Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ...

    ...

  • #2
    So? What exactly does this have to do with today's situation?

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

    Comment


    • #3
      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.

      Comment


      • #4
        Wrong.

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

        Comment


        • #5
          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)

          Comment


          • #6
            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!

            Comment


            • #7
              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.

              Comment


              • #8
                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.
                "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams on Defense of the boston Massacre

                Comment


                • #9
                  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.
                  "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams on Defense of the boston Massacre

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    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.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      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.....

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        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.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          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.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            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.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              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?
                              "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." John Adams on Defense of the boston Massacre

                              Comment



                              Working...
                              X