Costume dramas (most boring thing literature invented), I can help you sleep yeah by reading anything Paul McKenna ever wrote and the Prince doing wonders for race relations.
Bet the Mail’s only fuming because they actually let none whites in the army. Shut your hypocritical mouth that usually masquerades as an ass hole The Mail.
I seen some apologists claim that such language is part of the “camaradery” of the armed forces. Shouldn’t we question an institution which allows this and yet claims (but doesn’t) to be fighting “for us”?
However, something this does cast new light on is the possibility that Charles might really be his dad, because that would mean Phil’s his granddad. The quote is remeniscent of a young Phil.
I don’t think the Mail is racist but it’s no paper to take a moral high ground on race relations.It’s just like the Mail to brush away any form of racism with arguments of political correctness and then take on a 3 year old incident like this with some sort of authority. I don’t know if Harry was being racist either. I have a friend who’s in the Royal Irish and he says they all language like this all the time between each other to joke around and bond. I think that’s OK as long is everybody is comfortable with it. Was the solider he used the word against offended? If he wasn’t, then why bother with all this. The soliders father wants him to apologise to the pakistani government and everything.
What has made me stunned in this whole thing is commenters on every newspaper site that are saying, “What’s so offensive about the word “paki?” and “Can I be insulted if someone calls me a Brit?” Do any of them have any idea of the past history of the word? And yeah, being called a Brit can be offended if you walk threw Belfast and a republican calls you a “f***king Brit Bastard”
I actually think this headline is quite positive. It’s hardly a secret that the Mail’s headline is an expression of what the paper’s editorial team think and so we can safely assume that the Mail thinks Harry’s use of a racist term is not just unacceptable but worthy of condemnation. This is in contrast to, for example, the Prime Minister who criticised the Prince but then played things down with all the “learnt his lesson” stuff. Thing is, Harry is 24 years old, he has neither the excuse of immaturity nor being of a generation where such things were considered “acceptable”. The “all part of the cameraderie” thing is nonsense too, Harry’s, what, third in line to the throne, fourth? How long exactly did he think he’d get away with using that word in private? How exactly did he think the word’s media would react? How much of a field-day do you think the Taleban are probably having this now?
The boy is a world-class fool and a brilliant example of why the monarchy is best wound-up.
Not that I am condoning Harry of course, but I would love to know what would be “good enough” for the Mail to leave it alone. A donation to a racism charity? Another apology? Abdication of any right to the throne? Suicide?! Where is this enough line?
He does deserve some kind of punishment but I dunno what that should be. Either way, it should be private. But I almost feel sorry for him because once you have done something like this, bad as it is , you can never escape the Mail and its constant smug digging, digging, digging.
I agree with you broadly Sarah except the comparison between the term ‘Brit and ‘Paki”. Its the venom that is often associated with the latter. Accepted Brit could be offensive in NI but i think you would agree that slightly different rules apply there.
Oh of course paki is wayyy more offensive than Brit. I was just putting my thoughts on the sheer amount of people who are saying “why is brit not offensive then?” then.It can be where I come from but again, its all about context in which the word is used. I wasn’t making a comparison there. Paki has a much more nasty and brutal history. It involves race, not nationality.
I’m more liberal than right & also hate the tripe published by the Mail, but this thing has been taken out of proportion. To those who have served, they will understand this is just forces banter.
No malice is involved & banter normally centers around things such as hair colour, region of birth, etc etc.
You have to remember soldiers are prepared to die for each other – they do not fight for the Queen (though maybe Mr Wales does), or country or even the public.
They fight for their mates – when I was serving, anybody from Scotland was called Jock, Wales was called Taff, Ireland was called Paddy, Fiji – Fij etc… It’s certainly not malicious, It’s the same as a military forum I comment on – there are physically disabled soldiers on the site who be the first to use “derogatory” names to describe themselves – and other soldiers/ex-soldiers will do too… But then if somebody without a military background, who doesn’t hold such an understanding was to use it, people would not stand for it.
Sorrys not good enough … for this awfully laid out front page.
Ex-soldier, i see were your coming from however i don’t think taffy, jock & paddy carry quite the same racist connotations. Many comics feature people refered to as Jocks, Taff lad was a character in The Fast Show & Paddy power is a betting company. Paki, like Nigger, belies a much more serious form of persecution and Harry should really know better, particularly after the whole Nazi custume bollocks up.
(by the way, whats the point of having a slang name for folk from Fiji? Its only four letters anyhow!)
Outrageously hypocritical. How often has the Mail run “political correctness is ruining Britain” type rubbish? And now they’re outraged that Harry used an offensive term in a non-malicious way amongst his mates.
“I’m more liberal than right & also hate the tripe published by the Mail, but this thing has been taken out of proportion. To those who have served, they will understand this is just forces banter.”
Where do you draw the line though? Correct as you may be, you open a can of worms where anyone in any situation can say anything and dismiss it as “just banter”.
To NJH – not really, if he had said it to somebody who he didn’t know, or who wasn’t in the army, then it would be racist. I’m not dismissing it as banter, but I served eight years so I know what goes on… It’s no different to people who are black calling each other the N word.
And if I’m to be completely honest, most of the papers that have taken hold of this are acting no-different to when the Daily Mail prints claims of ‘wintervus’ ‘global-warming con’ etc.
It’s also not a can of worms, because I doubt as a result of this people all over the UK are going to think it’s acceptable to start using racist terminology.
The army is a sub-culture which unless you have served, you can never hope to understand. I’ve been out of the army for almost four years now & despite spending four years at university, I still failed to make even one friendship which was as deep as the ones I developed in the army – I often used nicknames that would be completely unacceptable outside of the army, but I would never use them outside…
This is a complete non-story/moral panic constructed by the media.
Mr Mordon – reference Fij – it’s just the way army nicknames work, I’m afraid. Although I think it also boiled down to their names being so hard for many of us to pronounce. Although a nickname is also a sign of acceptance
lthough I disagree with the word Paddy being harmless… I had countless mates when I was in called Paddy, and even if you didn’t know the guy, if he had an Irish accent, you could call him Paddy… But I would never dream of calling a mate outside of the army Paddy (and my grandparents were Irish)!
“The army is a sub-culture which unless you have served, you can never hope to understand.”
Could you not say the same for people of Pakistani descent? If you aren’t, could you ever hope to understand whether Harry’s colleague was offended by the use of that word? Is there a culture whereby you are able to speak out if it does offend you?
NJH – you are completely off the mark. When an individual joins the army, they always adopt the army values, sense of humour etc. Also, I very much doubt the individual was offended – he was awarded a best recruit reward. This suggests to me that if he was good enough to win a such a reward, he would have been a good soldier & well respected by his peers.
You are applying you own values onto a subculture which you have absolutely no understanding off. I served with people from a variety of cultures during my eight years & race or skin colour was never an issue. Often, individuals would refer to their ethnicity in a jokey way… One example was an RSM who called himself “the Chink”.
And well done for thinking an tan entire country is a subculture!
>To those who have served, they will understand this is just forces banter.
Sorry, Ex-Soldier, but Harry’s not really in the same position as everyone else. If, for example, a cabinet minister were caught using similar language and then argued that it’s acceptable in that environment then no one’s going to make excuses for them. Regardless of what might or might not be acceptable within a certain environment, Harry is a public figure, he knows perfectly well that he has to watch what he said. He should understand that he shouldn’t use words like “paki” even in private let alone when on videotape. As I said before it says a lot about the boy’s personality and suitability for the role he’s got whether he, or any of the rest of us, like it or not.
Come on guys. There’s nothing wrong with light hearted banter between people of different races within the Army and outside it. As long as everybody is comfortable with it, then what’s the problem? I think it helps integration with different nationalities and people of different races. I don’t think we should expect Harry to behave any different because then you’re bound to be lied to.
Racism is all in the context. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the word Paki, or any other word come to that. However because skinheads used it to abuse anyone without pale white skin it was associated with a term of abuse and became offensive. Harry may not have intended it to be offensive, but hes bloody stupid if he didnt realise it would be!
“And well done for thinking an tan entire country is a subculture!”
I didn’t say an entire country; I said “people of Pakistani descent”, which has subcultural tenets in the UK.
Again, I will ask where the line is drawn between “banter” and offence, because your phrasing is quite ambiguous. And I’ll ask again, as you have the experience, is there a safe mechanism whereby an armed forces member can speak out confidentially if they are offended, for any reason, and how is dealt with if so?
NJH – yes, from my own personal experience I will say there are plenty of avenues they can take if they feel they are being discriminated/bullied or victimized (though I don’t see why you feel the need to “ask me again”, when you never asked me in the first place… Some of the phrasing of your questions suggest you are quiet young/in-experienced at debate. Not an insult but remember this is not a court room!)
