Migrant Caravan Hysteria Returns

There's no evidence this caravan is full of Middle Eastern terrorists.


Ivan Sanchez/dpa/picture-alliance/Newscom

About 7,000 migrants are currently making their way through Central America, seeking refuge in the United States—and sparking hysteria here too. Several right-wing outlets and organizations have tried to link the caravan to ISIS. "100 ISIS Terrorists Caught in Guatemala as Central American Caravan Heads to U.S.," Judicial Watch warns. "Guatemala claims it has caught 100 ISIS terrorists as migrant caravan reaches Mexican border," blares The Blaze. "Nearly 100 ISIS Terrorist Arrests Prompt Worries About Caravans," claims LifeZette.

The ISIS story originated with the Guatemalan newspaper Prensa Libre, which reported that Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales had said his administration had caught almost 100 people with ISIS ties. Morales did not go into further detail, though Guatemalan Secretary of Strategic Intelligence Mario Duarte later cited the 2016 arrests of several Syrian refugees who were found to be in possession of false documents.

But Morales did not mention the migrant caravan. Indeed, Prensa Libre published its story on October 11, before the caravan started garnering international attention. Nor is it clear that the claim was true in the first place. Even the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a group that generally opposes illegal immigration, describes Morales' claim as "unverified."

"Healthy skepticism is warranted here," CIS senior national security fellow Todd Bensman wrote, explaining that Guatemala has "requested $15 billion in border security assistance" from the U.S., "and President Morales is laboring under accusations of corruption." One Guatemalan reporter told Bensman that many journalists in the area believe the Prensa Libre report is "bullshit."

Linking the migrant caravan to the threat of terrorism seems to be a popular tactic. This morning, President Donald Trump asserted on Twitter that "criminals and unknown Middle Easterners are mixed in" with the other migrants:

Trump provided absolutely no evidence to back up that claim. According to The New York Times, the "unknown Middle Easterners" he mentioned are probably some of the "bad people" he talked about during a rally on Friday. "A fairly big percentage of" migrants in the caravan "are criminals," Trump said then. Again, he did not give any evidence.

Trump is not the only one in his administration trying to fan public fear about the migrants. Last night Secretary of State Mike Pompeo alluded darkly to "the apparent political motivation of some organizers of the caravan." This may be a reference to Trump's frequent assertions that Democrats and their allies are funding the caravan. According to the Times, "there is no evidence" to back that up.

Trump and other immigration hardliners made similar arguments earlier this year when another migrant caravan headed toward the border. They're just as wrong now as they were then. ISIS-in-Latin-America stories have an even longer pedigree; they're dubious too. Indeed, as Reason's Ronald Bailey has pointed out on several occasions, immigrants, including those in the country illegally, are actually less likely to commit crimes than American citizens.

NEXT: A Law Intended to Protect Crime Victims Is Being Used to Shield the Identities of Police Officers

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I get the motivation to be here, and sympathize. But if you are leaving Honduras or Guatemala because it is a terrible place, why are you carrying their flag while you march to the USA? Wouldn’t the optics be better if you had an American flag?

    1. >why are you carrying their flag while you march to the USA

      Yeah. That’s weird. That doesn’t imply a desire to assimilate.

      Much like the Californians moving to Texas and then voting for Beto.

      1. even worse it would be like Syrian refugees carrying an ISIS flag….you don’t get to call yourself a victim if you represent the oppressor

      2. You can’t vote for Beto if you move from CA to Texas? That’s like saying you can’t vote for Diehl if you move from Texas to Massachusetts. Both ways it’s futile but a perfectly American thing to do.

        Political assimilation isn’t something you do when you move from state to state.

    2. They had one – and burned it to show how much they love the U.S.…..ican-flag/

      1. Ugh, those noble migrants haven’t even arrived and you ALREADY want to deprive them of their First Amendment rights? I just can’t even with you people…

        1. You should’ve waited for OBL to post first so you could drop the mic at him.

      2. It’s time to challenge the ‘migrants don’t commit crimes’ angle. It strikes me a tad like the ‘you’re more likely to be killed by right-wing terrorists than Islamic terrorists’ line.

    3. IMO – it is because this is actually, at core, a protest march about conditions in their own country – NOT a desire to immigrate.

      Those conditions are almost entirely caused by the dozen or oligarchic families who own those countries and keep them in a form of violent feudalism – who are in turn completely backed to the hilt by the US govt/elites.

      Unfortunately – we’re not going to pay attention, the marchers themselves are gonna have their own corrupt vanguard-types who want to send their own messages and make their own power moves, our elites will successfully distort the messages for us. So it will all I suspect be a totally pointless circus that changes nothing.

      On the bright side, we can expect the same show every few months from now until forever.

      1. The most ineffective form of protest evah!

        1. Not really. If they were to protest there, they would mostly be dead now. The murder rates in those countries are mostly political or economic violence imposed by the privatized militias of those oligarchs. ‘Drug trafficking’ is just what those privatized militias do in their spare time – or perhaps even nonsense that’s just planted in the media to divert attention.

          So they don’t really have an option.

