*
Some of your folks might have already read this in yesterdays paper.
I think the gentlemen hits the nail on the head. I agree 110%
This is an editorial written by an American citizen, published in a
local
newspaper. He did quite a job; didn’t he?
=======================================================
GOD BLESS AMERICA
IMMIGRANTS, NOT AMERICANS, MUST ADAPT
I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some
individual or their culture.
Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we have experienced a surge in
patriotism by the majority of Americans. However, the dust
from the attacks had barely settled when the “politically correct” crowd
began complaining about the possibility
that our patriotism was offending others.
I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who
is
seeking a better life by coming to America. Our population is almost
entirely comprised of descendants of immigrants. However,
there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country,
and apparently some born here, need to understand.
This idea of America being a multicultural community has served only to
dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. As Americans, we have
our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own
lifestyle.
This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and
victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom. We speak
ENGLISH, not Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other
language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn
the
language!
“In God We Trust” is our national motto. This is not some Christian,
right wing, political slogan. We adopted this motto because
Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation,
and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to
display it on the walls of our schools.
If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the
world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.
If Stars and Stripes offend you, or you don’t like Uncle Sam, then you
should seriously consider a move to another part of this
planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and
we really don’t care how you did things where you came
from. This is OUR COUNTRY, our land, and our lifestyle.
Our First Amendment gives every citizen the right to express his opinion
and we will allow you every opportunity to do so. But, once you are done
complaining, whining, and griping about our flag, our pledge, our
national
motto, or our way of life, I highly encourage you to take advantage of
one
other great American freedom, THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.
Please pass this along if you agree
Replies
*
What paper was it in?
*I don't know......got it in an e-mail....could be a hoax.I'll try to find out.
*That's kinda what I was wondering. I'm, always a little suspicious of things that say "Forward this to everyone you know". (Or something like that)I basically agree with the sentiment, though.
*Allen, I would whole heartedly agree with the author regaurding conducting business and the government in english.The authors comments regaurding religon are simply wishfull thinking on his part and possibly the biggest load of crap I have ever heard.The authors views on patriotism and the flag sound remarkably like Archie Bunker.Another "my country,love it or leave it" kind of guy.luckily in the " goooood ole U.S. of A" informed dissent is alive and well and is quite possibly one of our most valuable attributes.those "christian founding fathers" ,many of whom were actually deists, provided well for differing viewpoints.
*QUOTEOur First Amendment gives every citizen the right to express his opinion and we will allow you every opportunity to do so. But, once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about our flag, our pledge, our national motto, or our way of life, I highly encourage you to take advantage of one other great American freedom, THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.ENDQUOTEWell. My earliest documented ancester arrival in the US was 1690. Next were the Berry's who arrived in 1778 and served in General Washington's army; Elizabeth Gilmore Berry (who was a nurse at Valley Forge) being one of the few women who actually served as a member of his Army and received a pension for that service.The latest immigrant in my family treee that I'm aware of arrived in 1866.I'm going to exercise my right to complain and gripe and the stupidity of the lead comment posted. If you don't like it, I suggest i you leave. Mine were here first.I also suggest remedial civics classes. The right to protest and the right of a free press are two cornerstones of our strength as a nation. By arguing against dissent, whoever wrote this is demonstrating a complete lack of awareness of the central core of American democracy.Which English do you want us to speak? The english spoken in the 1600's? How are you going to order that round dough with tomato sauce, cheese and various toppings? Our language is very diffewrent from that spoken over the years, maily due to the diversity the writer complains of.Perhaps we should scrap large parts of our Constitution because they were drived from French philosphers. Perhaps we should scrap the intercontinental railroad, the masonry, all of the other contributions to "our" cultural that came from non-English speakers.And, of course, all of those whiners and people who've been attacking our federal government over the last 20 years or so should be the first to leave, under the views expressed by the writer.And, finally, since "In God We Trust" is our sacred national motto, we should disregard the Constitutions proscription against the establishment of religion and becoem an official "Christian" nation.Ooops. The Godi wetrust is the same God of the Hebrews and the Muslims. So maybe we ought to become an Muslim country, of Hebrew state.To paraphrase a founding father: I think what you said is incredibly stupid and un-American, but I will defend your right to say it. Go ahead and try to spread your brand of ignorance: true Americans will fight you every step of the way!