Anyway, they can seek help from the Army Welfare Service, the unit padre (priest), SSAFA, Unit Medical Officer, WRVS (one of these is on every camp), Officer Commanding – a few of those listed are external to the army system, or bound by confidentiality, just like volunteers at Nightline, social workers etc are… It might also shock you (understandably, as it’s not provided in many civilian workplaces) that all soldiers & officers must receive equal opportunities training at least once a year & this is recorded on their personal file. To be completely honest, I’ve been out for several years now & the level of awareness of equal opportunities in the army was probably higher than it was outside.
If you want more information on the attitude of the average soldier, then click on the link I provided. It’s a discussion on an Army forum regarding a potential Muslim recruit asking for advice. You’ll see the attitude on the whole is one that is pretty well informed.
“though I don’t see why you feel the need to “ask me again”, when you never asked me in the first place… Some of the phrasing of your questions suggest you are quiet young/in-experienced at debate. Not an insult but remember this is not a court room!)”
I asked in the final sentence of my fourth post above.
As for my age, youth is relevant to other parties. I’m in my mid-to-late twenties. I phrased my questions in a formal manner so as not to come across as snide to you. My views on armed combat are that I think we as a species might’ve evolved so we don’t have physical fights, but please don’t let that seem to castigate you or your ex-colleagues. If this blog was too singular in its opinions it could get quite dull. Welcome and hopefully you can contribute on future posts.
Thanks for the post – although I think we’ll have to disagree. I think we’ll always need an armed service – I don’t think it’sa case of evolution – because behaviour also depends heavily on situationalism.
And your view do not castigate me now (though maybe my friends who are still serving) – my next career move is a PhD, so I don’t plan to be in the thick of it again in this lifetime!
I should have probably added before, I think the armed services do a great job in disaster zones, etc, but the ideology of using violence to get your own way I don’t think will ever hold water with me.
why do left wing casuists’ always use their emotions to come to a conclusion and right wing sages’ use experiences. the left think empathy can solve problems of others. this is not kindness, people will fel better if they achieve by themselves. they don’t need my time, effort or money. stop poking your back seat driver, self serving job creating nose’s into others lives
I’m sure most Daily Mail readers and staffers have never used the word “paki” (they probably talk about “coloureds” instead).
Anyway, it’s not the word that’s important – it’s the sentiment behind it. Some people can say the phrase “coloured gentleman” with such seething resentment it offends even me, and I’m white.
NJH – thanks, I was always most proud of the humanitarian work done by the army anyway. I think few soldiers who have experienced war would support it. But sadly, I think the day an army is no-longer required is also when we no-longer need a police force – certainly something we will not see in our lifetime.
Interesting Scothmist – I’m not sure if I consider myself a sage or a casuist. I’m right-wing for somethings, such as benefit entitlement (think we should have the german system, which is more social than ours, but right-wing in who can get it), defence budget , punishment for some crimes, working ethic (stuff I have practical experience off, I guess) – but other things like mental health, addiction, emigration, criminal rehabilitation etc – I’m pretty much left wing (most of which I’m covered through education or media coverage).
BTW – Scothmist – am I likely to have met you on the site I posted a link to?
Iv never been in the army but used the same word in private for a friend for years, he used a similarly offensive word for me, Mutual understanding.
Filming the usage was rather stupid though, Harry was a bit of an idiot doing that. When I say a bit, I mean someone who gets their teacher to do their art homework stupid – so that’s quite.
As I have been preaching to liberal socialist Eeejits ( I should know I was one for years then I sobered up ) for years everybody in the world is a racist to greator or lesser degrees’ . Everbody should have the right to call anybody what they want too as long as they dont mind being called whatever the recipient of the insult calls them. It called manners. Dont force your illiberal morals on others. What does BTW mean and naw a dont think so
I’m going around the board….
Costume dramas (most boring thing literature invented), I can help you sleep yeah by reading anything Paul McKenna ever wrote and the Prince doing wonders for race relations.
Bet the Mail’s only fuming because they actually let none whites in the army. Shut your hypocritical mouth that usually masquerades as an ass hole The Mail.
I seen some apologists claim that such language is part of the “camaradery” of the armed forces. Shouldn’t we question an institution which allows this and yet claims (but doesn’t) to be fighting “for us”?
However, something this does cast new light on is the possibility that Charles might really be his dad, because that would mean Phil’s his granddad. The quote is remeniscent of a young Phil.
