Month: January 2024

Texas, SCOTUS, and the Time for TEXIT!

admin

“Stand your ground, don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.” -Captain John Parker

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Parker_(captain)

This post has been updated.

If you have not read my other posts on this subject I recommend that you at least read Texas V Feds (see below) for context. “Hopefully we can avoid any conflict and have learned from our past”.

Texas v Feds

However, we appear to be repeating history and moving to a moment where the events of history will compel Texas and the federal government of These Untied States to actions that once taken can only lead to capitulation or war.

I personally believe it is time for Texas to leave the Union and I pray that we are allowed to leave in peace.

I recommend people read Is Davis a Traitor: Or Was Secession a Constitutional Right Previous to the War

In a stunning 5 to 4 vote the Supreme Court has decided to allow the Federal government to continue the clearly unconstitutional violation of Texas’ Sovereign territory.

https://www.newsweek.com/texas-independence-supreme-court-border-ruling-texit-1863124

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/chip-roy-urges-texas-officials-ignore-supreme-court-order-border-razor-wire-go-hell

“They have a duty under the Constitution … and every other norm of leadership of any sovereign state, to protect your citizens, period, full stop. There is no exception to that,” Roy told Fox News Digital on Tuesday. “And if the Supreme Court wants to ignore that truth, which a slim majority did, Texas still had the duty, Texas leaders still have the duty, to defend their people.”

“It’s like, if someone’s breaking into your house, and the court says ‘Oh, sorry. You can’t defend yourself.’ What do you tell the court?” Roy said. “You tell the court to go to hell, you defend yourself and then figure it out later.”

New calls for Secession (see below)

From: Daniel Miller <team@activism.tnm.me>

Date: Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 9:30 PM

Subject: Statement on SCOTUS Border Ruling – Time For TEXIT

Dear,

Today the US Supreme Court issued a ruling that authorized the Biden administration to resume tearing down the limited fencing that the State of Texas has put in place in an attempt to secure the border. In response, I have sent the following letter to Governor Greg Abbott with a simple demand – call a Special Session and let the people of Texas vote on TEXIT.

I have included the text of the letter below. Be sure to read it, share it, volunteer your time and skills, and let us know that you support our efforts to get and win a vote on TEXIT.

Daniel Miller

President

Texas Nationalist Movement

Letter To Governor Abbott

Dear Governor Abbott,

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States rubberstamped the Biden administration’s intentional collapse of our border with Mexico. Now, all three branches of government are working in concert to deny Texas the right as a sovereign state to secure our border. They are, in practice, more aligned with narco-terrorists cartels than with a member of their own union.

This is an existential threat to the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Texas and the fundamental right of self-government of the people of Texas. As such, this constitutes an emergency, and the response should be immediate and proportionate to the constitutional crisis created by the actions of the Biden administration and the Supreme Court.

Article 1 Section 1 of the Texas Constitution is clear on this matter when it states, “…the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.”

Further, Article 1, Section 2 of the Texas Constitution clearly states that the Texan people have an absolute and inalienable right to choose how and by whom they are governed.

“All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient.”

On December 11, 2023, the Texas Nationalist Movement, in accordance with Sec. 172.088(d) of the Texas Election Code, delivered 139,456 signatures that meet the legal requirements to place the following proposition on the 2024 Republican Party Primary Ballot: “The State of Texas should reassert its status as an independent nation.”

But for the actions of the Republican Party of Texas Chairman Matt Rinaldi, in violation of the Texas Election Code, Texans would have an opportunity in March to debate and vote on whether they believe Texas should continue its relationship with a federal government that actively opposed the security of our international border with Mexico.

Planks 33 & 225 of the Republican Party of Texas platform call for the issue of Texas independence to be put to a vote of the people. They state:

“33. State Sovereignty: Pursuant to Article 1, Section 1, of the Texas Constitution, the federal government has impaired our right of local self-government. Therefore, federally mandated legislation that infringes upon the 10th Amendment rights of Texas shall be ignored, opposed, refused, and nullified. Texas retains the right to secede from the United States, and the Texas Legislature should be called upon to pass a referendum consistent thereto.”

“225. Texas Independence: We urge the Texas Legislature to pass a bill in its next session requiring a referendum in the 2023 General Election for the people of Texas to determine whether or not the State of Texas should reassert its status as an independent nation.”

Therefore, I submit to you the signers of the petition, and we call on you to let the people speak. It is within your power as Governor to call a special session of the Texas Legislature for the purpose of letting Texans answer the question, “Should the State of Texas reassert its status as an independent nation?”

