Securing Our Future: The Wall & Border Security

One of the most foundational and principal tasks governments have had for over 2,000 years has been to secure and maintain its borders. The once great Western Roman Empire, spanning centuries, fell not because of a superior rival or total through war as so many others have. Rome fell as a result of barbarians slowly encroaching upon her borders. Border security has been discussed in the US for decades, and has seen even more feverish discussion since Donald Trump threw his hat into the political arena, bringing the issue to the forefront of the political landscape.

Something about the discussion of border policy and security always seemed somewhat disingenuous to me. There is an almost absurdity that creeps around the topic. A sort of dramatic irony lurking in the shadows, an irony I was never able to put into words. That is until I happened to stumble upon a documentary about strife in Africa where I saw something incredible — African warlords, with 60-year-old AK-47s, that are able to secure territorial borders, while the most well-funded military in human history cannot stop low-skilled Mexicans from invading the USA. This is, of course, a deliberate policy decision.

The US government as well as the governments of Europe are choosing not to enforce our borders. They are choosing to instead use our tax dollars to help fund the invasion. This raises several questions, what does our military actually defend, other than the government’s ability to replace the founding stock of the nation? How would a foreign occupation look any different? Men storming the gates, securing territory, installing their own people as government officials, murdering and raping the native population, and looting coffers. Every aspect of our lack of borders and immigration policy is far more akin to a nation being invaded by a hostile army, and less of a rational policy choice made by people with the concerns of their citizens in mind.

US citizens spend a little over $600 billion on the military, or an average of $12,000 per tax-paying household.[1] For that $600 billion what do we get? Around 1.3 million active-duty military personnel, 15% of which, about 193,000 are deployed overseas.[2] None of those people are protecting US borders, or the borders of our European cousins, for that matter.

I believe I have a plan that will actually work. The United States-Mexico border is less than 2,000 miles long. There are 1,760 yards in a mile. If we were to deploy an armed member of the US military every 100 yards along the border, it would take 35,200 people to line the border. Having soldiers take 8-hour shifts, it would require 105,600 soldiers to cover every 100 yards of the entire length of the US-Mexico border, just over half the number of military personnel that are actively deployed overseas right now.

The money is already being spent for military deployments. The infrastructure is already in place. There would be no additional cost, only the opportunity cost of whatever we would hypothetically be losing by bringing our military home, to secure our own borders, and ensure the safety of our own people. Marines and Army infantry could be deployed tonight along the border, with enough MREs (Meal, Ready-to-Eat) to last until mess halls were setup every few miles. Shortly after the Marines and Army arrive to secure the border, support personnel could follow to build camps while wall construction begins. Without any additional funding, we could use military funds and the US Army Corps of Engineers to begin immediately. Further military personal would be needed to provide support roles along the border wall and in the camps, those currently on active duty could just as easily be stationed on the border Fort as they are anywhere else in the US.

The border is a dangerous place. In November of 2017, a border agent was killed by men who used rocks to murder him and seriously wound his partner.[3] Clearly no place for small patrols and a patchwork group of agencies running in all different directions. These are the kinds of dangerous invaders flooding into our nation. There are tens of thousands of criminal aliens in US prisons, who have committed millions of crimes, ranging from drug trafficking to rape and murder.[4] The cost to police them, prosecute them, and incarcerate them, is tremendous. The psychological effects on our citizens are even worse. Before long, we will follow in the vein of Europe, where we are afraid to leave our homes out of fear of the hostile alien invaders.[5]

Deploying the US military along the border is necessity at this point. If the US government continues to refuse to stop the invasion, it becomes even clearer they are openly advocating for our demographic demise. When I realized how minimal the costs are in terms of both human personnel and dollars, I came to see the US government as less and less legitimate. A government that is purposefully not enforcing borders is illegitimate and one that no longer serves the interest of the people it was created to protect. They exist for a purpose outside the scope of our best interest and protection.

Not only is there a clear necessity, border deployments will add a level of morale to those serving in our armed forces. For the first time since perhaps the American Revolution, our military will be taking up arms to actually secure the safety and freedom of the American people. Instead of fighting needless foreign wars created to secure the borders of Israel at the behest of Neo-con warmongers, they will be truly serving the nation they believe in and love.

