Home› A Moving Train

We Didn't Steal It.

onelongsongonelongsong Posts: 3,517
edited July 2007 in A Moving Train
http://www.cnsnews.com/indepth/archive/199809/IND19980914g.html

i'm tired of hearing about how we stole land from mexico. here's the true story of what happened.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«13

Comments

  • dunkmandunkman Posts: 19,646
    all US soil was stolen anyway.
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • Pacomc79Pacomc79 Posts: 9,404
    dunkman wrote:
    all US soil was stolen anyway.


    all soil of all soverign nations has been taken by force.

    History is simply written by the victors.
    My Girlfriend said to me..."How many guitars do you need?" and I replied...."How many pairs of shoes do you need?" She got really quiet.
  • onelongsongonelongsong Posts: 3,517
    dunkman wrote:
    all US soil was stolen anyway.

    if we want to stoop to that mentality; all land everywhere was stolen from someone. EXCEPT a good portion of america. land was bought from the american indians; the french; and mexico. they received compensation. mexico is still not a developed nation. we bought thousands of acres of worthless desert. most of it is still worthless desert. but something everyone seems to forget is the people living in those states VOTED to become a part of the union. if the mexicans living in california at the time wanted to remain under a dictators rule they could have voted that way. but they didn't. instead of being mad at their ancestors who voted to become part of the union; we hear that the us stole the land. had california stayed a part of mexico it still wouldn't be developed and they'd be sneeking into the us FROM california.
    if the us is so bad; why is everyone trying to get in?
  • dunkmandunkman Posts: 19,646
    onelongsong wrote:
    if the us is so bad; why is everyone trying to get in?

    so they can shoot each other?
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • onelongsongonelongsong Posts: 3,517
    dunkman wrote:
    so they can shoot each other?

    i should have expected that kind of response.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    onelongsong wrote:
    if we want to stoop to that mentality; all land everywhere was stolen from someone. EXCEPT a good portion of america. land was bought from the american indians; the french; and mexico. they received compensation. mexico is still not a developed nation. we bought thousands of acres of worthless desert. most of it is still worthless desert. but something everyone seems to forget is the people living in those states VOTED to become a part of the union. if the mexicans living in california at the time wanted to remain under a dictators rule they could have voted that way. but they didn't. instead of being mad at their ancestors who voted to become part of the union; we hear that the us stole the land. had california stayed a part of mexico it still wouldn't be developed and they'd be sneeking into the us FROM california.
    if the us is so bad; why is everyone trying to get in?

    blah blah blah blah

    and 'everyone' is trying to get in beacuse of the fabulous marketing campaign about the united states being the land of opportunity, a big old melting pot, home of the brave and land of the free. :)
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • onelongsongonelongsong Posts: 3,517
    catefrances wrote:
    blah blah blah blah

    and 'everyone' is trying to get in beacuse of the fabulous marketing campaign about the united states being the land of opportunity, a big old melting pot, home of the brave and land of the free. :)

    exactly. there's years of waiting to immigrate legally and over a million sneeking in each year illegally. what do we have that everyone wants?
  • CosmoCosmo Posts: 12,225
    catefrances wrote:
    blah blah blah blah

    and 'everyone' is trying to get in beacuse of the fabulous marketing campaign about the united states being the land of opportunity, a big old melting pot, home of the brave and land of the free. :)
    ...
    They want to come here so they can inherit the arrogance to call the rest of the world a bunch of stupid fucking foriegners who live in crappy countries.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • MLC2006MLC2006 Posts: 861
    it's funny that dunkman likes to talk shit about the US when the only thing his country is known for is the invention of the man dress.
  • melodiousmelodious Posts: 1,719
    onelongsong wrote:
    exactly. there's years of waiting to immigrate legally and over a million sneeking in each year illegally. what do we have that everyone wants?
    according to my resources what we have is gainful employment that many americans wouldn't do..
    many nationales feel that human ugliness is more prevailant south of the border..

    p.s. did you ever hear of manifest destiny???? ;)
    all insanity:
    a derivitive of nature.
    nature is god
    god is love
    love is light
  • CollinCollin Posts: 4,931
    MLC2006 wrote:
    it's funny that dunkman likes to talk shit about the US when the only thing his country is known for is the invention of the man dress.

