Brian Curry
Active Member
[Broken External Image]:
You are all illegal immigrants !
You are all illegal immigrants !
i think this is a good thing
- Thread starter Bill Barber
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
Jerry Medlin
Active Member
Man, I totally agree with what is being said here. I'm a veteran of the Viet Nam era, and have been watching this country go down hill for years because of the politicians in this country. The majority of them are all for themselves instead of the good of the country. My idea, and what I have been doing is whenever an election comes around, whomever is IN office at the time, I vote AGAINST them, and for new blood. If things don't improve by the next election, out they go and I vote for the new candidate. If we go thru a few elections with that seniero, after a while I think the politicians will get the hint.And we DAMN sure need term limits for Congressmen & Senators. And you get NO retirement unless you get re-elected enough times to put in 20 years, like most everyone else in the working world.
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
brianC, I really hope you're trying to be facetious.
No, we're not. The indians didn't have a concept of a country--nor did they allow immigration of any sort into their tribal approximation.
How can a race that believed that no one could "own" land claim to have a country, which is land owned by a nation? That there is a fallacy.
Furthermore, we didn't sneak in and abuse their systems of government and public service, we fought em hard and we fought em well, and they gave us hell for it. We won our country. If you do not believe that the victor gets the spoils, then I take it that you also do not condone many forms of competition in our daily lives, such as sports or voting.
Lastly, your picture is heinously wrong. Columbus in 1492 did not land anywhere near injuns on the Great Plains. Also if these injuns are border patrol, then they have officially decided to cede all lands east of the plains to the White Man, as by the time plains indians had guns, whitey had already claimed all land east of the Mississippi.
So, even if we ignore the fallacy of the 1492 statement at the bottom, your picture states that anyone east of the Mississippi is not an illegal immigrant, but a legal denizen of that land.
No, we're not. The indians didn't have a concept of a country--nor did they allow immigration of any sort into their tribal approximation.
How can a race that believed that no one could "own" land claim to have a country, which is land owned by a nation? That there is a fallacy.
Furthermore, we didn't sneak in and abuse their systems of government and public service, we fought em hard and we fought em well, and they gave us hell for it. We won our country. If you do not believe that the victor gets the spoils, then I take it that you also do not condone many forms of competition in our daily lives, such as sports or voting.
Lastly, your picture is heinously wrong. Columbus in 1492 did not land anywhere near injuns on the Great Plains. Also if these injuns are border patrol, then they have officially decided to cede all lands east of the plains to the White Man, as by the time plains indians had guns, whitey had already claimed all land east of the Mississippi.
So, even if we ignore the fallacy of the 1492 statement at the bottom, your picture states that anyone east of the Mississippi is not an illegal immigrant, but a legal denizen of that land.
Bill Barber
Well-Known Member
KL, your:wacko::lol:
My grandparents Immigrated from the Ukraine, Legally, thru Ellis Island in 1919, with papers.
My grandparents Immigrated from the Ukraine, Legally, thru Ellis Island in 1919, with papers.
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
Mr. Barber, I'm only trying to show some misguided person that the Injuns never had America as a country, so the Brits that founded America aren't illegal immigrants...and if they were, as that asinine picture asserts, then even though all of our ancestors have papers, those papers would mean nothing and we'd still be illegals....I'm sure you see how stupid the picture's argument is
For the record, I agree with the man in the video on his points about america, though I don't have complete trust in him.
I understand why he makes references to muskets though--by the time 2012 rolls around, they may be the only legal firearm left in America.
For the record, I agree with the man in the video on his points about america, though I don't have complete trust in him.
I understand why he makes references to muskets though--by the time 2012 rolls around, they may be the only legal firearm left in America.
gary s
Well-Known Member
just keep in mind, KL has underlying racism isssue's
Mark K 2
Well-Known Member
Isn't the term "injun" considered an insulting term for Native Americans? Oh... it's just KL. He still uses the term "japs" to describe Japanese. What a putz.
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
KL,
If you met a mentally challenged person on the street eating an ice cream cone, and you were hungry and really wanted that ice cream cone, would it be alright to take advantage of that mentally challenged person and take their ice cream? Maybe they don't understand everything you or I understand and you take it from them. Maybe you tell them something like: "You know, there is an ice cream fairy that will give you an ice cream every day for the rest of your life if you give me your ice cream now!"