          1. So what you are saying is that they won’t be going back?

            1. idk what they’ll do when they reach the border here.

              If they scatter en route, then presumably I’m wrong and immigration is actually their goal.

              If they get arrested en masse, clog our system with asylum apps and then get sent back, then – they’ll be back.

              1. I’m pretty sure they all want to immigrate here… But it’s not because they like the idea of America… It’s because their incomes will go up 5-10 fold even if they get a shit job, which they all will, since they’re mostly half illiterate peasants… It’s all about the Benjamins, nothing more, and nothing less.

                1. Their incomes will go up 5-10 fold on welfare, which is where a large percentage of them will end up. Dems could care less – if they make it across the border, most of these invaders will ultimately become citizens and Democrat voters, votes translate into power, and permanent power using demographics is the Dems ultimate goal, even if it means destroying the country to achieve it.

                  1. Yup. People who deny this crack me up. The Dems LITERALLY write news articles about how the demographic shifts will give them a permanent majority… Then deny that the Dems are doing it for that very reason. How stupid do you have to be?

          2. The murder rates are high, but 7,000 would be dead? Doubtful. If this many were brave enough to protest in Honduras or stand up to the gangs maybe something would happen. Even in Afghanistan there are tribes that form a more or less local militia to kill ISIS and Taliban that try and cause problems. If they can do it in Afghanistan then it can be done in Honduras.

            1. Standing up to a truly ruthless dictatorship will get you and your family killed.

              Gandhi stood up to a fairly democratic government, Great Britain. Martin Luther King stood up to southern racist states, but had the backing of the US federal government.

              Under a truly despotic government, such as Stalin’s, he’d be dead the next day.

            2. IDK, some of those countries are messed up to an extent that’s almost unfathomable for us.

              I know one person originally from Guatemala who had a cousin who got kidnapped and held for $50 ransom. When her cousin’s parents proved they couldn’t pay that much, the kidnappers eventually agrees to release him for $20.

              I have to admit that if I lived in a place like that, which really does qualify as a shit hole, I would do anything to get away.

              1. Sure, leaving is one option. Killing ALL the people that do shit like that is another option.

                In basically every society on earth, the majority of people are decent people. The decent people just need to stand up for themselves, and kill the scum bags. There’s a reason right wing strong man types are so popular historically. Often times they’re fairly benevolent rulers, and they take care of the shit bags. The make sure they’re paid handsomely for their services, palaces, harems, etc… But they do get shit taken care of.

                1. The decent people have to band together quickly because there’s a small time window until they are disarmed and helpless.

                  And even decent people are charmed by charismatic populists. Or maybe ESPECIALLY decent people are charmed, because those charismatics appeal to their high mindedness and trusting natures. Like good old Ted Bundy with the fake cast on his arm asking for help from the sweet young college girl. Once she’s in the trunk of his car it’s kind of late.

      2. As an aside – looks to me like those oligarch families are now using carbon credits and energy offsets for a lot of their land thievery in those countries. IOW – the west pays them money in order to appear ‘green’ ourselves and pat ourselves on the back for how sustainable we are becoming. Those oligarchs turn around and build dams and biofuel plantations. Which requires that they displace the current occupants of that land – and kill those who protest. The displaced get herded onto crappy land where privatized militia have a racketeering biz to kill those who try to find work (ie create uppity trouble) elsewhere in that country. Which is I suppose a good reason why the campesinos want to leave altogether – supported by both the watermelon greens and the neoliberal open-borders types who prefer that over tetchy uncomfortable questions.

        And I think to myself what a wonderful world

      3. Can you provide evidence that Honduras is only in it’s current state, 40 years after the fall of the Berlin wall, because of US “elites”. What elites? Who are they and who are they giving money to to oppress citizens. How about the idea that maybe human nature is flawed and corruption is easy to fall into, especially when many of these countries, like African countries, reject the economic and cultural systems that made their former “oppressive” colonizers so successful. At some point this “everything is America’s fault and we don’t have to take any action to right our own countries because of that” mantra, has to stop. Even if it’s true the US throwing money at them, which we’ve done since before the fall of the wall, hasn’t done a damn thing.

        1. I saw the ‘who died’ homicide breakout for one rural Honduran area – 170 bodies over a year or so. 140 were campesinos/indigenous known to be protesting their land being stolen/etc, 20 were ‘private security’ (let’s call that drug/gangs), 10 were all the other misc reasons people get killed.

          No one is ever going to get caught or held to account for that first group and everyone knows it. Not the actual murderers and not those who are gonna get that land project done. But imo you are willfully obtuse if you refuse to see the connection once its made clear.

          It’s much easier to see the ‘elites’ once you look at the land side – the same old inbred Honduran families who have run their military, their govt, their major businesses and dev projects – since forever. The US players are kind of the same too – Pentagon, major banks, and the intl development/finance crowd. We don’t ask questions cuz well TMI. Or worse

    4. A 5,000+ body of people marching through and intent upon forcibly entering territory without clearance isn’t a caravan, it’s a brigade.
      If it’s double that size or more, we might even call it a horde.
      A d that doesn’t even take into account the fact that they are marching under national banners foreign to their destination.

      1. But you know we all must be distracted by how many “militant terrorists” there are, they’re trying to distract us with fucking Where’s Waldo amidst a battle in the Third Age.

      2. But whatever you do, don’t call it a mob.

      3. You take any random group of 5,000 people. There’s bound to be a few terrorists.

        “A d that doesn’t even take into account the fact that they are marching under national banners foreign to their destination.”

        The horror. You keep this up and I’m liable to get hysterical too. Foreign banners even!

    5. Thats what invading armies do.

    6. Because they love their country, not their government. Sort of like anti – Castro Cuban exiles in the United States waving the Cuban flag.

      1. Well, they love the communist shithole version of their country that they were denied the chance to create.

        Be clear with that.

    7. Good point… that’s what invaders do, carry their flag into the conquered lands.

  2. Why can’t they seek refuge in Mexico?

    1. Many will

      1. And we know how merciful and humane Mexican immigration rules are

    2. Over a million Venezuelans crossed into Colombia this year alone. That’s over 3,000 every damn day. and 20,000 every week.

      A ” caravan” of 7,000 is basically theater.

      1. Venezuela is getting worse by the week. Anyone with any sense has left. It’s going to be a ghost town country pretty soon.

        1. The majority of those who have left are young – between the ages of 15 and 40. People over 55 are only about 7% of those who fled.

          I imagine that may be because so many thousands leave on foot, trekking miles over the Andes to Colombia or Brazil hauling suitcases, kids, and whatever other few possessions they can carry. You can’t be elderly and do that.

    3. That would be the option to take, if they weren’t simply in it for the money… But that’s all they’re in it for. They want to make more cash, so the USA it is!

      1. What’s wrong with “making more cash”?

        That’s what we used to call “ambition”.

      2. Some may want to actually “make” more cash – many just want to “get” more cash, courtesy of the US taxpayer, as well as free healthcare.

      3. There’s nothing wrong with wanting to make more cash… But going to a foreign country that you have no legal right to enter, breaking their laws by entering, and then committing identity theft so you can gain employment, lying on forms stating you’re a citizen, etc etc etc… Well I just can’t get behind that.

        I don’t think I have a right to move to saaay Lichtenstein, which is a VERY wealthy and awesome micro country in Europe, if they don’t want to let me in for some reason. It’s their country, and that should be their choice. If I just snuck in because I thought it would suit my financial interests, then broke a ton more laws… They would be well within their rights to toss me the fuck back out.

        Don’t get how this is so hard to understand. If you’re just trying to claim asylum, which is a REAL traditional law meant to deal with REAL fucked up situations, because you want to make more money, and don’t meet regular immigration requirements… Sorry, those people can fuck off.

  3. So the best you can say about this migrant caravan is that it isn’t associated with ISIS. You don’t know that. But we don’t know that it is and this being reason, the benefit of the doubt must always be given to migrants.

    If reason wants to push letting in whatever migrants from Central America want to come in, then it needs to start covering and answering for all of the problems that have arisen in Europe thanks to the migration that Reason pushed as wonderful three years ago but now that it is making large areas of formerly peaceful countries into violent hell holes won’t talk about.

    Reason seems to believe in the magic dirt theory of geopolitics. These countries are not violent and failing because of the people who live there. They are that way because the dirt in the US is magic and the dirt down there is not. That is why importing the population of these countries will not import the violence and disfunction of them.

    1. the benefit of the doubt must always be given to migrants.

      Well i read somewhere that “presumption of innocence” was an important libertarian value after all.

      1. “Benefit of the doubt” is a different standard than “presumption of innocence”. But then you know that and you think you’re being clever.

        You’re not.

      2. We don’t owe presumptions of anything to foreigners who are trying to immigrate here. They’re not US citizens, and we have no obligation to let them in.

        1. We have no obligation to keep them out either.

          1. I beg to differ. Just because they make it to our border should not give them rights to entry over potential immigrants from any other country. We do have an obligation to control our borders and scrupulously investigate anyone who wants to immigrate and send back anyone who is not deemed an asset to our country. We should also go back to more normal immigration limits, similar to what we had prior to the atrocious Ted Kennedy-sponsored immigration bill of the mid-60’s.

          2. We can do WTF ever we deem to be in our best interests.

            And the American people have CONSISTENTLY said they oppose low skill immigration. This includes blacks, Asians, and even Hispanics that are citizens in many polls. Americans are fine with immigrants, but not of the illiterate peasant variety.

            I grew up in California, I have seen that place turn into a borderline 3rd world country because of immigration of low skilled people. I’m part Mexican myself for fucks sake! Low skill immigration is just a loser across the board. Just deal with the fact that most Americans DO NOT believe in open borders, or anything remotely close to it.

          3. “Provide for the common defense”

            Sounds like an obligation to me.

        2. Totally agree, vek.

    2. The ISIS in Latin America is not just a rumor, unless you don’t count Hezbollah as ISIS.

      Google Tareck El Aissami.

    3. Reason seems to believe in the magic dirt theory of geopolitics. These countries are not violent and failing because of the people who live there. They are that way because the dirt in the US is magic and the dirt down there is not. That is why importing the population of these countries will not import the violence and disfunction of them.

