Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer Flugum who wrote (4592)	9/25/2001 2:58:43 PM
From: epsteinbd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23908

Against what law to live that way ?

To: Elmer Flugum who wrote (4592)	9/25/2001 5:11:33 PM
From: chalu2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23908

I think your test is wrong, if you want to be consistent: land should be returned to the original owners not based on how many years have passed, but whether the effects of the unlawful seizure are still being felt. Therefore, your land should be returned to the Native Americans. Of course, if your house is to be returned to the Iroquois, I hope you don't expect to be paid anything for it; it is an unlawful settlement, after all. And, why do you assume they want you here after you evict your home? They didn't invite you or your forbears here in the first place. I think their request that you "return" to Europe or wherever you might be accepted would, if I correctly follow your reasoning, be viewed by you as quite within their rights. Can you argue with that? Why not make the first move & deed your home to the Arapaho National Trust? Others may follow your noble example.