According to history of this great country, it is highly possible that your ancestors were illegal aliens. Because the US history is full of illegal aliens:

William Hogeland: U.S. history full of illegal immigration.


Published: January 02, 2007

Every nation is a nation of immigrants. Go back far enough and you'll find us all, millions of potential lives, tucked in the DNA of our African mother, Lucy. But the immigrant experience in the United States is justly celebrated, and perhaps no aspect of that experience is more quintessentially American than our long heritage of illegal immigration.
You wouldn't know it from the immigration debate going on all year (the bipartisan immigration bill-in-progress, announced last week, is unlikely to mention it), but America's pioneer values developed in a distinctly illegal context. In 1763, George III drew a line on a map stretching from modern-day Maine to modern-day Georgia, along the crest of the Appalachians. He declared it illegal to claim or settle land west of the line, all of which he reserved for Native Americans.
George Washington, a young colonel in the Virginia militia, instructed his land-buying agents in the many ways of getting around the law. Although Washington was not alone in acquiring forbidden tracts, few were as energetic in the illegal acquisition of western land. And Washington was a model of decorum compared with Ethan Allen, a rowdy from Connecticut who settled with his brothers in a part of the Green Mountains known as the Hampshire Grants (later known as "Vermont"). The province of New York held title to the land, but Allen asserted his own kind of claim: He threw New Yorkers out, Tony Soprano style, then offered to sell their lots to what he hoped would be a flood of fellow illegals from Connecticut.
Meanwhile, illegal pioneers began moving across the Alleghenies and into the upper Ohio Valley, violating the king's 1763 proclamation and a few more besides. (George would today be accused of softness on immigration; he kept shifting the line westward.) Immigrants from such déclassé spots as Germany and Ireland violated the laws and settled where they pleased. The upper Ohio was rife with illegal immigrants, ancestors of people who, in country clubs today, are implying a Mayflower ancestry.
Parallels to today's illegal immigration are striking. Then as now, it was potentially deadly to bring a family across the line. But once across, illegals had a good chance of avoiding arrest and settling in. Border patrols, in the forms of the British Army and provincial militias, were stretched thin. The 18th-century forest primeval, like a modern city, offered ample opportunities for getting lost. Complex economies thrived in the virgin backwoods, unfettered by legitimate property titles.
When conflicts developed between the first and second waves of illegals, some salient social ironies arose, too. By the early 1770s, George Washington had amassed vast tracts to which his titles were flatly invalid. The Revolution rectified that. With British law void, Washington emerged from the war with his titles legal by default. But he acquired another problem: Low-class illegals were squatting on his newly authenticated, highly valuable property.
Washington harbored no fond feeling for breakers of laws that he too had recently flouted. "It is hard upon me," he lamented without irony, "to have property which has been fairly obtained disputed and withheld." He went to court to have the squatters evicted, complaining that they had "not taken those necessary steps pointed out by the law." He was appealing to righteousness from atop a high but wobbly horse.
Descendants of the great immigration experiences of the 19th and 20th centuries visit the Ellis Island Immigration Museum to learn of the tribulations of ancestors who risked much to become Americans. Those of us whose ancestors risked everything as illegal immigrants, and in the process helped found a nation, owe our forebears a debt of gratitude, too. Without their daring disregard of immigration laws, we might not be here today.
William Hogeland, the author of "The Whiskey Rebellion: George Washington, Alexander Hamilton and the Frontier Rebels Who Challenged America's Newfound Sovereignty," wrote this article for the New York Times.

So? What exactly does this have to do with today's situation?

You cannot compare the situation from ancient history to today's chaos.

The best teacher is history. We learn from history. We cannot move forward without looking back. No matter how you strongly disagree, the fact remains that the only people who can claim America is theirs are the native Indians. The rest were immigrants, legal or illegal.

Wrong.

They entered across the Barring Straights when it was a land bridge.

