United States, Facebook, Central America discussed on Doug Stephan's Good Day

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Can help at Saint Jude dot org full statement. And that the first part is definitely saying directed to. I'm assuming Todd here that your humanitarian efforts are greatly appreciated a much-needed regarding your comments about the article about a wall, which was built by Obama and Bush two and then the question as we read it about the many miles of unprotected in the Rio Grande belly. So just to give a full proper context. They're definitely thanking you for your efforts but much interesting, and we have a follow up comment actually by Cindy there as well to see they're not address the people who ended the board the country illegally and do not present themselves to border patrol which again was has largely been a facet of previous immigration waves. And it's not that's not to say that there, isn't that isn't what we're seeing this time around. That that that that doesn't exist anymore? There's not that much focus on. It's it's still exists in my commentary is that. The actual current policies that are in place by ice and border patrol actually are geared to that to individuals who enter the country illegally nodded a border and are trying to just move on through and not interact writing for us. And I think the way that is in border patrol are are handling those is one complying with the law to legal and three makes sense. That's I want it very much differentiate the individuals that cross illegally to the individuals that I was servicing in the past few weeks that we're entering into the country illegally. Gotcha. And we do have a caller on the line. We have a John on line three, John. Thanks for joining us. Good morning morning. And this article that the professor wrote is that on is that on hard copy nation or is it on online its online. I don't know if it will be making the next hardcopy. That's something I can talk with the copy editor about, but it's definitely online. Okay. So it's over on the nation right now. And again, we have the link over right now on Facebook dot com slash talk. Right. Is it because I'm not online. I do anything a hard copy. I usually go to the public librarian read, and there's another text a textbook. I'm pretty sure a professor has had also used it may be in a classroom. It's by professor Howard zinn. I know Howard zinn. Yes. Okay. I did read that on my own. And I don't know about some of these facts that he writes about on on his textbook. What what is the reason why some of these liberal thinkers? The blamed a US for the for us causing a problem down there in Central America. Okay. That's a fair question. Well, it's. It's not as easy as most things you will read it eight long complicated history to say, the least, but the general arc of what they're trying to say is that. In the nineteen eighties. When we pushed gangs out of largely California and Texas the two of the gangs that President Trump likes to frequently invoke MS thirteen they went and resettled back into into their home countries, which is Guatemala Honduras, and El Salvador for the most part now, Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras, have traditionally had weak governments in when you have a weak government, and you put in an organized crime group like MS thirteen they will basically take over the country. Now MS thirteen wouldn't have power. If it wasn't for the consumption of drugs illegal early in the world, the vast majority of which passed through our border into the United States and United States. Of course is a huge huge, huge consumer of illicit substances of all types. Right. So when when individuals say that we helped cause. The issue that is going on in Central America. They're not wrong. But I don't think it's as easy to connect a direct line from point A point B, we've contributed to the problem, certainly, I don't think we caused it. But we certainly haven't shaped any of our international policy up to this point to help fix it. And that's one of the things congresswoman Escobar's talked about is if you really wanna stop this mass immigration from families from what we call the northern triangle region, you have to create a foreign policy that deals with the circumstances that make these individuals think that a two thousand mile journey is better than residing where they are. I mean. Yeah, it's not an easy decision there that anyone would think is just going to happen. And and be a nice pleasant experience in any case, another key on I think you can also some people in some things we've talked about previously on the show going back to you. You know, the the history of influence that there have been official government actions in some of the government's and areas of central and South American countries that are have not necessarily lead to the stability of those countries. I mean, either official or maybe not necessarily governmental. But like you look at the history of the United fruit co and some I mean, the entire phrase banana Republic was coined by the fact of what some American companies again, maybe not official government action. But definitely American influence had in these countries to make them their own kind of fiefdoms, and that doesn't necessarily to the stability of that country in the long run now. And if you think back to really the fifties and sixties the United States systematically was involved in installing authoritarian governments largely throughout Central America. Authoritarian governments are very good when it comes to law and order as long as they exist. But when those authoritarian countries attempt and most all of them had attempt to transition to democracy. Democracy is difficult to maintain when there has been no history of democracy previously. And that's when strong armed groups like MS, thirteen and other Narco trafficking gangs in the area can just systematically takeover. So yeah, I think it's I think it's fair to say that it has not been the policy of the United States government to make weak central and South American