      It’s perfectly logical to argue that mass migrations (such as the one in Central America, Africa, Middle East, etc) are in general a bad idea to promote while still believing that such mass migrations are caused by a history of the U.S. (especially the U.S. govt) meddling in those region’s affairs and are best treated with diplomacy and negotiation as opposed to brute and naked force. For some reason, you (and the Reason editorial staff, for that matter) seem incapable of acknowledging that.

      1. Well maybe they should be marching to Venezuela or sailing to Cuba to live a life free from Yankee Imperialism. Nicaragua’s a good bet too and so close to home.

        1. Right wing governments, even dictatorships, tend to dissipate over time and become more democratic. Not so with left wing dictatorships.

          See Chile vs. Venezuela

          1. Right wing dictatorships ALSO tend to make viable, functional, reasonably decent societies. Spain under Franco ain’t my idea of heaven, but it sure as shit beat Spain under whatever communist would have taken over. Saddam may not have been a Saint, but he sure as hell managed to make life in Iraq better for Iraqis than it has been since we removed him.

            Sometimes, the fucked up nature of the world basically requires a strong man to hold shit together. Eventually the troubles that require such a man tend to fade away, and things can go more democratic… But removing such men at the wrong time can be catastrophic.

      2. damn, the US ruined the whole world. Even Antarctica. No wonder they are coming here to fix our broken world-ruining country for us dumb whiteys

    4. So, what you’re saying is that my ancestors who escaped Mussolini were actually responsible for causing the crap they fleeing? And I suppose my Jewish relative who went into hiding from Nazis should have looked in the mirror to spot a Nazi?

      You really have no clue why people emigrate. It is not because they love the way of life they had so much, they want to try to share it with others.

      1. Did your ancestors come here waving the Fascist Italian or Nazi Germany flags when they fled here?

        1. Yeah, THAT is a major problem. If you’re fleeing something bad, you don’t celebrate what you are fleeing. And burning our flag? You can go happily and cheerfully fuck yourselves.

          1. Exactly. We have received plenty of people who fled shit situations because they hated them, and loved the idea of America… But nowadays that seems to be way less of a thing. Now it’s just that they want to make more money in the USA, and don’t give 2 fucks about any of the ideals America was founded on. I think the last large wave of people who moved here for ideological reasons was probably all the people that came here after the collapse of the USSR.

          2. They see themselves as the “true” Hondurans, Guatemalans, etc. Rather than the corrupt assholes they are fleeing.

            The Nazi flag was different than the original German flag that most German Jews would have been proud to display.

            Burning the American flag was and is stupid.

  4. “Healthy skepticism is warranted here,” CIS senior national security fellow Todd Bensman wrote, explaining that Guatemala has “requested $15 billion in border security assistance” from the U.S., “and President Morales is laboring under accusations of corruption.” One Guatemalan reporter told Bensman that many journalists in the area believe the Prensa Libre report is “bullshit.”

    So, the positive upshot is that a corrupt President asking for money to secure his borders persuaded 7,000 of his countrymen to come to the U.S.?

    You say extortion, the corrupt Guatemalan President says migration! I mean, what is a border but just an imaginary line really?

    1. Only a reason immigration article could treat charges of corruption in Central America skeptically. Sometimes I wonder if reason is taking money from the anti immigration side in return form making open borders advocates look ridiculous.

  5. ask Jacob if he wants them in Plano.

    1. If they can’t get jobs but living on welfare or on the street here is better than living there, what then? I guess everyone in the US is suppsosed to see their quality of life lowered and large areas of the country turned into third world slums because migration is a “right”. It is as always with reason and immigration, everyone else’ job to suffer for reason’s principles.

      1. people as political stunt is stupid. authors using them as moral fodder equally stupid. whether the “Wes” can support the “Thems” or not I have no real idea

        1. Our unemployed clearly don’t want the 7+ million jobs on offer, so parse them out to these huddled masses yearning to breathe free.

      2. John , they don’t mind it because most of the writers deal with zero of the negative outcomes. Almost all of the advocates get the benefits but none of the negatives. They don’t deal with the downward wage pressures. The increased crime. The utter alteration of the culture in short order.

        Shove them into rich neighborhoods and the demands to open borders will cease.

        1. Well, they THINK they don’t have to deal with the repercussions… Until their car gets stolen, or the wrong people start getting elected in their district, and their taxes go up, etc.

          Middle class on up people do benefit economically in many ways… But they’re getting hit on the back end without realizing it via taxes and other stuff.

  6. That might be the actual worst way to try to get into the country if you’re a terrorist.

    But then Trump and everyone who supports him is a fucking moron.

    1. and about the celibate morons?

      1. Not being able to please your wife is the no. 1 reason people support Trump isn’t it?

        1. funny. i wouldn’t know.

        2. I don’t have any trouble pleasing his wife.

          1. sweet. love a party.

    2. The operative word for your condescendingly biased ignorance being “might” so as to imply that you are reasonable but only to allow for even greater poor judgment.

