web analytics

THE FUTURE’S GOING TO BE SO GREAT

By Pete Moore On September 16th, 2018

A Spanish-speaking Taco Bell employee in the US was fired after video emerged of her refusing to serve an English-speaking woman in Florida.

During the argument at a drive-thru window in Hialeah, north of Miami, the worker said no-one there spoke English.

48 Responses to “THE FUTURE’S GOING TO BE SO GREAT”

  1. Taco Hell! Dios Mio the world is ending because of a fast food order.

  2. Yes obviously all Spanish speaking Residents in the USA must be deported now. It’s the only morally logical response to this incident.

  3. Alexandria Montgomery, the African-American woman who posted the video on Thursday, described the incident as “racist”.

    Joder! Madre mia. Dos pájaros con una piedra

  4. And if it was the other way round? If an English-speaking Taco Bell employee refused to serve a Spanish-speaking woman … would they be fired? Should they be fired?

  5. The employee was fired.

    _

    It is not usually expected that and employee Have knowledge of Spanish.

    But if the employee understood the request of a potential customer, that was made in Spanish, Hindi or Cantonese, That employee should be expected to fulfill the order. The employer would want them to do that.

  6. It was racist, and it was correct that this employee be fired.

    Low paying fast food jobs attract many idiots.

  7. If the employee was able to understand English and didn’t comply with the order then she absolutely deserves to be disciplined.

    I certainly don’t think the incident was based on race.

  8. Whether its based on race or tribe, it’s flat out bigotry.

    And yes, the customer’s request was understood, as per the account of the incident. The employee said so.

    Even in the most Spanish-speaking areas of Florida, California, or Texas I couldn’t imagine that a national chain fast food place would ever hire someone in the first place who didn’t speak English.

    And FYI

    A huge percentage of Hispanics born here speak English

    Even recent immigrants from say Mexico esp who work in service industries pick it up rapidly. I shop in family owned fruit markets and other small places and have never had any problem being understood, and have never encountered any discourtesy- quite the opposite

  9. If the employee was able to understand English and didn’t comply with the order then she absolutely deserves to be disciplined.

    Who are you arging against above?

    Yes, it was linguistic descrimination.

  10. I wasn’t arguing with anyone- I’m adding detail.

    Calm down

  11. I’m perfectly calm

  12. During the argument at a drive-thru window in Hialeah, north of Miami, the worker said no-one there spoke English.

    This is indicative of on-going population replacement as is happening in western Europe. Note that the term ‘ethnically diverse’ means ‘whites replaced’….

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/ethnicity/articles/ethnicityandnationalidentityinenglandandwales/2012-12-11

    Ethnicity and National Identity in England and Wales: 2011

    We focus on the increasing ethnic diversity within England and Wales. Whilst the majority of the population gave their ethnic group as “White” in the 2011 Census, results from the past 20 years show a decrease, falling from 94.1% in 1991 down to 86% in 2011. London was found to be the most ethnically diverse area, while Wales was the least diverse.

    Paul says – ten years ago my wife and kids were white. Today, my wife and kids are still white. This shows ‘population replacement’ to be absolute fucking shite

  13. there are idiots everywhere, we can run into them daily….

    The preachers of racial hate no matter of race or color are more plentiful than ever should be tolerated by all societies. Practitioners of racism are a cancer of ignorance in all human groups.

  14. Paul says – ten years ago my wife and kids were white. Today, my wife and kids are still white. This shows ‘population replacement’ to be absolute fucking shite

    What it shows it that every single one of my neighbours and work colleagues are white while the absolutely, overwhelming majority of faces of strangers I see on a daily basis are also white.

    How’s that ‘population replacement’ going in multi culti third world shithole Aberdeen?

    What is also show’s is that you talk absolute fucking shite.

  15. How’s that ‘population replacement’ going in multi culti third world shithole Aberdeen?

    It’s proceeding, getting darker and darker, right before my lying eyes……. If there’s a hurricane here, the town will be looted to death

    http://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities/aberdeen-population/

    The 2011 census found that 92% of the population is ethnically white. 8% of Aberdonians are from a non-white ethnic minority, including 4.3% Asian (1.5% Indian and 1% Chinese). About 2.6% of the population has a Caribbean or African origin. Almost one out of every 4 people in Aberdeen were born outside of Scotland, which is higher than the national average of 16%. Of them, 7.6% are from other parts of the United Kingdom.