He apologised already. What do they want then? It happenned 3 fucking years ago ffs
Perhaps stoning or bamboo splinters under the finger nails is more what the Mail has in mind.
And what is McKenna going to “cure” us of? Our lilly-livered communist liberal Zanu-Labour McBrownian ways?
Save 50 pence every day by not buying this tripe! (They seem to have overlooked that one……..)
The Mail – Champion of race isues.
I don’t think the Mail is racist but it’s no paper to take a moral high ground on race relations.It’s just like the Mail to brush away any form of racism with arguments of political correctness and then take on a 3 year old incident like this with some sort of authority. I don’t know if Harry was being racist either. I have a friend who’s in the Royal Irish and he says they all language like this all the time between each other to joke around and bond. I think that’s OK as long is everybody is comfortable with it. Was the solider he used the word against offended? If he wasn’t, then why bother with all this. The soliders father wants him to apologise to the pakistani government and everything.
What has made me stunned in this whole thing is commenters on every newspaper site that are saying, “What’s so offensive about the word “paki?” and “Can I be insulted if someone calls me a Brit?” Do any of them have any idea of the past history of the word? And yeah, being called a Brit can be offended if you walk threw Belfast and a republican calls you a “f***king Brit Bastard”
I actually think this headline is quite positive. It’s hardly a secret that the Mail’s headline is an expression of what the paper’s editorial team think and so we can safely assume that the Mail thinks Harry’s use of a racist term is not just unacceptable but worthy of condemnation. This is in contrast to, for example, the Prime Minister who criticised the Prince but then played things down with all the “learnt his lesson” stuff. Thing is, Harry is 24 years old, he has neither the excuse of immaturity nor being of a generation where such things were considered “acceptable”. The “all part of the cameraderie” thing is nonsense too, Harry’s, what, third in line to the throne, fourth? How long exactly did he think he’d get away with using that word in private? How exactly did he think the word’s media would react? How much of a field-day do you think the Taleban are probably having this now?
The boy is a world-class fool and a brilliant example of why the monarchy is best wound-up.
Not that I am condoning Harry of course, but I would love to know what would be “good enough” for the Mail to leave it alone. A donation to a racism charity? Another apology? Abdication of any right to the throne? Suicide?! Where is this enough line?
He does deserve some kind of punishment but I dunno what that should be. Either way, it should be private. But I almost feel sorry for him because once you have done something like this, bad as it is , you can never escape the Mail and its constant smug digging, digging, digging.
I agree with you broadly Sarah except the comparison between the term ‘Brit and ‘Paki”. Its the venom that is often associated with the latter. Accepted Brit could be offensive in NI but i think you would agree that slightly different rules apply there.
Oh of course paki is wayyy more offensive than Brit. I was just putting my thoughts on the sheer amount of people who are saying “why is brit not offensive then?” then.It can be where I come from but again, its all about context in which the word is used. I wasn’t making a comparison there. Paki has a much more nasty and brutal history. It involves race, not nationality.
Ahh! As comments are moderated… feel free not to publish!
Funny how they complain about the BBC… then give away free DVDs!
(including, shockingly – Fanny Hill!)
Jesus folks, it’s the Army. We pay them to kill people, yet act surprised when they act a little earthy? Please have some perspective here.
For the Mail however to take any kind of high ground on race relations though is frankly astonishingly shameless.
I’m more liberal than right & also hate the tripe published by the Mail, but this thing has been taken out of proportion. To those who have served, they will understand this is just forces banter.
No malice is involved & banter normally centers around things such as hair colour, region of birth, etc etc.
You have to remember soldiers are prepared to die for each other – they do not fight for the Queen (though maybe Mr Wales does), or country or even the public.
They fight for their mates – when I was serving, anybody from Scotland was called Jock, Wales was called Taff, Ireland was called Paddy, Fiji – Fij etc… It’s certainly not malicious, It’s the same as a military forum I comment on – there are physically disabled soldiers on the site who be the first to use “derogatory” names to describe themselves – and other soldiers/ex-soldiers will do too… But then if somebody without a military background, who doesn’t hold such an understanding was to use it, people would not stand for it.
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=113584.html
Perhaps Harry should resign from the Royal Family and do community service in Brick Lane.
Sorrys not good enough … for this awfully laid out front page.
