Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Alohameansgoodbye

Usa Thread

Recommended Posts

Orange Donald went to the border today and saluted a helicopter.

Are people who never served allowed to salute things?

Perhaps he was trying to hold onto his wig.

 

B25DFE54-0F36-4E5E-B6A0-1B1D2753B409_w10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reagan started that, although he actually had been a California National Guard officer decades early. I don't recall any non-vet presidents saluting before that, but since Reagan more or less  they all have, even BO on occasion..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2019 at 5:33 PM, radioman said:

Historically America had laws that specifically did just that.

 

The immigration laws of 1965 opened it up globally but Africa and the Caribbean were colonized in the 1800s and emigration from those areas were almost exclusively to the countries that colonized them. Even today, its more or less that way. 

In the 1800s the concept of "white" was vastly different than today. Eastern and southern Europeans were not deemed the same "white" as they are deemed today. In the south, only Blacks were lynched. Whites who raped, etc ,were not lynched. It was deemed a act for "blacks". Nevertheless, a Jew was lynched in Georgia as well as Sicilians in Louisiana. They were not deemed 'white" as we know it. But "quasi white" if I have to invent a phrase that characterizes what I am trying to convey. 

Even today, within the supremacist and nationalist movements they differ greatly as what constitutes white. There are arguments pro and con to include Jews, Portuguese, Sicilians, white Moslems from the Balkans, northern Africans, Turks, Persians, fair skinned latinos such as Cubans and Argentinians, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it ironic that Americans on this board are complaining about immigration where as in fact every one of you are descend from I’m immigrants. 

Oh but today’s immigrants are illegal, well who the fuck dictates legal and illegal? I very much doubt that the Native Americans granted the British, Spanish and French etc Legal status and visa free transit and long term stay. 

So basically the descendants of a bunch of Brits [Washington Himself was of British descendance and served in the British Army) can now dictate who it legal and who is illegal based upon ethnicicity, religion etc because th Brits got there first told King George to take a hike and had a free for all. 

So who are the illegals? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, chocolat steve said:

The immigration laws of 1965 opened it up globally but Africa and the Caribbean were colonized in the 1800s and emigration from those areas were almost exclusively to the countries that colonized them. Even today, its more or less that way. 

In the 1800s the concept of "white" was vastly different than today. Eastern and southern Europeans were not deemed the same "white" as they are deemed today. In the south, only Blacks were lynched. Whites who raped, etc ,were not lynched. It was deemed a act for "blacks". Nevertheless, a Jew was lynched in Georgia as well as Sicilians in Louisiana. They were not deemed 'white" as we know it. But "quasi white" if I have to invent a phrase that characterizes what I am trying to convey. 

Even today, within the supremacist and nationalist movements they differ greatly as what constitutes white. There are arguments pro and con to include Jews, Portuguese, Sicilians, white Moslems from the Balkans, northern Africans, Turks, Persians, fair skinned latinos such as Cubans and Argentinians, etc. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×