*amen, stephen and bob....if i'm going to draw lines in the sand it's not going to be for that kind of sentiment...how many of the president's relatives speak spanish as their first language ?and that huddling band of communists on the Mayflower were escaping from religious persecution so they could impose their puritan views on a new world...Connecticut and Rhode Island were both founded by people escaping from the Massachusetts Bay Colony..nope.... the sentiments expressed in the editorial are too simplistic and narrow minded to be of much value in the world we live in...b but hey, whadda i no ?
*Great post. This person indeed hit the nail on the head. It has always angered and disappointed me that even before 9/11 we have so called "Americans" rebel against their flag, their country, their president. Burning the flag, throwing God out of our schools. etc.Even the ACLU tried to stick their proverbial two cents worth in when they supported one opposer of having the words "God Bless America" on a message board at a school. Of course, they had no comment when it was pointed out that the words "In God We Trust" was on the back of US Currency---so why aren't they boycotting money? Sorry to get off on a rant here folks, but I love this country, I have served this country, and will be honored to do so again--and I am disgusted with the fanatical zealots who constantly try to mar the Judea Christian principles of freedom and democracy that is the stronghold of our great country--the country that they choose to live in. Why are they here? Why do they stay when it's apparently so bad? I'll tell you why. No one else wants them.
*Tara, you can't throw God out of our schools. You can't throw God out of anywhere God wants to be. If God is in our schools it is because he is in the hearts and minds of the students and teachers. But God was never in our schools in the way that you mean. The separation of church and state in our public schools is a positive good and necessary for the welfare of the entire society. One has a choice if one wishes one's children to have an overtly religious education. Our teachers do not have the time and money to provide an overtly and appropriate religious education to every child in the school system depending on the family's belief system. And I would not wish to delegate such responsibility to anyone else.I love and support this country as well. Everyone in it, including atheists, agnostics, and those who profess belief of any of the world's religions.i and I am disgusted with the fanatical zealots who constantly try to mar the Judea Christian principles of freedom and democracy that is the stronghold of our great country--I'm sorry, didn't you just advocate limiting some of those freedoms? And I will leave it to others of you to clarify to what extent our freedoms and democracy stem from the Judeo-Christian tradition.
*Allen, Tara, you want God in our schools?Oh, like the Taliban...one way, huh?
*you betchya He's in our school....right at home!
*Good for you Allen, for making the right choice for your family and taking responsibility for something that is important to you.
*Tara:QUOTEIt has always angered and disappointed me that even before 9/11 we have so called "Americans" rebel against their flag, their country, their president.ENDQUOTEI'll take that as a confession that your unremitting, kneejerk attacks on Clinton were worthy of anger and disgust.QUOTEI am disgusted with the fanatical zealots who constantly try to mar the Judea Christian principles of freedom and democracy that is the stronghold of our great country--the country that they choose to live in. Why are they here? Why do they stay when it's apparently so bad? I'll tell you why. No one else wants them.ENDQOUTERemedial civics for you too.The fanatacism of those who cannot tolerate views other than their own worries me.
*You guys crack me up. You never miss a chance to criticize your religous heritage and to chastize those who openly subscribe to such beliefs. Then you turn around and shout your amens and how great it is to be living in America. Stop it, you're killing me...
*RichI believe you just described the strength of this country. Closing our minds, out hearts and our borders is not what made this country great. Our strength comes from intelligence and open mindedness. I even try to tolerate the intolerant. Their freedom to advocate taking away other's freedoms is our strength.Terry
*Bob Walker, As per your quote. "I'm going to exercise my right to complain and gripe and the stupidity of the lead comment posted. If you don't like it, I suggest you leave. Mine were here first."Does this mean since your ancestors came here first you have more rights than the ones who came later? Just curious, is the infamous John "the Taliban" Walker part of your family tree?
*Armin:The whiner whose message was the initial post was saying, more or less:if you're new here and don't like things, stop complaining and go back where you came from.I was intending some satire: how long one or one's ancestors have been in the country bear no relationship to the excercise of one's rights to "petition the government with grievances."Nope, not that John Walker, nor the John Walker who was convicted of spying a few years ago.FWIW, Walker is one of the most common of last names.
*Rich,Whom are you addressing?