Bering...
and who gives a $hit? We have laws today, and border controls, so irresponsible $hitbags need to obey those rules or, head back across the land bridge (but bring some snorkeling equipment)

What does it have to do with today's situation?
Well, it means that if your ancestors were illegal immigrants (highly possible), and broken the laws by for instance, settling beyond the line drawn by Washington (the western side of it), which was against the law, then well, you are here illegally.

actually,mine came over to engage in the civil war, and had paid passage to come to the budding America. My ancestor fought for the North, and was awarded some land for his efforts.
For those of you trying to scam our system, GO HOME!! We don't need you! You have contributed zilch to America and yet you whine for undeserved benefits....eff you...leave.
I support LEGAL immigration, from the outset (i.e., no phony marriages, no phony student to H1b visas, no EWIs followed by a miraculous marriage, like those cows on immigrate2us.net seem to fall for)...earn your way here through honest means, fine with me....scam your way, and I will gladly drive your sorry a$$ to the nearest airport, carry your bags to check-in and wave your illegal butt good-bye!

Someone12 you forget that some people scam their way through the system because there is no "LEGAL" immigration to America today, at least IMO. The legal routes have extreme requirements and honestly the illegal immigrants get more benefits than those going the legal way. Those students you claim are phony pay more than your punk *** to be educated in this system. Those phony marriages happen because the "legal" immigration laws are non-existent for the honest man. Employers who are supposed to be honest hire cheap labor for the sake of profit regardless of the background of the worker. These are the things to tackle. Fix the immigration laws to allow honest people, instead of tightening the border and having fellow Americans attract the illegals anyway, causing an exploitation of the system and frustration to both legal immigrants and the American people.

My two cents.

To the untrained eye, it would appear that William Hogeland may have formulated an interest hypothesis, but if one looks at history of that period on a whole, Mr. Hogeland is again making controversy on a subject that he is trying to purpetuate.

The Royal Proclamation of 1763 is a complex piece of legislation that has been interpreted for over 200 years, on both sides of the Atlantic Ocian, while having its roots seeded in the precepts of the American Revolution. Let us go back to the 7 Years War, affectionately known as the French and Indian War, when it ended Feb 10, 1763 with the treaty of Paris. England gained the disputed territories beyond the Appalachian mountains, Quebec, Florida, and Grenada. And since many of the natives were on the side of the French, they were extremely distraught now being in the control of the British. As a result, you had the Pontiacd Rebellion (May, 1763-1768) by Ottawa Chief, Pontiac, in what is now the Great Lakes region. Many colonists abandoned settlements were abandoned (over 4000 civilians displaced). Then, in October 1763, King George III signed the Royal Proclamation of 1763. The Proclamation accomplished several tasks: created four new colonies, established a crown monopoloy on the fur trade, limited expansion by the British colonists in the Americas, and awarded parcels of land in the new territory by loyal soldiers who served in that theater.

Let us now look at that infamous line that King George III drew. What has been disputed is whether the line was a permenant line or simply a temporary boundary between American colonists and the natives. When we look at the supplemental treaties to the Royal Proclomation, Treaty of Fort Stanwix, Treay of Harl labor, and the Treaty of Lochaber, it readjusted the line several times. Furthermore and as previously stated, there were already many settlements located in the territory as well as existing land claims yet to be settled. In addition, the Royal Proclamation did allow acreage of land to be given to loyal soldiers who fought in the Americas. The land was to be granted without fees or reward in the new colonies, including the territory now ceded to Great Britan. Thus, the Crown had created a monopoly to any land speculation for future settlements and to keep the colonists closer to the oceas as to more easily control and regulate. This was the beginning of the disconnect between the colonies and the Crown which culmunated in the Stamp Act and other notorious acts by the Tory Government in London. Most fur traders and colonists ignored the Royal Proclamation for economic, political, and practical reasons. It simply was an attempt by the Royal crown to regulate the colonies and at least temporarily ease the native Americans. But the Crown also never intended to hold the Native Americans as equals in the long term as evident by the aftermath of the Pontiacs Rebellion and the subsequent treaties to extend the Royal Proclamation line.

In the United States, the first act which legally defined illegal aliens came when the US Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. It defined illegal alien by ethnicity.