According to the General Accounting Office’s (GAO) report on illegal aliens, in a span of 20 years they committed at least 22,000 murders at a rate far disproportionate to their population size. Over 1,000 murders per year on our soil by a small fraction of the population. Over 22,000 dead Americans because our government refused to secure our border.

The cost of foreign aid and the burden of illegal invaders are already more than enough to fund the construction and maintenance of a border wall. However, back to the $600 billion we already pay for the military, whatever we are currently doing with that money, it is not being as well spent as it could be. Over 22,000 families have lost a loved one at the hands of an illegal invader. In the years the US was involved in the Vietnam war, 58,000 Americans lost their lives. In the years the GAO report covered, over 22,000 Americans lost their lives to a foreign enemy, meaning some years in America, more Americans are killed by illegal aliens than they are in combat zones in the Middle East. This is nothing short of staggering. Countless have been raped, poisoned by the drugs flowing across the border, and the societal effects have been devastating. The money for the wall is not only there, it is imperative. Very clearly.

The cost of the wall, whatever it may be, should never be so much as a consideration. I’ve seen reports ranging from $15 billion, to $70 billion, with high-end maintenance estimates of $150 million per year.[7] Looking at the wider perspective, even the high-end estimates are negligible. Our foreign aid budget in 2016 was $37.9 billion, with Israel being the largest benefactor at $3.1 billion per year.[8] We pay tens of billions of dollars per year, to ensure Israel, Africa, and the Middle East remain “stable,” and ensuring Israel has a fortress-walled ethno-state, while our own border remains entirely porous. Cutting all foreign aid for a mere two years would pay for a $70 billion dollar wall. Reducing funding to Israel from $3.1 billion to $2.95 billion would cover any maintenance cost for our wall for the years to come.

Illegal invaders are estimated to pay $19 billion per year in state and federal taxes; they use however, nearly $135 billion dollars per year. A record deficit of $116 billion for the year.[9] That is more than enough money to build a northern wall too, if we were so inclined. These figures include the so-called contributions of DACA “dreamers”, which is no surprise, as the majority of “native” born Hispanics in the US are on welfare. 54% of legal Hispanic households receive some form of welfare, over double the rate of White households at 23%.[10]

The cost of foreign aid and the burden of illegal invaders are already more than enough to fund the construction and maintenance of a border wall. However, back to the $600 billion we already pay for the military, whatever we are currently doing with that money, it is not being as well spent as it could be. Over 25,000 families have lost a loved one at the hands of an illegal invader. In the eight years the US was involved in the Vietnam war, 58,000 Americans lost their lives. In the seven years the GAO report covered, over 25,000 Americans lost their lives to a foreign enemy. This is nothing short of staggering. Countless have been raped, poisoned by the drugs flowing across the border, and the societal effects have been devastating. The money for the wall is not only there, it is imperative. Very clearly.

Not only is a wall and military needed, I am entirely in favor for a permanent installation along the border. The US military has over 800 military bases around the globe, placing a permanent fort running the length of the border, or several satellite camps should be well within the scope of this discussion.

Many “conservatives” are not willing to take the necessary actions to conserve anything. They are not interested in a wall, mass-deportations, and the purging of all those complicit in this creeping invasion. What they are really saying, is that to them, the cost of securing our nation is greater than the cost of losing our nation, and that is simply an unacceptable proposition. Those we have elected to protect our nation are not at all interested in conserving our borders, our culture, or our people, they are not interested in conserving anything at all. Certainly nothing of value. Our survival and safety is not negotiable.

The reason African warlords with 60-year-old AK-47s are able to maintain territorial borders is quite simple. They are not afraid to use those rifles. The cost of protecting our borders, whatever it may be, is less than the cost of being subjected to millions of crimes, being subjected to rape, murder, drug epidemics, and supporting the invasion via welfare. Perhaps our government and the majority of our fellow citizens do not see this for what this really is, total war. We should act as such. Many have remarked my view is hyperbolic or extreme. I disagree. You cannot save your nation from destruction with your head in the sand and pretending that you are not in the throes of a war for survival.