  16. 92% white.

    That’ll be that multi culti third world shithole ‘population replacement’ then.

    (Yawn)

  17. Paul

    While I don’t buy Allan’s population replacement argument, yours is actually less logical

    Fifty years ago is a very short time ago. What was the non native population of Aberdeen in 1968? What are the trends in Scotland, the UK, Europe?

    You seem basically to say that if the non native population is less than 100 percent that no change has taken place, that all observations of change are to be mocked.

  18. Phantom – I put Paul’s position like this……..

    Paul – Allan, why do have that umbrella?

    Allan – because it’s going to rain. Look at the dark clouds approaching and the prevailing wind

    Paul – but it’s not raining

    Allan – but it will soon be raining

    Paul – it’s absolutely not fucking raining!! Utter shite

  19. He is not observing anything here, Which is fine, But I fail to understand why he mocks those who are paying attention

  20. Aberdeen has had a long standing, non-Scottish population (largely fueled by the North Sea Oil boom). In 1971 the proportion of the population who where not Scottish was 8.4% (and 11.5% in 1981). What has changed is the type of newcomers. What were originally English, American and Spanish newcomers are now Afro-Caribbean, Indian, Pakistani etc…

  21. The Americans Generally would not have been any permanent immigrants

    And depending on how you look at it the English weren’t immigrants at all

  22. Seamus – English, Welsh, Irish are not immigrants to Aberdeen as they are entirely assimilable and compatible with Scots in Aberdeen. Afro-caribbs, Indians, Pakistanis are not of the British Isles and as we see from elsewhere, there appear to be no net benefits to having them here. There are only 5 millions Scots, yet over 1 billion afro-caribbs, 207 million pakistanis, and 1.3 billion Indians – how many of these should be in Scotland or the British Isles?

  23. Phantom, let me put it like this:

    I’ve used both Pamplona and Aberdeen as examples as they are the places where we both live and obviously know best. Now, from his own stats Aberdeen is 92% white and, I don’t have the stats for Pamplona but from empirical observation I suggest that the stats for Pamplona may be even higher for whiteness.

    Now, this demonstrates that the notion of some ‘white replacement’ in these areas is absolute and utter bollocks. The large ethnic populations in England and Wales are largely a legacy of ‘the greatest gift to an undeserving world’ and FA to do with the EU or Common Purpose or ZOG or whatever either.

    The myth of ‘white replacement’ is conspiritorial bollocks. To propagate it one would have to allege that whoever’s behind it directed the WTC attacks and then the invasion of Iraq and destabilising of Syria which created the 2014 immigrant crisis. And what that headcase does is use countries of high Syria / Iraq immigration intake to allege this and suggest that this high immigrant intake is the same right across the board.

    Bollocks it is.

    That’s not ‘paying attention’ it’s absolute mooncattery which blames Jews on some masterplan to destroy western society fr some reason or other and should be absolutely mocked at every opportunity for the fucking insanity it is.

  24. Rome wasn’t destroyed in a day

    That’s all anyone is saying

  25. Yes, it’s a variation of Augustine’s prayer – ‘Lord make me chaste – but not yet’

    The apocalypse is always coming – tomorrow.

    The myth of ‘white replacement’ is conspiritorial bollocks. To propagate it one would have to allege that whoever’s behind it directed the WTC attacks and then the invasion of Iraq and destabilising of Syria which created the 2014 immigrant crisis. And what that headcase does is use countries of high Syria / Iraq immigration intake to allege this and suggest that this high immigrant intake is the same right across the board

    You’re actually giving cover to this pish?

  26. Paul

    You’re actually giving cover to this pish?

    Like myself, you’ve been reading Phantom’s posts on the subject of immigration over the years. Do you really not know where Phantom stands on this?
    For instance, his ‘Rome wasn’t destroyed in a day’, comment above.

  27. Sorry, Immigration from north Africa and Afghanistan is really great for Europe

    Let them all in!

  28. Phantom

    What’s that sarcastic comment supposed to mean?

    Because if it’s directed at me I’ve never once said that we should ‘let them all in.,

  29. You’re actually giving cover to this pish?

    Hiding refusing to define an ambiguious term like ‘countries of bad cultures’ etc will do that.

