In the days following the horrific slaughter of innocent men, women, and children by radical Islamists in Paris, small groups of Syrian refugees have been detained in unlikely ports of entry throughout the western hemisphere. Eleven Syrian refugees, traveling with fake passports, were detained in Paraguay; 5 Syrians, traveling with stolen Greek passports, were arrested in Honduras; 3 Syrian men, traveling with fake Greek passports, were arrested on the Caribbean Island of St. Maarten after traveling through Brazil, the Dominican Republic, and Haiti; and 8 Syrians were arrested after making it as far as the INS border checkpoint at Laredo, Texas,
Is it my imagination, or is there a pattern developing here? Is it pure coincidence that so many Syrians were detained in unlikely western hemisphere locations while trying to enter the U.S. illegally? Could it be that they were acting under orders from ISIS to make their way into the U.S. for purposes of committing acts of terrorism? And if these four insurgencies were detected, how many others went undetected?
In the meantime, Barack Obama’s plan to import more than 100,000 Islamic refugees per year has drawn strong opposition across the country. While Republican presidential candidates argue that the 10,000 Syrian refugees now destined for resettlement should be barred from entering the U.S. until a fail-safe vetting formula can be developed, Democrats argue that U.S. immigration officials should simply trust the refugees to answer truthfully when asked whether or not they represent an existential threat to the American people.
In light of a great many vicious terror attacks, both here and abroad, the American people are understandable frightened and are unwilling to accept additional large numbers of Muslims into our country. Unfortunately, members of Congress, on both sides of the aisle, fail to recognize that the question of whether or not to admit additional Muslims has already been decided in the negative. What I have suggested in recent columns is that, if the intent of the current law is unclear, the Congress should rewrite sections of the Communist Control Act of 1954, a statute that has not been overturned by the courts and is still in force, to read as follows:
SEC. 1. PURPOSE. The Congress hereby finds and declares that certain organizations exist within our borders which, although purporting to be political or religious in nature, are in fact instrumentalities of foreign political or religious entities or ideologies whose purpose it is to overthrow the Government of the United States by any available means, including force and violence. Such organizations operate as authoritarian dictatorships within our borders, demanding for themselves the rights and privileges generally accorded to all political parties and religious denominations, but denying to all others the liberties guaranteed to them by the U.S. Constitution.
SEC. 2. PROSCRIBED ORGANIZATIONS. Any political or religious organization as described herein, or any successors or affiliates of such organizations, regardless of the assumed name, whose object or purpose it is to overthrow the government of the United States, or to force the political or religious conversion of its people by force or violence, or threats thereof, are not entitled to any of the rights, privileges, and immunities attendant upon legal bodies created under the jurisdiction of the laws of the United States or its political subdivisions; and whatever rights, privileges, and immunities heretofore granted to said religious or political organizations, or any subsidiary or affiliate organizations, by reason of the laws of the United States or any political subdivision thereof, are hereby rescinded.
This amendment to the Communist Control Act of 1954 would serve to reinforce provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Public Law 414, which effectually bars any and all Muslims from either entering or residing in the United States. That law, otherwise known as the McCarran-Walter Act, is still on the books. And while it has not been enforced by recent administrations, Democrat or Republican, it is sufficient to protect the American people from attacks such as those carried out on September 11, 2001, and subsequent atrocities.
Chapter 2, Section 212, of the McCarran-Walter Act contains numerous provisions which bar Muslims from legally entering or residing in the United States. For example, Islam permits Islamic men to marry up to four wives. And although fewer than 2% of Muslim men have multiple wives, the practice of polygamy is permitted under Islamic law. Section 212(11) of the McCarran-Walter Act prohibits all aliens who are polygamists, or who practice polygamy, or who advocate the practice of polygamy, from entering or residing in the United States.
Section 212(19) of the Act bars entry to any alien who seeks to procure, or has sought to procure, or has procured a visa or other documentation, or seeks to enter the United States by fraud, or by willfully misrepresenting a material fact.
Section 212(27) of the Act bars all aliens “who the consular officer or the Attorney General knows, or has reason to believe, seek to enter the United States solely, principally, or incidentally, to engage in activities which would be prejudicial to the public interest, or endanger the welfare, safety, or security of the United States.”
Section 212(28) of the Act denies access to all aliens who are anarchists, or who have at any time been members of or affiliated with, any organization that advocates or teaches the overthrow of the government of the United States by force, violence, or other unconstitutional means.
In addition, the McCarran-Walter Act contains provisions for a reporting system whereby all aliens are required to report their current address to the INS each year. It also establishes a central index of aliens in the U.S. for use by security and enforcement agencies… much as Donald Trump and Dr. Ben Carson have suggested.
Section 212 of the Act makes irrelevant any current debate or legislative proposal that would restrict or delay the entry of large numbers of Middle Eastern refugees. Section 212 concludes by saying, “Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”
In other words, under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Muslims are prohibited from obtaining visas to enter or immigrate to the United States, and it gives Obama the authority to do exactly what the American people want him to do… i.e. suspend any further immigration of Muslim refugees to the United States.
Muslim immigration is prohibited under McCarran-Walter because the Koran and Sharia Law require complete submission to Islam, which is antithetical to the U.S. Constitution. All those who subscribe to the Koran as their guiding principle, by definition, subscribe to Islam and its form of government. Most liberals and Democrats insist that Muslims cannot be prohibited from entering the U.S. because Islam, as a religion, is a protected class under the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. However, Islam is not merely another religious denomination. Islam is a complete social, political, economic, legal, judicial, and military system with a religious component. As such, it is totally incompatible with principles embodied in the U.S. Constitution. Islam does not, and cannot, merit 1st Amendment protections.
When the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 was sent to President Harry Truman for his signature, he vetoed the bill. However, his veto was overridden by a vote of 278 to 113 in the House and 57 to 26 in the Senate. Speaking in support of a veto override, Senator Pat McCarran (D-NV), a principal author of the Act, said what any Republican of today might say. He said, “I believe that this nation is the last hope of Western civilization, and if this oasis of the world shall be overrun, perverted, contaminated, or destroyed, then the last flickering light of humanity will be extinguished. I take no issue with those who would praise the contributions which have been made to our society by people of many races, of varied creeds and colors. However, we have in the United States today hard-core, indigestible blocs which have not become integrated into the American way of life, but which, on the contrary, are its deadly enemies.”
He concluded by saying, “Today, as never before, untold millions are storming our gates for admission and those gates are cracking under the strain. The solution to the problems of Europe and Asia will not come through a transplanting of those problems en masse to the United States. I do not intend to become prophetic, but if the enemies of this legislation succeed in riddling it to pieces, or in amending it beyond recognition, they will have contributed more to promote this nation’s downfall than any other group since we achieved our independence as a nation.”
How prophetic! The enemies of America have been highly successful in “riddling our system to pieces,” and never before has the “last flickering light of humanity” been in greater danger of being extinguished than it is today. What is needed is not a temporary halt to immigration by the “hard-core, indigestible blocs” that now threaten us, but a reversal of the immigration that has taken place since the McCarran-Walter Act became law in 1953. So long as radical Islamists insist upon achieving world domination through acts of unspeakable violence, and so long as so-called “moderate” Muslims merely look on as bystanders, peace-loving peoples must insist that Muslims settle their age-old differences in total isolation, in their own barren lands.
If and when a new immigration bill comes before Congress for a veto override, Republicans would be well advised to resurrect the wise counsel of their 1953 colleague, Pat McCarran.