Prince Harry racial slur

[capncnut]

First it's swastika armbands, now he calls an Asian army trainee "our little paki friend" on video.

Click (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Prince-Harry-Racism-Row-Prince-Filmed-Making-Racist-Insults-News-Of-The-World-Says/Article/200901215200951?lpos=UK_News_First_UK_News_Article _Teaser_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15200951_Prince_Harry_Racism_Row%3A_Pr ince_Filmed_Making_Racist_Insults%2C_News_Of_The_W orld_Says) for article.

Needless to say, he's apologised.

[Danny]

i dont think ive ever used it myself, but i thought it was just a shortening of pakistani, like brit for british, ive never heard it used in a hateful way, hell some guys i know who's parents come from pakistan call themselves that.


though i call myself a honkey and a cracker so given there my friends we probably just share a twisted sense of humor and dont realize it.

[bassman]

I'm with hells on this one. I don't see the harm.....

:shifty:

[MinionZombie]

I saw the video on Sky News last night (after they'd been making such a fuss about it for half a bloody hour "RACIST HARRY VIDEO COMING SOON!!!" they bleatered).

Then I saw it, and what was all the fuss about? The Indian/Asian friend who is referred to as a "our paki friend" at one point is seen later joking around with Harry when he looks like a "rag head" (Harry's words, not mine - I'm being clinical about this).

It all seems a bit trumpetted up to be honest, Harry seems to get on quite well with his troops - but conveniently - the video stops before we get to hear one of the troops mock Harry for having red hair.

So clearly it's a group of lads poking a bit of gentle fun at/with each other - like you'll find in many places all over the globe. We're viewers on the outside looking in, we're not the men in the video itself, we're not "in the gang", so we don't know the social working of that group.

It's a bit silly to say it mind you, especially on camera.

But also - this video is THREE YEARS OLD apparently - geeeeeeeez. :rolleyes:

There are far worse and far more important things going on in the world you know, and this brings about a bunch of fuss - no doubt the class warriors in the news media looking to make a fuss out of it.

Don't be saying such words, especially on camera, and especially if you're a public figure - I mean have some common sense, yeah? :rolleyes:

[Tricky]

I dont see anything racist in that!i do think prince harry is an arse though,all that poncing about playing soldiers with his brother,when the reality is they wouldnt let either of them near any real danger annoys me.I bet soldiers who have been involved in the real dirty fighting over there get pissed off with the media constantly going on about "hero harry"
I dread to think how much public money has been wasted on letting those two play soldiers,money that would be far better spent on equipment & training for the guys who are actually going to be going into the shit!

[krakenslayer]

i dont think ive ever used it myself, but i thought it was just a shortening of pakistani, like brit for british, ive never heard it used in a hateful way, hell some guys i know who's parents come from pakistan call themselves that.


though i call myself a honkey and a cracker so given there my friends we probably just share a twisted sense of humor and dont realize it.

It depends on the context really. However, "paki" is used most often in the UK as a fairly strong racist term - not quite as bad as "nigger" but pretty close - and usually to refer to anyone of middle-eastern extraction (Indian, Arabic, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, etc.). Sometimes it's used simply out of non-hateful ignorance by older people - e.g. "I went to the paki shop today" - but usually it's pretty nasty. It is just a shortening of Pakistani, but then "spick" is just short for Spanish and that's about the same level of offensiveness.

That said, the context is important and it's pretty obvious he was just messing around with a friend (I have a black mate and we always jokingly call each other "cracker" and "nigger" in silly ebonics, nothing hateful just risque humour). I'm not a big fan of the royal family, but this is clearly just another example of low-brow shit-stirring by the tabloid titty-papers and the patronising, populist commercial TV channels.

[SRP76]

The constant bitching about "you called someone a name" is a lot more offensive than Harry. Bunch of kindergarteners running the world now. They'd probably go into mental meltdown if you walked up and slapped somebody, instead of calling them a name.

[blind2d]

Perhaps... physical violence is the only way to get attention in our disinfectant society. Maybe... the terrorists understand this, but their enemies are too afraid of utilizing it for themselves to make statements... and this is why terrorism will continue. We must either... leave them alone, like a bully with extremely low self-esteem, or fight the same way they do, but better. At least, sometimes this seems like the only way to victory, but so far... I don't know.

[Danny]

wow going from the word paki to terrorist, your truly a open minded and kind soul:rolleyes:

[hoohaa]

I have no time for the royal family. His Grandaddy, though, has been accused of similar racist remarks, hasn't he? Runs in the family, I guess...

