cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I adopt by reference your paragraph above and I'll throw in small pox and measles. It happened.
Indian tribes exterminated other Indian tribes for a millennium. It happened
So what? It happened.

I moved no goal posts.

And you seem determined to prove my point every time you vomit a post like your last

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Almost half the present-day United States is uninhabited. Fair game for conquest?

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Never said such a thing? You just said it again in the same post!

The land was not UNOCCUPIED, just like our National Parks are not UNOCCUPIED. There were people living there in the forest. Is every piece of median in a highway UNOCCUPIED? Than homeless can OCCUPY it.

Get it...

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Almost half the present-day United States is uninhabited. Fair game for conquest?

---

Thank you.

https://www.reddit.com/r/InterstellarKinetics/s/6jM058buRV

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Almost half the present-day United States is uninhabited. Fair game for conquest?

---

No it is owned by someone, used, and already CONTROLLED by a government. Why is this so hard to understand?

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Never said such a thing? You just said it again in the same post!

The land was not UNOCCUPIED, just like our National Parks are not UNOCCUPIED. There were people living there in the forest. Is every piece of median in a highway UNOCCUPIED? Than homeless can OCCUPY it.

Get it...

---

NO I have not. YOU made the claim about legal system. Provide evidence I have said anything about the legal system to you other than to repeat that you have FIRST said the words "legal system."

But you again go off on a tangent with what I said and throw in something random about medians.

I should not expect anything different from a person that does not understand the difference between FORCED and chosen.

cowboycwr said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Almost half the present-day United States is uninhabited. Fair game for conquest?

---

No it is owned by someone, used, and already CONTROLLED by a government. Why is this so hard to understand?

---

Well, if you're talking about ownership and government, you're talking about a legal system.

Please Vote Democrat!

- The IRGC

D!

{ sipping coffee }

{ eating donut }

Go Bears!!

Beat The Sol Satans!!!

Viva Trumpata!!!!

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical s...........lamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

---

---

---

---

---

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poo.......................

---

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Almost half the present-day United States is uninhabited. Fair game for conquest?

---

No it is owned by someone, used, and already CONTROLLED by a government. Why is this so hard to understand?

---

Well, if you're talking about ownership and government, you're talking about a legal system.

---

Dale.

- UF

{ sipping coffee }

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Almost half the present-day United States is uninhabited. Fair game for conquest?

---

No it is owned by someone, used, and already CONTROLLED by a government. Why is this so hard to understand?

---

Well, if you're talking about ownership and government, you're talking about a legal system.

---

Based on Supreme Court precedent at the time, native Americans had no legal ownership claims to any land they occupied, good deal for the federal government and land speculators, not so good for the people already living on and using the land.

Well now HE's changing the name of our country:



Maybe this is how HE plans to stay in power on January 21, 2029?

cowboycwr said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Almost half the present-day United States is uninhabited. Fair game for conquest?

---

No it is owned by someone, used, and already CONTROLLED by a government. Why is this so hard to understand?

---

Sam wants to argue, not understand

>>
Live
Last UpdateOctober 1, 2026, 1:04 PM EDT

Hero FlyDubai pilot who fought back against attacker identified as Indian Capt Smit Machchhar
Indian Prime Minister praised FlyDubai Flight 1073 pilot Capt. Smit Machchhar, calling him a hero after he managed to open the cockpit door amidst an attempted hijacking attack on a flight from Dubai to Tel Aviv, Israel on Wednesday.

Capt. Smit Machchhar, the Indian pilot who was stabbed by his copilot during a Wednesday attack onboard FlyDubai flight 1073, was stabbed in the head and sustained other severe injuries, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu revealed in an exclusive Thursday interview with Fox & Friends.
"He was stabbed in the head, and his arm was basically split in two. And there was a lot of blood," Netanyahu told Fox & Friends.

One Israeli on board the flight, a dentist, began treating Machchhar's injuries while other passengers subdued his attacker, Netanyahu recounted.

WHAT TO KNOW

• Passengers aboard Tel Aviv-bound FlyDubai 1073 successfully thwarted what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described as an attempted hijacking after the plane's copilot stabbed the pilot and attempted to crash the plane.
• After the plane's pilot opened the cockpit door, passengers on board seized control of the plane while it was dropping thousands of feet in the air.
• A second set of pilots that were on board the flight took control and ultimately landed the plane safely in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia, according to a spokesperson for Netanyahu.

...
<<

- UF

I am sure a few here are saddened by the news - their Rosca de Juden uneaten and the votive candles unlit as the opportunity to incinerate the tiny plastic parasite while enjoying CNNMSLSD footage goes awry.............

BID.

More winning!