Governments have been able to secure territorial borders for thousands of years. It is one of the oldest functions of government. 2,500 years ago the ancient Grecians put the Persian invaders to sword and fire to protect their land and people. Now suddenly nearly every last Western nation has forgotten this long-standing European tradition? These are illegitimate occupation governments being run by a hostile elite, not Europeans with a concern for their own people.


[1] Ocbazghi, Emmanuel. “The US spent $611 billion on its military in 2016 – more than the next 8 countries combined.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 1 May 2017, www.businessinsider.com/us-spent-611-billion-on-military-2016-army-defense-missile-trump-money-arms-politics-2017-4.

[2] Bialik, Kristen. “U.S. active-Duty military presence overseas is at its smallest in decades.” Pew Research Center, 22 Aug. 2017, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/08/22/u-s-active-duty-military-presence-overseas-is-at-its-smallest-in-decades/.

[3] “Border agent killed, partner injured by illegal immigrants using rocks, report says.” Fox News, FOX News Network, 20 Nov. 2017, www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/20/border-agent-killed-another-injured-during-attack-near-texas-southern-border.html.

[4] Spakovsky, Hans von. “What the Media Won’t Tell You About Illegal Immigration and Criminal Activity.” The Heritage Foundation, www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/what-the-media-wont-tell-you-about-illegal-immigration-and-criminal-activity.

[5] Lane, Oliver JJ. “Scared Sweden: Almost Half Of Women ‘Afraid’ To Be Out After Dark In Europe’s Rape Capital.” Breitbart, Breitbart News Network, 4 Mar. 2016, www.breitbart.com/london/2016/03/04/scared-sweden-almost-half-of-women-afraid-to-be-out-after-dark-in-europes-rape-capital/.

[7] Nixon, Ron. “Border Wall Could Cost 3 Times Estimates, Senate Democrats’ Report Says.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 18 Apr. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/04/18/us/politics/senate-democrats-border-wall-cost-trump.html.

[8] McCarthy, Niall. “The Countries Set To Receive The Most U.S. Foreign Aid In 2016 [Infographic].” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 14 Mar. 2016, www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2016/03/10/the-countries-set-to-receive-the-most-us-foreign-aid-in-2016-infographic/#570e6f9e5269.

[9] Raley, Matt O’Brien and Spencer. “The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers.” The Cost of Illegal Immigration to US Taxpayers | FAIR, 27 Sept. 2017, fairus.org/issue/publications-resources/fiscal-burden-illegal-immigration-united-states-taxpayers.

[10] Delvin, F. Roger, and Henry Wolff. “Welfare: Who’s on It, Who’s Not?” American Renaissance, 14 Oct. 2015, www.amren.com/features/2015/10/welfare-whos-on-it-whos-not/.

 

33 replies
  1. AceOfLances
    AceOfLances says:

    It would be interesting to see a chart comparing the advantages of near slave-level labour in economic terms; to the costs of patrolling, detaining, persecuting, imprisoning, etc.
    The US, through innovation, got past the need for such impoverished labour before, a hu dred fifty years ago; can’t it now do even better?
    with robotics in the fields, robovaccuums in the mansions, etc. surely the gap can be closed.
    but back to comparing the benefits of illegal immigration to the costs, surely there is no real comparison…I simply cannot see the…maybe…couple billion in cheap labour outweighing the staggering costs on American society.

    • Ned McLoser
      Ned McLoser says:

      Just to play devil’s advocate, what are these great costs? In my experience as a retail clerk, these immigrants are better behaved than our own underclass. They are at least nominal Christians, and if stereotypes hold they are neither feminists nor gay liberators. In fact, they are said to value masculinity. They are not keen to invade countries that annoy Israel. They don’t speak English but would learn if properly incented. If America showed them a little love they would likely return it, just like the Irish and Slavs of yore. As for competing with our own unskilled laborers that could be addressed by a minimum wage law and some job-creating programs. There could be a compromise deal between the parties: amnesty for the Mexicans and in return we deport the Jews. Wouldn’t that be “win-win”?