*The immigration law we have now is rather absurd and does not require effort on the part of the person wishing to come here. The Test of English as a Foreign Language(TOEFL) should be required as an entry to the US. Other religions do come here and live here. They usually shed their fundamentalist view when they find that only hard work will get you anywhere and that tolerance prevents you from killing your neighbor or he killing you. Refugees make up a difficult class. They are not necessarily here of choice, but of fear, warfare, torture etc. That said, anyone who comes to this country should be given 5 to 7 years to take the citizenship test. No permanent green card status unless tied to a work permit. And finally, the whiners and multiculturalist are home grown. Every immigrant I run into is here to work. Those who are not are simply taking advantage of the laws our home grown idiots chose to get passed. After 9/11, the most flags on lapels I saw were on Phillipinos, Mexicans, Ethiopians. And by the way, I will venture that these groups are more church attending than Americans per capita.
*Uh, oh, Dave. I've failed at least one of your tests. Eight plus years living in the US on an IR1 green card, i.e., one that is unrelated to a job or work. I think I could just about bluff my way through your ToEFL test though. Slainte, RJ.
*Bob:i The fanatacism of those who cannot tolerate views other than their own worries me. Are you the pot calling the kettle black?And I never spouted knee jerk "attacks" on my president--whomever that may be. I did critique his policies, and yes I did voice opinion about his character, but I don't demand change or special treatment for my opinions, and I believe that I do have the right to critique since I vote.Geeze.Can't anyone print anything on here without everthing being taken so damned personal?
*<<<Geeze. Can't anyone print anything on here without everthing being taken so damned personal? >>ummmmmm.. are u talking to me , tara ?take it back....hah, hah, hah.....
*Sgian, you durn furriner you! My reasoning is thus: After a certain time, make up one's mind and decide. I know of three of my friends and colleagues parents who have been here many years, one Finnish, one English, one Canadian. They all worked and retired here, payed taxes here, are good people. But they chafe at being treated like a foreigner when crossing borders, when asking embassy help abroad etc. They crab when their very elderly parents abroad can't just "hop on over". They howl about the war in Afghanistan and what "their" government is doing. Their children continually point out that they have no room to talk. They are merely guests here and no more. And they are causing their children heartache by chosing a permanent state of limbo. Just to keep me honest, why 8 years? Why not sign the papers and take the test? Just curious.
*Probably for the same reasons that Americans live all over the world, some 2cnd or 3rd generation in their adopted countries, and never give up their American citizenship or take out citizenship in their new countries.
*Dave, you asked,i "Why not sign the papers and take the test? Just curious." When we lived in my country, Great Britain, it would have been insulting to demand that my wife with her mixed American Indian/European ancestry, renounce her proudly held American passport to become British. I expect the same courtesy back because I'm just as patriotic about Britain as Americans are about America. If it wasn't for our marriage it's extremely unlikely that I would have moved to and lived in America; work permits aren't easy to come by for one, and apart from my wife I knew no-one at all amongst my family or friends that lived in America. I'm not a political refugee, nor an economic migrant, nor did I come from any sort of impoverished place. I was in my late 30's when I moved to the US, more than 4/5ths of my life, and I've no intention of forgetting where I grew up, my British family and friends, the values I grew up with, my countries long and not always glorious history, what kind of schooling I got, where I lived, played sports, chased girls, and worked for all that time. My Britishness is important and valuable to me in a strange, alien, and often bewildering country. I was too old, experienced, worldly wise, cynical, and yes, educated and intelligent, to be simply absorbed and melded into American culture and values when I arrived. Slainte, RJ.
*Bob, I purposely left it to others to decide to whom I'm addressing. If the shoe fits...Terry, how eloquent and succint, but I wholeheartedly disagree. Remember, America was made great by a singlemindedness of it's people and a sense of place in that folks felt they were all pulling together towards a common goal. (Relax, I'm not going to give a history lesson.) This unity was expressed in the actions of the people but had it's roots in the heart and spirit. Also, don't forget the vast American history of isolationist. America faired much better when the interest in America was for America. People flocked here because they wanted a piece. From whence did come that thing so attractive to cause people to risk much so that they too could call themselves "Americans"? (To say they came here only because it was better than where they came from is to deny the reason for America's greatness.) The principals and underpinnings that formed this nation arose directly from Christian teachings. Like it or not, that is every American's heritage. Tolerance is a much overused word these days. In fact, it has become just so much malarky. I can go stand on any street corner on any day and find out just how untrue that buzzword is. In my sector, it is by and large the "enlightened new world" thinkers who have decided they are to be the judge and jury of those who don't share their views. What I see today is mostly alot of bickering between various groups who have seen fit to segregate themselves according to world views, religious beliefs, ethnicity and more. It's fashionable to play the victim, I suppose.BTW: it was the original intent of our founding fathers that a "right" is protection of the people from undue interference by the government. Lately, the definition has been changed to that of entitlement.