The untrained eye? What about all the treaties that were broken? Smacks to me like the claim the Boers made when they said the Africans were not inhabiting their land so they were free to settle it. looks like this piece has muted the two clowns Someone and Sun Devil. If we bare the bones of American history, then a majority of these bigoted clowns may think twice. We can only hope.

quote:

actually,mine came over to engage in the civil war, and had paid passage to come to the budding America.

Ok, I usually don't respond to your posts Someone12 as you are on my ignore list, but thank you for explaining your immigration situation here.
So your ancestors PAID a passage to this land. Hmmm.... That's very interesting.
Then why do you think that paying back taxes and fees to apply for legalization via the CIR is a bad idea?
Double standards ey?

Thank you Hudson for your history review. Quite interesting. It sort of makes the term "illegal" relative....

because, IPerson, my ancestors had NOT violated any laws prior to their arrival, unlike the 12m DIRTBAG illegals in MY country at this time.
I do not support paying some paltry fine to receive a green card....instead, these irresponsible jagoffss should be sent back to their own country and wallow in their misery for a long long time.
There are legal ways to immigrate to the US...step one, however, is to abide and obey all the rules from the outset instead of cheating the system and/or using fraud to get here.....

So, ok Someone12. I temporarily put you out of my ignore list.
Now, can you tell me what you do for a living and the approximate annual income range you fall in. Also what is the highest education level you graduated from? This is just to illustrate something for you. General information will suffice. Thanks.

white collar work (management), income in the low six figures annually, degree in Business Administration. IQ in the high 140s.
Have nothing against LEGAL immigration to America, from the beginning, do not agree with illegal immigration in any form.

Haha, I was just thinking to myself, if you are in the field of management, it is no wonder that immigrants are about to run you out of the place. Hopefully your job cant be offshored because your posts say nothing about someone with an IQ of 140.

my job cannot be 'offshored' - and no illegal immigrant can do my job, under any circumstances.
As to how I choose to write, style-wise, that says more about one's IQ than less....
And, in regards to illegal immigration, its supporters and the actual ones as well, not one of them has been able to provide a rational, logical reason why 12M illegals should be rewarded instead of deported. The usual response from either group attempts to label me or others who do not share any enthusiasm for illegal immigration as 'racist' - but I am not aware that illegal aliens are a race (a fact overlooked 100% of the time by illegals and their supporters)......but no doubt you have the only true logical reason why illegals should be rewarded ahead of everyone playing by our rules???? If so, let's hear it. But if you are about to play that tiresome refrain about 'native Americans were here first' or 'these people are looking for a better life' - well, neither of those shop-worn excuses holds water in today's modern world. It does not address the irresponsibility inherent in every illegal and most of their supporters; it dodges the issue of fairness and responsibility and avoids discussing the economic and educational destruction that illegal immigration causes upon the AMerican taxpayers.

Well well, as soon as I posted my post, I regretted it, knowing you would lie Someone12.
The person you described as yourself would not spend countless hours posting garbage.
Didnt you know managers and highly educated people have no time to post on internet forums?
They have much more important things to take care of than worry about illegal aliens.

The point I was trying to make by asking you your whereabouts is that no middle class person, with high school diploma or even undergraduate college diploma who is not an engineer or a businessman running a million dollar company, able to immigrate to the US legally.
If you fall into this group and were born outside of the US, you have no chance.
There is simply NO legal way to immigrate to the US at the current stage.

quote:

Originally posted by Someone12:
white collar work (management), income in the low six figures annually, degree in Business Administration. IQ in the high 140s.
Have nothing against LEGAL immigration to America, from the beginning, do not agree with illegal immigration in any form.

name the NAICS code?

dear IPerson: thus, I have the perfect disguise.
And no matter what I would have posted, you would have twisted the situation around to fit your so-called views.
People can immigrate to the US without having fancy degrees....there is a skilled worker category available and while the number of visas that can be granted annually are limited, that was the decision of Congress -- designed to protect the AMerican worker....or are you not interested in that fact?
You should study immigration law sometime....