Submit your comments on this article |
Britain |
Brown says prince's 'Paki' remark unacceptable |
2009-01-13 |
What're you gonna do? Fire him? Have Brown flogged. As you wish, your princeliness! |
Posted by:Fred |
#19 I don't see the slur on this list |
Posted by: 3dc 2009-01-13 20:28 |
#18 Tell Brown to 'stuff it up his arse', as they say in merry ol' England. |
Posted by: bigjim-ky 2009-01-13 18:50 |
#17 Bend Over Like Brown (2009) Rated:R |
Posted by: Poison Reverse 2009-01-13 17:37 |
#16 It is the military. It is in Jest. Harry is the only one worty to be King anyway. |
Posted by: newc 2009-01-13 17:03 |
#15 We Are Not Amused |
Posted by: mojo 2009-01-13 15:22 |
#14 'Paki' is generally an offensive term in the UK, in the same sort of vein as 'nigger' - it's offensiveness depends on the context and who's using it, which is why you should just apply common sense when dealing with it and hearing it. For Prince Harry to use it in the way he was is affectionate. And the usual crowd are spinning it to try to make people interpret it as exactly the opposite. |
Posted by: Bulldog 2009-01-13 13:23 |
#13 Back to my original question: Who would even WANT a soldier who was so PC he could not utter a potentially offensive term? I surely do prefer this prince to that Charles fellow. |
Posted by: Glenmore 2009-01-13 13:19 |
#12 Paki Paki Paki Maybe to find the bad association they should look within... |
Posted by: Hellfish 2009-01-13 13:10 |
#11 Words are bad because of they meaning that become associated with them Like "illiterate tranzi scrote"? |
Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2009-01-13 12:51 |
#10 So calling a cunt a cunt isn't rude or taboo if one is referring to a ladie's front bottom? And in polite company you'd mention that you are leaving the table to go and have a shit? Words are bad because of they meaning that become associated with them. "Paki" is a very offensive term because its usually yelled by people who hate asians and like to kick their heads in. |
Posted by: dirtyspudwater 2009-01-13 12:40 |
#9 I suspect that Pak is ok, whereas Paki is not. (If our British correspondents could chime in on this point?) The answer to why a given term is offensive is because historically the intention was derogatory. Nonetheless, this fuss over a private video made three years ago is a bit of posturing for effect. The real question, to me, is how the video got out now, and why. |
Posted by: trailing wife 2009-01-13 12:23 |
#8 This just in: calling a spade a spade now deemed hate speech. |
Posted by: William Marcy Tweed 2009-01-13 12:08 |
#7 You people don't understand. It's politically incorrect because the Pakis say so. Bow down before them, infidels. |
Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2009-01-13 11:29 |
#6 'Stan' means 'Land', right? So 'Paki-Stan' means 'land of the Pakis,' right? So wouldn't a person from the Land of the Pakis be a Paki? |
Posted by: Glenmore 2009-01-13 11:16 |
#5 I agree with Snowy. I got in a huge argument on a UK blog over that term. I finally asked "What is bad about it? It's just a shortening of the nation's name?" Nobody could give me a decent answer.... |
Posted by: 3dc 2009-01-13 10:13 |
#4 You know, if they didn't like the term, it occurs to me they shouldn't have made it up when they created their country. |
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2009-01-13 10:03 |
#3 Was there ever a soldier anywhere who did NOT speak 'unacceptable' ethnic words? For that matter, are there any such words when speaking with or of your battlemates? |
Posted by: Glenmore 2009-01-13 09:59 |
#2 But comparing Israel to Nazi Germany is perfectly all right. |
Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2009-01-13 06:13 |
#1 All this excitement over three-year-old video of the Prince joking around with classmates is ridiculous. The supposed "victim" of the Prince's comments is unlikely to be too bothered - for reference, here is a link to a photo of him with the Queen of England (at bottom of page): http://www.sandhurst.mod.uk/news/archive/apr06/index.htm |
Posted by: Lone Ranger 2009-01-13 01:58 |