      • Luddite
        Luddite says:

        The inherent problem with your comparison between the hispanic throngs of today and the Irish/Slavic of previous immigration periods is 1) those previous groups worked to assimilate into the dominant culture and did not “enclave” as modern immigrants frequently choose to do; 2) the earlier diasporas entered the country LEGALLY, as through Ellis Island, and many who were unfit or diseased were quarantined or repatriated; 3) during the earlier waves of immigration, the social welfare state was nonexistent. People came to America to better themselves and improve the lot for their families and future generations, not to send remittances back home or join the Free Shit Army of gibsmedat. The film Gangs of New York is blisteringly accurate historically, as it shows the Democratic machine of Tammany Hall relying on newly-minted Americans (nèe Irish for the most part,) to prop up its patronage system. You could not, in those days, get a job sweeping horse turds from the street iylf you weren’t a Democrat.
        The Democrats are doing much the same today, except now they win the loyalty of naturalized citizens through the obscenely benevolent welfare state.
        That in short, is the fallacy of your logic and comparison.

        • Ned McLoser
          Ned McLoser says:

          I don’t see too much of a problem with immigrants “enclaving” so long as they are required to learn English. I am assuming that by ‘enclave’ you mean ethnic neighborhoods and networking. Doesn’t everyone do that? I suggested a minimum wage law, which would force immigrants to provide dollar value equal to current American labor in order to get hired. As for our having a welfare state, benefits could be denied or restricted for immigrants until they have been here awhile. I can’t recall any Spanish-looking people using EBT (food stamps) cards. The people who use them are mostly poor whites. For some reason few blacks use them. Maybe more evidence of the sinking white lower class. I realize there’s a problem with their bringing drugs in, but in other respects they seem ok to me. My problem with the nationalist movement is that many of you are happy to accept the whole Jewish agenda other than immigration and then you turn around and complain about Jews. Make up your minds!

      • Thorgrun
        Thorgrun says:

        “As for competing with our own unskilled laborers”…etc. This almost sounds verbatim from the Ronald Reagan, neo-cons, playbook, decades ago. Compete,… please, obviously you lack first hand experience with the “joys” of diversity, in say Mexifornia. These illegals have broken the livable wage of those in the labor jobs. Sure they are polite for now, humble, quiet, just good wage slaves, right? Wait, until they are a majority and in order to work you will be required to speak Spanish on some manual labor job. As for their masculinity, well,… their men folk always travel in threes.

      • Randolph Scott
        Randolph Scott says:

        Well Ned, I think we should put at least 20,000 of these illegal immigrant in your neighborhood. Did you read the part about all of the criminals?

        • Ned McLoser
          Ned McLoser says:

          I think we already have that many! Unz has done some studies purporting to refute the link between Hispanics and crime. As for having them in my neighborhood I’m going to be totally frank with you even though Big Brother is watching: Having lived around both Hispanics and blacks I trust my intuition that the Hispanics are not dangerous to me whereas the blacks are dangerous. I don’t know why that is, but it might be that the blacks are angry with white people and agree with liberals that we deserve to be mugged, while the Hispanics aren’t similarly hostile, for the most part.

      • Bennis Mardens
        Bennis Mardens says:

        They are horrible. They have deep resentment toward whites and the GOP.
        They say that we stole their land. They are NOT an asset by any stretch of the imagination.

  2. BlackedOut
    BlackedOut says:

    I completely agree. The troops would provide far more benefit by patrolling the border than inviting trouble overseas. If a wall is built, it won’t be for years and will cost billions. Who knows what legislative compromises might be required. Even if it is built, a future president/congress can put “big, beautiful doors” in it. Further, it does nothing about visa overstays.

  3. James
    James says:

    How can one contact Mr Houck by email? It seems 90% of people doesnt have an email account. I dont want my comments to be published on a web page, but I have comments for some writers.

      • royAlbrecht
        royAlbrecht says:

        Your article is spot on.

        No PC BS, no backing away from the Jewish Criminals in the woodwork, no mincing words about using the AK-47s, calling a treasonous [my word] government cadre what it is instead of simply calling it stupid or inept, etc.

        Good to see the hardening trend of writers here that are starting to call for plain old action instead of pussy footed theoreticians.

        • Ned McLoser
          Ned McLoser says:

          Calling malevolent behavior “stupid” is as counter-productive as it is popular. Better to say nothing.

  4. Stefania Says
    Stefania Says says:

    What you are saying is not extreme at all. It is normal and natural to want to protect your nation and your people.

    What is extreme is that our people and the government don’t care. I believe that our people have been thoroughly conditioned to accept the invasion as normal and natural and we need to make them understand that this is extreme!

