More gub'ment waste: sea level rises affect DHS?

[drebo]

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/napolitano-says-dhs-begin-battling-clima

Napolitano Says DHS to Begin Battling Climate Change as Homeland Security Issue
Friday, December 17, 2010
By J. Brady Howell
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano (CNSNews.com/Penny Starr)


(CNSNews.com) - At an all-day White House conference on "environmental justice," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano announced that her department is creating a new task force to battle the effects of climate change on domestic security operations.

Speaking at the first White House Forum on Environmental Justice on Thursday, Napolitano discussed the initial findings of the department’s recently created "Climate Change and Adaptation Task Force."


Napolitano explained that the task force was charged with “identifying and assessing the impact that climate change could have on the missions and operations of the Department of Homeland Security.”

According to the former Arizona governor, the task force would address specific questions, including:

“How will FEMA work with state and local partners to plan for increased flooding or wildfire or hurricane activity that is more serious than we’ve seen before? What assistance can the Coast Guard bring to bear to assist remote villages in, for example, Alaska which already have been negatively affected by changes up in the Arctic?”

The findings from the Homeland Security Department (DHS) also asked: “(H)ow can we focus on how climate change is going to affect our rural citizenry including those who live along our boarders both northern and southern?”

Napolitano did not elaborate on the new task force and the Department of Homeland Security has yet to respond to requests by CNSNews.com for additional information on the task force.

The conference did not define “environmental justice,” and the only reference to the task force that can be found is on the DHS Web site. The June 2010 Department of Homeland Security Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan states “climate change has the potential to accelerate and intensify extreme weather events which threaten the nation’s sustainability and security.”

This plan also noted: “Many USCG [Coast Guard] and Customs and Border Protection facilities, by their mission, are located in the coastal zone which will be adversely impacted by sea level rise. Costs will increase for protecting existing facilities from the impacts of sea level rise and some facilities might have to be abandoned in the longer term.”

The all day White House Forum on Environmental Justice also included talks by White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley, EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar, Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, and Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius.

All I can say is "WTF?"

Napolitano needs to go. She is toxic to everything that is (or, rather, was) "America". This is simply a ploy to further expand the most anti-American organization of them all: the DHS.

This is bullshit. The ever-expanding and wasteful government making policy decisions based on knee-jerk, unproven pseudoscience. Great.

Maybe they should make a task force to study whether or not darksuckers are harmful to their gestapo officers while they're molesting holiday travelers.

 

[fskimospy]

/facepalm

Wait, are you arguing that a significant change to the US climate would have no effect on DHS operations? The agency tasked with responding to natural disasters... will not be affected by an increased frequency and severity of natural weather disasters?

(I don't care if you are a global warming denier, btw, so don't try to make this into a denier thread)

 

[drebo]

/facepalm

Wait, are you arguing that a significant change to the US climate would have no effect on DHS operations? The agency tasked with responding to natural disasters... will not be affected by an increased frequency and severity of natural weather disasters?

(I don't care if you are a global warming denier, btw, so don't try to make this into a denier thread)

I am saying that there is no proof what so ever that our climate is any worse by any changes that may or may not be happening. I am also saying that if there were any changes, they would be happening over such a long period of time that our evolution to deal with those changes would be implicit and would not require a special "task force."

I am also taking issue with the fact that FEMA earned only a brief mention in the article and that the majority seems to be about other "organizations" within the DHS.

 

[fskimospy]

I am saying that there is no proof what so ever that our climate is any worse by any changes that may or may not be happening. I am also saying that if there were any changes, they would be happening over such a long period of time that our evolution to deal with those changes would be implicit and would not require a special "task force."

I am also taking issue with the fact that FEMA earned only a brief mention in the article and that the majority seems to be about other "organizations" within the DHS.

So you are arguing against planning ahead because you're sure we'll just figure it out as we go along.

This is ridiculous.

 

[techs]

I am saying that there is no proof what so ever that our climate is any worse by any changes that may or may not be happening. I am also saying that if there were any changes, they would be happening over such a long period of time that our evolution to deal with those changes would be implicit and would not require a special "task force."