*rich... which history lesso wud that be..<>>bs....no unity of purpose until we fought a civil war to decide wether it would be federalism or state's rights....and isolationism....?...was that in between manifest destiny..... and imperialism....and it worked so well, too... your view is .. just that.. your view..but it ain't much as far as history or the origens of how we got to be us....the really remarkable thing is that we've avoided bloodshed since the civil war... well, give or take a coupla assasinations....here & dere....
*Tara:QUOTEThe fanatacism of those who cannot tolerate views other than their own worries me. Are you the pot calling the kettle black? ENDQUOTEPlease take a look at my responses to CloudHidden in Dave Riggs "YO, Republicans!" 12/29/01 1:17pm Not directly on point, but I beliebve it demonstrates that I think about the various issues and form ny own opinions instead of wpouting whatever jibberish the politicians are soitting out thses days.QUOTEAnd I never spouted knee jerk "attacks" on my president--whomever that may be. I did critique his policies, and yes I did voice opinion about his character, but I don't demand change or special treatment for my opinions, and I believe that I do have the right to critique since I vote. ENDQUOTEI was responding to:QUOTEIt has always angered and disappointed me that even before 9/11 we have so called "Americans" rebel against their flag, their country, their president.ENDQUOTESo, when you attack a president you don't like, it's healty criticism and a critique, but when others "attack" a president you like it angers and disappoints you. Right.Oh, BTW, the right to pettition the government for redress of grievances and the freedom of the press are not reserved for voting citizens (although I agree that if you are a citizen and have the right to vote, it is hypocritical to whine when you don't vote; unless one has made a principled decision to not vote where one feels neither candidate would represent one's interests.)BTW, a question. I haven'[t had time to research it, but if I recall, Clinton was often attacked by military types for for not setting a timetable for Overseas US military actions. If that memory is right, I expect the right wing to be howling about Dubya's announcement there is no timetable in the "war on terrorism."Oh yes, please use the respond button, it makes following the discussion much easier for us simple minded folks
*I wonder how many of these" real" americans could pass the citezenship tests that they want those "damn fuuurinner immigrants" to take?BTW this discussion is nothing new. We could have heard the same claptrap 50 years ago,100 years ago,150 years ago.....
*> Also, don't forget the vast American history of isolationist. America faired much better when the interest in America was for America.Really? Damn, learn something everyday I guess. Any evidence to support this?Rich Beckman
*RichIf there ever was any one common goal wasn't it b Freedom.I can't have it if I take away yours or anyone else's.Terry
*He means me, I think. I said I loved America and that I tolerate the religious beliefs of others in the same paragraph.
*Sgian, marriage is a reasonable reason to be here as the notes. Same for spouses most anywhere. And yes British institutions are very worthy of respect. But I detect a little of the British "We'll just muddle through" in there too. It is only when unfortunate circumstances arise that people find themselves face to face with our INS. They are not a nice lot. I would be torn if I had to give up my citizenship. On the other hand, most other countries will welcome you back later based on birth alone. I could not do that with similar ease. Another thing I remember reading is that Western Europeans are given a quota for immigration every year, and it often goes unfilled, particularly France. I think the UK quota goes unfilled as well. Finally, HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE!