Ex-soldier, i see were your coming from however i don’t think taffy, jock & paddy carry quite the same racist connotations. Many comics feature people refered to as Jocks, Taff lad was a character in The Fast Show & Paddy power is a betting company. Paki, like Nigger, belies a much more serious form of persecution and Harry should really know better, particularly after the whole Nazi custume bollocks up.
(by the way, whats the point of having a slang name for folk from Fiji? Its only four letters anyhow!)
Zagrebo wrote:
‘The boy is a world-class fool and a brilliant example of why the monarchy is best wound-up’
couldn’t agree with you more, just keep the buildings since they are what bring in the tourist money
Outrageously hypocritical. How often has the Mail run “political correctness is ruining Britain” type rubbish? And now they’re outraged that Harry used an offensive term in a non-malicious way amongst his mates.
“I’m more liberal than right & also hate the tripe published by the Mail, but this thing has been taken out of proportion. To those who have served, they will understand this is just forces banter.”
Where do you draw the line though? Correct as you may be, you open a can of worms where anyone in any situation can say anything and dismiss it as “just banter”.
To NJH – not really, if he had said it to somebody who he didn’t know, or who wasn’t in the army, then it would be racist. I’m not dismissing it as banter, but I served eight years so I know what goes on… It’s no different to people who are black calling each other the N word.
And if I’m to be completely honest, most of the papers that have taken hold of this are acting no-different to when the Daily Mail prints claims of ‘wintervus’ ‘global-warming con’ etc.
It’s also not a can of worms, because I doubt as a result of this people all over the UK are going to think it’s acceptable to start using racist terminology.
The army is a sub-culture which unless you have served, you can never hope to understand. I’ve been out of the army for almost four years now & despite spending four years at university, I still failed to make even one friendship which was as deep as the ones I developed in the army – I often used nicknames that would be completely unacceptable outside of the army, but I would never use them outside…
This is a complete non-story/moral panic constructed by the media.
Mr Mordon – reference Fij – it’s just the way army nicknames work, I’m afraid. Although I think it also boiled down to their names being so hard for many of us to pronounce. Although a nickname is also a sign of acceptance
lthough I disagree with the word Paddy being harmless… I had countless mates when I was in called Paddy, and even if you didn’t know the guy, if he had an Irish accent, you could call him Paddy… But I would never dream of calling a mate outside of the army Paddy (and my grandparents were Irish)!
Hurrah for the Pakshirts!
“The army is a sub-culture which unless you have served, you can never hope to understand.”
Could you not say the same for people of Pakistani descent? If you aren’t, could you ever hope to understand whether Harry’s colleague was offended by the use of that word? Is there a culture whereby you are able to speak out if it does offend you?
NJH – you are completely off the mark. When an individual joins the army, they always adopt the army values, sense of humour etc. Also, I very much doubt the individual was offended – he was awarded a best recruit reward. This suggests to me that if he was good enough to win a such a reward, he would have been a good soldier & well respected by his peers.
You are applying you own values onto a subculture which you have absolutely no understanding off. I served with people from a variety of cultures during my eight years & race or skin colour was never an issue. Often, individuals would refer to their ethnicity in a jokey way… One example was an RSM who called himself “the Chink”.
And well done for thinking an tan entire country is a subculture!
>To those who have served, they will understand this is just forces banter.
Sorry, Ex-Soldier, but Harry’s not really in the same position as everyone else. If, for example, a cabinet minister were caught using similar language and then argued that it’s acceptable in that environment then no one’s going to make excuses for them. Regardless of what might or might not be acceptable within a certain environment, Harry is a public figure, he knows perfectly well that he has to watch what he said. He should understand that he shouldn’t use words like “paki” even in private let alone when on videotape. As I said before it says a lot about the boy’s personality and suitability for the role he’s got whether he, or any of the rest of us, like it or not.
Come on guys. There’s nothing wrong with light hearted banter between people of different races within the Army and outside it. As long as everybody is comfortable with it, then what’s the problem? I think it helps integration with different nationalities and people of different races. I don’t think we should expect Harry to behave any different because then you’re bound to be lied to.
Racism is all in the context. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the word Paki, or any other word come to that. However because skinheads used it to abuse anyone without pale white skin it was associated with a term of abuse and became offensive. Harry may not have intended it to be offensive, but hes bloody stupid if he didnt realise it would be!
“And well done for thinking an tan entire country is a subculture!”
I didn’t say an entire country; I said “people of Pakistani descent”, which has subcultural tenets in the UK.