    There are legitimate concerns and questions surrounding the 2015 Euro immigrant crisis as Noel has recently referred to. Serious discussion surrounding this will not be acheived by snidey and untrue emotive terms like ‘invasion’ ‘population replacement’ ‘open borders guys’ ‘pets’ etc.

  30. My position is not the same as your guys’

    I don’t believe in Allan’s conspiracy theories, but I think that your countries have made grave errors in this area. Merkel is the worst offender against Germany and Europe as a whole, but she is not the only one.

    If Europe is to exist as Europe, you must implement exceptionally tight controls to the south and to the east. You won’t. This is a crime against future generations.

  31. My position is not the same as your guys

    What? How could you possible know that as you’ve never asked me mine and never defined yours?

    Anytime the subject comes up you immediately go to Allan mode and try to close down any criticism of usually sensationalsist points with sneering ‘pets’ ‘invaders’ ‘open borders guys’ emotive rubbish, (and yes, you’ve used all these personally), despite being continuouslly told that with the pssible exception of Petr, none of this is true and then hide behind sophistry when asked to explain and define ‘countries of bad culture), (which IMO is the mirror image code for a particular ethnic group like ((( ))) is).

    You’ll also gladly jump in when Pete etc conflate immigration in the UK, France, Belguim etc with the 2015 crisis and EU freedom of movement, despite these countries’ sizeable immigration populations being a result of their past colonial histories, because at best you’re suspicious of the EU.

    Here’s a summary of my views:

    I think Merkal responded to the biggest humanitarian crisis since WWII in a humanitarin as opposed to sinister plan context. I think the response was rushed and fumbled.

    I think that any economic immigrants from non conflicted countries should only be accepted into the EU only after a legal application and they have satisfied the skills / financial etc criteria for that particular EU country

    Those applying to the EU for refugee / asylum status should be kept in single sex centres until their applications are processed. Those unable to prove their country of origin should be refused entry to the EU / returened to their point of entry.

    Once granted asylum / refugee status the rufugee should be given temporary status only in their country of residence and not freedom of movement, this residence and status should be reviewed annualy. Once given refugee status the refugee should be given all available assistance by the state which certainly shouldn’t be more than that given to the state’s citizens. If the refugee commits a crime they should be deported to their country of origin and if that country refuses accepance the EU should sanction them.

    THIS is my position. You’re invited to to discuss / question it and to present your own.

    I don’t believe in Allan’s conspiracy theories

    Perhaps not, (although sometimes I wonder, as a result of some of the language that you use), but I mostly give you the benefit of the doubt. You may not agree with Alaan’s bullshit insanity but your language certainly enables, gives cover to and encourages it.

  32. You may not agree with Alaan’s bullshit insanity but your language certainly enables, gives cover to and encourages it.

    No that’s entirely incorrect.

    Much of your immigration has been entirely harmful. This is objectively true, for a thousand reasons available on request.

    You seek to avoid real conversation on the matter, which is fine, but many Europeans or friends of Europe in the rest of the world see what you’ve chosen to do to your societies and despair.

    Allan is a kook, but he’s not the problem. Anyone who has supported any of the immigration we speak of is the root cause of your problems.

  33. Paul

    Once granted asylum / refugee status the rufugee should be given temporary status only in their country of residence and not freedom of movement

    Wouldn’t that put an unfair burden on those EU countries like yours (Spain) Italy etc where they border the regions that the refugees are coming from?

    Switzerland, Belgium and others would never have any of the burden.

  34. Much of your immigration has been entirely harmful

    ‘My’ immigration is outlined above.

    You seek to avoid real conversation on the matter

    No, that’s you with your emotive, untrue ‘pets’ ‘invaders’ and ‘open borders guys’ sneers.

    And whatsmore,

    Here’s a summary of my views […]

    THIS is my position. You’re invited to to discuss / question it and to present your own.

    You’re once more avoiding real discussion on the matter.

  35. Wouldn’t that put an unfair burden on those EU countries like yours (Spain) Italy etc

    Not necessarily Pat. Point of entry doesn’t necessarily mean country of residence.

  36. Patrick. Good point.

    Paul. I’m pretty much in agreement with what you said mate. Authough like Patrick, I’m not sure sending them back to the last country they came through, or lived in for a while, is workable.

