Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
The courts ruled Arabs, Syrians, and Armenians as not white in the following cases: In re Halladjian (1909), Ex parte Shahid (1913), Ex Parte Dow (1914), In re Dow (1914), and In re Ahmed Hassan Araxian (1942), Chamacharjjian (1957), Ex Parte Hateesh Chandanivaroopian (1960). The courts ruled Arabs, Syrians, Middle Easterners, or Armenians to be partly-white in the following cases: In re Najour (1909), In re Mudarri (1910), In re Ellis (1910), Dow v. United States (1915), United States v. Cartozian, and Ex Parte Mohriez (1944).[26][27].
Judge Lowell of the Boston Massachusetts Circuit Court was then bribed for 20000 US dollars by VAHAG EKMEKJJIAN to make a declaration for the state of Massachusetts that Armenians should henceforth be allowed to buy and sell property in the United States of America and would be classified from that moment forward as being "of or very nearly of the white race".
What a charade.
@walrus
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
therefore, and since Armenians are from Mesopotamia, I AM NOT WHITE
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
Come on now, Brock. You are a little bit white and you don't listen to hip hop.
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
You are admittedly Italian nothing wrong with that. Armenia is similar to aryan I’m sorry but you are white. You are free to think what you want though, you are an American, you have birth right citizenship and we are free to choose gender and race apparently absolutely nothing wrong with what u think
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
Exactly, Brock can be what he wants to be. After reading Peterson I am convinced that I am part lobster. I won't be stereotyped as a human being. If you trace our history back far enough us and lobsters were quite the same.
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Exactly, Brock can be what he wants to be. After reading Peterson I am convinced that I am part lobster. I won't be stereotyped as a human being. If you trace our history back far enough us and lobsters were quite the same.
Oh shit u r genius. I really like cats. We are very close genetically to cats. I am definitely part cat. I also greatly enjoyed my stay in china, it’s a very based country. I am definitely part Chinese. I am Chinese-cat-Irish-American. I must say it is good to be me.
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
Human and cats have about 90% of DNA in common. Here are some more facts and figures:
- Genome-wide variation from one human being to another can be up to 0.5% (99.5% similarity)
- Chimpanzees are ~ 98% similar to humans, depending on how it is calculated.
- Cats have ~90% of homologous genes with humans, 82% with dogs, 80% with cows, 79% with chimpanzees, 69% with rats and 67% with mice. Initial sequence and comparative analysis of the cat genome
- Cows (Bos taurus) are ~80% genetically similar to humans
- 75% of mouse genes have equivalents in humans, ~90% of the mouse genome could be lined up with a region on the human genome. About 99% of mouse genes turn out to have analogues in humans.
- The fruit fly (Drosophila) shares about 60% of its DNA with humans.
- About 60% of chicken genes correspond to a similar human gene.
@Gandalf the above list proves it is reasonable for me to pick any or all of these animals
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
Quote:
Originally Posted by
walrus
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Gandalf
Exactly, Brock can be what he wants to be. After reading Peterson I am convinced that I am part lobster. I won't be stereotyped as a human being. If you trace our history back far enough us and lobsters were quite the same.
Oh shit u r genius. I really like cats. We are very close genetically to cats. I am definitely part cat. I also greatly enjoyed my stay in china, it’s a very based country. I am definitely part Chinese. I am Chinese-cat-Irish-American. I must say it is good to be me.
I have always considered you a pussy, so I guess it makes sense.
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
Jews, Irish and Italians were considered sort of not-really-white in those days.
Cats were the incarnation of the devil.
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
Quote:
Originally Posted by
goti71
Jews, Irish and Italians were considered sort of not-really-white in those days.
Cats were the incarnation of the devil.
Exactly. Not only that but Armenians were referred to as dirty black Armenians and also Fresno Indians
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
Quote:
Originally Posted by
brocktonblockbust
therefore, and since Armenians are from Mesopotamia, I AM NOT WHITE
Let me explain something
If this is you
http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...ine=1525717482
You are white.
That means you are white in this society (and around the world) because to anyone with whom you'd interact, you will appear “white.”
So employers, loan officers, police, teachers, and average everyday ppl on the street would look at you, presume your whiteness, and treat you accordingly.
So that means the presumptions of competence, and law-abidingness, and credit-worthiness, and general intelligence would be given
These are things no black person can presume others will think about them
Whiteness is what ppl presume you to be. And that has nothing to do with genotype (since people cannot know your DNA just by looking at you) but everything to do with phenotype, which is the way certain genes are expressed outwardly, like skin pigmentation, and a handful of other characteristics, which are controlled by about six genes out of 30,000 in the overall human genome.
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
You are confusing the color of someone's skin with someone's DNA and genetic ancestry. You are right that the apparent color of someone's skin can give them advantages around the world but you were arguing something different now which has nothing to do with genetics. The color of one's skin is only one genetic indicator but there are so many other chromosomes that indicate a person's genetic origin besides skin color
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
So if I am white then why do I have really terrible credit and I have a very poor career and I am very poor? I have never been able to get into a high-paying job despite my college education I have always been financially poor. My 2017 tax return shows $13,700 US Dollars income. In 2016 I earned $21,400 and it 2015 I only earned $9,700. No rental agency will rent me a one year lease for an apartment because I do not have any credit worthiness. My apparent whiteness has not helped me at all.
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
I know plenty of black people that have much better credit than I have. I know plenty of black people in New Jersey and New York who own their own homes to the tune of half a million dollars and up. There are plenty of black entrepreneurs here in New York and New Jersey with their own businesses. Their Blackness did not stop them from doing those things. And my whiteness as you would like to call it has not helped me at all to be able to accomplish any of those things
@denilsonReturnsWithViolins
Re: Interesting United States Supreme Court decisions on race
Quote:
Originally Posted by
brocktonblockbust
You are confusing the color of someone's skin with someone's DNA and genetic ancestry. You are right that the apparent color of someone's skin can give them advantages around the world but you were arguing something different now which has nothing to do with genetics. The color of one's skin is only one genetic indicator but there are so many other chromosomes that indicate a person's genetic origin besides skin color
Dude. You are a white man.
It's not even close. You could walk right into Aryan Nation gathering. Any alt-Right gathering and they'd welcome you with open arms. Stop talking B.S