[Mike70]

meh, stuff like this is blown wayyyyy out of proportion.

[AcesandEights]

So is Paki considered a mildly off color (like a bit distasteful, let's say) term or full on racist in English society?

[krakenslayer]

So is Paki considered a mildly off color (like a bit distasteful, let's say) term or full on racist in English society?

You mean "British society". England is one one part of Britain.

I'd say it's somewhere in between - if you heard someone say "Go to the Paki shop for a bottle of milk", you'd think he was a bit of a dick, not necessarily hateful but ignorant and possibly a passive racist. If someone shouted "Hey, paki!" at someone of middle-eastern descent, it would be considered fairly strong, like calling someone a "nigger".

As I said, in general, it's about the same level of offensiveness as "spick".

[MinionZombie]

Well, "paki" is also a term used in a certain period in time, and by people of a certain age. Back in the day it was perfectly coloquial - it wasn't meant out of malice, almost like in that analogy/tale of "my Jewish friend such-and-such" (or however the tale went) ... ... anyway, what I'm getting at, is like it being used coloquially by the oldest of generations, the army in itself is an old institution - so it might take time for the coloquial use to filter out.

Anyway - there is definitely a class war angle in the sheer obsession with this issue (e.g. Sky News who are absolutely OBSESSED with it - clearly Gaza/Israel has gotten boring for them now (although they were OBSESSED with that last week too)) ... but also, technically you could class any soldier who has ever killed anyone as a "murderer" - but it's all about context and intent. Obviously classing a soldier as a 'common or garden' murderer is preposterous, it's their job and the context is wholly different from normal society.

Also - these soldiers are being SHOT AT everyday, their lives are in danger even when taking a shit in the privvy, or catching some sleep in their bunk back at the base - let alone when they're out on a mission against an enemy unlike those we've mostly faced in the past.

There's FAR WORSE things going on in society at large, and far worse things being said in schools across the globe, let alone in the army. The only true problem in the army - as in an act committed by a soldier - were those cases of abuse conducted by a tiny few people who clearly stepped way over the line - kind of like the whole Winter Soldier stuff back in the time of the Vietnam War.

ALSO - I'd like to know what the man (whose identity has been obscured in the video) thinks about it all, because clearly he doesn't give a stuff in the video - it's obviously an 'in joke' - albeit tasteless.

But then again, how many of us are guilty of tasteless in-jokes? You just don't film them - which was bloody stupid, and Harry should know better in general - mind you, that was THREE YEARS ago, and you'd hope he's grown up more since then.

He's appologised, end of story to be totally frank...otherwise ... mountain ... mole hill?

There's far worse shit going on in the world, and far worse things coming out of the mouths of children in primary schools.

AND - the video conveniently cuts before a troop ribs Harry for having red hair - and I have to say, I can't be doing with hair-colour-based bullying - but in that context it would have obviously been an in-joke.

It's all very well and good for the chattering classes to sit there pontificating from their fung-shuai living rooms as they guzzle another large glass of red while perusing the pages of The Guardian. I'd like to see them in a war zone, see what they think is important after that, eh. :rockbrow:

[krakenslayer]

Yeah, as I said it's all vapid, titty-rag-flogging bullshit. Only an air-headed shit-fed idiot (read: 90% of British TV viewers/tabloid readers) would find anything worth a furore in this story.

[Mike70]

Yeah, as I said it's all vapid, titty-rag-flogging bullshit.

:lol: that is a saying i am defo going to remember and use sometime in the future. thanks for the laugh.

i agree with MZ - aren't there slightly more important things going on in the world that qualify as actual news other than what very might well be a slip of the tongue that had no mean spirit or ill will behind it?

[kidgloves]

Whoevers making these editorial decisions needs to be sacked. Totally out of sync with more important news items.

[blind2d]

I've noticed this problem in the media going on for almost ten whole years now. Most "news" programs really only focus on the things that will create powerful emotions or reactions from people, not neccesarily what is actually important information for the masses. Half the time the information is biased or incomplete anyway. I want to see more on the stations than tabloid material! - Noodle
Calm down, ya Oriental midget. Just a bit a fun. - Murdoc

[MinionZombie]

Whoevers making these editorial decisions needs to be sacked. Totally out of sync with more important news items.
Ugh - damn straight Sir.

BBC News and Sky News are both awful these days for pish editorial decisions. If it's a problem for Labour, they're grinding their teeth with agony if they have to report it. If it's a poke in the eye for the Tories, they're all over it with a fevered boner - even if Labour's Mandleson is part of the scandal (i.e. "Yacht-gate").