    Some sort of joke, funny.
    onelongsong wrote:
    had california stayed a part of mexico it still wouldn't be developed

    You have some weird psychic powers, man.
    if the us is so bad; why is everyone trying to get in?

    What kind of logic is that? I think you can come up with something smarter than that.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • kenny olavkenny olav Posts: 3,319
    onelongsong wrote:
    http://www.cnsnews.com/indepth/archive/199809/IND19980914g.html

    i'm tired of hearing about how we stole land from mexico. here's the true story of what happened.

    Let's see if this makes sense.

    "Despite the huge amount of territory involved in the treaty, only about 80,000 Mexicans lived in the whole Southwest"

    Why exactly does the number of Mexicans living there matter? So when 300,000 Americans moved in for the Gold Rush of 1849 and declare California a U.S. state a year later, we can just assume the now vastly outnumbered Mexicans were cool with that?

    Furthermore, the internal struggles between the indigenous peoples and the Spainards had nothing to do with the Americans.

    Congressman Abraham Lincoln was a strong opponent of then President Polk for his waging of the Mexican War, but ironically, The Claremont Institute which put out this article "has great admiration for the statesmanship of America's founding fathers as well as that of Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill."
  • melodiousmelodious Posts: 1,719
    Kenny Olav wrote:
    Let's see if this makes sense.

    "Despite the huge amount of territory involved in the treaty, only about 80,000 Mexicans lived in the whole Southwest"

    Why exactly does the number of Mexicans living there matter? So when 300,000 Americans moved in for the Gold Rush of 1849 and declare California a U.S. state a year later, we can just assume the now vastly outnumbered Mexicans were cool with that?
    It's a horrible mess...
    all insanity:
    a derivitive of nature.
    nature is god
    god is love
    love is light
  • onelongsongonelongsong Posts: 3,517
    Kenny Olav wrote:
    Let's see if this makes sense.

    "Despite the huge amount of territory involved in the treaty, only about 80,000 Mexicans lived in the whole Southwest"

    Why exactly does the number of Mexicans living there matter? So when 300,000 Americans moved in for the Gold Rush of 1849 and declare California a U.S. state a year later, we can just assume the now vastly outnumbered Mexicans were cool with that?

    Furthermore, the internal struggles between the indigenous peoples and the Spainards had nothing to do with the Americans.

    Congressman Abraham Lincoln was a strong opponent of then President Polk for his waging of the Mexican War, but ironically, The Claremont Institute which put out this article "has great admiration for the statesmanship of America's founding fathers as well as that of Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill."

    have you ever seen this vast amount of territory? it's worthless. at least most of it is. worthless desert uninhabitable by humans.
    but wait; let's look at all the territory england has conquered over the world. from india; to the falklands to austrailia. why don't we hear about this?
    mexico is still an undeveloped country and the chances that they would have built hoover dam to bring water to some of this area are nil. the southwest would still only be area to pass through to get into the us.
  • JeanieJeanie Posts: 9,446
    onelongsong wrote:
    ......let's look at all the territory england has conquered over the world. from india; to the falklands to australia. why don't we hear about this?

    Um.....England did not and will never "conquer" Australia. :)
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • onelongsongonelongsong Posts: 3,517
    Jeanie wrote:
    Um.....England did not and will never "conquer" Australia. :)

    the queen seems to think differently.
  • JeanieJeanie Posts: 9,446
    onelongsong wrote:
    the queen seems to think differently.

    Actually, the queen has said in recent times that she would support Australia becoming a Republic if that is what the people choose.
    Unfortunately the only model that was presented to us at referendum by the current government made it impossible to vote for a Republic.

    And as to us being "conquered" in the past, well the English never had to "conquer" Australia. They used Australia as yet another means to "conquer" the poor classes in their own country, not to mention as a dumping ground for all the poor sods that they were busy starving out of Ireland.

    When push comes to shove Australians have stood up to the English.
    I mean lets face it, they can't even field a cricket team to beat us anymore! ;)
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • melodiousmelodious Posts: 1,719
    onelongsong wrote:
    have you ever seen this vast amount of territory? it's worthless. at least most of it is. worthless desert uninhabitable by humans.
    but wait; let's look at all the territory england has conquered over the world. from india; to the falklands to austrailia. why don't we hear about this?
    mexico is still an undeveloped country and the chances that they would have built hoover dam to bring water to some of this area are nil. the southwest would still only be area to pass through to get into the us.
    well, i think U.S. is competing up in the ranks with colonization. It's really about one rule...

    and many fruits of life to be found in the desert when one considers how nature provides..have you not seen suvivor man.....:)

    for instance the agave cactus, you know the one that looks like a grayblue starfish? it has numerous uses..the pulp can be consumed for water source, the prickly points can be transformed into a needle, and the fibre can be weaved into fabric...amazing!!!

    be well..
    all insanity:
    a derivitive of nature.
    nature is god
    god is love
    love is light
  • chadwickchadwick up my ass Posts: 21,157
    melodious wrote:
    well, i think U.S. is competing up in the ranks with colonization. It's really about one rule...

    and many fruits of life to be found in the desert when one considers how nature provides..have you not seen suvivor man.....:)

    for instance the agave cactus, you know the one that looks like a grayblue starfish? it has numerous uses..the pulp can be consumed for water source, the prickly points can be transformed into a needle, and the fibre can be weaved into fabric...amazing!!!

    be well..

    Also the Agave Cactus is used in the making of Mezcal.
    You know, the alcohol alot of ppl get confused with Tequilla?
    The worm in Mezcal is the worm out of an Agave Cactus.
    Tequilla does not have the worm in it.
    I have drank many a bottle of this.
    As well as eating that Agave worm.
    A mighty fine cactus.
    for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7

    "Hear me, my chiefs!
    I am tired; my heart is
    sick and sad. From where
    the sun stands I will fight
    no more forever."
    Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
  • onelongsongonelongsong Posts: 3,517
    chadwick wrote:
    Also the Agave Cactus is used in the making of Mezcal.
    You know, the alcohol alot of ppl get confused with Tequilla?
    The worm in Mezcal is the worm out of an Agave Cactus.
    Tequilla does not have the worm in it.
    I have drank many a bottle of this.
    As well as eating that Agave worm.
    A mighty fine cactus.

    the agave is not a cactus. it is a succulent. TRUE tequilla is made by cutting the agave so it looks almost like a pinapple (removing the fiber); it is then put in a pit and roasted. when cooled it is fermented and distilled. true tequila is not bitter. tequila is made from the blue agave and bitter tequila is made from the more abundant agaves. the only distillery making true tequilla for sale is in a small town near porta vallarta mexico. the others have commercialized using ovens to bake the agave which also adds to it's bitterness.
  • melodiousmelodious Posts: 1,719
    agave.jpg
    all insanity:
    a derivitive of nature.
    nature is god
    god is love
    love is light
  • JeanieJeanie Posts: 9,446
    mmmm.....tequila! :)

    and that's a mighty fine looking agave too melodious! :)
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • chadwickchadwick up my ass Posts: 21,157
    onelongsong wrote:
    the agave is not a cactus. it is a succulent. TRUE tequilla is made by cutting the agave so it looks almost like a pinapple (removing the fiber); it is then put in a pit and roasted. when cooled it is fermented and distilled. true tequila is not bitter. tequila is made from the blue agave and bitter tequila is made from the more abundant agaves. the only distillery making true tequilla for sale is in a small town near porta vallarta mexico. the others have commercialized using ovens to bake the agave which also adds to it's bitterness.

    on the labels of mezcal ive drank it stated agave cactus, ect.
    or maybe it said agave plant, either way.
    its a bad-ass plant for makin alcohol.
    so what is the difference between tequilla and mezcal?
    and yes ppl stole mexico just like they stole every other country.
    for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7

    "Hear me, my chiefs!
    I am tired; my heart is
    sick and sad. From where
    the sun stands I will fight
    no more forever."
    Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
  • melodiousmelodious Posts: 1,719
    Jeanie wrote:
    mmmm.....tequila! :)

    and that's a mighty fine looking agave too melodious! :)

    that's kind of you to say Jeanie, but what attracts me to this post at this time, is your signature...might be exactly what the doc orders..