The mentally challenged person might do it, because they don't know any better. But that doesn't negate the fact that YOU do know better.
The settlers that "traded" hundreds of thousands of acres and whole territories of land with the Native Americans (N.A.s), giving them beads, or blankets, or whatever they felt was appropriate took advantage of the N.As. When entering into a deal, or in this case, a "trade contract", both parties should be aware of what is being given and the significance of the transaction. The fact that N.A.s had no concept of land ownership meant that they were incapable of entering into such a contract in an appropriate manner. Likewise, since they really didn't claim to own the land, some could say that transaction would be null and void on that ground alone.
Ultimately it was "might makes right" on the transaction, which, I have no problem with because it was done hundreds of years ago, and I can't change things. Also, I am not so naive as to deny the principles of imperialism that built most of this world and how, again, ultimately, it has led to the world we have today.
TJR
If you met a mentally challenged person on the street eating an ice cream cone, and you were hungry and really wanted that ice cream cone, would it be alright to take advantage of that mentally challenged person and take their ice cream? Maybe they don't understand everything you or I understand and you take it from them. Maybe you tell them something like: "You know, there is an ice cream fairy that will give you an ice cream every day for the rest of your life if you give me your ice cream now!"
The mentally challenged person might do it, because they don't know any better. But that doesn't negate the fact that YOU do know better.
The settlers that "traded" hundreds of thousands of acres and whole territories of land with the Native Americans (N.A.s), giving them beads, or blankets, or whatever they felt was appropriate took advantage of the N.As. When entering into a deal, or in this case, a "trade contract", both parties should be aware of what is being given and the significance of the transaction. The fact that N.A.s had no concept of land ownership meant that they were incapable of entering into such a contract in an appropriate manner. Likewise, since they really didn't claim to own the land, some could say that transaction would be null and void on that ground alone.
Ultimately it was "might makes right" on the transaction, which, I have no problem with because it was done hundreds of years ago, and I can't change things. Also, I am not so naive as to deny the principles of imperialism that built most of this world and how, again, ultimately, it has led to the world we have today.
TJR
Last edited by a moderator:
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
Though the fall of imperialism is what created most of our international issues
(e.g. Way to go Britain, gotta love the Middle East.)
TJR, the indian was not retarded, as neither of us imply. I'm not disposed to believing that the red man didn't know that the transaction was disfavorable to him, especially not after word got around that the first indian got screwed. Perhaps they signed because they realized that they'd be obliterated as the other option. "Live to fight another day"...which they did, and ultimately lost.
Aren't you the guy who tried to incite protesters at the Republican stands at your state fair?
Firstly, I was born here, thus I am a Native American, and the term "injun" does not insult me.
TJR, seriously, just call them indians. We're all native americans, lest we not be born here.
So, when are ya'll going to march on FedEx Stadium and declare the Redskins to be racist?
Secondly, the Japs still use the term "Gaijin" to describe us, which is horribly offensive. In no way can it not be offensive. Even modern television shows like ABC's FlashForward have used it in a manner of speech oriented at offending the white man.
Lol, condemning me as a "racist" because I understand that what was "racist slang" 70 years ago actually saves on syllables as opposed to "Japanese".
Do you all feel guilty for the skin you were born in? Seriously.
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
KL,
Rationalize much?
I say N.A. because I WANT to say N.A. Period! No other reason.
If you want to say injun, or jap, or gook, or ni66er, or kike, or anything else, then just SAY IT, don't apologize for it, and don't rationalize it.
But, if you do say those things, don't get your panties in a twist when people take offense or try to enlighten you on the racism they perceive.
TJR
Rationalize much?
I say N.A. because I WANT to say N.A. Period! No other reason.
If you want to say injun, or jap, or gook, or ni66er, or kike, or anything else, then just SAY IT, don't apologize for it, and don't rationalize it.
But, if you do say those things, don't get your panties in a twist when people take offense or try to enlighten you on the racism they perceive.
TJR
Bill Barber
Well-Known Member
the braintrust on this site is amazing:lol:
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
Bill,
"Braintrust". LOL.
I guess not everyone can be the "piece of work" that you are. :banana:
TJR
