House\nDemocrats want the U.S. military to disclose troop deployment and housing\nlocations at the southern border, essentially providing a roadmap to human\nsmugglers, drug cartels and violent Antifa hooligans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As\nmigrants from countries with terrorist ties transit north through Mexico,\nDemocrats embedded a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act\nrequiring the Secretary of Defense to notify the House and Senate Armed\nServices committees of “deployment of any member of the Armed Forces or\nunit of the Armed Forces to the southern land border of the United States in\nsupport” of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The measure, which requires 30-day advance notification, even\norders the Defense Department to furnish maps.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Titled \u201cModification and technical correction of authority for deployment of members of the Armed Forces to the southern land border of the United States,\u201d Section 1044<\/a> of the defense bill is congressional micromanagement at its worst.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Andrew Arthur<\/a> of the Center for Immigration Studies, and a former Capitol Hill staffer, notes several downsides to Section 1044. \u201cWhat legitimate purpose is served by providing Congress with maps \u2018indicating the location where units are so deployed\u2019? To allow members to second-guess that troops should be set up at mile marker 175 instead of mile marker 282?\u201d he muses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That\u2019s just for openers, of course.\n\u201cInevitably, the information will become public knowledge and will be used to\ndirect smuggling operations,\u201d Arthur asserts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAnd beyond that, imagine what would happen if it became public that a hotel in Yuma houses\u00a0troops who are supporting CBP. How many sanctimonious trolls would call for a boycott because that hotel is supporting the detention of \u2018asylum seekers.\u2019 Even worse, can you imagine what Antifa<\/a> would do with this information?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n To make\nsure the word gets out, Section 1044 mandates that \u201ceach report \u2026 shall be submitted in unclassified form and\nwithout any designation relating to dissemination control.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n (In September, Defense Secretary Mark Esper approved a request from the Department of Homeland Security to maintain up to 5,500 troops<\/a> at unspecified locations along the southern border until Sept. 30, 2020. Military units have been deployed for border duty since October 2018.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Though the Senate\u2019s defense bill contains no disclosure dictates, there are no guarantees that the House language won\u2019t prevail. All but eight of 235 Democrats<\/a> voted for the House version, with seven others not voting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Among those with a stake in the outcome are terrorist and human-trafficking networks always probing for points of least resistance. Migrants from Africa and Bangladesh<\/a> \u2013 Islamic terror hubs whose nationals make up a rising percentage of migrants moving through Mexico \u2013 are surely watching with interest.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" House Democrats want the U.S. military to disclose troop deployment and housing locations at the southern border, essentially providing a roadmap to human smugglers, drug cartels and violent Antifa hooligans. As migrants from countries with terrorist ties transit north through Mexico, Democrats embedded a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act requiring the Secretary of<\/p>\n