I am also taking issue with the fact that FEMA earned only a brief mention in the article and that the majority seems to be about other "organizations" within the DHS.

Hmm. US farmers are planting much earlier. I guess they are just stupid.

 

[drebo]

So you are arguing against planning ahead because you're sure we'll just figure it out as we go along.

This is ridiculous.

What exactly are we supposed to be planning ahead for?

We have no clue what (if anything) is going to happen and when it's going to happen. If we plan for a sea level rise of 10 feet in 100 years, and the sea level FALLS 20 feet in 5 years, what the hell good did our planning do?

The government is entering in to this with preconceived notions about what's going to happen that are far from proven and are not even concensus among scientists, and they're going to put a non-scientific organization in charge of planning for it?

If that's not government waste, I don't know what is.

 

[fskimospy]

What exactly are we supposed to be planning ahead for?

We have no clue what (if anything) is going to happen and when it's going to happen. If we plan for a sea level rise of 10 feet in 100 years, and the sea level FALLS 20 feet in 5 years, what the hell good did our planning do?

The government is entering in to this with preconceived notions about what's going to happen that are far from proven and are not even concensus among scientists, and they're going to put a non-scientific organization in charge of planning for it?

If that's not government waste, I don't know what is.

We don't know for sure, but you NEVER know for sure what's going to happen in the future, that's because it's the FUTURE. Do you understand why people and organizations plan ahead? Of course if things don't go as you think they will your plan isn't useful, but if they DO, you save a lot of money, and in this case probably lives. All future planning is a cost/benefit analysis. How on earth do you think that the idea that we might incorrectly predict the future is a reasonable argument against planning for the future?

Clearly you don't think climate change is real, but the overwhelming majority of scientists do. The government taking reasonable steps to assess its future needs on an issue that the vast majority of experts believe will happen in order to save money and lives in the future is the absolute definition of good government.

 

[MotF Bane]

She's just doing what any government agency does best - provide itself with powers.

 

[drebo]

The government is taking responsible steps to ensure that they can control every aspect of our lives. That's all this is. It has nothing to do with anything else.

Clearly, you don't have a problem with that, but the overwhelming majority of Americans do.

Also, I do not think that climate change isn't real. I simply take the more realistic view that there is nothing we can do about it, because the climate has been changing for the last 5 billion years, and will continue to change long after the human race has turned to dust. We cannot control the climate anymore than we can affect the spin of the Earth. I also do not believe that change will be catastrophic, which is the assumption being made by the government, and the reason they need to "plan" on it.

If the overall temperature of the Earth changes by .1 degree celcius over the next 100 years, is that really something we need to plan for, or will even notice? I think not.

 

[fskimospy]

The government is taking responsible steps to ensure that they can control every aspect of our lives. That's all this is. It has nothing to do with anything else.

Clearly, you don't have a problem with that, but the overwhelming majority of Americans do.

Also, I do not think that climate change isn't real. I simply take the more realistic view that there is nothing we can do about it, because the climate has been changing for the last 5 billion years, and will continue to change long after the human race has turned to dust. We cannot control the climate anymore than we can affect the spin of the Earth. I also do not believe that change will be catastrophic, which is the assumption being made by the government, and the reason they need to "plan" on it.

If the overall temperature of the Earth changes by .1 degree celcius over the next 100 years, is that really something we need to plan for, or will even notice? I think not.

Clearly, tyranny has arrived at our shores by the creation of a task force that is going to do an assessment.

 

[EagleKeeper]

She wants an assessement to bolster FEMA powers which is a subset of DHS

 

[drebo]

Clearly, tyranny has arrived at our shores by the creation of a task force that is going to do an assessment.

Tyranny's already here. This is just further evidence of that.

If you don't agree, then you will need to justify "enemy combatants", Gitmo, "domestic extremists", the TSA's new screening policies, no-fly lists, the existence of the DHS to begin with, "If you see something, say something", and the new iPhone "big brother" app. And that's just to start.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Violins in the streets! "giggle"

 

[Throckmorton]

OP, you know insurance companies are planning for the effects of global warming right?