*Dave, I do my bit, but I'll never be American. We Brits do muddle through, just like our American allies seem to do. Here are some recent bits of international news I find interesting outside Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden that is. The Channel Tunnel was closed due to a breakout of refugees in their attempt to get into GB; they were being held in France. Sydney is full of smoke, and the fires raging around the Blue Mountains may have been set deliberately and four people are being held with a view to prosecution for arson; my daughter is fully aware of the fires, she's living in Oz right now. Did you know that tomorrow (Jan. 1 '02) the Euro (€) will be the official ongoing currency of the European Union, replacing the Franc, Deutsmark, lira, guilder, Peseta, etc., but that GB, Denmark, and Sweden will retain their own currencies because they chose not to participate in the Euro adventure. They might join later, at some unspecified time. Norway will retain its Kroner- naturally, because that country is not a member of the EU. South Africa as an economy that is dying on its feet due to the fact that something like 20% of the population is infected with AIDS. Robert Mugabe, President of Zimbabwe is facing an uncomfortable re-election procedure around about May '02 because his self perpetuating government of the last 20 years has crippled the country, and that Argentina is broke, and has defaulted on debts of something like US $150 billion.The football world cup takes place next year in Japan and South Korea, and this sporting event will dwarf all other sports events that might take place in the world in '02. The year after, the rugby world cup will consume fans and afficionado's all around the world.Just a few titbits that caught my eye over the last week or so. Everyone have a wonderful Hogmanay, and all the best for the new year. Slainte, RJ.
*Good morning boys and girls, can you say North American Indian?
*"North American Indian." Easy-peasy. Mind you, that's one hell of a mouthful for the simple word Indian. My wife is a good chunk Cherokee Indian, and I can say Injun without batting an eye, and so can she. Was there a question in there somewhere? Can we say 'white', or is it more politically correct to say 'European Caucasian'? Can we say black, or does it have to be African-American? Can we say ass-hole, or does it have to be described as a rectal orifice? Slainte, RJ.
*i Easy-peasy. My wife is has a big chunk of north american indian in her.Are you saying she's Easy-peasy ?
*i is it better to say North European Caucasian? Actually, i was born in Butte, and we prefer "Buttician".How's this for an immigration policy?And here 's a hand, my trusty fiere, And gie's a hand o' thine; And we'll tak a right guid-willie waught For auld lang syne.Happy New Year, RJ!
*Rabbie was truly a bit o' tha lad wi' the wurds, (sic) SG. Slainte, RJ.
*Ha, ha. Far from it, Luka. Slainte, RJ.
*North European Caucasion is ok as I have grown used to dumbass squarehead smelly lutefisk eating Norski. At least no one accuses me of being Swedish. Those would be fighting words. hehehehehehe
*hey, svenny... do you want me to hold your coat ?hah, hah, hah.....
*It all started down-hill when the Puritan/Episcopalian majority lost their fight to keep out the Irish.:)
*guvnah..a roun fer the "Lime eater At Large."u make a me laff..ha ha ha u 2 lukahny2002
*phillll .. cromwell won the first round.. but you no wot they say.... revenge is outlivin the bastids...sides... the establishment couldn't breed as fast as the immigrants....still can't..
*Is this related to something, or just your usual unconnected drivel ?
*Sgian, British humor is in a class of it's own, you are really quite funny, who ever would have guessed that of a Brit.
*phillll.. r u addressing me ?<<<>>>
*What's the matter ? Does this mean I can't take a dig at Tara's xenophobia, or you agree with her ? {try using the reply button}
*phill.... i'd probably quit the board in disgust if anything happened to u or tara...but xenophobia ?....no.. i was commenting on the new immigrant class usurping the old establishment... seems to be a recurring theme in the "new worlds"..
*Well I was commenting on the fact that yesterday's denied immigrant is today's denying establishment.
*and so it goes....
*> That said, anyone who comes to this country should be given 5 to 7 years to take the citizenship test. Anyone? Suppose a 24 year old university graduate comes here, learns English, gets a job, then a better job, buys a fixer upper and fixes it up. He can probably pass the test in his first year. Then he brings his 84 year old grandmother over to spend the rest of her days in better circumstances than he could afford to provide for her in the old country, because he has enough room in the house. She gets by just fine speaking the old language with the family and other members of that immigrant community. She teaches the language to the great grandchildren. Grandma lives to be 97. Do we really want the law to give her the toss at age 91 because she didn't learn enough English?-- J.S.
*John:"Do we really want the law to give her the toss at age 91 because she didn't learn enough English?"You're darn right. She not only didn't learn enough English, but she taught the little nippers some subversive ferrin lingo!