      Please try harder in your efforts to generate opportunities to display your TDS. Quality, not quantity.

      1. I’m not sure what you expect on a Monday.

        1. Incel Tony Monday?

    3. Most terrorists who come here with an agenda already have passports. Being part of an actual organized network tends to cover their bases.

      How the hell is any member of a terrorist organization going to get orders ” When and if there is some kind of large group of people walking days and weeks to the US border, get a suitcase and walk along with them for hundreds of miles. Easy peasy and nobody will suspect!”

  7. Why don’t we do some real reporting about how all these people are being fed, where they are sleeping/camping on the way, the actual demographics and nationalities of the people and finally how/why they decided to do this spontaneously during the lead up of the midterm elections what a coincidence. Or not and we can just take pot shots at people guessing about intentions of people from a perspective of equal ignorance.

    1. These things don’t just happen.

      1. Reason’s assertion of that there are no middle easterner terrorist is just as ignorant as Trumps. Even though the idea is totally implausible neither party has any fucking idea.

        1. Believe the accuser. Isn’t that how it’s supposed to work?

        2. The CIA, NSA, FBI, etc., all work for Trump. He’s the g.d. US president, for fk’ s sake. Either he knows or they are lying to him. He also has a whole bunch of money to actually bypass them and find out for himself through independent means. Of course, we should instead believe Reason that there are no bad apples in this bushel because…Trump!

          1. No, no, we only believe the alphabet soup when they say that we need to be scared of Russia and it’s installed puppet.

          2. Joe, we’ve seen how little control Trump has over much of the government machinery. No, he does not control the CIA et al. And civil service laws insure he never will.

        3. I wouldn’t discount the idea of Islamic terrorist organizations in Latin America. I know for a fact there are. And if I know, Trump knows.

          The idea that this is the way they would infiltrate is borderline ludicrous though.

          The 9/ 11 hijackers came in from Canada and had passports. They were not about to hoof it hundreds of miles through Mexico.

      2. There’s an NBC article that interviews a Pueblos Sin Fronteras person who talks about how they organize these caravans. He admits that the size of this one got out of hand as they prefer to assist a more manageable horde. Can’t provide a link now, but it’s an easy article to find if you search on the name of the NGO

    2. Honest reporting?

      Young men began tugging on the fencing and finally succeeded in tearing it down, and men, women and children rushed through and toward the border bridge just up the road.

      Ambassador Luis Manuel Lopez Moreno added that more than 100 migrants had been allowed to cross the bridge to apply for refugee status, including some who were from the caravan and others who were not.

      Mexican Foreign Relations Secretary Luis Videgaray said those with passports and valid visas would be let in immediately, though he acknowledged that “we anticipate those are the minority.”

    3. I was wondering a lot of this too. It is not like it is free to walk for weeks or that you do not need supplies. I am very curious who is the puppeteer behind the facade.

  8. Terrorists or not, it’s no fun being an undocumented immigrant.

  9. Even the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), a group that generally opposes illegal immigration, describes Morales’ claim as “unverified.”

    Unverified, sure, but could we describe the claim as “credible”?

  10. Maybe not.…..van-video/

    Don’t forget that most of the minors detained by Trump were unaccompanied and some kids were not reunited with their parents because they were criminals.

    Is the caravan a Trojan horse for terrorism? Probably not. But it’s strange to suggest that a nation shouldn’t be concerned with 7000 people marching into their soil, after having (miraculously) crossed borders of several nations unopposed. Who’s feeding, clothing, and sustaining them through a trip that covers more distance from San Diego to Northernmost California?

    Most nonviolent parts of immigrant population are Asians, and the legal ones undoubtedly passed all kinds of INS muster. Why compare American immigrants to an unverified 7 thousand strong caravan coming from broken parts of Latin America? Even Obama deported thousands of Latinos near the border. It’s naive to think open borders won’t lead to some spike in crime among the immigrant population.

    1. having (miraculously) crossed borders of several nations unopposed

      They weren’t unopposed. Where they were opposed, they destroyed property. They weren’t violently oppressed but they weren’t unopposed.

  11. Probably no more than a few dozen jihadis and other terrorists tucked in among the army marching our way. Be serious, now — how much damage can they do, really? Try to chill out people!

  12. Maybe there are no middle easterners, it is still 7,000 (your number) people coming here that do not have any business here, most of whom appear to be young men, with the occasional crying mother for the TV cameras

    1. Maybe there are no middle easterners


      maybe former Pres. Obama was born in Hawaii,

      maybe evolution is not a satanic plot launch from the pits of hell,

      maybe climate change is not a Chinese hoax,

      and maybe Donald Trump rawdogged a porn star after showing her a photograph of his wife and newborn son, then lied about it.


      1. You have no proof of this one way or the other you fucking retard.

  13. Foreign nationals do not get to target and set the internal and/or the international policies of any country at or for their convenience, particularly, in this case the US. Period. It’s as if foreign nationals get to create all the games wherein they get all the trophies because they made all the rules.


