The only solution to Washington tyranny: Restore state sovereignty

Restoring state sovereignty

Don Hank

The San Bernardino terror and the ease with which two jihadi killers entered and took up permanent residence in the US show that the US is putting US citizens in harm’s way.

Look, Folks, the solution is right in front of us and its name is state sovereignty.

Large central governments controlling large swaths of territory comprised of regions with people holding different political opinions and different cultures are an evil in themselves, because ultimately, a small group grabs all the power via “education” and the msm and produces a situation for the people that threatens life and basic freedoms.

Central government is the culprit here, and Europe is instructive. The EU has grabbed virtually total political power over European nations. Yet now that the EU is insisting on opening its borders to Muslim refugees in defiance of the will of the people and the nations, there are nations that defy them refusing to open their borders, such as initially Hungary, and later, at least partially, the Balkan countries,and now even Sweden, the country with the most open-border policy of all Europe. Under duress, European nations are rediscovering their sovereignty.

It’s not that the EU lacks laws to stop them, but it has no real power over them in cases where the exercise of such power threatens the security and liberty of the nations. They can’t enforce laws that are patently bad.

Our US states are analogous to these EU nations and their dire situation is also analogous. Our states do have a God-given right to sovereignty when the central government literally harms the citizens of the states as they are doing now with Obama’s resettlement of Syrian refugees and his policies of amnesty and open borders, all by fiat. Every American must know that no law that forces a people to harm itself can be Constitutional, regardless of whatever the Supreme Court says. The imported jihadis themselves are bringing this to light as they did in San Bernardino.

Eventually, our US states will be forced to do what Hungary and its copycats did and close their borders.

Here is what should be done now and will be done once enough Americans have died:

States that no longer wish to commit suicide will decide who enters their territory. If a person, even a US citizen, tries to enter a state, they may be denied entry on the basis of background checks. If they entered the US illegally, they may be barred — even if Washington gave them citizenship, because the state may decide whether this person was entitled to that based on the security concerns of the state. The states must be keenly aware that the Feds have overstepped their bounds as defined by Article 4, Section 4 of the Constitution (see below). If a person desirous of entering a state has entered the US illegally, then the state may deny them entry on those grounds, legitimately claiming that the federal government exceeded the powers granted to it under the Constitution.

Naturally, the Supreme Court will declare the state’s position un-Constitutional. However, we must examine the European model to see what can be accomplished regardless of the wishes of central-government agencies, such as the Supreme Court, which today is nothing but an interest group defending the Washington cabal and no longer represents the people of the US. Again, taking our cue from Europe, the EU government has declared, under the Schengen Agreement, that no EU nation may close its border except under specific extraordinary circumstances that threaten the country in question. However, initially, when the Hungarians closed the border, the requisites defined by Brussels may not actually have been met for this closing. However, the Hungarians, the Balkan countries and Sweden did not beg the EU dictators in Brussels for help in securing their borders or seek legal recourse. They simply resorted to their sovereign right to self-determination, bypassing the EU, and made it clear that this is the way it is going to be. Brussels made noises that they would be punished, but nothing happened. In a revolutionary move, Budapest (like the capitals of the other renegade nations that followed suit) faced down Brussels and won, at least for now, thereby restoring its sovereignty and providing for its own security. Indeed, in so doing, it caused the other above-cited nations to take notice and still others seem poised to do the same. EU officials are now warning of a potential collapse of the EU, and although dire consequences are elicited by the cunning EU officials, there could be no better solution. The same can happen in the US, with states declaring a state of emergency following a mass jihadi murder, and while the US could bluster and threaten, if the state stood firm, there would be little Washington could do short of civil war.

If a person is from a terror exporting country and has entered the US after a certain age, say, 15, then they can be denied entry into a state based on the fact that their country of origin is a terror exporting country. If it can be proved that they are not SUNNIS, then the state may allow their entry. ONLY the SUNNIS are pursuing jihad (where do we read that in our PC press? Even Trump ignores this fact).  Whether this is “constitutional” or not is irrelevant. The state must stand firm or perish. Indeed, the grounds for doing so could be a declaration of state-level emergency or even a claim that the state is at war (with jihadis, for example), whatever it takes.

The legal grounds for state-level initiatives are clear:

Article 4, Section 4 of the US Constitution

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature can-not be convened) against domestic Violence.

The clear-cut grounds for the states to ignore US statues are that the US has failed to protect the states from invasion and/or domestic violence — as it actually did by admitting the San Bernardino jihadis into our country — and if the Supreme Court makes excuses for the jihad-sponsoring government, then it too must be defied on the simple grounds that it too is blatantly ignoring the above-cited clause. A grave risk to the people of the state is always legitimate grounds to ignore federal orders because no government can demand that its own people commit suicide. Everything depends on the will of the people to survive and to know and understand their God-given rights to life and liberty.

This restoration of basic state sovereignty could either happen now at the discretion of states with security minded populations or – based on the European model — it will happen spontaneously when it becomes clear that this kind of security is vital to keep the population safe from imminent harm. For now, there are enough libertarians and leftist liberals to convince the sheeple of most states that the absurd borderless-world ideology trumps security.

