Could this guy get any more stupid, we will just have to wait and see.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
So an AMERICAN called Pakistanis 'Pakis,' which is an insult in BRITAIN.
Hey, guess what! We don't always use the same words to mean the same things, you daft gowk!
I mean, these are the same people who call trucks 'lorries', elevators 'lifts' and asphalt 'bitumen.'
And I won't even get into how differently the phrase "Want to blow a fag" is interpreted...
Who CARES what's an insult there? It ain't HERE!
So the answer is... "he still isn't as stupid as the people who think that this is newsworthy."
Posted by Grokca (Member # 722) on :
The point is that a President should know better. If I called you daft, even though it is not common usage in the US you would still feel insulted.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Uh, I kind of got to go with Rob on this one. Who cares if its an insult in Britain? Then again, why is Bush calling them 'Pakis' when they're 'Pakistanis'? Does he not like saying 'tanis'?
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
"Paki" is considered a fairly insulting racial slur in Canada, too. I'm a little surprised it isn't used in the US, actually.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
probably because most Americans hadn't ever heard of Pakistan until oh.. about the last quarter of last year. And those that had probably couldn't be bothered to single out the said natives from their larger racial slurs that embody that entire region (or hemisphere).
God Bless America -------------------- "Isn't that whole area kind of.. you know.. iffy? -- Maude Flanders Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
Don't know why "Paki" would be any more offensive than "Turk," which is completely legitimate shortening of "Citizen of Turkey."
Nope, this is just a case of some hypersupersensitive, or some hatemonger, trying to stir up offense where none exists.
Read the damn article. Even the Paki said it wasn't a slur.
Posted by Grokca (Member # 722) on :
I apologize in advance for having to write this
Nigeria = nigger It's the same thing FOT
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Fo2, it's a slur. You may think it isn't, you may apply all manner of liberarian logic to it, but that doesn't change the fact that it is indeed one. Pakistani's (indeed, it's generally applied to all people of South Asian descent) consider it one, not just crazed hordes of liberal politically-correct feminazis. The Pakistani embassy said they accepted that Bush made an honest mistake. Which he did. I don't think anyone is insinuating that Bush is a racist prick. But it's nonetheless worrying that the most important man in global foreign affairs continues to make no effort to familiarize himself with the people he deals with on a daily basis. The next time he goofs, the people he pisses off mightn't be so ready to brush it off.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
Grocka: That's just Dumb. Nigeria is pronounced Ny 'jheer'i'a. So the short, if it was used, which it isn't, would be pronounced Ny'jheer'ee. Although "Nigerians" is more correct, it would be easy to slip and call them "Nigerans"... of course, THEN someone would just have to point out that "Nigerans" are the inhabitants of Niger, a country NEAR Nigeria. (Really creative, these country-naming folks)
The other word is pronounced totally differently, DOESN'T apply to citizens of any particular country, and would be far less likely to be used by mistake in any case.
Tom: "Liberarian???!!" That's a SLUR! You'll be hearing from my lawyers!
Tom, the PURPOSE of the article WAS to imply just such a thing. How can we tell? Because, as I said before, it's totally unnewsworthy otherwise.
So Bush shortens words when he talks. I know lots of people who do that. BFHD. It just so happens that some people in a country Bush isn't from consider the shortened version to be a 'slur.' Frankly, I'm not impressed.
Posted by Grokca (Member # 722) on :
Ok, Tom tried to explain this to you and I will try one more time in a way in which you might be able to relate it to your country. Abroad, people from your country are know as yankees. If this is said to someone from Buffalo, it is probably not a slur. If you said this to a person from say, Alabama they might consider it a slur. The point is that they did not mean to insult which I also believe Bush did not. But if he is to run a foreign affairs department then he should be aware of the terms, both derogatory and proper that foreigners should be refered to. It is no excuse that it is not a slur in your country, he should be aware of these things. Hence the hoofinmouth award. And lastly if it meant nothing them why did the Whitehouse sorta apologize for it?
Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
Ah, it's good to see the Second-Grader-In-Chief is in fine form.
quote:The point is that a President should know better.
Yes indeed he should.
But this is what you get with Mr. Bush. You get a person in the White House who's lack of understanding brings about stupid, unknowledgeable statements. And then people get to make excuses for him.
[ January 08, 2002: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
Posted by BlueElectron (Member # 281) on :
Man, "Pakies" is a common racial term toward "brown" people. Which included Pakistan, Afganstan, India, and various Southern Asian and Middle East nations.
I'm highly suspicious of Geoge's comment on how he doesn't really know the term.
Even if he is telling the truth, a leader of his magnitude should know better. If he's baseing his defense on the ground that he's using it as a verbal contraption (spelling?), then it'll still makes him look bad, cuz a real speaker should address in formal English, in which contraption are not allowed
[ January 08, 2002: Message edited by: BlueElectron ]
Posted by Tahna Los (Member # 33) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jay the Obscure: But this is what you get with Mr. Bush. You get a person in the White House who's lack of understanding brings aobut stupid, unknowledgeable statements. And then people get to make excuses for him.
Frankly, I don't give a rat's ass about whatever verbal screwups Bush may make. Two reasons: 1) sometimes it comes with the character, and 2) if his words do not clarify an offending fact.
In other words, if there was evidence that Bush was being racist long before he made the comment, then this concern and criticism is justified. But to my knowledge, he isn't.
I simply see this as a verbal blunder more than a racist remark. Unfortunately, it is the views of the offended party that matter more in the limelight.
[ January 08, 2002: Message edited by: Tahna Los ]
Posted by BlueElectron (Member # 281) on :
Two words, "Freudian Slip"
How is it okey for him to make a racist comment, and be okey with it?
What happen if he said "Niggers" instead? How would you react then? How would the people in the States react then?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
BE: As I recall, you're from Canada, so you can't make the claim that "Paki" is such a common insult that Bush should know it. It may be so where you are, but it isn't here. Besides, you can't even speak English half as well as he can (which is one hell of a feat), so you really can't complain.
And if "Pak(i)" isn't the legitimate term for them, where'd they get the word "Pakistan"? It works in every other case:
Afghanistan -> Afghan Kazakhstan -> Kazakh Kyrgyzstan -> Kyrgyz Tajikistan -> Tajik Turkmenistan -> Turkmen Uzbekistan -> Uzbek
So, presumably, the word "Pakistan" should come from some people called "Paks" or "Pakis".
Oh, also, regarding the Nigeria thing... Nigeria is named for the Niger River. "Nigger" is a corrupted pronunciation of "Negro", which means "black". So there's no connection between "nigger" and "Nigeria", other than the fact that they're both ultimately traceable back to the Latin word for "black". Alternatively, the slur "Paki" is derived directly from "Pakistan". So there's a basis for thinking a person from Pakistan is called a Paki. There's no basis for thinking a person from Nigeria is called a Nigger. A "Nigeri", maybe, but that's not even close to "nigger".
[ January 08, 2002: Message edited by: TSN ]
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
I've heard two explanations... One is that it's an acronym of various ethnic groups native to it... P for Pashtun, A for something, K for Kashmiri, etc.
The other that it literally translates to "Land of the Pure."
In any case, there have never ever been a people called "Paki."
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
[ January 08, 2002: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
Tahna, I'm not sure where you're going by quoting me, but it certainly isn't down the racist trail.
I don't think Mr. Bush is a racist, I just don't think he cares enough to learn about things in general. That to me is a real failing in a person acting as president of the United States.
And I find this screw-up / make excuses a troubling trend. The country bumkin act only goes so far and it's gone far enough.
If you can't articulate your ideas better than that, you ought not be in the White House.
[ January 09, 2002: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Interesting... I didn't know it was such a recently invented word, either.
