Trump to Make Border Wall Clear So Cartels Can See Where to Throw Drugs – Seriously

In a transcript of a White House meeting that was recently leaked to Buzzfeed, President Trump reportedly told staffers and reporters that the proposed border wall should be transparent so that drug cartels don’t crush people with launched drug packages.

During the meeting, Trump reportedly said that “One of the things with the wall is, you need transparency. You have to be able to see through it. In other words, if you can’t see through the wall—so it could be a steel wall with openings, but you have to have openings because you have to see what’s on the other side of the wall. As horrible as it sounds, when they throw the large sacks of drugs over, and if you have people on the other side of the wall, you don’t see them — they hit you in the head with 60 pounds of stuff? It’s over. As crazy as that sounds, you need transparency through that wall.”

President Trump offers a vivid example of someone on our side of the wall being killed by a falling, 60-lbs. bag of heroin pic.twitter.com/AH4XpV4Y28

— Katherine Miller (@katherinemiller) July 13, 2017

Advertisment

In this discussion, Trump basically pointed out that his own wall is not even going to work to prevent drug dealers from importing into the country, which is one of the main excuses that Trump has used to justify the proposal of the wall.

Trump went on to say that his wall will not even stretch for the entirety of the border.

“It’s a 2,000-mile border, but you don’t need 2,000 miles of wall because you have a lot of natural barriers. You have mountains. You have some rivers that are violent and vicious. You have some areas that are so far away that you don’t really have people crossing. So you don’t need that,” Trump said.

READ MORE:  Leaked Emails Show Feds & Police Threaten Local Govts who Try to Stop them from Stealing from You

However, people moving into the country have proven that they will traverse the most dangerous terrain in order to enter the country.

Regardless of theoretical concerns, government borders are a utopian idea to begin with, especially when considering areas as large as Europe and the United States. In most of the world (and especially in Western countries), governments can’t even secure their own prisons and airports, which increasingly resemble fortresses.

Furthermore, creating an effective and staffed wall for the border of the U.S. is barely even physically or financially possible. Over the course of a three-year project, the U.S. government spent $2.4 billion to build 670 miles of very unimpressive fencing along the Mexican border.

Considering the U.S. shares roughly 6,000 miles of international borders, it would cost $19 billion to construct a small, unimpressive fence along that entire border. This figure does not include the cost of staffing the fence, or the costs that would come along with making a fence large enough, the barbed wires, weapons, and a buffer zone. These additional expenses could easily double or triple the cost of the project.

Additionally, this militarized border would require an expansion of the already bloated police and surveillance states. Currently, most of the U.S. border is not even fenced or staffed with military, and there have been no major disasters as a result. Some would argue the violence along borders, particularly the southern border between the U.S. and Mexico, is an example of a major disaster that could be remedied with tighter border controls. However, it is the state and the insistence on intervening in free humans movement and exchange of goods which fuels the cartels and gangs that cluster around distribution points along the border.

READ MORE:  EXCLUSIVE: Leaked Docs Expose Real Story of Man Accused of Killing a Cop in Botched Raid

The blame should be placed on the restriction of movement that comes along with closed borders, not a lack of border control. Even if a massive wall were built and soldiers were staffed every few feet, the closed border would create a demand for immigration, and thus a huge financial incentive for soldiers and government workers to use their positions to smuggle people inside. This is exactly why drugs and contraband flow through prisons, behind many layers of walls and barbed wire. Even at airports, which are now as secure as prisons, people are still capable of sneaking guns and other prohibited items onto flights.

Pablo Escobar’s Son: Drug Cartels Will Die “The Day Drugs are Legalized”

Juan Sebastián Marroquín, born Juan Pablo Escobar Henao — as in, son of one of the most notorious drug kingpins, ever — has an answer to the drug war the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency likely won’t heed.

Even though myriad studies and voluminous research demand it should.

To end the nefarious, politically-motivated, and inordinately pernicious War on Drugs, legalize.

In fact, legalize all currently-illicit substances.

Answering questions from El Mundo in a recent interview — of many, pertaining to his new autobiographical book, “Pablo Escobar In Fraganti” — Marroquín provided the answer nations like Portugal found most effective in quashing the long-troubled drug war.

‘Is ending the war on drugs possible someday?’ El Mundo’s Hugo Sáenz asked.

‘The day [drugs] are legalized and regulated,’ Marroquín replied.

Asked whether Marroquín, himself, would be in favor of — assumedly — blanket legalization, the drug lord’s son offered a somewhat surprising, yet reasoned, response.

‘I am in favor of regulation,’ Marroquín explained, because ‘for me, drugs are already legal. They can reach any location, unimpeded.’

Comparing two calls made at the same time — one for home pizza delivery versus calling a dealer for drugs — the drugs would arrive before the pizza, he noted.

A popular misperception about legalization — perpetuated primarily by well-funded and cunning drug war propaganda — falsely claims legalization would birth countless social and health issues, increase exponentially the rate of addiction, and doom youth to desperate lives of dependence.

Marroquín, however, does not abide that theory — nor does data from Portugal — thus far, the longest-running decriminalization petri dish on the planet.

Indeed, Pablo Escobar’s son seems to have either derived his opinion from the indisputable failures of the drug war, itself, or from his unmistakably street-wizened father — who would have known the health of his multi-billion-dollar empire hinged on the basic premise of drugs’ illegality.

Sáenz queried the junior Escobar on whether legalization and regulation would lead to increased health spending, violence, death, and communicable diseases, Marroquín astutely pointed out,

‘On the contrary, the status of being illegal — (obtainable only through the black market) — means drug quality is worse.’

Without the standardization of quality, as would come from regulatory controls, drugs are more likely to contain undesirable additives, be of widely varying strengths, or stray from purity so far as to be either untenable or outright dangerous.

Cocaine, he continued, would be far likelier to contain high percentages of things like ground glass — additives which not only do not add to quality of product, but which detract detrimentally from a user’s health.

‘They are worse,’ Marroquín asserted, ‘because they are prohibited.’

READ MORE:  Precedent Set -- Man Found Not Guilty for Shooting 3 Cops During No-Knock Raid

Further, he observed keenly, anti-drug propaganda is the most reliable guarantor people will seek out and use illicit substances.

About the cable show, Narcos, the younger Escobar opined, ‘I wrote a chapter [in the new book] devoted to the series because there has been a glorification of my father’s criminal activity, and an addition of glamor to a story that has none of that.’

Producers of such series confuse younger generations into wanting to become the next Pablo Escobar — even inciting them to violence — as the influence of media in glamorizing the high-level drug trade shades the bloody and brutal reality.

Sáenz also touched on a previously discussed and hotly contentious revelation from Marroquín’s book — that his “father worked for the CIA selling cocaine to finance the fight against Communism in Central America.”

Marroquín reiterates Escobar worked for both the CIA and DEA while in the height of power, though points out that relationship with U.S. agencies has not yet been explicitly proven — and, for him, the book and his father’s statements on the topic are as deep an investigation he plans to perform.

Not that Marroquín would discourage dogged investigations by people independent of any government — in fact, he asserted, the prospect of proving collusion or complicity by the world’s two largest agencies should constitute a tantalizing prospect.

In the meantime, Marroquín has taken personal accountability for his father’s violent crimes — meeting with around one hundred different families, for which he claims a 100 percent success rate.

Gilded though the image of the outlaw, Pablo Escobar, has become, his son has — for all intents and purposes — done his best to abate positive press where none should exist.

And that includes advocating the best possible end to the political establishment’s War on Drugs — whether it be legalization, decriminalization, regulation, or an agreeable hybrid — to save lives and end the reign of terror drugs’ illegality continues to provide as a gift to the drug lords and cartels so personally familiar to Escobar’s son.