Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

George Putnam: "This land is OUR land" (The Aztlan activists have their history backward)
newsmax ^ | Oct. 21 04 | George Putnam

Posted on 10/25/2004 8:52:47 PM PDT by churchillbuff

One Reporter's Opinion - This Land Is Our Land George Putnam Thursday, Oct. 21, 2004 It is this reporter's opinion that it is time to set the record straight for the misinformed Mexican illegal aliens and troublemaking Latino activists who call my Talk Back radio program monotonously.

They repeat for the millionth time the tired worn-out lie that "America stole the seven southwestern states from Mexico. This is our land, gringo, and we are taking it back!"

WRONG!

Here are the facts: Texans fought for and won independence from Mexico on April 26, 1836 following its victory over the Mexicans at the Battle of San Jacinto.

Nine years later, in December of 1845, the U.S. annexed the Texas republic. Congress sent General Zachary Taylor to Texas to protect its border with Mexico.

Mexico claimed the Rio Grande River as "their territory." After a series of attacks and clashes with Mexican troops inside the Texas territory, Congress declared war on Mexico May 13, 1846.

Hostilities continued for two years as General Taylor Scott led American troops to engage Mexican forces in New Mexico, California, and deep into Mexico. Mexico City was captured by General Scott in August of 1847.

February 2, 1848 Mexican officials and U.S. representatives signed a peace treaty known as "THE TREATY OF GUADALUPE HIDALGO."

The provisions of that treaty called for Mexico to cede to the U.S. 55 percent of its territory (that is present day Arizona, California, New Mexico, Texas and parts of Colorado, Nevada and Utah) - this in exchange for $15-18 million in compensation for war-related damage to Mexican property.

The U.S. Senate ratification of the treaty, U.S. forces then left Mexico City.

There you have it. There are the facts. Either accept the facts or continue living a lie.

The U.S. did not steal anything from Mexico; the former Mexican territory was won by the blood of young Americans like the ones who fought World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, and are now engaged in Iraq. The seven southwestern states are American land, not "their land."

This despite what the pro-Mexican and Hispanic racist groups like La Raza, Aztlan, Lulac and La Mecha teach their uninformed young Spanish-speaking students in our own American public schools. Shame, shame, shame!

It is exactly how Adolf Hitler indoctrinated his people to kill anyone who opposed the German view of the world as he shouted, "Deutschland Uber Alles lebersraum!" (Germany over all and living room!). This is KKK American Nazi or Black Panther talk.

As Sgt. Friday said, "Just the facts, ma'am... just the facts."


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; US: California; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: aliens; antiamericanism; aztlan; communists; illegalimmigration; immigrantlist; immigration; invasion; laraza; liberalbigots; mexico; racebaiting; racism; reconquista
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

1 posted on 10/25/2004 8:52:47 PM PDT by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

Damn Straight!


2 posted on 10/25/2004 8:55:24 PM PDT by DSBull (Liberal logic: the most mutually exclusive words in the universe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

Didn't Mexico take the land from the native Indians?

Racist hypocrites.


3 posted on 10/25/2004 8:56:27 PM PDT by weegee (George Soros has probably spent more on this election that many rock stars make in a year.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

It is also the Palestinian argument.


4 posted on 10/25/2004 8:58:36 PM PDT by spyone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DSBull

Actually the Battle of San Jacinto where General Santa Ana was captured wass fought on the 21st of April,1836-not the 26th of April (about 10 miles from here) And Mexico City and Chapultapec Castle were captured by General WINFIELD Scott - not "Taylor Scott' - no such person


5 posted on 10/25/2004 9:07:43 PM PDT by Armigerous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

Man, how old is George Putnam now? He's been around all of my life. Used to watch his news shows as a kid, then listened to him on several LA radio stations. He just keeps going and going.


6 posted on 10/25/2004 9:08:01 PM PDT by sangoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weegee

Besides the land in question belonged to Spain --- which invited white Americans in and gave land grants to them which are still honored by the USA government. Mexico declared it's independence from Spain and was so unable to rule that it hung onto the northern territories for only something like 25 years. Mexico has been a mess ever since it's independence, it still has no ability for self-rule.


7 posted on 10/25/2004 9:10:04 PM PDT by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff

One addendum to this acurate peice. It is common to look upon the Mexican War of 1847 in terms of Mexico and the US today. But in 1847 the sides were much more equal. In land area Mexico approached the US. While smaller in population and poorer, there was no certainty that the US in its industrial infancy could project the military power to defeat Mexico, Mexico's regular army of 60,000 men was four times the size of the US Army. It had been in constant combat since the 1820s, while the US had not fought a European style adversary since 1812. Many Mexican leaders refused America's offer to buy California in 1846 because far from fearing war, they believed they could win, and recover Texas.


8 posted on 10/25/2004 9:10:24 PM PDT by xkaydet65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sangoo

Yeah I caught that, I live in Houston too.