Well, anyway, while I'll obviously grant that he should have checked his lexicological facts before speaking, it's still a reasonable mistake.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
It's a perfectly understandable mistake for Joe American to make when he's attempting to have a conversation about the situation in Pakistan over coffee at Krisy Kreme Donuts. As you've demonstrated, Tim, there is a certain logic that might suggest Pakistan is named after its native "Paki" inhabitants. Fine, well, and good. Let's not dub Joe American a Klansman over it.
It's a completely unacceptable mistake when George W. Bush makes it when acting as President of the United States and Superpower Peace Broker while attempting to convince the Pakistanis and Indians not to blow each other into itty-little bits with nuclear weapons. This guy has a team of guys around him at all times who get paid in a week what I make in a year to make sure that Bush doesn't unintentionally refer to a people by a name that is a broadly-recognized racial slur in the rest of the English-speaking world. And he manages to nonetheless. I mean, wasn't Bush theoretically working closely with Musharaf, since, oh, September 12? How exactly do you fail to figure out the correct term to refer to citizens of Pakistan after working with this "closest of friends" against a terror network for four months?
So, my question is, what next? Will Bush thank Jiang Zemin and his fellow Chinamen for their friendship? Intervene in the conflict with the Tamales in Sri Lanka? Visit the Irish in Dublin, then fly to Reykjavik and meet the Iceish?
[ January 08, 2002: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
Test for oh-so-brilliant, 'I know more than the US President' types:
1: What's the commonly accepted term for a person from Utah?
2: Is it acceptable to call a person from Waco a "Baptist?"
3: What do you call a person from Djibouti?
4: From Duluth?
5: Where's a MooseJavian from?
BONUS: Two acceptable terms for a person from Barbados.
------------- "It's hard to tell just what makes a shortened demonym insulting. 'Jap' for Japanese is highly offensive, but 'Brit' for Briton is not. The British use it themselves." -- N. Sally Hass, linguist.
[ January 09, 2002: Message edited by: First of Two ]
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Well, the fifth one's Moose Jaw, Canada, but the rest...
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
1: What's the commonly accepted term for a person from Utah?
American.
2: Is it acceptable to call a person from Waco a "Baptist?"
I'd call them an American, too. Because, guess what ... ?
3: What do you call a person from Djibouti?
Djiboutian
4: From Duluth?
Since its in Minnesota, I'm going to say American. Because, they're American.
5: Where's a MooseJavian from?
Canada.
BONUS: Two acceptable terms for a person from Barbados.
Barbadian. Or Bajan.
This really doesn't excuse Bush any, as he had four months working closely with the Pakistanis to know that they were *CALLED* Pakistanis. If he'd called them "Pakis" on 9/11 he could've pled ignorance and had a better case.
Otherwise, Rob, you might have had a point. Sadly, you don't.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Actually, he pointed out quite well that someone from any given place can have multiple terms for nationality/origin. If it wasn't for the insult aspect of it, Paki could easily be an acceptable alternative term for someone from Pakistan.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
And yet you and I are both 'Americans', not 'Ameris'. Bush worked with Pakistan closely enough over the past few months to know they were called 'Pakistanis.'
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
But as the Canadians are so happy to point out, "American" is just as inaccurate.
And I've heard Americans from the United States referred to as Mericans and U.S.'ers and even, once, "Romans" by people on non- U.S. extractions.
And the Brits call the Argentine "Argies." Of course, that's cause they hate them.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Sorry Rob.
Your whole arguement revolves around that our President was unaware of what is proper to refer to the residents of Pakistan. But by working so closely with them for so many months, he knew damn well they were called 'Pakistanis', not 'Pakis' or 'Stanis.'
It'd be a different story if he'd said it during the presidential campaign, when he didn't even seem to realize the military had overthrown the government. It's completely different after he's been buddying up to them for going on four months.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
NO, what I'm saying is that he was talking off the cuff, and that it's stupid to read so much into a half-second of speech, especially someone who's known for fudging their words on occasion.
If you expected to have a president with perfect diction, you should have elected ME. Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Ok, so what you're saying is he just forgot to say the 'stani'? How did he leave that out?