The power to determine how Texas is governed does not lie with the federal courts. It is, by right, reserved to the people of Texas. It’s time to let the people speak.

Share Share

Tweet Tweet

Share Share

Forward Forward

Copyright © 2024 The TNM, All rights reserved.

You subscribed to our emails on the Texas Nationalist Movement website or by opting in through one of our volunteers.

Our mailing address is:

The TNM

PO Box 403

Nederland, TX 77627

https://tnm.me/
texit-SCOTUS-replyDownload

What gives the FEDS authority over the boarder? NOTHING!!!

https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/federal-role-immigration/

The Constitution Gives Congress the power to “To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization…” (Article I, Section8). This does NOT give them authority over the territory of the boarder. Texas is enforcing the laws passed by congress.

Remember:

9th Amendment

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/full-text

10th Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/full-text

The People are already planning to protest.

Pray for this nation, Pray for peace, Si vis pacem, para bellum.

Abiotic Oil and Climate Change

admin

I have long believed that at least some of the Hydrocarbons we have found (deep wells) cannot be easily explained by traditional theories. The Video below is just a low level primer. Real research is needed and has not been taken seriously by the mainstream. While I do NOT agree with all that Mr. Soon said I think this is a good introduction to the idea. This discussion is also a good conversation about the historical temperatures the world has seen.

Even if you believe that the temperature is overall warming, the question is it caused by humans or are there other forces at play? Lastly, is a rise in global temperatures a bad thing? Does a rise in CO2 doom us all? I personally do not think so.

Weather, ERCOT, and Renewables

admin

The Fallowing is a point made by a good friend of mine about the Texas grid this morning.

“Current demand this morning of 71648 mw and renewables along with batteries combine for 5003 mws yet the federal government wants to go strictly with renewables. Fossil and nuclear is the only thing keeping the grid from failing.”

Wind, Solar, and Batteries cannot replace base load thermal units. We need Gas, Coal, and Nuclear power!

Texas v Feds

admin

https://www.yahoo.com/news/armed-texas-national-guard-soldiers-173641607.html

We are watching history repeat it’s self. Some of the same rational that lead to the first American Civil War (The War of Northern Aggression), is now playing out in a similar way. Hopefully we can avoid any conflict and have learned from our past. However, it sure looks to be escalating to a similar point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff_of_Abominations

“Deeply impressed with these considerations, the Representatives of the good people of this
Commonwealth, anxiously desiring to live in peace with their fellow citizens, and to do all that in them
lies to preserve and perpetuate the union of the States and the liberties of which it is the surest pledge-but feeling it to be their bounden duty to expose and to resist all encroachments upon the true spirit of the Constitution, lest an apparent acquiescence in the system of protecting duties should be drawn into precedent, do, in the name of the Commonwealth of South Carolina, claim to enter upon the Journals of the [U.S.] Senate, their protest against it as unconstitutional, oppressive, and unjust.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Carolina_Exposition_and_Protest

Exposition-and-Protest-John-C-Calhoun-1828-1n0m501Download
DECLARATION-OF-CAUSES-February-2-1861-A-declaration-of-the-causes-which-impel-the-State-of-Texas-to-secede-from-the-Federal-Union.-TSLAC
https://www.tsl.texas.gov/ref/abouttx/secession/2feb1861.htmlDownload

“The Federal Government, while but partially under the control of these our unnatural and sectional enemies, has for years almost entirely failed to protect the lives and property of the people of Texas against the Indian savages on our border, and more recently against the murderous forays of banditti from the neighboring territory of Mexico; and when our State government has expended large amounts for such purpose, the Federal Government has refused reimbursement therefor, thus rendering our condition more insecure and harrassing than it was during the existence of the Republic of Texas.

These and other wrongs we have patiently borne in the vain hope that a returning sense of justice and humanity would induce a different course of administration.”

Stop Breathing!!!

admin

https://nypost.com/2023/12/19/news/humans-may-be-fueling-global-warming-by-breathing-new-study/

“Exhaled human breath can contain small, elevated concentrations of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), both of which contribute to global warming,” according to research released last week in the UK journal PLOS.

If it has not become clear to you yet, you are the carbon that they want to eliminate! Your mere existence is a problem for the climate religion. Humans are being compared to livestock, and our exhalations are now being linked to a threat to the rest of the planet. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/15/netherlands-announces-25bn-plan-to-radically-reduce-livestock-numbers

The Study can be found below.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0295157

journal.pone_.0295157Download

“The highest reported proportion of MPs was found in African populations with up to 84% [15]. Proportions of MPs in Western populations vary from 25% [17] to 62% [18], while in Asian populations (such as Japanese) it can be as low as 15% [13]. The reasons for geographic, ethnic, diet, gender or age-based differences emissions of CH4 in human breath are not understood, and historical studies have likely suffered from issues such as poor detection limits of available analysers and limited sample populations (n < 100).”