*I work with immigrants every day. Gramma is supposed to be here and taken care of by the family. She is not supposed to get welfare, social security, and free medical care. I can assure you she will get all three without contributing a penny. The immigration laws were written to "keep families together" in the thought that it would help them succeed. It did no such thing. The only factors proven to help immigrants succeed are a command of English and finishing higher education. I know of many many immigrants on the dole who fly home at the cost of thousands of dollars every year to visit family. No, gramma needs to be a resident alien so she can't get free bennies. The people who passed these laws never had to deal with funding the economic consequences thereof. I am not against immigration but the current law makes zero sense. Besides, it is far cheaper to have the family send $ home than to care for a person here. There is a big difference between a young person with the ability to work and a post retirement age person.
*Sound like a change is needed to the laws of welfare, social security and free medical care, yes?I'm kinda late into this....where did you find this old, ancient drivel, Allen? This shit's from handbills, pre-Civil War. And all of it comes from envy. See, the deal has always been, "Come to America, in exchange for exploiting you, your children will have a chance to become real Americans, speak the language, become educated, blah........"And when the immigrant says forget it! I'm gonna be a success. That's when we see the handbills, the love it or leave it.Usually written by folks living in houses with wheels, eating mayo sandwitches.....What an ancient, tired old pile of crap.Hate well........it's still hate.
*xJ, anyone, what is the official language of the US federal government? Is it written in stone somewhere- perhaps in Spanish- that all American citizens, or residents, must be able to speak and write English, and must all government documents be written in English? Why not Spanish, or German? Spanish is probably the most commonly used language in the part of the world I live in. Somebody please identify and name the law that says American English is the official language of the USA. Forget custom and usage; give us details of the Federally ratified and sanctioned law. Slainte, RJ.
*Dunno. Ben Franklin suggested German and it only lost by one vote. Pennsylvania used to hold sway due to its German Quakers etc. So English was on the table 200 years ago.
*Mark, I never could find out who wrote it or what paper it came from......I think its a hoax.
*I was wondering when someone would bring this up. The U.S. has no official language. English, is, by far the most commonly spoken one, but it isn't the law.
*i Actually, i was born in Butte, and we prefer "Buttician". And up here in Lethbridge, the locals are referred to as Lethbians.
*Too funny, CM! I was considering Kamloops...Kamlooper? (a relative of the inch-worm)Kamloopier? (than thou)Kamloopian? (Let the Games begin)Kamloopite? (new to the periodic table)
*> You're darn right. She not only didn't learn enough English, but she taught the little nippers some subversive ferrin lingo! Ah, yes. One of the little nippers grows up, and they stick him in the Navy to keep him out of trouble. A "regional conflict" occurs, and the Navy makes good use of his knowledge of the old language, which they desperately need in the crisis.-- J.S.
*Apart from yourself, I see no-one's biting on that tasty worm CM. I wonder why? Actually, I don't wonder at all. Slainte, RJ.
*I'll bite. Does Gaelic pass in London? How about Welsh? Better yet, how about a lower class accent in London? What do you need if you are a soccer hooligan in the docket? King's English? Polish or Paki pass?
*Dave, Are you responding to me? It's hard to tell. You might be. The language used in the UK for nearly all- that is- effectively all legal proceedings and documents is English. We use it because it's the custom and the practice, but you are welcome to use any of the gaelic languages if you like, and as long as everyone else understands what's going on,.... but otherwise it's English. Unlike most democracies we don't have any kind of written constitution or 'Bill of Rights', or anything that begins something like 'We, the people, etc.." Law is made in peculiar ways in the UK too, but I was intrigued by the fact that several contributors here seemed to believe that English is the 'official' langauge of the USA. I'm just curious to know where it says in some of the verbiage that follows the opening phrase, 'We the people' it states unequivocally that "English is the official language of the USA." Can you incontrovertibly identify a statement to that effect in the constitution of the USA, or not? As to these points that you raised,i "Better yet, how about a lower class accent in London? What do you need if you are a soccer hooligan in the docket? King's English? Polish or Paki pass?" Just like the US, a good solicitor instructing a barrister might come in handy here, or even just being rich will often get you out of holes that others get mired in. ;-) Slainte, RJ.
*Ricardo,I just looked at a site that said English was official in the UK, Welsh in Wales, and that some Scotsmen were known to speak in full sentences.Is it true?
*Wha'? Blx. Hu sed tha'?
*On the other hand, i just researched another site that said French was pretty much the only language of civilized peoples.So, which do you prefer, Gitanes? Or Gauloises?
*Sgian, ever heard of the Magna Carta ? And the British common law system is used in many countries, including the US.