    More, as automation foreseeably takes over all repetitive jobs, leaving a huge pool of people without a negotiable skill, are we to take in hundreds of thousands of people with no discernible skills what so ever? Numbers sound high, well answer this please, why should anyone live anywhere that isn’t as economically remunerative as the US when all they have to do is take a trip on the “yellow brick road”?

  14. I sense that a majority of those in the caravan likely possesses a better command of standard English than does the current president of the United States.

    (It seems possible that Pres. Trump learned enough in college to handle basic capitalization and intentionally botches his messages in an effort to signal to his half-educated backwater base that he is one of them.)

    1. Your trolling gets better and better Kirkland

  15. I don’t care if there are no ISIS sympathizers, or MS13 in the entire caravan,

    I don’t want 17,000 indigent people who hate the US entering. Do my feelings not matter? Why are the feelings of others prioritized over mine?

    Trump was elected largely because he pledged to actually do some “comprehensive immigration reform”, i.e. to stop the relentless flow. “Stop the relentless flow” sounds like a tampon commercial.

    1. Well I don’t want you living as my neighbor. So if you decide to buy a house in my neighborhood, I plan on petitioning the city council to have them vote to keep you out. That’s the libertarian way!

      1. I wouldn’t want me as a neighbor either. Unfortunately for you, I am a citizen of the US and free to move anywhere in the US.

        I will come to your city council meetings and cheer you on while you explain that illegal aliens have a right to enter the US. It will be fun.

        1. Oh no no no. My feelings matter too. I don’t want you living near me, because you scare me. What if you’re a terrorist or a rapist or a child molester? Can’t be too careful these days. Better to use government coercion to keep you out. That’s the libertarian way after all!

          1. LOL. Government coercion is keeping the illegals hordes at bay. I thought it was simply the US controlling immigration in accordance with the Constitution.

            I am gonna move in next door to you, and invite you to a back yard BBQ. Your feelings will be reset to normal after spending some time with me.

            1. Yes, it is government coercion, authorized by the US constitution.
              Where did you get the idea that the Constitution was non-coercive?

              1. It is authorized by the Constitution as interpreted by SCOTUS.
                The text itself doesn’t authorize restrictions on immigration.

                1. Article I, section 9. You ignore it every time.

                  1. The portion of Article 1, Section 9 that you love to cite deals with slavery.
                    Please show me where SCOTUS has ever ruled that the federal government’s power to regulate immigration originates from Article 1, Section 9.

                    1. Jeff, some people aren’t anarchists. Some people also have the common sense to realize that the country will not benefit from a bunch of illiterate peasants moving here, and using more in government services than they can ever possibly pay in in taxes. Even without direct welfare, dishwashers and the like are a tax drain.

                      So fuck these people.

    2. No, your feelings don’t matter. Nor should they. Only your rights matter, and the mere presence of someone here in your vicinity who you don’t like doesn’t violate any of your rights.

  16. JFree is right. You all do realize that the US has a long and complicated history with Central and South America which, over the years, has led to the current state of affairs that we see today in those countries. Do you think it is really because Guatemalans are inferior people that their country is in the state that it’s in? Read up on what the CIA did to overthrow the democratically elected government of Guatemala in 1954. This coup d’etat led to decades of military rule and repression. And the US did nothing about it, as long as those dirty “communists” were kept out of power. So a country was ruled as a feudal estate by a military junta for decades, exploited and repressed by their authoritarian government, all with American government explicit and implicit backing, and when repression winds up leading to poverty and misery for Guatemalans, you blame… the people? Give me a break. Libertarians are not afraid to point out how American interventionism in the Middle East created a fertile climate for Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and all that resulted from that horror. Why can’t libertarians admit much the same has occurred in America’s own backyard?

    1. And just to clarify, before someone jumps on me:

      when I write “much the same has occurred in America’s own backyard”, I don’t mean that Guatemalans are a bunch of terrorists. I mean that American foreign policy has, both intentionally and unintentionally, created adverse conditions in those countries that have come back to bite us in the ass.

      Just maybe, if the CIA hadn’t run around Central America overthrowing governments and arming right-wing death squads, that place wouldn’t be as shitty as it is today.

      1. I don’t think it is too bold to suggest that what we see in Central America today is blowback from decades of CIA misbehavior in an effort to fight the commies lurking in every corner during the Cold War. It’s not because Guatemalans or Salvadorans or Hondurans are shitty people. It is because their Big Brother in El Norte has consistently supported oppressive right-wing authoritarian regimes in their countries that kept the communists out of power but also led to all sorts of other horrors. And now we see the chickens coming home to roost.

        1. As long as the chickens roost south of the US border…

          1. Even if you don’t give a shit about the Guatemalans.

            Can we stop blaming them for what the CIA did?

            1. We can blame them for not fixing their own shit after 64 years.

        2. The Communists are in power in Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. The horde isn’t headed to any of those places. If they want to deal with the ones who really fucked them up let then sail to Spain.

        3. What exactly do you want the USA to do, intervene again but this time on the side you consider the right side? For fucks sake man.

          In any event, yes, let us pretend there were not difficult choices to make with Soviets actively trying to destabilize areas close to the USA and it being the height of the Cold War. It is much easier to just bitch about the CIA and America being mean.