    • Jed Clampett
      Jed Clampett says:

      In the current climate symbolism counts for more than substance. Building a wall or even stationing soldiers every few feet would symbolically endorse white nationalism and xenophobia. Trump is trying to do nationalism and populism without being perceived as racist or anti-Semitic, but it’s a tall order and he has few allies. He seems to have opted to hire his enemies, which makes things awfully tricky.

    • Ned McLoser
      Ned McLoser says:

      Immigration is not an invasion. And frankly, Mexico can have California for all I care. Oregon and Washington as well. And Nevada. And New Mexico. And Austin. As for the rest of it, people would rise up and demand it end if the harmful effects were properly publicized, but they won’t be because the media (and the political donations) is in the hands of people who are in favor of it. There’s your problem in a nutshell. But if indeed illegal immigration destroys the two-party system, that could be a blessing, so long as it happens quickly! (Boiling a frog)

      • Pierre de Craon
        Pierre de Craon says:

        Immigration is not an invasion.

        What a coincidence! That’s what George Soros and Barbara Lerner Spectre say, too.

        … Mexico can have California for all I care. Oregon and Washington as well. And Nevada. And New Mexico. And Austin.

        Thanks for making plain that you are no friend of white men and women, let alone Western civilization.

        • Franklin Ryckaert
          Franklin Ryckaert says:

          I would give the whole of Latin America to the Hispanic invaders. That is a far more generous gift than merely west and south-west USA.

        • Ned McLoser
          Ned McLoser says:

          I’m not in favor of an all white society. I just want us to return to being a country dominated by Anglo-Saxon Christians. Blacks and Hispanics don’t bother me because they have no real power. Jews are a problem because they use the other groups as voting leverage to elect Dems who will help them undermine anything that seems Christian or gentile to them.

  5. Andrea Ostrov Letania
    Andrea Ostrov Letania says:

    One thing for sure, the reason why Syrian War got out of control was because the government lost control of borders. With the aid of Israel, US, Saudis, Turkey, & Qatar, all sorts of Jihadis were equipped and sent across the border into Syria to mess up the nation royally.

    Given that Syrian mess was caused by loss of border control, did it make sense for EU to let its borders to violated by millions of ‘migrants’ and ‘refugees’? How can any social order survive unless it can prevent invasion and colonization by aliens?

    Of course, the biggest tragedy of a people resulting from loss of border control is that of the Palestinians. As Palestine was under British rule, Palestinians had no control over their own territory. So, when Brits made a pact with Jews and allowed in tons of Zionist migrants and ‘immigrants’, Palestinians were powerless to say NO(just like whites are powerless to say NO to mass invasion because their elites are cuck-collaborators of Jews and because so many whites have been brainwashed into Antifa Janissary or Antifanissary thuggery for globalist Jews). Since Palestinians had no control over their borders, more and more Zionists came and eventually triggered a war, expelled Palestinians from their homeland, and replaced Palestine with Israel.

    This tragedy is called Nakba by Palestinians. And it was a test-run for what Jews have in store for whites in the West.

    If Jewish immigrant-imperialist-infiltrators arrived in huge numbers and replaced Palestinians, the White Nakba is engineered with the help of Third World invasion of the West. Jewish elites forged a partnership with the Third World. Jews aid Third World entry into the West, and the invaders vote for political parties that are servile to Jewish supremacism. So, even though Third World mobs don’t care for the Homo Agenda or Jews, they vote for Homomaniacal Parties(like that of Justin Trudeau) since they keep the door open to Third World invaders.

    And so, White Nakba is upon us, and whites better wake up and start pushing back. Whites are mostly angry at the migrants and immigrants, but they really need to be looking at The Power: The Jews who’ve brainwashed many whites into Antifanissary pitbulls(who attack their own race) and who not only let in tons of Third world masses into the West but use PC to turn them into Anti-white rabid dogs. Notice that these yellow Asians and brown Hindus in the US come under the spell of Jew-Homo PC and use their positions to defame whites.

