U.S. Immigration Act vs. Subversion vs. Rob Natelson

U.S. Immigration Act vs. Subversion vs. Rob Natelson

The Walter-McCarran Immigration Act vs. Rob Natelson...

Regarding my Rob Natelson comment that I also posted on Mario Apuzzo's Natural Born Citizen blog on May 26, 2016 at 12:38 PM:

>> https://puzo1.blogspot.com/2016/03/ted-cruz-neither-natural-born-citizen.html?showComment=1464280680500#c8213117118635483886

U.S. immigration policy would be undermined by Rob Natelson's suggestion about an amendment to clarify that only one U.S. citizen parent would be sufficient to make a child "...eligible to the Office of President."

See Natelson's Fort Worth Star-Telegram article which he posted on his website:

>> https://www.i2i.org/cruz-withdrawal-postpones-natural-born-issue/

Diana West has a short article about the House Committee on Un-American Activities in which she includes a comment by Archibald Roosevelt about the Walter-McCarran Immigration Act and connecting it to the legal immigration and U.S. naturalization of Russian communist agents ever since the 1917 communist revolution in Russia.

She wrote that "...the Committee held hearings into Communist Political Subversion in the cities of Washington, D.C., Youngstown, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle," and published their findings in which she found "...a statement by Archibald B. Roosevelt (1894-1979), conservative businessman and much-decorated veteran of both World Wars who was also a son of President Theodore Roosevelt."

Diana writes that Roosevelt described "...the Kremlin's "two-pronged course of action," in which "Roosevelt noted that the Kremlin first needed "assurance that their foreign-born operators ... will not be deported or denaturalized. This would ensure the maintenance of those forces which the Red strategists have filtered in through our weak immigration barriers throughout the years."

In the penultimate paragraph Diana quotes Roosevelt:

>> <i>"The second requirement for the conquest of America is to make certain that the security checks against immigrants are weak and ineffective and that there must exist loopholes through which swarms of Red agents can enter this country to swell the size of the subversive forces. ... The Walter-McCarran Immigration Act provides America with the legal weapons to stop the Red immigration plot in its tracks ...."</i>

Diana concludes:

>> "Holy smokes. Roosevelt was discussing what remains a matter of intense topicality, the subversion of U.S. immigration policy, focusing on the 1950s Communist/Leftist opposition to the Walter-McCarran Immigration Act."

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

My point is this.

Roosevelt's words about communist subversion as Diana put it: "...matter of intense topicality, the subversion of U.S. immigration policy," are relevant for the same internal security reason that John Jay was relevant and prescient in 1787 (with the intention of being perpetual generation to generation) when he underlined the word "born" in "natural born Citizen" before the first immigration and naturalization act was passed.

The U.S. Congress should strengthen U.S. immigration policy. Also, if the U.S. Constitution is amended, it should be amended to strengthen U.S. citizenship, not to diminish it like Natelson has suggested in his article on the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

Professor Natelson is not thinking clearly, it seems to me, if he thinks that only one U.S. citizen parent was John Jay's original genesis original intent, and that, consequently, ONLY singular U.S. citizenship is of no consequence.

Original-Genesis-Original-Intent.blogspot.com

Art