“Results

Concentration enhancement of CO2 in the breath of the participants ranged from 26.5 to 63.4 parts per thousand (2.65–6.34%) following a Gaussian distribution, with an arithmetic mean of 4.35 (4.29–4.43) % (Fig 1A). All participants exhaled CO2, and while the data distribution skewed slightly towards higher values, overall, the data was relatively symmetrical around the mean. Concentration enhancement of CH4 in breath varied from -0.56 to 49.6 ppm, following a log-normal distribution with an arithmetic mean concentration of 5.08 and Zou’s mean of 4.26 (3.37–5.54) ppm (Fig 1B). While the lowest of these values is negative (emitted concentration below the 2 ppm background), the precision of the GC instrument is approximately 0.04 ppm (Drewer et al., 2021), thus the small number of negative values is likely to be instrumental noise as 55% of the concentration differences were less than the instrument precision. The distribution of concentration enhancement of CH4 are heavily skewed towards higher values, with a large number of concentrations near zero. A total of 32 (31%) of the participants were classed as MPs (single or mean concentrations in breath measurements exceeded the 3 ppm threshold). The arithmetic mean concentration enhancement of all samples measured from the MPs was 17.1 ppm and the Zou’s mean was 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm. The arithmetic emitted mean of the concentration enhancement among NMPs was -0.1 ppm, with most samples reporting breath concentrations around the precision limit of the GC instrument (results from NMPs were essentially instrumental noise around zero). Therefore, it is approximated that 31% of people emitted a mean concentration of 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm CH4 in their breath, while the rest emit effectively none. Concentration enhancement of N2O in the breath of the participants also followed a log-normal distribution, ranging from 0.11 to 0.88 ppm with an arithmetic mean of 0.33 and a Zou’s mean of 0.329 (0.315–0.342) ppm (Fig 1C). The skew in the distribution of N2O concentrations was more towards higher values than the CO2 distribution, but not as extreme as that of CH4 concentrations. No concentration enhancements of N2O in breath were below background levels, indicating that while there is a large variation in observed N2O concentrations, all participants emitted at least some N2O.”Concentration enhancement of CO2 in the breath of the participants ranged from 26.5 to 63.4 parts per thousand (2.65–6.34%) following a Gaussian distribution, with an arithmetic mean of 4.35 (4.29–4.43) % (Fig 1A). All participants exhaled CO2, and while the data distribution skewed slightly towards higher values, overall, the data was relatively symmetrical around the mean. Concentration enhancement of CH4 in breath varied from -0.56 to 49.6 ppm, following a log-normal distribution with an arithmetic mean concentration of 5.08 and Zou’s mean of 4.26 (3.37–5.54) ppm (Fig 1B). While the lowest of these values is negative (emitted concentration below the 2 ppm background), the precision of the GC instrument is approximately 0.04 ppm (Drewer et al., 2021), thus the small number of negative values is likely to be instrumental noise as 55% of the concentration differences were less than the instrument precision. The distribution of concentration enhancement of CH4 are heavily skewed towards higher values, with a large number of concentrations near zero. A total of 32 (31%) of the participants were classed as MPs (single or mean concentrations in breath measurements exceeded the 3 ppm threshold). The arithmetic mean concentration enhancement of all samples measured from the MPs was 17.1 ppm and the Zou’s mean was 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm. The arithmetic emitted mean of the concentration enhancement among NMPs was -0.1 ppm, with most samples reporting breath concentrations around the precision limit of the GC instrument (results from NMPs were essentially instrumental noise around zero). Therefore, it is approximated that 31% of people emitted a mean concentration of 15.0 (11.9–19.9) ppm CH4 in their breath, while the rest emit effectively none. Concentration enhancement of N2O in the breath of the participants also followed a log-normal distribution, ranging from 0.11 to 0.88 ppm with an arithmetic mean of 0.33 and a Zou’s mean of 0.329 (0.315–0.342) ppm (Fig 1C). The skew in the distribution of N2O concentrations was more towards higher values than the CO2 distribution, but not as extreme as that of CH4 concentrations. No concentration enhancements of N2O in breath were below background levels, indicating that while there is a large variation in observed N2O concentrations, all participants emitted at least some N2O.”