Short-Sighted Media Misses the Bigger Picture About the Migrant Caravan



When the Trump administration announced its plan to send 5,200 active-duty troops to serve in support roles and assist in securing the Southern border, the media responded with the expected hysteria and hyperbole.

The Chicago Tribune characterized it as an “extraordinary military operation” designed to “turn the caravans into a key election issue just days before elections that will determine whether Republicans maintain control of Congress.”

SFGate.com, the online portal for the San Francisco Chronicle, mimicked the Tribune in a “news” article, asserting that the “deployments come as the president has been trying to turn the caravan into a key election issue with just days to go before the midterm vote that will determine whether Republicans maintain control of Congress.”

The decision to boost border security forces may very well be a politically advantageous move. However, they are willfully blind to immediate need to gain control of the border – election or no election.

Yes, no-border and open border advocacy groups like Pueblo Sin Fronteras have funded caravans in the past, but the caravans now heading our way are exponentially larger.

April’s group was larger than in the past and that was just some 1,000 migrants – far fewer than the current 7,000-member caravan on its way to U.S.

A second caravan, which Department of Defense officials said Monday was comprised of 3,000 migrants, gathered last week in Guatemala and a third is organizing in El Salvador.

“This means that at any given moment, there are tens of thousands of intending migrants between the Guatemala border and the U.S. border moving towards us at any given time,” stated Kevin McAleenan, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Commissioner, in a press conference announcing the deployment.

McAleenan added the caravans have unlawfully crossed international borders and “deployed violent and dangerous tactics” against both Guatemalan and Mexican border security teams.

With their focus on politics and elections, the media cannot see the potential peril in standing-by as thousands of migrants demand from the Mexican government safe passage. They are blind to the fact that Mexico has offered protection and work authorizations, but the migrants to date have rejected them.

And they have closed their eyes to the reality that the CBP already is understaffed and overburdened by having to defend against the migrants who try to cross illegally every day.

About Author

avatar

Jennifer joined FAIR as Web Content Writer in 2017 and brings to the role extensive communications and media background. She began her career as a policy research analyst on multiple national and state political campaigns before entering journalism. In addition to spending over a decade writing for several broadcast and print news outlets, Jennifer directed communications strategy for a member of Congress and a military nonprofit.

16 Comments

  1. avatar

    Barbara the military is allowed to use force. The law about using military as police is about doing this,against American Citizens. This does not apply to illegal border crosses, they are invading our sovereignty and have no rights.

  2. avatar

    2 Tim 3:1-2, 3 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, KJV

    • avatar

      FACEBOOK IS FINDING DIFFERENT Ways of stopping CONSERVITIVES FROM COMMENTING. THEY PICK OUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BEHIND TRUMP, AND STOPPING THE INVADERS, BY SCREWING WITH POSTS THEY ARE WRITING. I SAY ITS TIME WE ALL GO TO ME WE , WHERE WE’RE FREE TO SPEAK.

  3. avatar

    Don’t Play Chess With Trump

    This last move, a week before the Mid-Terms, he suggests reading the 14th Amendment clearly and banning anchor babies. An immigration issue curve ball IMO for the Open Border Party news to rant endlessly about that an EO can’t change the old SCOTUS application 150+ years ago….meanwhile the caravan cancer keeps marching closer to America and the Open Border Party waves their UN flags in approval….but keeps their mouths shut about it [lest they be labeled Open Border Party].

    LOL….the anchor baby allegations against Trump will shine the flashlight right at the Open Border Party, they can’t pretend they aren’t who they are anymore…Hypocrites IOWs.

  4. avatar

    Allow these seven to ten thousand to crash the border, and it’ll be 100,000 next time, and a million after that. What’s to stop them?

      • avatar

        By Federal law they are not allowed to use force or arms to stop.them!!!!! So how will they STOP THEM!!

        • avatar

          Barbara the military is allowed to use force. The law about using military as police is about doing this,against American Citizens. This does not apply to illegal border crosses, they are invading our sovereignty and have no rights.

          • avatar

            True! They are invaders! Of course it is our right to protect the citizens and our country. I’m so proud of our President! We will win because of his strategies!

  5. avatar

    Some people claim that the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 forbids using federal troops at the border. Once again, this is misreading the original intent of the act. It was to remove federal troops in the southern states after the Civil War from everyday law enforcement actions. And there are exceptions under which the president can act. Does anyone seriously want to make an argument that Congress meant to say that our armed forces should be excluded from protecting the borders?

    Trump is no doubt starting a discussion with his remarks on birthright citizenship. But the whole concept derives from the Wong Kim Ark US Supreme Court decision of 1898. In the final paragraph of the majority decision, meaning that they gave the following the maximum weight in their thinking, the Justices noted his parents, at the time of his birth, “have a permanent domicil and presence in the United Sates and are there carrying on business”.

    In other words, they were what we now call permanent residents, not just here temporarily, but long time residents known to the authorities and here with permission obviously. And that really ties into the “under the jurisdiction of” part of the 14th amendment, which was another post Civil War amendment that was intended to give citizenship to freed slaves. So by obviously noting that Wong Kim Ark’s parents were long time permanent residents, that would tend to nullify the idea that someone here illegally or just arrived on a plane could be the parents of citizen children. Words matter, and especially with Supreme Court decisions. And actually another look at this by a present Supreme Court could clarify the issue.

    It’s also a fact that all European nations have modified their policies on the issue, even Britain and especially Ireland which voted a dozen years ago by about 70% in a national referendum that merely being born on Irish soil did not make you a citizen and that the parents had to have a long established legal residence in the country.