> It was about which was the BEST choice....

There's a difference between a choice and closing out options....that's called discrimination. But, you won't know or understand because you belong to the previleged, obviously. It's a shame the way you're crowing about just the one thing, without trying to see truth and another point of view.

> So, why do they use NATIVE speakers on language learning CDs and
> tapes?

To your mind, that might signify 'native' teachers being better...but there's no connection between tapes/cd's and teachers. And if tapes could do all the teaching why would anyone need teachers? A language is not learnt merely by parroting and 'mimicking'. I hope you realize that.

> Yes, better to learn from a bilingual Japanese teacher.

> Again, they are people from German speaking countries, so that answer
> doesn't support your point of view. try again....

Well, so are some of the other countries - other than the previleged 5. What that means is there are other countries, too where is English is spoken, is an official language and a mother tongue to a large number of its citizens. But, that'll be hard for you to see....you've apparently got your blinkers on.

> I only recommend learning the basics of a language from a
> non-native(common sense), once you pass that early stage in language
> learning, I would only use a NATIVE teacher for learning speaking
> that language.

There's no sense in your repeated assertions, let alone common sense. There are enough posts around that prove quite contrary to your point, if you care to see them.

English is a language that's spoken the world over. Those who learn the language learn it not to communicate merely with the nationals of 5 countries. They learn the language to communicate with English speakers all over the world. In case you didn't realize, there are enough 'native' teachers around that can't write a sentence without spelling errors and if despite that they qualify or pass muster in your eyes, to the exclusion of those who write better, speak coherently and yet are not considered for a teaching position, you reveal your mind.

The posts here are not about denying teaching positions to 'native' teachers. It is about denying opportunities to equally good and often better teachers from countries other than the 'five' purely on the basis of their passports.

That's DISCRIMINATION! And no matter how you try and justify an abominable practice, it will remain abominable and passportism is abominable.

BTW, do you feel threatened by 'lesser' teachers filling in those vaunted teaching positions? Your vehement defense does seem to suggest so.