The PointBy Daniel Greenfield

How to Stop Migrant Caravan Invasions With One Easy Trick

The technical term for what Mexico and other countries have been doing to us is, “military colonization”.

Latin American countries send settlers across the border. They set up shop here, sign up for every welfare program under the sun, and send the money back home to their families… and their countries.

Some countries actually use these payments as a major part of their economy.

President Trump has talked about taxing these payments to build a wall. But now he’s cracking down on foreign aid to these countries.

“We have today informed the countries of Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador that if they allow their citizens, or others, to journey through their borders and up to the United States, with the intention of entering our country illegally, all payments made to them will STOP (END)!” he tweeted.

A similar threat was made 6 months earlier.

Guatemala has made a minimal effort to comply by arresting the Honduran ringleader. But has done little else.

Latin American countries that allow the migrant caravan through should absolutely face a zeroing of their foreign aid. But we also need to urgently pull out of a UN treaty that forces us to accept these invaders, instead of keeping them on the other side of the border.

As I wrote back in May, that’s the reason why they keep coming and we have to keep taking them.

United States asylum law derives from the United Nations. The 1951 UN refugee convention and the 1967 protocol, to which we became a signatory in 1968, have been baked into our legal codes. Article 3 precludes a Muslim travel ban, Article 16 mandates free legal aid for refugees, Article 17 requires allowing a refugee to work, Article 22 mandates free education, Article 23, welfare, Article 26, travel anywhere within the United States, Article 28, travel outside the country, Articles 32 and 33 make deportation very difficult, and Article 31 prohibits imposing, “penalties, on account of their illegal entry or presence, on refugees”. United States courts have debated how to interpret these articles, but a leftist Supreme Court could easily use Article 33 to open up our borders.

And we would be obligated to process and possibly take in every refugee anywhere in the world.

When the United States signed on to the convention in ’68, LBJ and his people lied to the Senate and to Americans and assured them that it wouldn’t change anything about our system. The convention however is the most damaging piece of immigration law that doesn’t carry Ted Kennedy’s name.

“Accession to the Protocol would not impinge adversely upon established practices under existing laws in the United States,” LBJ had claimed. “State laws are not superseded by the Convention or Protocol.”

He described it as a “symbolic element” in his message to the Senate.

There’s nothing symbolic about it. And until it’s gone, our borders can never be secure.

This needs to be fixed. And soon.