But once a critical mass of terrorist murders has been reached, there will be a spontaneous and unstoppable movement to secure our people, with or without the approval of our terror-supporting federal government, and the states will be at the forefront.

Trying to replace our corrupt central government with people who actually care about our nation’s security will fail as a permanent remedy, just as it has failed in Europe. A Trump presidency may be a vital stop-gap measure, but in fact, given the fickle nature of national political sentiment, only the individual states can provide for their security in the long run.

Sooner or later we will learn the valuable lesson that the states have the right to self-determination and only need to reclaim it. Those that lose this right to the federal government do so voluntarily by surrendering their sovereignty, ie, wrongly taking federal statues and their interpretation by a corrupt and ideology-driven Supreme Court – rather than We the People — as supreme. The number of dead Americans that lead us to that awakening depends on how soon our states respond to the threat.

Do you agree or disagree with the above analysis? Post your response at the forum below.

Further reading

http://conpats.blogspot.com/2014/02/chuck-kolb-02162014.html

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hank/140522

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hank/141110

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hank/140522

NATO’s double standard being exposed

NATO’s double standard being exposed

Don Hank

Long before Russia got involved militarily in Syria, I had read in the Greek press about the frequent invasions of Greek airspace by Turkish fighters. No international organization — not the EU, not NATO, not the US government — none of them even issued an opinion let alone a scintilla of a rebuke in Turkey’s direction. Except for Greece and Russia, the msm were mum. Then when Turkey shot down the Russian fighter over Syria and the pilot was murdered by Turkish allies on the ground, the Western allies finally issued an opinion. Obama said only that all countries have a right to defend their borders. He didn’t mention that countries who are in the same coalition on the same identical mission are not expected to shoot down each other’s planes on the grounds that these planes spent a few seconds in the other ally’s airspace. Besides, why didn’t he say that when Turkey started making regular incursions into Greek airspace? His silence was deafening.

Now Barack Obama, as president of the US, has more power over NATO than anyone alive today. So what does the Obama-led NATO say about the shootdown of the Russian jet?

Why they say that NATO-member Turkey has every right to defend its airspace but NATO-member Greece does not.

Here’s what the Greek press says:

 

http://www.takaluteraedo.gr/2015/12/blog-post_19.html

 

My translation of excerpt:

PROTOFANIS CHALLENGES NATO Secretary General:

“the Turkish violations in Greek air space are a different thing”

Commenting on the downing of the Russian aircraft in Syria, NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg reaffirmed Turkey’s right to defend its borders. However, when reminded of the violations of Greek airspace by Turkey, he stressed that these are “two completely different situations.”

Well-known CNN journalist Hala Gorani said that the NATO Secretary General has essentially “double standards” in this case and should apply the same standards to everyone, reports Russian news agency RIA Novosti.

Therefore, according to Mr. Stoltenberg, Turkey has the absolute right to defend its airspace, but Greece “may not.” In other words, one NATO country is free to violate the air borders of another, and the latter is not allowed to “respond.”

 

END EXCERPT

 

This story of the Turkish encroachments on Greek airspace is all over the Greek press. Here is another of many examples:

 

My translation of excerpt:

 

http://www.enikos.gr/international/356097,Kasoylidhs-Oi-Ellhnes-pilotoi-panta-deixnoyn-egkrateia-stis-Toyrkikes-paraviase.html

 

Kasoulides: Greeks pilots always show restraint in Turkish violations – VIDEO

During the joint press conference of Foreign Minister of Cyprus, Ioannis Kasoulides and his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, the Cypriot official was asked about the Turkish violations in Greek air space.

“I fully support the position of the Greek prime minister, Alexis Tsipras, that Greek pilots always show restraint whenever Turkish fighters invade Greek airspace, without having tragic results and hoped the Turks would show similar behavior when their own air space was violated for a few seconds”, said Ioannis Kasoulides.

 

END EXCERPT

 

This goes to show that the world is noticing the extreme hypocrisy of NATO and the West in general.

Of course, if it stopped at Greece, the hypocrites may not have much to worry about.

But the story of Erdogan as a villain is spreading around the world. A search of the German press yesterday showed that even the most popular news sites, such as Bild, were spreading Putin’s story about Turkish president Erdogan’s involvement with ISIS and how, for example, Erdogan’s son Bilal had purchased millions of dollars worth of stolen ISIS oil for resale.

This morning I saw ample coverage of the Erdogan scandal on Italian cable channel RAI. Only at the very end of this coverage did they briefly mention Turkey’s denial of the story. Italian viewers saw a Moscow war room with oversized satellite photos of the ISIS oil installations and tank trucks headed for Turkey in various directions. The presentation was done as a clear indictment, showing Erdogan as a culprit funding ISIS and offering no excuses.

No matter how hard the Madwoman of Berlin tries to persuade Europe to accept Turkey as a member of the EU, the public pressure is building and will not stop.

Thanks to Putin’s saintly restraint and his fearlessness in sharing these satellite images, Erdogan is emerging as the big loser in this propaganda war and the public is gradually siding with Putin.