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/...ompanies-have-no-doubts-about-global-warming/

 

[Scotteq]

DHS "owns" FEMA


FEMA is responsible for Managing, Assessing, Reacting to, and Mitigating (where possible) Natural and Man Made Disasters. So questions like - If Hurricanes get worse, then how would we need to improve New Orleans' Levees and Dikes to handle that? are absolutely valid. Now, given that Hurricanes are driven by hot air evaporating ocean water in the presence of the trade winds... and that (whatever level of, whatever the cause is) an increase in air temperature would logically drive larger and more frequent storms....


Sounds like a perfectly reasonable request to perform a study to see what the potential is.

 

[fskimospy]

Tyranny's already here. This is just further evidence of that.

If you don't agree, then you will need to justify "enemy combatants", Gitmo, "domestic extremists", the TSA's new screening policies, no-fly lists, the existence of the DHS to begin with, "If you see something, say something", and the new iPhone "big brother" app. And that's just to start.

I don't need to justify any of those things, I'm just calling you out for making this ridiculous thread.

 

[drebo]

I don't need to justify any of those things, I'm just calling you out for making this ridiculous thread.

Those things I listed are, by definition, tyranny. That they exist in at all is evidence that tyranny has taken hold in the US. As you cannot, or will not, justify their existence in a truely American society, you must agree with tyranny.

And that, I'm afraid, is what is most wrong with the American public.

(Of course, I knew all of this by the drivel you spew on a daily basis. It's just nice to see one of you admit it for once.)

 

[fskimospy]

Those things I listed are, by definition, tyranny. That they exist in at all is evidence that tyranny has taken hold in the US. As you cannot, or will not, justify their existence in a truely American society, you must agree with tyranny.

And that, I'm afraid, is what is most wrong with the American public.

(Of course, I knew all of this by the drivel you spew on a daily basis. It's just nice to see one of you admit it for once.)

This thread has nothing to do with any of those things, and if you actually paid attention to the 'drivel I spew on a daily basis' you would know that I am vehemently opposed to quite a few of the things you mentioned.

What I'm ALSO vehemently opposed to is chicken little stupidity however, as it distracts from the focus on things that are REAL tyranny. That's where this thread comes in.

 

[feralkid]

Ridiculous thread is ridiculous.

OP is off to a really great start in the Troller Derby.

Or is it the Igno-Rama?

 

[drebo]

What I'm ALSO vehemently opposed to is chicken little stupidity however, as it distracts from the focus on things that are REAL tyranny. That's where this thread comes in.

And yet you actively support the government's chicken little stupidity when it relates to climate change.

 

[fskimospy]

And yet you actively support the government's chicken little stupidity when it relates to climate change.

No, I support reasonable measures to assess the impact of events thought to be probable by an overwhelming majority of scientists.

You're so addicted to outrage that you don't even know what to be outraged about anymore.

 

[MovingTarget]

So, the overwhelming majority of scientists agree that climate change is taking place and that it may effect those living near the coasts in a significant manner. DHS/FEMA decides to do a bit of planning ahead for this scenario. Sounds perfectly reasonable and prudent to me. Even if it doesn't happen (again, the scientific consensus is that it will to some extent), then it is still resources well spent. But go ahead, make "Big Sis" the new liberal boogeyman to suit your political purposes. (Thanks for that one, Drudge) There are plenty of reasons you can fault DHS in its operations, but this isn't one of them.

 

[Pens1566]

Stoopid thread

 

[Throckmorton]

So, the overwhelming majority of scientists agree that climate change is taking place and that it may effect those living near the coasts in a significant manner. DHS/FEMA decides to do a bit of planning ahead for this scenario. Sounds perfectly reasonable and prudent to me. Even if it doesn't happen (again, the scientific consensus is that it will to some extent), then it is still resources well spent. But go ahead, make "Big Sis" the new liberal boogeyman to suit your political purposes. (Thanks for that one, Drudge) There are plenty of reasons you can fault DHS in its operations, but this isn't one of them.

Sea level rise is already happening. There's nothing hypothetical about it.

 

[hal2kilo]

Sea level rise is already happening. There's nothing hypothetical about it.

Just ask the people of Norfolk, VA.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/26/science/earth/26norfolk.html