*Really, there is no official language in the U.S. Honest.Check it out here:http://www.englishfirst.org/whoef.htmMy mother's former boss belongs to this group.
*Sgian, I was poking fun at all your regional accents, which are par with ours. If English was in any way official, Louisiana might as well leave the union. My goodness, I knew a guy from Ponchartrain, and what an accent. More like a peach inspediment. As for Scots, my best buddy is from Scotland and I think our good friendship is based on his highly understandable grunts, slobbering, and facial expressions. What a hoot! I could care less about English being official in any way. I care a lot that primary education be in English only. That way the new kids will get on board and not carry generation after generation of a foreign tongue. English only fanatics really just don't want public money spent on something that is costing the public money. That said, ever talk to a service rep over the phone? Even the English is incoherent half the time.
*Used to roll my own out of Gauloise. Slainte, RJ.
*Yes I have Phill, but I certainly couldn't recite it. Insofar as I can recall it was a document that summarised or outlined the basic right to liberty, freedom from slavery, and to a fair trial(?) for the English people and it was produced sometime in the early 13th century. Does that document lay out in detail the constitutional rights of the citizens of Great Britain, and has it been amended, updated, and added to over the last 700 or so years? I'm not sure. Slainte, RJ.
*Dave, I've heard a rumour that the Indian government has to publish all official documents in something like 9 languages. Probably the US would not be best served in following a similar route, but others might disagree. We certainly have plenty of accents in the UK. Slainte, RJ.
*Splintergroupie,i Iwas born in Butte and we prefer ButticianWhat does that make some one born in Coxsackie!!!???Mr T ;)
*When I was in Riyadh one of my Indian carpenters asked me to spell-check a petition he had written to the local court about a land dispute because apparently such documents have to be written in English.It was full of 'Honourable and esteemed Sir', 'we humbly beg' and Victorian phrases like that.
*I presume one should hang out in Coxsackie and develop a feel for the place first.
*Maybe it's because we didn't imagine you were serious?
*Yes, and it is the document that puts no-one above common law, even the King. Here's an American view of the Magna Carta and how it became the basis for the US Constitution http://www.nara.gov/exhall/charters/magnacarta/magmain.html This particular example is actually the briefest version, by Edward I, roughly 1300.
*That sort of over-kill obsequiousness has long been a trait of the Indians (some of my family were part of the Raj and there were a lot of stories when I was a child). That being said, the pomp and ceremony of the formal English court system (as practised in many countries BTW) actually contributes to the fairness of the process. It hurts the orator and helps the common speaker.
*English court system actually contributes to the fairness of the process.I wonder if the European (Roman?) system isn't better in some ways, a case decided on the basis of the facts at hand rather than on the precedent of common law might be fairer and the absence of counsel for both sides must be a bonus --- but I admit I don't know much about it.
*Phill. Fascinating. I haven't read a version of the Magna Carta in over thirty years, not since I was about 11 years old, and it was dull, compulsory, and unintelligible history instruction then. A brief scan was interesting. Slainte , RJ.
*"I wonder if the European (Roman?) system isn't better in some ways, a case decided on the basis of the facts at hand rather than on the precedent of common law might be fairer and the absence of counsel for both sides must be a bonus "The idea behind common law and it's adherance to precedence is that it becomes easier to predict how certain facts will be judged."Absence of counsel for both sides" Ah, you must be thinking of "The Peoples Court" - there are plenty of lawyers in the civil law system.If you watch the Peoples Court a few times, I think you'll realize that the efficient administration of justice with some semblance of rationality requires the presence of counsel!
*Yes, I think it takes years of experience before you can appreciate what such documents actually say and why they're important.
*English common law is a system based on facts, but guilt is not always a fact, sometimes it's a conclussion; therefore, any system which is hard-bound to facts would, by definition, have to presume that all witnesses were truthful and accurate, and preclude all circumstancial evidence.
*English common law is a system based on factsYou are certainly correct insofar as it applies to criminal law but I would have said civil law here seems to be based more on precedent.I was thinking of the French (say) system of the tribunal d'instance which seems very similar to the US Small Claims Court. That, in my admittedly limited experience, is vastly superior to the equivalent County Court case here.
*my memory says;that Magna Charter (sp) was written for the English Barons, not the common folkIn US in 1790 the only folks who could vote were land-owning men, who a lot things writen down were aimed at??