          1. What exactly do you want the USA to do, intervene again but this time on the side you consider the right side? For fucks sake man.

            That’s exactly what he wants.

            And who is that side? Why, it’s the collectivist statists. What a shock.

      2. True dat. I have personally watched how US-exported fascism kept the sorry buggers from learning what the Venezuelans and Guatemalans are now learning the hard way. “We” could have sat back and in two years they’d’ve been lighting the cassocks of Libertation Theology pederasts and shipping them back to Rome. By now we would have had markets for corn, steel, power plants, railroads, Colt equalizers, computers, Gadsden flags…

        1. So how did it work out Chile vs. Venezuela? I know I’d rather live in present day Chile than present day Venezuela.

    2. What did you just take a college class on this bullshit and want to flaunt your cred as someone who cares? Who cares man, educated people know this shit.

      As has been pointed out by Niall Ferguson, the Spainards and Portugese arrived first and grabbed all the best land. The Brits came later. Now hundreds of years later there is a pretty stark difference between Latin America and Anglo America and it is not because we had the most gold or best mines. It is because of Common Law, property rights, checks and balances, the Parliamentary system, the Glorious Revolution, and John Locke. So yes, Anglo America is better than Latin America because of our system which is exactly why you do not need all of Latin America moving to Anglo America en masse and bringing their shit systems with them and giving them no time to assimilate.

    3. Well Jeff, if we hadn’t intervened, they would have all been taken over by communist dictators instead… So we probably saved the lives of lots of them, by preventing Hispanic Pol Pot from taking over.

      I’m not in favor of interventionist policies, but if you think things would have been magically perfect without us being involved, you’re fooling yourself.

      Anyway, does that mean we’re perpetually bound to give in to any whim from anybody from any country where our nation has taken any action that said people decided they didn’t like?

      I say no. It’s not like we did this shit last week… So I say fuck ’em. They can fix their own damn countries. We’re sending them shit tons of aid money anyway. We don’t owe them a right to come to the US and fuck our country up. Sorry.

  17. What a ridiculous bunch of garbage from Setyon. It’s like he copied a DNC marketing brochure.

  18. “There’s no evidence this caravan is full of Middle Eastern terrorists.”

    SO WHAT We do NOT want them here when they come this way.

  19. So, you would prefer to stick your head in the sand and all them to enter the US illegally? Hell, we can’t even properly vet them…San Bernadino multiple killings. I’ll bet if those victims were YOUR relatives, your tone would be different.

  20. Compassion for migrants? How about they are illegal in every country they enter? How about turn them back? Maybe the internment camps like those of WWII for Germans, Italians are appropriate now. It’s not like we are or would be stripping them of any property or possessions. Theses are not our citizens, they are an invading force of some sort.

  21. There is something delightful about the way mystical kleptocrats who export asset-forfeiture prohibitionism are so surprised when their plan results in collapsing economies and hordes of Altrurian refugees at the gates. That most of the illiterate starving wretches also support coathanger abortion laws only adds to the irony.

  22. Where’s the link for the earlier-this-year plague of grasshoppers?

  23. “Healthy skepticism is warranted here,”

    Sort’a like the healthy skepticism of the accusations against now-Justice Kavanaugh?

    1. No, he was a straight white male, therefore, guilty.

  24. Comments made by one woman from about 36 years ago (not really sure of the year), from some place in Maryland (again not really sure), with some people she says would back her up (but none did) at a house she really can’t remember ~ARE~ credible, but a comment that a caravan of 7,000 people (that formed in a country that just caught 100 terrorists), that is carrying flags representing the horrible, oppressive governments that they are fleeing, while burning the flag of the country they are fleeing too, probably contains a few terrorists is just poppycock? Could we maybe apply some consistent standards or filters to our viewpoints to provide some coherence?

    Is it ok for MS-13 gang terrorists to come in with the caravan but not ISIS terrorists? One really is better than the other? I am at a loss. Progressives are so caught up in their NPC monologues that they can’t see threats that are made worse by ignorance really do exist.

    Just as an aside, as a few others have pointed out, where do 7,000 people get food and water for several weeks if they have no money? I would imagine there are some charitable people out there, but I do not believe they can donate enough for 7,000 people. Yet they persevere and proceed onward.

  25. 100 possible terrorists?
    It only took 19 of them to pull of 9/11.
    Even if the current number is inaccurate, how many would it be acceptable to allow to sneak in?

    1. Jesus was a false prophet and God is a superstition.

      1. Jesus and the Judeochristian God is the only reason you are alive.

        The belief that ALL life is sacred is not a terribly common one historically. Judeochristianity is about the only belief that holds such as being true.

        1. You’re talking about fetuses aren’t you.

          We can get along just fine without retarded-ass cult nonsense dictating to stupid people what to think.

        2. Buddhism does and has for centuries before Christianity.

      2. Your statement contradicts itself.

  26. I’m a “little ‘l'” libertarian & I am for a robust immigration system being a LEGAL immigrant from South Korea & my best friend being a LEGAL immigrant from Palestine. I believe we should work toward the ideal of open borders, much like the open borders of the states of the USA. But it’s idiocy to just turn on open borders without the preparatory work done and reward cheating over legal immigrants. And it’s a bit disheartening seeing ‘open border’ libertarians be as ideologically straight-jacketed as liberals in their conventional wisdom that is not at all wisdom but more an example of ‘the king has no clothes’ stupidity. On that accord, bravo.