Report: Government workforce is smallest in 60 years after Trump fired "hundreds of thousands" of federal employees

https://notthebee.com/article/report-government-workforce-is-smallest-in-60-years-after-trump-fired-hundreds-of-thousands-of-federal-employees

Perks for the biggest buyers of Trump meme coin include:

— VIP seating at the dinner & reception
— Trump 18K Gold Watch
— Access to “3 Legends” to be named later
— “An evening you will talk about forever” at Trump National pic.twitter.com/PxWnVNaW0T

— Jeff Stein (@jstein_sun) October 1, 2026

JUST IN: Trump administration begins sending $500 Obamacare rebate checks to 950,000 Americans just weeks before the midterms, with 71% of payments going to battleground states.

— Polymarket (@Polymarket) October 1, 2026

TRUMP: Did you see the story about my uncle?

TIME: The one who taught at MIT?

TRUMP: I have the highest of IQs. I have the highest. pic.twitter.com/0x1NxEW2zQ

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) October 1, 2026

BREAKING WSJ:

The Trump Justice Department is reviewing whether the special prosecutor's office that investigated Watergate committed misconduct.

A revisionist historian went to DOJ HQ to present his case that Richard Nixon and his associates weren't treated fairly.…

— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) October 1, 2026

Republican or Democrat, no U.S. president should display framed photos of dictators in the White House. It’s an insult to the democratic values that office is supposed to represent. https://t.co/U0wdG3v39r

— Brittany Martinez (@_Britt_Martinez) October 1, 2026

FCC Chair Brendan Carr says that new pro-Trump TV ads paid for with government funds don’t “merit any sort of FCC review.” https://t.co/rmQRoXt9WZ

— NBC News (@NBCNews) October 1, 2026

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Almost half the present-day United States is uninhabited. Fair game for conquest?

---

No it is owned by someone, used, and already CONTROLLED by a government. Why is this so hard to understand?

---

Well, if you're talking about ownership and government, you're talking about a legal system.

---

Sigh. But not with the native argument you and Florida are trying to make.

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Almost half the present-day United States is uninhabited. Fair game for conquest?

---

No it is owned by someone, used, and already CONTROLLED by a government. Why is this so hard to understand?

---

Well, if you're talking about ownership and government, you're talking about a legal system.

---

They just don't want to admit it was a poor analogy or outright wrong. That seems to be a big thing on this Board.

Or, they are true bigots that truly believe that the native Americans either didn't have a "legal" system or because it wasn't European doesn't count. Even Washington called it encroachment onto Indian Land. How many treaties referencing carving up Indian land. All through US history we have attacked, treatises, bought and managed Native land, even today. Why do you think Indian Nations run most Casinos, because it is on their land.

I don't even want to get into Mexico and how we conquered them for their land. Mexico wasn't a government controlling land after all.

I don't understand why it is so hard to understand that we did the same things other powers, including the native Americans did and conquered people to take land because we wanted it. We are not much different than the other European/Western nations. But, I do see how the MAGA mindset sets it, it is hard to understand other's positions when you can't be true to yourself about what you have done and who you are.

Just patronize them... "Yes, everything the US has done is because we are good and caring. You can sleep knowing you wear a white hat..."

Porteroso said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

whiterock said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

To the center is the key word. Not to MAGA

---

There's a not short list of Maga policy positions that have super-majority support.

---

IRS settlement slush fund?

---

you should instead be outraged that the IRS was used by Democrats to go after Republicans.

---

Who says one has to pick?

---

They call that a false dilemma. it's not at all uncommon for people who win lawsuits against the IRS (and get cash awards) to be granted periods of immunity from audits. I am aware of one group that got a 10-yr reprieve. There was also a cash settlement, only it wasn't called a slush fund because the ruling occurred during the Obama admin. The practice makes sense - it prevents the IRS from losing a lawsuit then turning right back around and using audits & lawsuits to harass the victor.

Using the alphabet agencies to harass (or worse) one's political opponents is reprehensible. Obama admin was relentless at it. Donate to a Tea Party, and Osha shows up at your manufacturing plant. Then EPA. Etc.....happened to a Waco era businessman I know very well. Biden was by far worse, actually using criminal prosecutions to attempt to hang criminal records on grandmas & grandpas who did not get within a quarter mile of the Capitol (again, happened to a couple in Waco...FBI came to their places of work just because they were in WDC that day.).

william said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial....

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

Well, if you're talking about ownership and government, you're talking about a legal system.

---

Dale.

- UF

{ sipping coffee }

---

How soon the great men are forgotten........

- el UF

D!

{ sipping covfefe }

{ eating sow-gage sammich }

Go Bears!!!

FLBear5630 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, just not in the "historical" sense of conquering other human persons with dignity more or less equal to our own. Kind of like Palestine, I guess.

---

There is a difference between settling a land and conquering it. One cannot conquer land that nobody occupies. Much of it was unoccupied.

---

Really? I think there were quite a few reservations filled with people that would disagree. The Seminole's motto to this day is "Unconquered".

You really are a teacher?

---

Yes much of the land of both the Americas had no one on it. The tribes tended to live in small areas. The nomadic ones lived in smaller groups that moved around but it still meant that most of the land was unoccupied.

---

Wow, Iowa, Alaska, Texas, the whole southwest is open for occupation... Just because they didnt have a US recognized legal system of meets and bounds doesnt mean they didnt exist as nations. Didnt they teach you any other cultures in Texas. In NY we learned the Iriqous in Jr High... But if you guys believe we didnt conquer the Native tribes or they didnt have legal systems? Cant help you. But the Alamo... We were right there too. No war with Mexico, occupation of vacant land.

You guys can really mold things to be morally right... This site is an education.

---

Great job at taking what I said, taking a left turn, and going in a completely different direction. But that seems to be what you are good at.

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---

I never said any such thing. Please provide a direct quote where I said anything about a legal system.

I never said it so you won't be able to find it.

Yes the plains Indians followed the bison. But still the FACT remains much of the land was unoccupied.

Same as the land in the east that was massive forests. Or the land in the west.

So what I said is still facts and you went off on your own tangent.

---

Almost half the present-day United States is uninhabited. Fair game for conquest?

---

No it is owned by someone, used, and already CONTROLLED by a government. Why is this so hard to understand?

---

Well, if you're talking about ownership and government, you're talking about a legal system.

---

They just don't want to admit it was a poor analogy or outright wrong. That seems to be a big thing on this Board.

Or, they are true bigots that truly believe that the native Americans either didn't have a "legal" system or because it wasn't European doesn't count. Even Washington called it encroachment onto Indian Land. How many treaties referencing carving up Indian land. All through US history we have attacked, treatises, bought and managed Native land, even today. Why do you think Indian Nations run most Casinos, because it is on their land.

I don't even want to get into Mexico and how we conquered them for their land. Mexico wasn't a government controlling land after all.

I don't understand why it is so hard to understand that we did the same things other powers, including the native Americans did and conquered people to take land because we wanted it. We are not much different than the other European/Western nations. But, I do see how the MAGA mindset sets it, it is hard to understand other's positions when you can't be true to yourself about what you have done and who you are.

Just patronize them... "Yes, everything the US has done is because we are good and caring. You can sleep knowing you wear a white hat..."

---

cesos de mierda........

- el UF

you're a willing participant in your destruction a la patty hearst.....

Go Bears!!

Beat The Sol Satans!!!

>>
G*** L**, 38, a.k.a. Y** K*** L**, and owner of a San Gabriel Valley-based technology company, was arrested today on a three-count federal indictment charging him with smuggling to China more than $300 million worth of export-controlled high-end computer servers containing U.S.-manufactured graphics processing units (GPUs) commonly used for Super Intelligence (SI) applications.

L** is charged with one count of conspiracy to violate the Export Control Reform Act and the Export Administration Regulations, one count of outbound smuggling, and one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering.
<<

>>
JEANINE PIRRO JUST SENT HER PROSECUTORS ALL THE WAY TO MADAGASCAR TO TAKE DOWN CHINESE SCAM COMPOUNDS TARGETING AMERICANS.

They arrested 400 people, seized more than 3,000 devices, and grabbed about $52 million in crypto in a single day.

These crooks text you by "mistake," become your friend, and then drain your retirement through some fake crypto deal.

Pirro says Americans lost around $20 billion to these scams in 2025 alone.

Her strike force has now seized a billion dollars, and she's getting money back to the victims.

For years, Washington shrugged while foreign crime rings robbed our parents and grandparents blind.

President Trump made this a priority, and Pirro is hunting them down wherever they hide.
<<

- el UF

Viva il Donaldo!!

{ sipping coffee }

- UF

Viva il Donaldo!!!

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

historian said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

historian said:

---

That's not exactly what I said. Even the expansion out west, Manifest Destiny, was not imperial conquest in the historical sense. It was often complicated and chaotic and the Native American people's often suffered horribly, although they dished it out too. The reality is that the Great Plains was a vast territory that the US owned (purchased from France) and sparsely populated by small groups of Stone Age nomads. Clashes were inevitable and it was impossible for the status quo to continue.

---

So it was conquest, ....

---

---

---

---

---

I never said a word about legal system, boundaries, etc. Just that they didn't use the land or live on it. And of course you try to throw in digs at education.

---

No, that is what you said and you won't say you misspoke or stand corrected or used poor choice of words. Actually, none of you do.

But, they did! The plains indians whole lifestyle was based on using the land and following the herds with the seasons. We killed all of what they ate and used to live.

We did what we did, acknowledge it. Not everything we have done as a Nation is good. We have done a lot of good. But, also a lot of wrong. At least acknowledge the truth. The indians used the land and we wanted it so we killed their food supply, conquered them and put them on reservations. That is pretty much fact. Just like the Texicans rebelled and took Texas from Mexico. Call it like it is...

---