*NO - The Magna Charta or Great Charter of England was written BY the Barons to limit the power of the King to actions within the Law.Jeff
*As history reveals, the Magna Carter, now known as Master Card, was definitely not invented for the benefit of the commoners. In fact, one often hears that the sun never sets on the MasterCard Empire. Hold the presses; i was wrong. It's Mistress Visa that is everywhere you want to be.
*Splinter, Wasn't it Magnum carte PI, the guy who drove a Ferrari around Hawaii?T
*We have a "small claims" system here too; it behaves more like binding arbitration than a court; and that's probably goodness at the low end of the scale.
*My impression of the main differences bewteen Common Law of England and its former colonies and Civil Law of the European continent and former colonies is that:In the Common Law system, "law" has been traditonally be made ("discovered") and/or applied by courts. In resolving a conflict, a court would look at the facts of the case, and look at prior cases (and, now, legislation) to determine who would win and who would lose.Because one of the functions of law is to regulate behavior, the Common Law embraced the concept of "binding precedent:" if a court of sufficient importance/authority over the court hearing the case had decided an earleir case with the same facts, then the court hearing the current case would be bound by the precedent. With binding precedent, we know or can learn the "law" and decide how to behave.In the Civil Law tradition, the courts look to legislation as the primary source of decisional law. Courts would also look at earlier cases for guidance, but not be bound by them.In the Common Law tradition, one issue is the extent to which one court's decisions have binding edffect on another court.The United States District Court in Manhatten (a trial level court) is bound by the decisions of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, the court "directly above" the district court. It is alos bound by the US Supreme Court, which is 2 steps up.The District COurt is not bound by, say, the 10th circuit Court of Appeals. It will certainly look at that court's decisions and consider them as of some persuasive effect, but if it has an "identical case" it is not bound by the 10th Circuit's decsion.That's the theory.No 2 cases are ever exactly the same, however, and often the legal argument between 2 sides is the extent to which the differences in the facts are significant from the point of view of applicability of the law from some previous case which might provide binding precedent."In the earlier case, thew car was red; in this case the car was blue."One side argues the color of the car is significant under the prior case law, the other side argues "that's a distinction without a difference."I practiced international banking for a number of years (which primarily uses NY or English law as the applicable law - in contracts you have a great deal of freedom in deciding on which law will govern.) I did not study Civil Law in depth. Whenever I had an issue come up which would governed by, say German law, I would engage German counsel.My semi-informed impression was that, the similarities and practical effects of the two systems outweighed the technical differences in the oiverall structure and administration of the law.
*>We have a "small claims" system here too; it behaves more like binding arbitration than a courtAnd we have Judge Judy. Same thing.
*
Some of your folks might have already read this in yesterdays paper.
I think the gentlemen hits the nail on the head. I agree 110%
This is an editorial written by an American citizen, published in a
local
newspaper. He did quite a job; didn't he?
=======================================================
GOD BLESS AMERICA
IMMIGRANTS, NOT AMERICANS, MUST ADAPT
I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some
individual or their culture.
Since the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, we have experienced a surge in
patriotism by the majority of Americans. However, the dust
from the attacks had barely settled when the "politically correct" crowd
began complaining about the possibility
that our patriotism was offending others.
I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who
is
seeking a better life by coming to America. Our population is almost
entirely comprised of descendants of immigrants. However,
there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country,
and apparently some born here, need to understand.
This idea of America being a multicultural community has served only to
dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. As Americans, we have
our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own
lifestyle.
This culture has been developed over centuries of struggles, trials, and
victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom. We speak
ENGLISH, not Spanish, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other
language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn
the
language!
"In God We Trust" is our national motto. This is not some Christian,
right wing, political slogan. We adopted this motto because
Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation,
and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to
display it on the walls of our schools.
If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the
world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.
If Stars and Stripes offend you, or you don't like Uncle Sam, then you
should seriously consider a move to another part of this
planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and
we really don't care how you did things where you came
from. This is OUR COUNTRY, our land, and our lifestyle.
Our First Amendment gives every citizen the right to express his opinion
and we will allow you every opportunity to do so. But, once you are done
complaining, whining, and griping about our flag, our pledge, our
national
motto, or our way of life, I highly encourage you to take advantage of
one
other great American freedom, THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.
Please pass this along if you agree