And why were you argueing in the posts above that Bush might have thought 'Paki' was an appropriate term for those from Pakistan?
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
How did he leave that out? The same way millions of people contract their language on occasion.
I'll give you an example: People in southwestern pennsylvania, even some of the most literate, often contract "all that" into "alls."
My comments about it maybe not being offensive was a shot at the obvious oversensitivity of the press, as in, 'why are you even writing a story about this if no one was even offended?,' and a shot at these folks who are grasping at any straw to say something bad about Bush II. I mean, okay, you have free speech and all... but try at least to say something of substance.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I listed six examples above where the "stani" is supposed to be left out. Apparently, "Pakistani" is the only one where it isn't. So his "leaving it out" actually makes sense, more so that leaving it in.
And we aren't called "Ameris" because we live in "America", not "Ameristan".
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
quote:So his "leaving it out" actually makes sense, more so that leaving it in.
Right. So Bush should be allowed to call the inhabitants of Iceland "Iceish," since the inhabitants of Ireland are Irish, Scotland Scottish, and Finland Finnish. And how about those Iranis, tucked in that part of the world near the Saudis and Iraqis and, um, Pakis. Indeed, aren't the Turkis over there, too?
There is absolutely no regular system for matching the placenames to the name used by inhabitants. "Making sense" doesn't factor into it.
In the circles of international diplomacy, you simply are expected to know things like that, indeed, sillier things, too. If you don't know, you're supposed to have teams of advisors handing you a dossier on Air Force One to make sure you know the name of Musharaf's wife(s), the GDP and principal exports of Pakistan, and the small matter of the correct way to refer to its inhabitants.
I don't buy the "he shortened it" excuse. I can't say I've ever "spoken off the cuff" and unintentionally shortened "Japanese" to "Jap." He simply exercised his patented Dubyaist wit and blundered ignorantly into another situation, presumably ignoring his advisors. Oops.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
quote:My comments about it maybe not being offensive was a shot at the obvious oversensitivity of the press
This wasn't reported, as far as I can tell, by CNN, or The Washington Post or The New York Times. It was one internet paper that published it -- and for that you blame all of them? So, if one guy in Pennsylvannia commits a crime, we can say "All those people in PA are criminals!"?
But, you're right. There's no reason to bring any more attention to the fact that George W. Bush is known for not being the sharpest bagel cutter in the world (especially when many Republicans seem to think a certain ex-President had his dog whacked).
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
Many? I haven't heard ONE yet. Not even a joking one.
The only one I've heard suggest it is YOU.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Or you could try doing a search in the message boards here.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
You're making less sense as you get more desperate.
That lady's article implied only that Buddy was irrelevant to the Clintons, and thus no great loss once he'd served his political purpose.
Given politicians' of all stripes attempts to curry favor by appearing to be a 'perfect' family, this is not suprising.
She never suggests that anybody 'whacked the dog.'
As for the posters at that other place... half of them are cranks hey, we have cranks on here, too sometimes.
And the other half are people just like you, spreading the rumor that some people actually DO believe that.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
You could use a sense of humor, Rob.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Considering that no one could possibly take what you said to be a joke...
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
I'm well-known for my sense of humor.
You, unfortunately, are currently about as funny as an overturned school bus on fire.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
So you believed me when I said Republicans thought Bill Clinton had Buddy whacked? Well, hey, if it's got Omega's endorsement that's gotta be good enough for Rob ... Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
No, I take that back. I can think of an instance in which I might even find that school bus funny.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Sure, like when Rush Limbaugh or Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell is in it.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
'Test for oh-so-brilliant, "I know more than the US President" types:'
Complete bollocks. Sorry. But knowing words for people from individual US states is hardly the same as knowing an insensitive word for an entire country (and several others), especially since the entire English-speaking world (apart from, apparently, the US) seems to know it.
The scale is completely different, and the questions unresonable. I'd expect other English-speaking countries to know, for instance, that Britain uses pounsd for it's currency. I wouldn't expect them to know how much a shilling is now worth. Or, to use a more related example, it's the difference between knowing that Liverpool is a city in the UK, and knowing what scousers are. No-one expects other countries to know that. But, if someone had gone to Newcastle to try and foster good relations, it would make a lot of sense if they learnt what "Geordie's" were beforehand.
And in any case, none of us are President of the USA, and none of us are trying to maintain good diplomatic relations with Utah. There is no need for us to know that. There is every need for Bush not to insult the country he's trying to be friendly with.
'And the Brits call the Argentine "Argies." Of course, that's cause they hate them.'
We do? And, er, we do? That was almost 20 years ago anyway. We are actually capable of not holding onto a grudge, you know. Or have you confused us for O'Brien? I know he was Irish, and therefore almost British (*cough*), but there's still a slight difference. Reality mainly.
[ January 11, 2002: Message edited by: PsyLiam ]
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
I got the "Argies" part out of a year-old dictionary of names people from different places are called, and by whom.
Incidentally, the answers to 1-4 are
1 Utahn
2 Yes
3 Djibouti
4 Duluthian
The other ones were answered correctly.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
I'm going to have to argue with you on #3, the listing I found on here said what I posted.
BTW: Rob, you figured out who John Edwards is yet? Omega?
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
So, to sum up: The leader of the Free World appears to have made a mistake over the term for inhabitants of Pakistan. Those people here apt to support said President contend that:
a) It was a perfectly natural mistake to make, b) it's a legitimate term for said inhabitants given naming conventions of other counties in the region, and c) it's not an insult in the USA so it soesn't matter anyway.
Meanwhile, people who don't like Bush very much say:
a) He should have known better, b) his staff should have known better, and c) it is an insult regardless.
I'll make a mental note to ask some Pakistani friends what they think. . .
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Um... if neither involved party thinks of it as an insult, how, praytell, can it be?
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Ah, so Omega has contacted random Pakistanis and asked if they think being called "Pakis" is an insult. Quick work there, bud.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Well, since Omega didn't, I did.
One of the things about working in pizza delivery is, you tend to work with a great deal of people who have recently come over from other countries.
So, anyways, I asked three Pakistanis about being called 'Pakis.' Two of them have been in the U.S. less then five years (and Ahmed's English is pretty far from anything close to good). I don't know about Ayudin's educational background (I do know he served in the Pakistani Army, if that means anything), I know that Ahmed has a degree in the engineering field (and was laid off from that job after 9/11). The third (Rehman) came over when he was about three (this is the guy who gave me my grey hairs when I was a manager at Domino's and he worked for me). He's got a degree in accounting from Penn State and works for a firm in Towson.
Rehman said that 'Pakis' was an insult.
Ahmed and Ayudin both said they didn't think of 'Pakis' as an insult, but I don't know how much faith I can place in their answers, since they've both shown a high willingness to be very accomidating to anyone who has either been in the country longer then them, or speaks English better then them (Ahmed especially). So, it's sort of iffy.
Posted by Ultra Magnus (Member # 239) on :
I'm a MooseJavian. Whoopie.
Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :
Congratulations. Where you been, anyway?
Posted by Ultra Magnus (Member # 239) on :
In Moose Jaw, naturally.
Posted by BlueElectron (Member # 281) on :
I ask several of my "brown" friends (this is not intended as a insult). They mostly agree that although "Pakies" in general is an racial term toward "brown" people, but under this perticular circumstance, Bush probabaly means no harm since he was addressing both India and Pakistan (both country are occupied by vast majority of "brown" people). It does not make sense to insult Pakistanis alone.
But, they also agree that Bush, while being the president of supposingly one of the most highly educated nation, who also attended one of the ivy league university, is an dumbass for making this mistake.
My friends also question what kind of a lousy job his "public relation staffs" are doing to let this one slip by them.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"...one of the most highly educated nation[s]..."
Ha!
Posted by BlueElectron (Member # 281) on :
Hence I used the word "supposingly".
Posted by Ultra Magnus (Member # 239) on :
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)