    Jews also promote ACOWW or Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs so that white-babies-that-could-have-been will effectively be killed and be replaced by black-babies-that-grow-inside-white-wombs.
    Just like cuckoo bird has its hatchling push out the chicks of warbler birds, ACOWW has black babies effectively pushing out and killing white-babies-that-could-have-been from white wombs. Just imagine if Colin Kaepernick’s mom had a kid with a white man. Her child could have grown up to be a white patriot. But her white womb produced his hideous pile of trash Negro who shits on the white race. Her womb was colonized by black seed.

    Anyway, White Nakba is upon us. It is 2018, the 70th anniversary of the terrible event that destroyed the Palestinians. White Gentiles of US and USSR aided Jews in this destruction. And white Americans have been mocking and belittling Palestinians all these yrs while supporting Israel 100%.

    But who’s laughing now? Jews who destroyed Palestine are now working so very hard to destroy the White West. Whites are discovering they are the New Palestinians. It sure isn’t fun to be dehumanized and replaced and destroyed.

    70 yrs ago, 1948, entire people were ethnically cleansed & entire nation was destroyed by Zionist migrant-imperialists who invaded by boats & planes with full backing of 2 superpowers, US & USSR. Today, 70 yrs later, Palestinians still lose land & live under apartheid.
    What Zionists did with Palestinians was a test-run for what they intend for all of the West. If Zionist ‘immigrants’ took over Palestine and replaced Palestinians, Zionists are now using the Third World to invade and replace white people in the West.
    Resist. Fight back. In 2018, Palestinians are a totally defeated people. But we are all Palestinians, and White Nakba is upon us. Wake up!

    Alt Right should demand that Donald Trump declare Nakba Remembrance Day in this 70th anniversary of that awful tragedy. And since US was complicit in the destruction of Palestine, it must offer apology and condolences and STOP aiding and abetting the Zionist Imperialism in West Bank.

    • Ned McLoser
      Ned McLoser says:

      Cuckery is only half the problem. The other half is that most people are so clueless. People need to learn the basic facts about history and the forces in play. It appears that the left will censor the right as much as it can get away with. What we need is a vertically integrated internet channel, one that cannot be shut down whenever it becomes too annoying. The removal of Daily Stormer shows the right’s helplessness and tomorrow it may be Occidental Observer or vDare or Daily Caller or eventually even a wuss like Ben Shapiro may be banned. Or the President.

  6. Trenchant
    Trenchant says:

    (Mod. note: Trenchant, your question has been submitted to “higher powers”. Please RESEND. Your email submission wasn’t received by its intended recipient.)

  7. Sawtelle
    Sawtelle says:

    Great article pointing out that America has been invaded by immigrants. American government workers have been replaced by invaders. Medical workers replaced by invaders.

    I read something Algeria did to stop Black African immigration. The army hired bulldozers and drivers. The bulldozers built a 4 ft wide 4 ft tall berm along the border. They built some barracks and garages. They put teams of 4 soldiers in a Jeep. The soldiers drive up and down the border all day and night.

    Solved the problem in a few months

  8. Jud Jackson
    Jud Jackson says:

    Fantastic article. Best summary of the immigration situtation I have ever read and I have been a Vdare/Amren reader for many years.

    Clearly our leaders hate us and want to replace us.

  9. Junghans
    Junghans says:

    A very reasonable and sensible proposal, Mr. Houck. I have been saying the same thing for many years. Put the Army on the border with orders to shoot. Unfortunately, the (((media mesmerized,))) somnolent White population seem incapable of recognizing vital and critical issues such as this. They usually appear deaf and dumb, and their eyes glaze over in morose response. They will pay some attention, however, if they constantly hear about an issue, (usually distraction or disinformation which) the kosher kept media wants them to hear about. Hence, the unattended, invasive racial disaster continues to loom ever larger.

  10. MN Steel
    MN Steel says:

    As for equipment and materiél, just check out any of the varuous government auctions online.

    Everything from earth-moving equipment, steel and rebar, computers and office equipment, and tons of other useful items, all bought at top-dollar and sold to the highest bidder, was purchased with tax dollars already.

    Cuts a lot of the cost out, with soldiers cutting another cost out, the total would be miniscule.

  11. VASILI ZARGONIS
    VASILI ZARGONIS says:

    If these illegals were being shot by the Army, the border crossings would come to a screeching halt.. I see it as the only effective way to control the border…

Comments are closed.