    1. Sorry but most of your open border bros are anarchists or lefties looking for different agendas than you.

    2. The truth that many open borders people will never admit is that in the world as it presently exists, you CAN NOT have open borders AND be a 1st world country.

      The only reason any 1st world nation exists is because we sharply limit the immigration of unskilled people. If we actually opened our borders up, we’d have so many people immigrate here in such a short span of time that the standard of living here would collapse. Not to mention they’d all vote for horrible laws that ruined America to boot.

      So if “violating” a single “right” of international freedom of movement is what must be done to maintain a free, 1st world nation… I’m all for it.

      I welcome reasonable numbers of skilled legal immigrants though.

    3. Why not start with opening the border in your native country. Then come preach.

  27. You made some good points there. I looked on the internet for the issue and found many people will go along with your website.

    Roller blind jakarta
    Roller blind surabaya

  28. Begging your pardon, but there *is* extensive evidence that Jihadists have been coming into the US through the Mexican border for decades. They do it through Arizona, where the Coyotes lead them from waterhole to waterhole, which soon became immigrant hobo jungles. Local ranchers who assist ICE patrols in searching these waterholes have found Muslim prayer-rugs, leaflets written in Arabic, and even a copy of the Koran hidden at these hobo-jungles. The only part of the Arizona border where the Coyotes don’t come through anymore are the stretches of land owned by the Navaho, where — as a legal nation — the Navaho can do their own policing independent of ICE and varying federal policies. Perhaps in retaliation, the Obama administration ignored the complaints the Navaho brought them about the number of Islamic illegal immigrants. Naturally, so did the Democrat-serving media.

    I really hope the leaders of this “caravan” try to get through the border on the Navaho lands, because the Navaho have adopted a necessary policy of shooting first.

    1. Like Jihadists would walk through a desert when they can fly here with passports.

      It’s about as likely as Satanists looking for blonde kids to sacrifice. Hysterical people will believe anything.

  29. Another apologist article for someone’s feels. Fuck laws. Fuck the constitution. Throw up a picture of a crying kid and just like that, all future actions are justified.

    Watch a few other videos from foreign news sources. The coverage is so skewed its disgusting. Reporters are finding a woman with a couple of kids to interview while literally hundreds of guys walk by behind them. None of these people look un healthy. They just want something and they want it the easy way.

    How are we not doing anything about the organizers of these clearly political agenda funded, sacks of horse shit?

  30. Now if only Trump was actually LITERALLY HITLER, and just ordered the border patrol to open fire when they got to the border! You want to see this shit come to an end, pop off a few rounds in the general direction of the crowd, and we’ll see how many giant hordes get formed in the future.


  31. OK, that straw man is smacked down: The caravan is not stocked with ISIS. Well done.
    But Reason, as usual, refuses to see the main problem with this type of illegal immigration. It’s not that they are potential terrorists, they are 90% certain welfare deadbeats.
    Does the staff of Reason ever go to the grocery store? Do they do not know what EBT cards look like? Can’t they see people who can’t put together 2 words of english very often use these cards? Have the Reason staff ever hear of Milton Friedman? : “You can open borders. You can have large welfare system. You cannot have both.”

    1. I’m not bothering to answer this for the benefit of the person who posted it, but for anyone else out there who might not, by now, know the truth. People who enter this country illegally are NOT (nope, nada, zip) eligible for any means-tested financial assistance. NO welfare. NO Food Stamps. NO housing subsidies. NO SSI.

      And for johngray0: Think of a better cover for your racism. This one is wearing thin.

  32. About 7,000 migrants are currently making their way through Central America, seeking refuge in the United States

    That’s not how this works.

    1. They passed out of Central-America when they crossed the Guatemala-Mexico border.

  33. It’s only hispanic gang members? Why didn’t you say so.

  34. Just one terrorist is one terrorist too many.
    And, since none of these people have been vetted by any of our vaunted immigration folks, we haven’t the faintest idea about any of them….which is more the reason to keep them all out.
    Or, they could all bunk-in with you.

  35. The refugee’s…They all look well fed.

  36. There’s also no evidence that there aren’t any terrorists hiding in the caravan…

  37. Doesn’t matter who its full off. Why such duplicitious reporting??

    Why is it moral for brown people to not want to live in a brown country but immoral for white people to not want to live in a brown country?

    Africa for Africans, Asia for Asians, White countries for everyone IS White Genocide.

    Some basic truths: Access to White people is not a human right

  38. What is the evidence that this caravan is not some sort of invasion, isis, middle easterners or not. They are someone else’s problem. And if I’m not compassionate, who gives a rats ass?

  39. Brett Kavanaugh: Innocent until proven guilty!
    Crown Prince Whatsisname: Innocent until proven guilty!
    Migrants: Evidence? We don’t need no stinkin’ evidence!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.