    Phantom.

    Like Paul, I found your stance on immigrants and immigration on this site over the last few years interesting to say the least. Like you’ve done with Paul, you’ve made many snide comments to me over the years when we discuss the subject of race, immigrants and immigration. Such as when I mentioned about the views of the Muslim guy who runs the takeaway in my village, being a decent bloke who hates ISIS as much as we do.

  37. Dave

    I’m not speaking about any good or bad individuals.

    I’m speaking of the hugely negative impacts on your entire societies.

  38. I’m not sure sending them back to the last country they came through, or lived in for a while, is workable.

    Dave, in my 3.39 I speak about country of origin and point of entry, I mean in a EU context. If they’re point of entry is Turkey, Morrocco, Libya etc and they can’t prove they’re country of origion they should be returned to their point of entry. I’m open to alternatives on all the points above.

    Phantom, if you want serious discussion on this there’s a summary of my views above which you’re welcome to probe. I also look forward to you presenting your own opinions on the subject.

  39. Paul

    Apologies I misunderstood. I thought you meant the country that they were coming from the country that they originated from.

  40. Paul

    My views have been expressed at length over the past 10 years

    Is this your first day on the website?

  41. I thought you meant the country that they were coming from the country that they originated from.

    ditto

  42. // If they’re point of entry is Turkey, Morrocco, Libya etc and they can’t prove they’re country of origion they should be returned to their point of entry.//

    Eh?

  43. Dave, Pat.

    I meant returned to the point of external entry to the EU in the case of being unable to prove their country of origin in terms of their asylum / refugee claim.

    Is this your first day on the website?

    More (seeking) to avoid real conversation on the matter . Well okay.

    That’ll be the ‘open borders’ guys’ sneer put to bed then.

  44. You are asking for a restatement of things that you already know.

    Unhelpful.

  45. My position is not the same as your guys

    What I’m asking for is ‘serious discussion’ on my unambiguous summary of position above and how it differs from you. If you don’t wish to converse on the issue it’s entitrely up to you.

    You can see that I’m far from the ‘open borders’ guy’ you accuse some here of being.

    Noel, hope my comment at 5.15 clarifies things.

  46. //hope my comment at 5.15 clarifies things.//

    Cheers. But, Paul, returning people to a place like Libya is between difficult and impossible. The country has no government. Armed gangs control a lot of the easern region, including the coast.
    Even returning refugees to a country like Turkey or Libya is complicated. These places were simply glad to see the back of the refugee burden; the refugees were not their citizens and they’re under no obligation to accept them back from a European country.

    If, say, a refugee crossed (a normal route) from Afghanistan by truck through Iran, into Turkey, and from there to Greece, Serbia, Croatia, Slovenia, Austria, Germany etc, why should the Turks accept them back to precisely their country? Why should they not simply tell Germany to send them back to the country of departure for Germany, i.e. Austria, and tell the Austians to send them back to Slovenia etc, after which the Slovenes should send them back to Croatia etc. Turkey would (and has) simply and rightly refuse the EU argument that it’s the point of origin. If you want the Turks or the lawful part of Libya to take them back, you have to offer them a load of baksheesh to do so. That has also been tried, with mixed results.

    It isn’t easy.

  47. But, Paul, returning people to a place like Libya is between difficult and impossible.

    So prevent the NGO smugglers from picking them up 3 feet from Tripoli in the first place.

    We know that it’s a taxi service and not a rescue service. We know that the NGO ships co-ordinate with the smugglers. We know that the NGO ships meet the invader vessels at prearranged points. It’s an incentive to everyone to keep it going.

    The NGOs must be treated like the criminals that they are and shut down. The moment that is done no more invaders will bother to cross from Libya. Problem solved on that route.

  48. Cheers. But, Paul, returning people to a place like Libya is between difficult and impossible. The country has no government. Armed gangs control a lot of the easern region, including the coast

    Agreed Noel although the above was a comment on what should happen and was mostly in response to Phantom’s ‘open borders’ guys’ myth. I’m well aware that it’s not an easy process.

    IMO if transit countries and / or countries of origin refuse to accept their responsibilities in the crisis then the stick of sanctions rather than the carrot of € should be tried.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.