Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
bone up on your history. arizona was mexican land, until the united states violently overthrew the mexican army, and threw them a bit of money for the violently acquired lands, to make it seem somewhat legit (despite the fact the treaty was made under the threat of annexation).
.
Arizona was once Mexican land---which a few years earlier had been Spanish land, until the Mexicans violently revolted against Spain---which a little earlier had conquered Pima, Chiricahua, and Apache land, when these tribes were ruthlessly overthrown by the Spanish. But the only "bad guys" in all of this sordid history were the Americans---their big mistake was in "offering money" and trying to look "legit". Big mistake---the world doesn't respect sissies. If you're going to "conquer" someone, conquer them like you MEAN it. Don't get all sentimental about it and "offer them money"....You don't hear the Aztlan people offering to "negotiate" with us, do you?
How did this thread get hijacked by the illegal immigrant folks?
Isn't there a whole separate sub-forum for that?
Good point--I hadn't noticed our "drift"...I do think, though, that anti-open borders folks DO see a threat from "letting people in" without oversight. You're right, though---the thread has definitely taken on a life of its own.
Arizona was once Mexican land---which a few years earlier had been Spanish land, until the Mexicans violently revolted against Spain---which a little earlier had conquered Pima, Chiricahua, and Apache land, when these tribes were ruthlessly overthrown by the Spanish. But the only "bad guys" in all of this sordid history were the Americans---their big mistake was in "offering money" and trying to look "legit". Big mistake---the world doesn't respect sissies. If you're going to "conquer" someone, conquer them like you MEAN it. Don't get all sentimental about it and "offer them money"....You don't hear the Aztlan people offering to "negotiate" with us, do you?
many mexicans are descendants of the original tribesmen that inhabited the lands. they have more of a right to it than america, or spain.
many mexicans are descendants of the original tribesmen that inhabited the lands. they have more of a right to it than america, or spain.
Some Mexicans are also descended from people who practiced human sacrifice. I'm not sure exactly what that has to do with today---should we hold people accountable for the actions of their ancestors ?....I'm afraid we'd ALL be in big trouble....
many mexicans are descendants of the original tribesmen that inhabited the lands. they have more of a right to it than america, or spain.
Some of my ancestors were native americans. I guess by your argument I am allowed to claim all of Wyoming as mine and just go squat on some land owners property. Hmmm Maybe a huge ranch with a nice house on it.
Or I can say that was a very long time ago and not relevant to any discussion on the topic.
Besides why can't those lefties adapt and use right handed scissors.
When I was in school I hated sitting on the left side of a smart lefty. Almost impossible to copy off them on a test. How rude.
Some of my ancestors were native americans. I guess by your argument I am allowed to claim all of Wyoming as mine and just go squat on some land owners property. Hmmm Maybe a huge ranch with a nice house on it.
Or I can say that was a very long time ago and not relevant to any discussion on the topic.
Besides why can't those lefties adapt and use right handed scissors.
When I was in school I hated sitting on the left side of a smart lefty. Almost impossible to copy off them on a test. How rude.
My wife's ancestors--(mostly Indian w/ some Hispanic) once owned a "minor" ranch, upon which we still live. It was about 11,000 acres (many were much bigger)-or about 17 square miles. We now live on the remaining 6 acres. The other 10,994 acres now contain about 75,000 tract homes, a mall, and parts of 3 cities..
I'm thinking about starting "door-to-door" tomorrow, trying to convince these people to leave...because my wife actually has more right to their homes than they do...because someone "took it away", about 120 years ago, and offered money for it. Now she wants it back.
Hope I don't sound too silly---wish me luck!...
BTW I'm sure a lot of these new folks are "lefties"...
To some extent, the issue of crime among illegals acts as a "sweetener", making the position of being anti-illegal easier to defend.
I once had a professional environmental activist admit to me that very few people of ANY political persuasion actually CARE "two hoots" about the spotted owl (in the Pacific N.W.)--or the Kangaroo rat (in my area)...these are just "sweeteners" in the argument. That way, one doesn't have to say, "I don't want logging companies cutting down trees (even though lots of peoples' jobs depend on it)---But I just want to SAVE THE SPOTTED OWL"
Similarly, in Southern California, one doesn't have to say' "I don't want to see huge new subdivisions built (even though it means homes for thousands of people)--I'm only trying to SAVE THE HABITAT of the KANGAROO RAT".
In the case of illegals, one is able to say "I don't mind Mexicans moving in here illegally---I'm certainly no racist---I'm only objecting to them because I want to cut down on the CRIME they bring with them". It's a neat 'sweetener' for anyone who really DOES object to the immigrants for racist reasons. Unfortunately, though, as I've mentioned above, there are also quite LEGITIMATE reasons for objecting to crime committed by illegals--and you don't HAVE to be a racist to point this out.
The "sweetner" is better called a smoke screen. The Hall of Mirrors [that is the Immigration sub-forum] is a very scary place. These people complain that the migrants don't want to assimilate but it's really that they can't assimilate because they cannot get into the mainstream and they cannot get into the mainstream because they are not accepted by the current residents (who can vote) and the vicious cycle repeats. Self-fulfilling! This also can be applied to transplants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UB50
Hmmmm... "Hijacking." Isn't that something terrorists do? Could there possibly be "illegal immigrant forum terrorists"?
(Coming to a theater near you! Illegal Immigration Forum Terrorists Threaten to Take Over The WORLD!!!! )
The Religious Right has done it too. How did they manage to hijack the Catholic Church (or at least the hierarchy)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by macmeal
Good point--I hadn't noticed our "drift"...I do think, though, that anti-open borders folks DO see a threat from "letting people in" without oversight. You're right, though---the thread has definitely taken on a life of its own.
Ironically some of them are the ones who are enthusiastic about the War on Drugs. (How many wars do they want to fight at the same time?) They see a "threat" from drugs and it must be illegalized and stomped out. It seems making it illegal is causing more problems than it solves.
Ghost, are you an American citizen? You realize you're only inflamming the issue. A low intensity race war already exists in L.A.. It could spread. American territory is American territory. Illegal immigration will naturally die out over the next decade. Mexican fertility rates have been steadily declining. Populations will stabilze again. People will assimilate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
)
