Went to Social Security office in Texas and didn't hear English spoken for 30 minutes

page: 19
66
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 10 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by VonDinkinDunken
 





Where were you unable to get a job b/c you didn't speak a certain language? Were you applying for a job which had a bilingual requirement?


There are people all across the USA who are required to speak Spanish in many areas in order to get a job that has nothing to do with international businesses. I questioned one business and their reply was that the reason they required you to be bilingual is because most of their employees spoke spanish.
What does that tell you? A red flag went up for me that they were most probably hiring illegals, or if they were legal, they were too lazy and disrespectful to their new country to bother to speak the language.




What language is required to make important phone calls?


Obviously I was reffering to the press one for english option. All immigrants who come here legally to live are required to learn english. There shouldn't have to be an option to hear our own language when all our immigrants are supposed to know english. Again, I think this is to cater to illegals who shouldn't be here in the first place.

With over 300 languages spoken here and all immigrants required to speak english, there is no reason to be catering to the spanish speakers.
edit on 10-12-2012 by Night Star because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 10 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by VonDinkinDunken
 





What planet do some of you people live on? America is and has always been the land of immigrants. Much of this sounds racists because it is racist


Correct, we are the land of immigrants. No one is disputing that. We are saying that out of over 300 languages spoken here and english being required when you immigrate, there should be no reason to cater to the spanish speaking population. They are no different than anyone else. It has nothing to do with being racist.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xaphan

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
What country? They didn't "become a nation", as you even pointed out. They were scattered tribes, with many languages, that fought each other as often as not. They are not "Native Americans". A native American is someone born in the United States of America. Call them Amarinds or something, if Indian won't do(and yeah, these days, that can be confusing). But can we please toss out that utterly racist and elitist term "Native American"?

I really don't understand how anyone that ever studied the early history of this continent can pretend that all these many tribes were the same people. Such a claim is out of touch with reality.

There are so many things wrong with this post that I had to resist the urge to drop my computer out the _

Countries and nations were mainly a European concept at first. Just because they hadn't established a country with a flag doesn't mean they didn't have a right to this land, and doesn't mean that they weren't the original inhabitants.

The term 'Native American' was never intended to be elitist or racist. It denotes that they were the original human inhabitants of North America. And yes, they are Native Americans, they were here before anybody else. Everybody else born in America is an American.

Apparently it is you who hasn't studied the early history of the continent. They were the same people, just living in different tribes and localities. They lived on the same continent and came from the same genetic stock. Their bloodline has been traced to Mongolians who traveled across the Bering Strait somewhere between 30,000 and 50,000 years ago. They have actually inhabited this continent for longer than white people have even existed.


At the American Association of Physical Anthropologists meeting, held here from 28 to 31 March, a new report on the evolution of a gene for skin color suggested that Europeans acquired pale skin quite recently, perhaps only 6000 to 12,000 years ago.

In today's age of technology and easy access to information, there is no excuse for ignorance except mental retardation.
edit on 7-12-2012 by Xaphan because: (no reason given)


So why are you ignoring the other data I posted, on remains such as those of Kennewick Man? Such remains are pretty clear proof that these Mongolian-ancestry people were NOT, in fact, the first here. Those remains are a lot older. Use some of that "easy access to information", and study up on that issue.

Nothing you said shows that there was some nation here, continent-wide, that the Europeans conquered. Scattered tribes, warring with each other, are not a nation. Genetic similarities don't make a country.

If you can't understand these issues, then maybe you should give in to that urge you mentioned next time.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 05:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
So why are you ignoring the other data I posted, on remains such as those of Kennewick Man? Such remains are pretty clear proof that these Mongolian-ancestry people were NOT, in fact, the first here. Those remains are a lot older.

I think you might have conveniently ignored this, so I'll say it again. It is now believed that Native Americans have inhabited this continent for 30,000 to 50,000 years, which is longer than white people have even existed. Kennewick man is approximately 5,650 to 9,510 years old, and is most likely Caucasian. Kennewick man would have arrived much, much later than the Native Americans. Also, one body does not imply that there was even a settlement here. He may have just been an inexperienced explorer who bit off more than he could chew and perished.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyesNothing you said shows that there was some nation here, continent-wide, that the Europeans conquered. Scattered tribes, warring with each other, are not a nation. Genetic similarities don't make a country.

Take note of my previous post and how I wasn't even trying to say it was a nation/country.

Originally posted by Xaphan
Countries and nations were mainly a European concept at first. Just because they hadn't established a country with a flag doesn't mean they didn't have a right to this land, and doesn't mean that they weren't the original inhabitants.

My point was that they weren't an 'official country' in the eyes of Europeans, because they had never encountered Europeans before. They had no knowledge of the white man's legalities. But that doesn't make their status as the first long-term inhabitants any less valid. People can't just go around pillaging and taking what they want just because there's no flag jammed into the soil. But they did, and that was the excuse. What makes European laws more valid than any others? All laws are man made, and therefore subjective, so what makes one more powerful than the rest?
edit on 11-12-2012 by Xaphan because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xaphan
I think you might have conveniently ignored this, so I'll say it again. It is now believed that Native Americans have inhabited this continent for 30,000 to 50,000 years, which is longer than white people have even existed.


Archeology and paleontology are very, very cool, but for God's love, what does it have with anything? Last time I looked outside, it was the second decade of the 21st century out there, and no we didn't have dinosaur steaks for dinner (I know they are older than that but hey).

It's about Social Security, the service and users of that service, and how the immigration pattern the US experienced in the past 30 years has screwed things up. It's not about skin color or radio-carbon dating of some bones and artifacts. Duh.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Spanish was spoken in Texas for a century before English crept up. There are still entire families in Texas that don't speak English. Why should they have to change because some immigrants came and decided to speak English?



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by DoYouEvenLift
Why should they have to change because some immigrants came and decided to speak English?


They can speak Mandarin for all I care, but there must be a language spoken by everybody. Since English is the language of industry, science and a large part of culture in the United States of America, not learning that language is an affront to our country.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by DoYouEvenLift
Why should they have to change because some immigrants came and decided to speak English?


They can speak Mandarin for all I care, but there must be a language spoken by everybody. Since English is the language of industry, science and a large part of culture in the United States of America, not learning that language is an affront to our country.


Oh, you want genocide.

Gotcha.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by DoYouEvenLift

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by DoYouEvenLift
Why should they have to change because some immigrants came and decided to speak English?


They can speak Mandarin for all I care, but there must be a language spoken by everybody. Since English is the language of industry, science and a large part of culture in the United States of America, not learning that language is an affront to our country.


Oh, you want genocide.


What? If you wanted cognitive dissonance, don't worry, you already have it.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by DoYouEvenLift
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Spanish was spoken in Texas for a century before English crept up. There are still entire families in Texas that don't speak English. Why should they have to change because some immigrants came and decided to speak English?


Even if you gave them Texas back, they have still invaded all across the USA. They don't care where they are, they refuse to speak the language of the land and are catered to. Not only that, but we are required in some instances to speak a foreign language in our own country to please them which isn't necessary.



posted on Dec, 11 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by DoYouEvenLift

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by DoYouEvenLift
Why should they have to change because some immigrants came and decided to speak English?


They can speak Mandarin for all I care, but there must be a language spoken by everybody. Since English is the language of industry, science and a large part of culture in the United States of America, not learning that language is an affront to our country.


Oh, you want genocide.

Gotcha.


What does genocide have to do with wanting our common language?



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Cornczech
 


Unfortunately TPTB never made English the official language, of the country. I wouldn't doubt that you had that problem, where I'm at, you're not even considered for a job if you're not bi-lingual, they say they don't discriminate, but these people are sly and will tell you that, while they're doing it to you. All this just seemed to creep upon us all of sudden.

That's my take on things.



posted on Dec, 12 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Night Star
 


Amen to that, Take a look at what Mexico expects out of their naturalized citizens.

I'm not against anybody, I'm just pointing out the situation, but if I went to their country to do business I'd have to know their language.
edit on 12-12-2012 by 1loserel2 because: typo



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by DoYouEvenLift
Oh, you want genocide.

Gotcha.

lol wait, what? How does that make sense? What is this? I don't even...

Argument and credibility instantly lost.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xaphan
I think you might have conveniently ignored this, so I'll say it again. It is now believed that Native Americans have inhabited this continent for 30,000 to 50,000 years, which is longer than white people have even existed. Kennewick man is approximately 5,650 to 9,510 years old, and is most likely Caucasian. Kennewick man would have arrived much, much later than the Native Americans. Also, one body does not imply that there was even a settlement here. He may have just been an inexperienced explorer who bit off more than he could chew and perished.


"Believed". By whom, exactly, and based on what evidence? Kennewick Man is about the oldest remains they have for this continent. So, I guess I am "conveniently ignoring" evidence that doesn't exist? How dare I?


Originally posted by Xaphan
*snip*People can't just go around pillaging and taking what they want just because there's no flag jammed into the soil. But they did, and that was the excuse. What makes European laws more valid than any others? All laws are man made, and therefore subjective, so what makes one more powerful than the rest?
edit on 11-12-2012 by Xaphan because: (no reason given)


They can't? Hmmm..... There was no mass takeover of the continent. Parts were settled peacefully, parts were purchased, and some parts were conquered. SO WHAT? By your standards, I could fly to Scotland, confront people that took land from my ancestors centuries ago, and demand it back, because my people were there first. That's simply ridiculous.
edit on 13-12-2012 by LadyGreenEyes because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 04:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
"Believed". By whom, exactly, and based on what evidence? Kennewick Man is about the oldest remains they have for this continent. So, I guess I am "conveniently ignoring" evidence that doesn't exist? How dare I?

New Evidence Puts Man In North America 50,000 Years Ago.

Originally posted by LadyGreenEyes
They can't? Hmmm..... There was no mass takeover of the continent. Parts were settled peacefully, parts were purchased, and some parts were conquered. SO WHAT? By your standards, I could fly to Scotland, confront people that took land from my ancestors centuries ago, and demand it back, because my people were there first. That's simply ridiculous.

Except that wasn't even my argument at all. I never once said that anybody has the right to demand anything back, as it's a little too late for that. The point I originally tried to make before you dropped that straw man fallacy was that European legalities shouldn't have applied to people that had never even encountered them before. I'm just sick of people making excuses for these original European settlers, making them out to be glorified patriots and heroes, when many of them were in fact devious underhanded thieves. I'm not saying anybody should leave, I'm not saying white people should feel guilty, I'm not saying everything should be given back. I'm just saying that people should acknowledge the truth. It wasn't fair, they were invaded and treated like sh*t, and that's what happened. That was my argument all along. There are still so many people who just don't want to accept the cold hard truth. I don't know why exactly, but I imagine most of these people are clouded by a patriotic bias. I pretty much summarized all this in a previous post anyways:

Originally posted by Xaphan
My post wasn't meant to be a personal attack to anybody or any country. I just wish people would stop acting like their ancestors were right. Our ancestors did some terrible things, and no, it isn't our fault, but the very least we can do is admit that they aren't the heroes that they were originally thought to be. We should just acknowledge the truth of what really happened and try to move forward. My main concern isn't who did the most or least amount of damage, it's making sure things like this don't happen again. If we don't acknowledge historical truths, history is bound to repeat itself.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Xaphan
 


Look, I said and I'll say it again: events from 50,000 years ago don't mean jack when one is pondering the long lines in the local Social Security office. Fossils found in Siberian Tundra do not have bearing on immigration policies, fiscal cliff or quality of tequila.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 

I wasn't addressing you at all. Besides, if you had read all the posts that led up to these ones you'd understand that it is somewhat on topic.

Also, just ignore my posts if you don't like them or think they have no bearing on the thread.



posted on Dec, 13 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   
This is the OP here...WOW! I didn't expect my thread to get so big! I have not read on here for a few days...nasty Texas flu and all....
I was born in El Paso.....I went to HS here and to UTEP.....Spanish has ALWAYS been spoken here....it was the first place I saw a bilingual McDonalds menu...in the 80's (I was raised in White Oak, Texas...near hte LA/AK border.....)
My point is being missed by some, it seems ......this was a FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BUILDING.....there was no press one for English, press two for Spanish......EVERYTHING was in SPANISH...the numbers were being called in Spanish...not ONCE>...NEVER in English.....there was NO CHOICE!!!
I now live IN chicago......LOTS of different 'hoods...Polish, Chinese, Nigerian, MEXICAN.....and people can speak what they want to speak...in fact I am FOR bilingualism....makes the brain work for kids to learn another language.....BUT IN THE CASE OF ME GETTING MY NEW SS CARD....I was FORCED into Spanish...and since leaving Texas in the late 80's....I have forgotten most of the little Spanish I DID know.....
When I went to Poland in the 1990's....nobody would accomodate me and why should they have...I mean...I was in friggin POLAND...why should I DEMAND someone accomodate MY language? IN Sweden...most people I came across spoke English...but I wasn't LIVING there like I was in Poland....
I think my point is very simple and a XENOPHOBE? Come the hell on.....if I were, then I wouldn't have lived and traveled through-out the world....

Anyhow....thanks all ya'll (plural for ya'll for all non-Texans), for responding to my original post....
by the way...I was told 2 weeks to get new SS card.....for once...I got it in only a few days....wow, huh?
Peace ya'll......



posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cornczech

What the heck is going on in America? There is even a MOSQUE in EL PASO!!! I NEVER would have imagined this....when I grew up in BFE East Texas..there was not even a CATHOLIC church, (most of the people in my old town were Baptists)
SO...what are ya'll's opinions on the destruction of our culture...and what are ya'll's opinions on how "political correctness" has destroyed our American culture.....


Couldn't help but chuckle....Folks speaking Spanish!!! And a "MOSQUE" in EL PASO!!!

BTW - El Paso?...Spanish for the Gateway...used to be El Paso Del Norte...gateway to the north....

San Diego, Los Ageles? Spanish BTW....Chicago, Milwaukee ...Native American...the list is VERY long.

As far as "the destruction of our culture"....we are a "melting pot"...and every immigrant wave...Irish, Italian, German, and yes even Hispanics and Middle Eastern.....has made America STRONGER. A melting pot...and an alloy is stronger than steel.

And while "when you grew up" there wasn't even a Catholic Church in "El Paso"...When your g-grand dad was alive, El Paso was Mexican Territory.

So take a chill pill...same as it ever was....which is to say America's culture is a melting pot and thier will always be folks terrified that the "melting" will not occur, but since our birth a couple centuries ago and countless waves of immigrants, we have only gotten stronger...it's actually our secret...our diversity is the source of our greatness..

See how some folks viewed the Irish once upon a time....



Just cuz we wear green and celebrate St. Patrick's day...doesn't mean the Irish destroyed America.





new topics

top topics



 
66
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join