9 posted on 10/25/2004 9:12:43 PM PDT by DSBull (Liberal logic: the most mutually exclusive words in the universe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sangoo
George was born on July 14 (Bastille Day) 1914. Yep, the ole codger is 90!
10 posted on 10/25/2004 9:17:52 PM PDT by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: weegee

To be fair, most Mexicans are descended from native indians.


11 posted on 10/25/2004 9:32:46 PM PDT by Clemenza (This thread needs more cowbell!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
Besides the land in question belonged to Spain --- which invited white Americans in and gave land grants to them which are still honored by the USA government. Mexico declared it's independence from Spain and was so unable to rule that it hung onto the northern territories for only something like 25 years. Mexico has been a mess ever since it's independence, it still has no ability for self-rule.

That is very true!! What mexicans claim to be their own, they got (through a revolution) from Spain who took it from Indians. We've had possession of those lands a lot longer than Mexico.

But what gives someone the right to claim a land as its own? It is one thing and one thing only - your ability to defend it!! But we cannot be complacent in our military superiority. There's other ways to take over territory besides military force. One other way is through the power of demographics. And guess what folks?? Mexicans will soon be a majority in most southwestern states!! And with their vote they can take over.

12 posted on 10/25/2004 9:37:55 PM PDT by aquila48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
Besides the land in question belonged to Spain

The original con job.

The land never "belonged" to Spain in any real sense; it was only printing on bad maps and the wishful thinking of a self-impressed, but historically irrelevant society -- the Spaniard Conquistdors and their descendants. The pitiful attempt at colonization by baptism of the Indians in California and sustained, but numerically small settlements north of the Rio Brazos, merely points out the irrelevancy of their 3 centuries of "ownership" of the land that is now referred to as the Southwest.

Spain did not "own" the land north to the pole, even though the Pope may have declared it so; Mexico could not "inherit" what Nueva Espana never had; and the United States did the right thing in 1846 by securing both coasts against monarchial domination by any European power. History has proven that this was one of the best things to have ever happened.

The present mass exodus from the glaring failure country of the Americas threatens to end the shining achievement of the greatest success story in history, the country known as the United States.

13 posted on 10/25/2004 9:55:42 PM PDT by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: churchillbuff
The U.S. did not steal anything from Mexico; the former Mexican territory was won by the blood of young Americans like the ones who fought World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, and are now engaged in Iraq. The seven southwestern states are American land, not "their land."

He was doing alright until this part. Under this logic Western Europe, Japan, and Korea should be American States.

14 posted on 10/25/2004 10:02:49 PM PDT by LPM1888 (What are the facts? Again and again and again -- what are the facts? - Lazarus Long)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weegee

There were no Mexicans before the Spanish invaded because a Mexican is the result of the raped Indians by the Spanish.

There are the mixed breed, which is the Mexican as we know them and the Mexican Indian still exists in numbers.

They also SHOOT people at their southern border.


15 posted on 10/25/2004 10:03:04 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Regulator

Some of the land in question was territory of Spain -- the Spanish land grants are still recognized --- but that wasn't the Mexican government --- if Mexicans think that land that was considered theirs for about 25 years must be returned, then all of Mexico would have to be returned to Spain.


16 posted on 10/25/2004 10:03:37 PM PDT by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza

Why do they choose to speak the language of the Spanish conquerors?

The Mexicans in interior Mexico have little to no connection to the Indian tribes of the American southwest. Claiming it all as a single region is a myth.


17 posted on 10/25/2004 10:05:12 PM PDT by weegee (George Soros has probably spent more on this election that many rock stars make in a year.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LPM1888

America has been slow to add new states since arriving at a nice round number. We have all sorts of "territories" and quite frankly we might have done better to plant flags elsewhere.

Instead we have to offer financial assistance and troop protection over land that we do not control.


18 posted on 10/25/2004 10:07:52 PM PDT by weegee (George Soros has probably spent more on this election that many rock stars make in a year.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Clemenza
To be fair, most Mexicans are descended from native indians.

Indians native to Mexico though --- one reason the Spanish government invited "anglos" into the northern territories like Texas was because the Indians gave them so much trouble, no Mexicans would move into them.

"Indians" is a misleading term anyhow -- it's not like Indians were ever one big happy family or one united people --- they were many separate groups which often raided each other and went to war. The Indians of Mexico are different tribes than the ones who were here -- except for a few --- so being Indians doesn't entitle them to the land which belonged to other Indians groups.

19 posted on 10/25/2004 10:09:04 PM PDT by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: weegee
True about their being little cultural connection between the Indians of central Mexico (the Mexica or Aztecs) and the Indians of the southwest. The only connection would be the Kickapoo (spelling?) who were never very advanced culturally, but whose decendenta are on both sides of the border.

The reason Spanish is the lingua franca is due to the fact that 1. The Church essentially encouraged those who were baptized to learn Spanish, 2. Indians who traditionally moved to urban areas had to find a common language to communicate with others they encountered away from their native villages and 3. the fact that the original Spanish settlers had their way with native women, creating a large number of mixed race (and by extension, mixed culutured) people.

20 posted on 10/25/2004 10:10:37 PM PDT by Clemenza (This thread needs more cowbell!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson