112014@news.newsgroupdirect.com> 900704fb
XPost: alt.law-enforcement, alt.prisons, alt.revisionism
XPost: alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy, alt.politics.immigration
XPost: alt.true-crime, talk.politics.guns, misc.survivalism
XPost: soc.culture.usa, alt.survival
From: fmhlaw@comcast.net
On 11/22/2014 9:44 PM, CLz6dCxDCFBpU01ZZONL wrote:
> In article <5471048e$0$4417$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>,
> Just Wondering wrote:
>
>> On 11/22/2014 12:03 PM, CLz6dCxDCFBpU01ZZONL wrote:
>>> In article <54705afc$0$17998$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>,
>>> Just Wondering wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/21/2014 10:46 PM, CLz6dCxDCFBpU01ZZONL wrote:
>>>>> In article <546feb0b$0$17939$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>,
>>>>> Just Wondering wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/21/2014 12:07 PM, CLz6dCxDCFBpU01ZZONL wrote:
>>>>>>> Just Wondering wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/20/2014 1:07 PM, CLz6dCxDCFBpU01ZZONL wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Just Wondering wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/19/2014 12:52 PM, CLz6dCxDCFBpU01ZZONL wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> at one time Native Americans owned *ALL* of North America, but you
>>>>>>>>>>> took
>>>>>>>>>>> almost all of their land, gave them a few beads and gave none of it
>>>>>>>>>>> back.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There never was a single group of Native Americans. There were
>>>>>>>>>> dozens,
>>>>>>>>>> of different groups, some of whom had comparatively well developed
>>>>>>>>>> civilizations and governments, others who were unorganized savages.
>>>>>>>>>> Some groups did not even have the concept of property ownership.
>>>>>>>>>> Certainly Native Americans never "owned" all of North America, at
>>>>>>>>>> least
>>>>>>>>>> not in the sense that we understand land ownership.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> you could say that about all of Europe, Africa, etc, but it doesn't
>>>>>>>>> change the fact that in the Americas, the land didn't belong to the
>>>>>>>>> Europeans
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So what? You could just as well say say that there's no land anywhere
>>>>>>>> that once didn't belong to someone else. So since your original claim
>>>>>>>> above is a lie, what's your point?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> all land at didn't belong to someone else.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tell us who owns a parcel of land today, who owned that same land five
>>>>>> thousand years ago. Put your answer here:
>>>>>
>>>>> In the Americas, the land was "owned" by the Native Americans,
>>>>>
>>>> That's crap. Name the person who, in 2990 BCE, owned the 600 acres at
>>>> the center of what is now present-day Death Valley, California. Who
>>>> owned Mount McKinley five thousand years ago? Or Ellesmere Island? Or
>>>> the present location of Venice, Louisiana? Or any other identifiable
>>>> parcel in the entire Western Hemisphere?
>>>
>>> I'll wait until you tell me the name of the person 2990 BCE who was your
>>> grandfather 250 generations ago
>>>
>> We're not discussing my ancestry.
>
> why not? if you feel you can make an absurd request, why am I prevented
> from expecting the same from you?
>
The best answer is that the center of Death Valley, Mt. McKinley,
Ellesmere Island and Venice probably were not owned by ANYONE.
>
>> I asked you who owns land today, and
>> who owned the same land 5,000 years ago. You replied the land was owned
>> by Native Americans.
>
> as there were only Native Americans in North America 5000 years ago, no
> one but Native Americans could have owned the land...it's really that
> simple
>
You assume that someone owned the land. It's much more likely that no
one owned the land.
>>>
>> For all you know, five, ten, twenty or
>> thirty thousand year ago there were two, ten or a hundred groups of
>> "first Native Americans" who fought tooth and nail over everything.
>
> what I know is that no matter how many groups there were, there was
> always a group known as the first Native Americans and they did not take
> anything by force...it's really that simple
>
For all you know, there was not "a group known as the first Native
Americans." For all you know, "the first Native Americans" were two or
more groups who fought over the land and everything else.
>
>>>
>>>> Much of what did belong to someone when Europeans came,
>>>> that someone voluntarily transferred ownership to Europeans, and then
>>>> that land DID belong to Europeans.
>>>
>>> If by voluntarily, you mean after being forced from their lands, chased
>>> and killed at every opportunity, you might be correct. but if you are
>>> correct you can provide the title change documents
>>>
>> The Puritans who arrived on the Mayflower obtained land by peaceful
>> exchange. That was not an isolated incident.
>
> it was also not the rule
>
Prove it.
>
>> And if you want to rely on "title change documents" or "title documents"
>> or "documents" as proof of ownership, then none of the Native Americans
>> owned ANY land in the Western Hemisphere, because none of them had
>> documents to prove their ownership.
>
> they used the legal concept of adverse possession. as no one challenged
> their ownership, they must have indeed owned the land
>
No they didn't. "Adverse possession" was English common law. Native
Americans knew nothing of English common law. And many of the Native
Americans who occupied land did so without making any claim to ownership
of the land.
> That would make all of the land
>> free for the taking, first come, first serve. I don't claim that's what
>> happened, but by your invoking documents as proof of ownership, that's
>> the consequence of your position.
>
> The Native Americans owned the land, by any definition of ownership.
>
Prove it. There were probably thousands of square miles where no one
lived and may never have even seen, much less set foot on. By most
definitions of ownership, that land was not owned by anyone.
>
> their may be cases where they voluntarily ceded land to other Native
> Americans or Europeans, but that didn't abrogate the ownership of the
> other land whether they occupied it or not.
>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
