Texas Secession or Borderless, Which?
Texas Secession or Borderless, Which?
by Bill Lockwood
What exactly is involved in Texas Secession? In simple terms, the removal of Texas from the United States by popular vote. However, any kind of Texas Independence talk quickly draws the anger of the establishment. Many constitutional conservatives worry as well. Will we enjoy the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution?
Sometimes even the “T” word is pulled out of the bag. Treason is the charge leveled against those who suggest removing the political bands that attach Texas to the United States. At a recent Republican meeting in Jefferson County, Texas, Independent-minded members were charged with “sedition” for the suggestion that a vote be taken on Texas sovereignty.
Instead of becoming heated over Texican-Americans who favor Independence, perhaps politicians should become more inflamed over the political left, for it is from this quarter that calls have been originating for the removal of Texas from the United States by splicing the entire nation into a New World Order. Texas as a sovereign state, as well as the very sovereignty of the nation of the United States, will be history. As a matter of fact, the socialist one-worlder crowd on the left side of the political spectrum have been beating this drum for decades.
Swift-boat Secretary of State John Kerry gave the most recent voice to the erasure of the borders of Texas and the United States in his commencement speech last Friday evening. To graduates from Northeastern University Kerry exulted in a “borderless world” which he is assisting to craft. Kerry then lashed out at Donald Trump and his American supporters who, according to Kerry, long-for a “nostalgia for some rose-tinted version of the past that did not really exist… You’re about to graduate into a complex and borderless world.”
So, I ask: Why be excited about the Texas Nationalist Movement, even using the words “sedition” and “treason,” when the Obama Administration is doing its dead-level best to completely remove the borders and sovereignty of Texas? John Kerry is doing nothing more than following the globalist script that has been publicized for the past forty years. It is called “Reconquista.” Professor Charles Trujillo of the University of New Mexico boasted of the burgeoning Hispanic immigration in the Southwestern U.S. He openly declared that secession is an “inevitability.” Piping Kerry’s borderless doctrine he added, “We may join Mexico… Throughout history, nations and empires rise and fall. No nation’s borders have been permanent.” Perhaps this is where the words “treason” or “sedition” should be used instead of giving him a post to brainwash young minds.
Globalist Vicente Fox, while speaking in Chicago on June 16, 2004, expressed his idea of a borderless continent this way: “We are Mexicans that live in our territories and we are Mexicans that live in other territories. In reality, we are 120 million people that live together and are working to construct a nation.” This explains why Fox supported the North American Union and why he is currently going ballistic against Donald Trump who actually proposes that America protect its own borders.
Fox’s predecessor, Ernesto Zedillo, affirmed on July 27, 1997 that “… the Mexican nation extends beyond the territory enclosed by its borders and that Mexican migrants are an important- a very important – part of it.” These bold calls for Reconquista and Borderless territories prompted Steve Murdock, demographer and sociologist at Rice University, to conclude that due to the major influx of Hispanics into Texas “It’s basically over for Anglos.”
Art Moore, writing in WorldNetDaily in 2002, quotes University of California at Riverside professor Armando Navarro as follows: “If in 50 years most of our people are subordinated, powerless, exploited and impoverished, then I will say to you that there are all kinds of possibilities for movements to develop like the ones that we’ve witnessed in the last few years all over the world, from Yugoslavia to Chechnya.” Navarro goes on to state, “A secessionist movement is not something that you can put away and say it is never going to happen in the United States. Time and history change.”
As early as July, 1982 Carlos Loret de Mora was quoted in Exelsior, a major Mexico City newspaper, as saying “The American southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing of a single shot” (July 20, 1982 “The Great Invasion: Mexico Recovers Its Own.”) After visiting Los Angeles, CA he was enthused that such dreams were becoming reality. Loret de Mora continued that the conquering of the southwest as a whole would occur “by means of a steady, spontaneous, and uninterrupted occupation … The territory lost in the 19th century by a Mexico torn by internal strife and under centralist dictatorships led by paranoid chiefs, like Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, seems to be restoring itself through a humble people who go on settling various zones that once were ours …”
Harvard Professor Samuel P, Huntington, Chairman of the Harvard Academy for International and Area Studies, wrote The Hispanic Challenge in Public Policy Magazine, (April, 2004). In it he observed, “[t]he persistence of Hispanic immigrants threatens to divide the United States into two people, two cultures, and two languages… The United States ignores this challenge at its peril… Mexican immigration differs from past immigration due to a combination of six factors: contiguity, scale, illegality, regional concentration, [in the American Southwest], persistence, and historical presence… Demographically, socially, and culturally, the reconquista (re-conquest) of the Southwest United States by Mexican immigrants is well underway.”
Our Founders recognized that our gifts from God; life, liberty and ownership of private property could only be realized by keeping government bound in tight constricting chains. Those chains have now been broken by an oversized super-state that aggressively pursues its own policies—including allowing our nation to be overrun with Mexican nationals who have no intention of assimilating. If our elected representatives would be more interested in upholding the rule of law instead of pandering to various minority groups or power brokers of the New World Order we would be in a much safer place. There is no doubt that the Obama Administration is in a full-court press to cram America into a regional, if not global government wherein our liberties will have been forever lost.
In light of current realities, there are only two viable options for those who wish to enjoy any of the liberties bestowed by God. One, return swiftly to a limited Constitutional government. If this type of reformation is possible at this late hour I have yet to see its formation. The current rupture in the Republican Party demonstrates the challenges facing this course.
Two, various states separate from the lawless socialist monstrosity that is destroying the few freedoms that remain and go it alone. In this option self-governance is to be preferred over slavery to the behemoth in Washington. If all men have a right before God to live free—as our forefathers believed and died to obtain—then this is not an incidence of treason or sedition. Those labels belong to the powers-that-be that insist on erasing not only our borders but our Constitutional way of life as well.