    *i've made a mess of myself by f*cking me...
    all insanity:
    a derivitive of nature.
    nature is god
    god is love
    love is light
  • JeanieJeanie Posts: 9,446
    melodious wrote:
    that's kind of you to say Jeanie, but what attracts me to this post at this time, is your signature...might be exactly what the doc orders...

    :) Do you mean I should speak my mind? Or do you think I should get laid? ;)
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • onelongsongonelongsong Posts: 3,517
    chadwick wrote:
    on the labels of mezcal ive drank it stated agave cactus, ect.
    or maybe it said agave plant, either way.
    its a bad-ass plant for makin alcohol.
    so what is the difference between tequilla and mezcal?
    and yes ppl stole mexico just like they stole every other country.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agave

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mezcal

    Mezcal is a Mexican distilled spirit made from the maguey plant, and refers to all agave based distilled liquors that are not tequila
  • onelongsongonelongsong Posts: 3,517
    chadwick wrote:
    on the labels of mezcal ive drank it stated agave cactus, ect.
    or maybe it said agave plant, either way.
    its a bad-ass plant for makin alcohol.
    so what is the difference between tequilla and mezcal?
    and yes ppl stole mexico just like they stole every other country.

    when i have a gig in porta vallarta i go to that distillery. they have a tour about making tequilla. they make lots of different flavours. my favourite is the coffee. you can't imagine how smoothe it is.

    land is aquired; not stolen. it's done to this day. in 2004 i aquired a couple acres by adverse possession. my neighbor put up a fence but it was well within his property line because it was easier for him to fence. i then fenced my property connecting to his fence. then i waited until i could go to court and claim it. when i sold i made an extra $50K on that property.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession
  • dunkmandunkman Posts: 19,646
    Jeanie wrote:
    Um.....England did not and will never "conquer" Australia. :)


    thats right... cos it was Great Britain.. of which England is only one 1/4 of... England hasnt existed as a colonial force since 1707... since that date its been great britain
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • JeanieJeanie Posts: 9,446
    dunkman wrote:
    thats right... cos it was Great Britain.. of which England is only one 1/4 of... England hasnt existed as a colonial force since 1707... since that date its been great britain

    Seriously? Dunk? I can't be bothered trying to keep up with England, Great Britain or whatever they want to call themselves. I usually refer to them as the poms and that's affectionately of course.
    I strongly doubt that Scotland, Wales or Ireland had much to do with sending the First Fleet to Australia, whether it was referred to as Great Britian at that time or not.

    :D Actually I can't believe that ironically I referred to it as England in my initial post because I didn't want you flaming me! :p
    NOPE!!!

    *~You're IT Bert!~*

    Hold on to the thread
    The currents will shift
  • spongersponger Posts: 3,159
    The mexicans left behind some really nice architecture, though. The Missions that dot the entire california coast are really an interesting piece of history to look at. You know you went to elementary school in california if you went on a field trip to a spanish mission when you were a kid.

    When I was in h.s. I was banging this chick who lived in a hacienda style mansion. Threw a party in the court yard one night when her dad was out of town, and I was the designated "bouncer". I ended up throwing out this guy who didn't want to break out the backpack full of beer he brought with him. He was a really nice guy for all intents and purposes. I had PE with him. I don't know what his problem was that night. Actually, now that I remember, he said that he was holding onto it for a friend. Anyway, he passed away a couple of years ago, and I couldn't help but feel really guilty about our last interaction being one that was so negative.
    reigning champion

    http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
Sign In or Register to comment.