Again, I will ask where the line is drawn between “banter” and offence, because your phrasing is quite ambiguous. And I’ll ask again, as you have the experience, is there a safe mechanism whereby an armed forces member can speak out confidentially if they are offended, for any reason, and how is dealt with if so?
NJH – yes, from my own personal experience I will say there are plenty of avenues they can take if they feel they are being discriminated/bullied or victimized (though I don’t see why you feel the need to “ask me again”, when you never asked me in the first place… Some of the phrasing of your questions suggest you are quiet young/in-experienced at debate. Not an insult but remember this is not a court room!)
Anyway, they can seek help from the Army Welfare Service, the unit padre (priest), SSAFA, Unit Medical Officer, WRVS (one of these is on every camp), Officer Commanding – a few of those listed are external to the army system, or bound by confidentiality, just like volunteers at Nightline, social workers etc are… It might also shock you (understandably, as it’s not provided in many civilian workplaces) that all soldiers & officers must receive equal opportunities training at least once a year & this is recorded on their personal file. To be completely honest, I’ve been out for several years now & the level of awareness of equal opportunities in the army was probably higher than it was outside.
If you want more information on the attitude of the average soldier, then click on the link I provided. It’s a discussion on an Army forum regarding a potential Muslim recruit asking for advice. You’ll see the attitude on the whole is one that is pretty well informed.
get a life you bunch of tossers
“though I don’t see why you feel the need to “ask me again”, when you never asked me in the first place… Some of the phrasing of your questions suggest you are quiet young/in-experienced at debate. Not an insult but remember this is not a court room!)”
I asked in the final sentence of my fourth post above.
As for my age, youth is relevant to other parties. I’m in my mid-to-late twenties. I phrased my questions in a formal manner so as not to come across as snide to you. My views on armed combat are that I think we as a species might’ve evolved so we don’t have physical fights, but please don’t let that seem to castigate you or your ex-colleagues. If this blog was too singular in its opinions it could get quite dull. Welcome and hopefully you can contribute on future posts.
Thanks for the post – although I think we’ll have to disagree. I think we’ll always need an armed service – I don’t think it’sa case of evolution – because behaviour also depends heavily on situationalism.
And your view do not castigate me now (though maybe my friends who are still serving) – my next career move is a PhD, so I don’t plan to be in the thick of it again in this lifetime!
I should have probably added before, I think the armed services do a great job in disaster zones, etc, but the ideology of using violence to get your own way I don’t think will ever hold water with me.
why do left wing casuists’ always use their emotions to come to a conclusion and right wing sages’ use experiences. the left think empathy can solve problems of others. this is not kindness, people will fel better if they achieve by themselves. they don’t need my time, effort or money. stop poking your back seat driver, self serving job creating nose’s into others lives
I’m sure most Daily Mail readers and staffers have never used the word “paki” (they probably talk about “coloureds” instead).
Anyway, it’s not the word that’s important – it’s the sentiment behind it. Some people can say the phrase “coloured gentleman” with such seething resentment it offends even me, and I’m white.
NJH – thanks, I was always most proud of the humanitarian work done by the army anyway. I think few soldiers who have experienced war would support it. But sadly, I think the day an army is no-longer required is also when we no-longer need a police force – certainly something we will not see in our lifetime.
Interesting Scothmist – I’m not sure if I consider myself a sage or a casuist. I’m right-wing for somethings, such as benefit entitlement (think we should have the german system, which is more social than ours, but right-wing in who can get it), defence budget , punishment for some crimes, working ethic (stuff I have practical experience off, I guess) – but other things like mental health, addiction, emigration, criminal rehabilitation etc – I’m pretty much left wing (most of which I’m covered through education or media coverage).
BTW – Scothmist – am I likely to have met you on the site I posted a link to?
Iv never been in the army but used the same word in private for a friend for years, he used a similarly offensive word for me, Mutual understanding.
Filming the usage was rather stupid though, Harry was a bit of an idiot doing that. When I say a bit, I mean someone who gets their teacher to do their art homework stupid – so that’s quite.
As I have been preaching to liberal socialist Eeejits ( I should know I was one for years then I sobered up ) for years everybody in the world is a racist to greator or lesser degrees’ . Everbody should have the right to call anybody what they want too as long as they dont mind being called whatever the recipient of the insult calls them. It called manners. Dont force your illiberal morals on others. What does BTW mean and naw a dont think so
On a slightly less serious note, would anyone here like to mess with a gun toting man called Captain Khan? I deliver the paper so I read the article.