
David Dirkse, …….. GETTA CLUE ……… and cease with your partisan Democratic claptrap, …..
If government employees were doing their jobs (instead of partying in Puerto Rico, etc., etc., ….) ….. there wouldn’t be tens-of-thousands of foreigners who have over stayed their visa.
Federal Judges should be issuing “rulings” to force federal Immigration employees to do the job they are being paid to do ……. instead of aiding the Democrat Party in their asinine, idiotic attempt to impeach the POTUS.
Its long past time that those highly politically biased Federal Judges be charged with malfeasance and removed from their judicial positions.
David Dirkse – January 13, 2019 at 5:50 pm
The leftist liberal argument for “open borders” …… doesn’t get much more asinine, foolish and idiotic than what is stated above.
“DUH”, David Dirkse must have been told by his like-minded friend that …. ALL illegal immigrants that sneak across US Borders carry with them their personal resume including their photo, DOB, given name, country of origin, fingerprints, Interpol status, US criminality status and warrant status …… just in case they get arrested for their illegal action.
The ‘Wall’ is under construction….
https://youtu.be/H-f6KkLJF9c
More ‘Wall’ construction in progress…
https://youtu.be/xgP1wPCtwa4
Trump should propose installing a 1000 mile 30 foot high Solar Panel array (topped with razor wire) along the border. Sell the electricity to Mexico to pay back the investment. The dems should have no problem coming up with the extra billions. Win-win. 😀
@David – “Visa overstays” is a frequent excuse for not securing our borders. Anyone that applied for and received a visa, went through the lawful process to enter the country. If they were smuggling drugs, trafficking women and children, and committing violent crimes, we would be more concerned about them. The problem is not people that come here legally. The problem is people who come here illegally. We don’t know who they are, and what they plan on doing while they are here. Most people that come here on a Visa are students, or have family here. Both of those reasons are legitimate, and have a stabilizing influence on their behavior. If they are a problem, we have information on why they are here, and that makes them easier to find.
Russ, people that come here legally on a visa, then overstay that visa are now here illegally.
They entered the country legally. We have a record of who they are and what they intend to do. If they violate the law we already have a record of who they are and why they are here. Are you that dense that you don’t understand the distinction?
Cartel drug mules don’t get a Visa.
Felons running from charges in Mexico don’t get a Visa.
Violent gang members fleeing other violent gang members don’t get a Visa.
Traffickers and smugglers don’t get a Visa.
We can’t stop them all, but we can make it more difficult for them, and make it less profitable.
Russ R:
…
1) Most drug smuggling is done through ports of entry, via trucks, cars, boats and planes.
2) Ditto for human traffickers.
3) Violent gang members can easily get a visa, especially since the US State Department doesn’t track violent gang members in foreign countries.
4) “If they violate the law we already have a record of who they are” Really?……tell me, how does the FBI know who violated the law in Guatemala?
….
Russ, visa overstays will not be stopped by a wall.
The wall is not designed to stop visa overstays. When visa overstays are a problem, we will address that problem, if it needs addressing. We may just make it easier for people to renew their visa, if they are productive and law abiding.r
1) Most drug smuggling is not caught, so we don’t know where it is done. We know where we find more, and that is where we have walls and enforcement. If we knew where the stuff we didn’t stop was, we could stop more of it. If you remove one option, you have limited the drug smuggling options, which makes it easier to deter.
2) ditto…
3) It is easier to stop those that get a visa, than it is to stop those that don’t.
4) If they violated our laws, and were previously deported. Many crimes are committed by a small minority of repeat offenders. Why do you want to make it easier for them?
We can’t solve every problem. But that does not mean we should not try to improve the situation. We should have done this years ago, but we hoped it would get better. It has NOT.
You want to defend 4000 homicides? How many is too many? You have better ideas than the border patrol, or is your plan to do nothing? How many more mothers have to bury their children, or children grow up without a parent, before we decide to do something about it?
David Dirkse – January 13, 2019 at 6:40 pm
David Dirkse, ….. and just why in hell did you ask the above question, ….. given the FACT that you already told us the answer in your above posting of, ….. to wit:
Fer shame, fer shame, …. deviousness, disingenuous and dishonesty masquerading as feigned ignorance and cluelessness.
Fer shame, fer shame, …. deviousness, disingenuous and dishonesty masquerading as feigned ignorance and cluelessness.
in other words a typical leftist democrat.
Where a wall exists, there are no migrants. link
I would also note that, since I brought my cats to the neighborhood, no dragons have devoured maidens. If you want to keep your daughters safe, you must keep at least one cat.
On the other hand, keeping a cat could actually be quite good for your daughters’ health. link
Jim’s facile logic was met with the facile logic of the social media. The truth is always more complex.
McAllen, not McAllister.
I daresay some time in Big Mac would do him some good.
(Big Mac is a nickname for the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlister)
McAlister is in Oklahoma.😉
Keeping our country safe from harm requires awareness of the reality and seriousness of the global elite’s theft of our wealth.
Well said, but missed in practice while witch-hunting so called “skeptics” and “doubter”
Don’t forget to, as one of the original Progressives said, “but carry a big stick.”
Kirshn,
Good point, he never did not learn a thing about respect for others, honesty, ethics, or the need for a good scientist to be skeptical.
why did he need security?
were there roving bands of post-grads looking to abuse non-protestants with obvious accents?
what type of people actually do people do business with this guy???
Classic Confirmation Bias / Group Think coupled with Cognitive Dissonance.
Nothing more need be said.
what about World Peace?
Got it right here:
That about encapsulates it. When the climatemongers can’t sell the stinking fish they have to throw in something extra to get the pleb’s support. “But wait there’s more.”
First, you need a world piece. *rattle, click*
Ben obviously knows from nothing about the U.S. southern border. Let’s feed just a third of those 24 million illegals into East Anglia. making sure they have the correct proportion of murderers, rapists, drug dealers, etc. Ben the Boob. Big mouth, nothing behind it.
Santer should have been placed behind a wall for his actions regarding the IPCC SPM in 1996.
I noticed our prisons have walls around them to keep the antisocial within.
There’s a door in the wall though where those deemed safe pass in and out pretty regularly.. but the walls do a pretty good job preventing the uncontrolled flow of the antisocial element.
Maybe this bloke might like to contemplate living next to a wall-less prison before he opens his mouth and inserts another foot?
I’m guessing his house has walls, too.
A closed mouth gathers no foot. Good advice, that.
Modern prisons are built around the concept of the inverted fortress. A classic fortress has multiple lines of obstruction for keeping assailants out. An inverted fortress has multiple lines of obstruction to keep prisoners in. From the individual cells to the walls to the fences to the regular guard patrols and so on. A prisoner attempting escape may make it through some of those lines but is highly unlikely to make it through them all.
In a similar vein, when we talk about The Wall, we don’t mean just the physical wall, but also the patrols, surveillance equipment, alarms, and other lines of obstruction that go with it. Trump’s libby-leftie detractors all seem to assume just a wall will be built.
We don’t need no stinkin’ lectures from Santer.
I see he didn’t ask Mexico to stop building a wall on their Southern Border?
So obviously this rant of his was political theater, nothing else…
He is just repeating the Left’s doublespeak. No facts, no common ground as to what are the true issues. Just repeat the same thoughtless ideology/propaganda.
The issue is legal immigration vs a dangerous rush for the border which is dangerous for all concerned. Same problem in Europe. How many Africans drown trying to get to Europe. There are 1.2 billion Africans.
Legal immigration is controlled. There are hundreds of millions of people who would ‘immigrate’ to the US if the border truly was open. Open borders is chaos that leads to shanty towns around major cities.
Illegal immigration does not solve the problems in the countries that people are leaving.
Hundreds of billions of dollars is spent every year on CAGW. The money spent on CAGW has accomplished nothing.
The observations support the assertion that there is no CAGW.
“Those lessons seem relevant today.” It may seem that way, but it only seems that way.
Well, we have Somalia refugees flooding Maine and Massachusetts. We have Latin American, South American and Mexican refugees flooding the north country (many from Canada).
Just think of how much more heat energy will be required to keep them warm vs. not so much from where they came from. The wall will help.
Just saying…
The wall is about drugs, criminals being booted from their home countries, terrorist and more votes for democrats who just love waging war in other countries.
John, you don’t understand.
Ben just pointed out that the folks who make up the caravans and are causing chaos at the border points only want to gain entry in order to help us
I am going to have to listen to Trump’s speech again ’cause I missed the part where he said he wants a wall in order to protect us from climate change.
“As I learned during my youth in Germany, exploring frontiers beats hiding behind barriers…”
I do not know what Santer did in Germany but it appears not to have included any study of history. But as I recall, the “barrier” he is likely referring to was known as the Berlin Wall. It was built by the communist East Germans to keep East Germans in, not other people out. So who was hiding?
And a wall along the Canadian border? That must be the strawiest of straw men every proposed. Canada is a great country. Canadians have good jobs and homes and a good standard of living except for the poor who are always with everybody. Besides, they own a bunch of Florida. So why a wall? Who is proposing such a wall? Only Santer that I can see.
And this is the same guy who recently fudged the RSS satellite temperature graph to increase “warming” by roughly half a degree more since 2000 than it otherwise would. Using the same satellite data as Christy and Spencer at UAH which shows no such increase.
Furthermore this is the same “settled science” guy who somehow does not agreee with the “settled facts” of our southern border as expressed by the experts – that is the Border Patrol.
Enough venting. Santer is worth no more.
DHR,
interesting.
I seem to recall a certain German Quisling called Walter Ulbrich, telling the imprisoned Easter Berliners that his wall was to prevent the poor starving and repressed West Berliners invading their ‘utopia’ in the East.
So nothing new in Mr Santers version of the great lie.
It just goes to prove that communism never dies. It has just changed colour from red to green.
I think it was the great James Delingpole who coined the term ‘Watermelons’ to describe them.
I thought Quisling was Norwegian.
I think that patrick is using Quisling as an descriptive noun , just as I might say ” on holiday last summer a German Casanova seduced my sister ” , even though Casanova was Italian.
Indeed. A quisling (noun) is “a traitor who collaborates with an enemy force occupying their country.” named after Vidkun Abraham Lauritz Jonssøn Quisling who was Norwegian. Calling someone a quisling isn’t claiming they are Norwegian.
similarly the term “Cassanova” (as mikewaite points out) is used to describe a charming, smooth-talking womanizer, was named after the Italian adventurer Giacomo Girolamo Casanova. Referring to someone as a cassanova isn’t a claim to them being Italian.
Many words and phrases can be traced back to historical figures: Benedict Arnold (a traitor, named after the traitor Benedict Arnold), Boycott (organized refusal to do business with a company, named after Charles Boycott), Pompadour (hairstyle named after the Madame de Pompadour, mistress of Louis XV), Wellingtons (the rubber boots, named after the 1st Duke of Wellington), Maverick (an unorthodox or independent-minded person, named after Samuel Maverick)
And a wall along the Canadian border? That must be the strawiest of straw men every proposed.
Indeed, I somehow missed the caravans of illegals trying to cross the US/Canada border (in either direction). Likely because both countries are stable first world countries who citizens don’t have an overwhelming need to flee.
“from those who are not like us, who speak differently, or do not look like we do”
What is it about liberals and their desperate need to believe the worst about anyone who disagrees with them?
No one is saying that. Perhaps Mr. Santer is projecting his racism?
Everyone else is worried about the drain on welfare, jobs for low paid workers (i.e. entry work that school leavers would normally do), vote shifting, slum communities, and criminal gang entry into the area, and illegal entry into the country as opposed to legal entry.
But Santer is worried about how they look and speak. It’s either projection, or he doesn’t know why people don’t want uncontrolled immigration.
Complaining about Climate is just ridiculous.
“What is it about liberals and their desperate need to believe the worst about anyone who disagrees with them?”
They call this ‘tolerance’ and ‘inclusion’. Interestingly enough, the intolerance of opposing points of view transcends everything else that the left claims to be tolerant of. I must be hard to recognize hypocrisy when you’re a hypocrite.
Liberals are not like us, speak differently and don’t look like we do.
It’s not about ‘refugees’, it’s about THEM.
The problem is that sophistry is ideal for this issue, and understanding the real issue is difficult. Simple misleading science is more difficult to communicate the real science. Climate Change is based on energy fluxes. It is far easier to describe CO2 increases Temperature increases then to try to explain the real science behind the issue. Here is an example of how to simplify the message using an example that almost anyone would understand, a giant bucket at a water park.
An Einstein Thought Experiment on Climate Change
https://co2islife.wordpress.com/2019/01/12/an-einstein-thought-experiment-on-climate-change/
Co2islife
Reading through your link reminds the reader to beware of carefully worded non-sense. Mostly you can look out your window to the world and decide for your self if there’s a catastrophic climate disaster stalking the land.
Reducing reality to climate change.
Seeing the world through the lens of climate change.
Rejecting all other views.
How long before, “two plus two is 4, because climate change”?
Its creeping into math word problems at the elementary level.
Read Orwell’s 1984 and you will find how 2+2 can equal 5 or 3 or even 4. Poor George went to Spain to fight for the Republican Cause. It went well until his fellow travelers had a falling out. The Republican Cause was being run by the Soviet secret police and the organization George was fighting with was denounced as Trotskyite saboteurs. They were hunted down for extermination. George was able to flee for his life. The episode seems to have given him a jaundiced view of life.
2 + 2 can equal 5.
2.4 + 2.4 = 4.8
Now round those numbers to integers, and you get
2 + 2 = 5
Maybe I should have been a Climate Scientologist?
However, that’s not 2 + 2 equaling 5, that’s a rounding error (quantization error) as 2.4 is not really 2 and 4.8 is not really 5 so trying to round in that way is not going to give you the correct result.
Every time they open their mouth a non sequitur pops out.
Humans are destroying the planet, therefore we should not build a wall.
Mr. Santer,
I don’t think you have enough experience with what climate is made of, weather.
On how quickly and unpredictably it can change. Nor how swiftly it can kill.
You have a thing or three against warmth. My opinion is that you’ll definitively change your mind after you experience what winter operations really look and feel like for be it a few days.
Your credo to control climate relies implicitly on controlling weather. Good luck with that Mr. Santer. Only those who never faced the powers of weather can eventually listen to your claims.
Which is why your rhetoric calls for “deniers”, “skeptics” and other very scientific claims.
Face it Mr. Santer, going that low is the ultimate evidence that your business is in a flat-spin.
How many mathematicians rely on ONG’s and government decisions to substantiate their claims?
There was a time when “concerned” scientists attempted to support the politics of a certain “reich” and vice-versa. Which is why we are more than happy to witness your ideological struggles as you grasp for funds by any means.
It’s over Mr. Santer.
More absurdities from the worlds of philosophy and egotism.
Typical, choose a topic the writer, Santer, has zero real world knowledge but lots of opinions, and introduce a false strawman so the writer can misdirect readers.
Trump’s Administration has not made any of these explicit claims:
* “We are told that we need the wall to keep us safe from rapists and terrorists”,
* “from those who are not like us”,
* “who speak differently”,
* “or do not look like we do”.
Every one of Santer’s imagined claims are his claims, not the Trump’s Administration.
Trump’s Administration seeks to stem and control the invasions and smuggling across our Southern Border.
That those invading, are willing to break immigration, treade, human rights law is itself very worrying.
Within those invading crowds are, identified, rapists, murderers, human rights offenders, drug smugglers, etc. is not a fantasy; it is proven fact.
Pure egotism and vastly inflated self importance.
“Security came from listening, from learning, from seeking understanding of a world that was new to me.”
Apparently Santer confuses or conflates emotional security with physical security. Another twist allowing Santer to use his limited experience to address Santer’s own false strawmen, not reality.
Within two years, Trump’s Administration has corrected and is still correcting bad treaties, horrendous trade negotiations, international relations disasters, wars, violent threats, etc. etc.
* Not talked about.
* Not acquiesced to weaker nations or trade associations.
* Not ignored, or as a preceding President achieved so often, not inflamed through ignorance or overt weakness.
Nope! Santer assumes he knows what is best for topics where Santer has zero experience, but lots of opinion.
All based on Santer’s false strawman arguments. e.g. Santer’s framing his strawman as “True security”, a security that appears to be based on Santer’s emotional vision of security.
Nothing to do with the very real problem at America’s Southern Border that causes economic chaos, violence, illegal immigrants stealing false identification. Santer also ignores the human rights violations illegal immigrants endure while trying to stay in this country.
Maybe Trump’s Administration will simply defund those agencies, departments and grants that result in anti-Government screeds while failing to produce real science.
One should try not to fight a war on too many fronts. Santer wants to tie global warming to illegal immigration (and many other unrelated causes). By doing so, he dilutes his message and gives his detractors new avenues for attack.
We need to build physical walls to avoid building legal boundaries. For the construction of legal boundaries, society is not prepared for the moment, so we have to build physical boundaries prematurely. We are forced to build borders in the same way as the fight against climate change, it is not a matter of free choice.
So they want us all to live a third-world existence, except those who actually have a third-world existence. Those unfortunates should move to a first-world country where they will undoubtedly start putting out more CO2.
Because that will save the planet from GlobalCoolingWarmingChange.