countries that are easily that there will crumble and make these situations happen, but I don't think our foreign policy has been focused in any way on making that not happen either. Right. There hasn't been a foreign policy solution that I've seen put forward by either sides that would address the circumstances that are causing this immigration. And in fact, it's something that's still being studied. Like we were talking with Dylan Corbett with the hope border institute, the director for that institute there about they were going to be sending a fact-finding missions down to some of these what they were calling the sending communities to find out. What really are the situations on the ground there? What is going on that is causing people to seek to flee to the United States and do. That was that another comment on the Facebook page over here from Tracy fuller talking about the question. Full comment here being a phone fag. Border fences started being built about two decades ago, including ours coincidence, I think not and it's undeniable that will pass has had a border fence wall large fence, whatever you wanna call it in some form, or fashion sense. Got the bright line moment. I think of is going about to Sylvester today during his time not just as a Representative. But actually as a government official because he was in the federal government agencies because he was a large part of kind of changing those policies and building physical barriers Paso, definitely used to have a non violent crime problem where people where was documented people were coming across doing like robberies thefts, those kind of things and then going back across to evade law enforcement, and that the up things like operation hold the line, which he put into place, we're definitely effective in stopping that part of it. So we've had stuff in El Paso, and it's undeniable we basically have a version of what could be called a wall here. Right. And I want to juxtapose the national radio. Eric of what we're hearing with what all of us who live here in El Paso are living. It's very different, and we should be able to send look from the rhetoric to what we know that are that the border wall. Here is not the border wall that's being proposed. And as I point out in the article, and is that the influx that we saw in the past two weeks will be not affected by a wall or the absence of a wall because these individuals are presenting themselves legally to border patrol agents do attempt to seek asylum. And they're going to try that at the ports of entry as well with without a wall, so dealing with the current situation a wall may or may not be effective in that way. But if there's anything we've seen the patterns have been kind of consistently changing as of late, right? I mean, we can talk about legal immigration with the wall or legal immigration without a wall. But that's that's what I'm advocating for. That's what I'm passionate about these individuals who present themselves seeking asylum. Do so legally build a border wall, don't build a border wall. It's not going to affect these families who have presented themselves. They will still do it. And that doesn't solve that problem for me. That problem for me is the actual humanitarian crisis that is happening on the border. Not whatever else we're talking about illegal immigration, violent crime, etc. And that also brings up the other issues like again, another policy that we saw kind of being tested here. No Paso in the later. Parts of last year was requiring people once it was being talked about about requiring people to present themselves at the port of entry. Then having. You know, the I see in this case actually, running the the ports of entry claiming for people attempting to cross at the ports of entry and claim asylum saying that the facilities were full, and they could not be processed and lines being created at the ports of entry of people waiting to present themselves for asylum, and even people being numbered and sudden Annunciation has another groups were part of a a response to that in on the water side of the ports of entry as well. So even a wall, and forcing people at the ports of entry doesn't necessarily solve the humanitarian issues in particular, the policies, we've seen it shifts at a couple of the comments I want to get to here left on the Facebook page, we a Irene donnas Jackson, ain't border patrol needs a wall and Catherine sky flower at a two thousand miles of steel fence is a wall. I think that there are a lot of the wall is, of course, a bright focus that has been since the start of this administration. And I think that if we talked about one thing closely here today. Is that that wouldn't necessarily solve the issues that we've been seeing in our community here? Right. I. I don't I'm I'm theoretically against the wall from -serily an economic standpoint, but from a policy standpoint, I get the reasoning behind wanting one it makes logical sense to me. But as someone who's advocating for these asylum-seekers, these individuals who are nonviolent. Are escaping violence are being persecuted in their home, countries and are complying legally with the standards that are in place. The border wall isn't going to change that. And unless we have a policy that can simultaneously handle that and also handle violent immigration, violent criminals crossing the border, illegal immigration taking place. Then I won't be I will be happy. If we have a policy that handles both of those. But right now, what we have is a national rhetoric entire centered entirely around one of those things and the other thing is still going on in. It's not being discussed. And that's why I am passionate about this is that there. The issue of illegal illegal immigration, and legal immigration is much more nuanced than what's playing out in the national rhetoric. I mean, yeah, we are currently in the midst of the longest government shutdown in our country's history base on the large demand from President Trump for funding for a border wall steel slats fence barrier of some time, whatever it may be called..

Coming up next