Sky News' red button with 8 windows of news is a complete joke too.

1 window is the weather, 1 window is showbiz wank, 1 window is usually boring sport bollocks, 1 window is the live feed - this leaves 4 more windows - in that you have Headlines (a shorter version of the live feed essentially), and then three real windows for other news - BUT IT'S ALWAYS WHATEVER THE BIGGEST STORY IS - three issues related to the biggest story, that's rolling around EVERY BASTARD FIFTEEN MINUTES on the main feed, clogging up the three properly available red button interactive windows - it's bloody stupid.

Now while Gaza etc is an important issue and it needs to be known about - the world doesn't stop turning, and nor do home-bound issues disappear. There needs to be far more variety in the news reported, and less of this "every fifteen minutes" bullshit, because then you've just got the same 15 minutes of two stories cycling round for 24 sodding hours.

Then when it comes to politics - BBC and Sky are completely biased - just look at them from a floating voter's eyes - what can you deduce from their political coverage?

Labour get the lion's share. The Liberals get fuck all, and the Tories only get any air time when they can't be possibly ignored any longer, or if it's a chance to poke them in the eye.

It's gotten worse since Mandleson came back as well (and with that scumbag Alistair Campbell rummaging around in the background).

As a floating voter you'd have no real, true and honest view of the three main players in British politics today - it's sick - especially when you've got the likes of the middle-aged-teenager (whose name momentarily escapes me) on Sky News who is friends with Gordon Brown's wife and goes there for parties for fuck sake! Kay Burley - that's her name - fucking hell she's useless, and certainly not worth half a million a year or whatever she's pulling down.

And while I'm ranting - what's with Sky News having this "who does Brown talk to first?" trailer running on their channel - firstly it's politically biased, and indeed shows up Sky News' political leanings behind the scenes, and secondly it's actual bollocks. Sky News might sometimes be the first news channel he talks to first - but more often than not it'll be Andrew bloody Marr and his softly-softly easy ride touch - hence why Brown ran off to Marr to say that he wasn't calling an election after all and he didn't want any awkward or probing questions.

God, this bloody government and the television news media in this country makes me sick - and what's more - the way the presenters deliver the news. They all have the same patter to their voice, the same words get emphasised in the same way, and they all "um" and "ah" their way through their ham-fisted attempt to skew the news to suit Mandleson's backstage manipulating, or whenever the Autocue breaks down (John Snow was absolutely fucking useless in December when the Autocue broke, he was a jibbering wreck of nonsense, I saw it live on telly, it was half-hilarious and half-pathetically worrying).

Geez! :eek:

*gasp*

Rant over.

[Chic Freak]

So is Paki considered a mildly off color (like a bit distasteful, let's say) term or full on racist in English society?

Full-on racist. Maybe it was considered okay by our parents' or grandparents' generation (as some people have already highlighted)... but then a lot of shit was back then.

It's not just an abbreviation of "Pakistani" any more than "nigger" is just a slight variation on the Latin word for "black." It holds a lot more meaning than that, as a pejorative term against anyone of Middle Eastern origin, or, to quote an Asian comedian whose name I have totally forgotten, "anyone who, y'know, has a bit of a tan."

NO, Prince Harry saying "Paki" is not THE worst thing that has ever happened in the history of the world, but NO, he still shouldn't have said it.

[MinionZombie]

NO, Prince Harry saying "Paki" is not THE worst thing that has ever happened in the history of the world, but NO, he still shouldn't have said it.

Indeed on both counts.

I see Prince Charles is getting bitched at for calling an Asian polo buddy "Sooty" - now I duno about anyone else, but since when was "Sooty" a racist term for an Asian? I hear "Sooty" and I think of this dude:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51VZKM9Z7QL._SL500_AA280_.jpg

The "victim" of the "Sooty" name also has said himself he doesn't mind whatsoever - and so I'd still like to find out what the "victim" in the Harry case has to say about it - a dude who, you could argue, was implicit in the whole "raghead" dialogue.

Also - Harry gets mocked for having red hair - and some people still to this day mock and bully and victimise red haired people in the exact same manner that a racist would pour grief on a black person or an asian person or whatever.

So it's all a bit "oh just fuck off", to me really.

Mountain out of a molehill, that's what it smacks of to me - and nope, I'm not defending racism or racist language, but it's far from angry or with malicious intent as seen in the much-screamed-about video as seen on Sky News, who've made such a song and dance about it.

There are far more things going on right now to be properly concerned about - and as I've said before, WORSE things are said - and indeed done - in primary and secondary schools up and down the country. :rockbrow: