Mutiny as passengers refuse to fly until asians are removed

Remove all ads!

and usually caucasian, intelligent, bedwetters, arsonists and animal abusers, so you only need to avoid white geeks that wear bloody fur, have a box of matches and smells of urine...

 

If the passengers wanted to get off because of their bigotry - sure - they'd just be morons. However - that the two men were removed from the plane so that these others could fly - that's bull****. The pilot should have been replaced with someone less paranoid and they should have gone on their merry way. Screw those who wanted to get off.

 

I'm going to need some help here. They are referring to the people who were removed from the plane as "Asians". In the U.S., we don't refer to people of middle east decent as Asians. We call them Middle Easterners. That's because people from the Middle East are caucasians. The term "asian" is used to describe a race - usually people from the far east. People from China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, etc. are "asian". So I apologize for what might seem like a stupid question, but when these people are referred to as "asians", do they mean they were from the Middle East or the Far East?

 

@Aldeth the classical term for the middle east is Asia Minor whilst the far east is known as Asia Major so calling them Asians is actually correct for both, and less offensive according to the PC people.

 

Well the term Caucasian is so named because the German physiologist Blumenbach [wrongly] believed that peoples from Europe, western Asia, India and North Africa originated in the Caucus region. Like the terms Mongoloid, and Australoid, the term Caucasian has very limited validity as a scientific category.

The classification is not even very practical as it includes peoples whose skin colour ranged from light (in northern Europe) to dark (in parts of North Africa and India). In fact practically anyone who wasn't 'Black', 'Oriental', or a native of the Americas would fall into this classification.

Although the classification is outdated and the categories are now not generally accepted as scientific the term Caucasian is still used especially in the U.S. Properly the term should only be used when referring to 1.) anything/anyone relating to the Caucasus region. 2.) relating to a group of languages spoken in the region of the Caucasus.


@ Darkstrider,

Although, as you correctly point out, anyone hailing from the Asian continent can be referred to as an 'Asian', the term is useful only when making broad generalizations about the world's geography or in terms of geopolitics, it is, however, too broad a classification in regards to race. It also leads to confusion when it is applied to a specific race or nationality from Asia. While Aldeth, and presumably other Americans, use the term to refer to East Asians, in England the term usually refers to people of a South Asian background. To avoid confusion and the perpetuation of bad science the names of specific peoples or nationalities should be used wherever possible [something which is lost on much reporting].

 

Well, I'm "asian". I have brown skin and black hair and I am british. Now why should I feel intimidated by a bunch of Nazi Ass kissing jerks ? Should I feel ashamed just because of my skin ? HELL NO! I refuse to be "judged"! I have every right to enjoy my country just as everybody else does. And just for the record I despise those "terrorists" who have the mallicious intent of hurting others. I am a muslim but that doesn't mean I want to hurt anyone because of it. A lot of these british terrorists come from pakistani backgrounds and not Indian, Sri Lankan or Bangladeshi. The only thing I do agree with is the fear shown by the passengers and I think the fault must lie with the staff involved with security checks and of course the paranoid pilot who might have flied the plane to mars if he wasn't careful. Question is, how do you prepare for the future ? Deport all brown skinned, black haired muslims ? Turks are muslims but the big difference is their white.

 

@SBF and therein lies the absurdity of PC, they refer to anybody coming from the continent as Asian, whereas in reality asians are seen to be people from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia and Indonesia etc, Orientals are Vietnamese, Korean, Chinese, Japanese and Cambodians etc. But hey they're only humans in my book.

@Deadman Being Jewish I have reason to hate Nazis, but just because people reacted out of fear and the pilot acted out of hysteria induced paranoia, does not make these people Nazi ass kissing jerks. These are people are frightened because of the sensationalist way the news is presented, and also in a jingoistic propaganda style that is seemingly designed to arouse feelings and actions.


As for preparing for the future and I'm serious about this, for the sake of the planet wipe out the humna race. With them gone, the planet will survive a lot longer, and who knows intelligent life with a sense of reponsiblity may evolve.

 

So where were the men from? That still wasn't answered. Are they from the Middle East? I still think it's strange that people from the middle east are referred to as Asians. Especially because in appearance and genetics, they are practically identical to the native people of northeast Africa.

While I do not debate that the term Caucasian is somewhat flawed, there is a genetic basis for it. Basically, the people of Europe, the Near East, the Middle East, northeastern Africa, and India can all be traced to a single genetic line. And the term white or caucasian, while offensive to some, still shows up on official government documents - like the tax returns you file every year, and the census forms every ten years. (And yes, if you are multi-racial you are allowed to check more than one.) All of the delineations used in official U.S. forms are based on genetic lines and the following distinctions are made:

White/Caucasian (non-Latino)
Black/African
Asian (which here refers to southern and east Asia)
Pacific Islander'
Native American
Latino (which is kind of strange, as if you're Latino, you are some combination of White, Black and/or Native American)
Inuit (again strangely, as I would think Inuits cannot be too genetically distinct from Native Americans)

EDIT: @DS - the term "Oriental" is considered offensive in the U.S. Any "Asian" will tell you that only rugs and food are Oriental - not people.

 

@Darkstrider I apologise for my comment which you picked up on earlier. I meant no offence whatsover.

However, I am angry at the way asians are potrayed as evil by the media. What I do know is people from my race (or similiar) and religious background make more problems for themselves and are sometimes complete idiots. Young muslims are cruelly beaten in mosques by muslim clerics - who spend all day lecturing junk, can't speak english and claiming benefits - and bought up to hate the life that surrounds them. How do I know ? I've been through the system, taken the beatings and seen what a bunch of retards these preachers of hatred are. Then there's arranged marriages - popular in pakistan - in which women have no rights and finally terrorist wannabes who fight for jihad. Idiots! Just to add to that, the same fools also suffer racist abuse from white people, with taunts such as "paki" and "terrorist", or experience lots of Xenophobia. Theres a lot of psychological damage inflicted on muslims especially when their young.

 

@aldeth precisely the grouping of races into a generic term is offensive to all peoples. Try telling a Zulu warrior that he's a black African, I'll start running first.

@Deadman I didn't take offense, I just wished to point out it probably could be offensive and wrong. I understand the anger and frustration at the portrayals in the media, it is dangerous and biased how things are been shown these days.

 

How is grouping people genetically offensive? We're just describing their appearance, not the person. I'm thinking along the same lines as Aldeth here, I can't imagine Asians - as in Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese etc. - stirring this terrorist paranoia. I would imagine the person would have to be from Iraq, Iran, Turkey or basically the 'was-Persian' countries for people to associate them with terrorists.

If somebody is offended because I label them as 'black' or 'black-african' or whatever then they have some issue. Only reffering to their appearance, if they're offended by me identifying them so I imagine they must have many broken mirrors around the house.

 

This makes me sick. I'm ashamed that people from my country could be so disgustingly racist.

 

Aldeth, in the UK, most of the muslim people are from places like Pakistan, which is in Asia. If you say the word 'Asian' in London, people will think first of someone from India or Pakistan, rather than from the Far East / China / Japan / etc (which is what I would call 'Asian'). Just goes to show that the term 'Asian' actually refers to about 80% of the world's population so is a bit of a useless term for describing any group of people properly (might as well just say they were from Earth).

 

@HB - Yes, I understand that India, Pakistan and a whole lot of other Middle Eastern countries are in Asia. What makes it strange to me (and I'd imagine many of my fellow Americans) is that we evidently use the term "Asian" completely differently from how it is used in other english-speaking countries. The difference here is that Americans use the term to describe a race, whereas you're telling me that people of UK use the term to describe people from a geographic area.

I guess it's an issue of perspective. For example, I don't know any people who are from Japan, China, etc. who would be offended if you referred to them as Asian - it's the PC way to refer to them here (with Oriental being a no-no). However, people would look at you like you had three heads if you referred to someone who was Pakistani or Indian as being Asian. You could call them Caucasian, although that isn't particularly decsriptive, as that also refers to most people in the U.S., Europe, and Australia (and NZ). That's why the PC way to refer to them here is Middle Eastern.

I will admit that people living in the Middle East are living in Asia, but the article was the first time I've ever heard that term used to apply to people from the Middle East. My first thought upon reading the article was, "Why the heck were people from Japan/China/Korea/etc speaking Arabic, and further, why did people fear they were terrorists?" That's how foreign that classification is to Americans.

 

Just want to inform you: Both the languages and apperances of Turkish people is different from Arabs because their origins are the middle of Asia.

 

Yes Turkish is closer to Japanese than Arabic.

 

I prefer to be described as Asian or more appropiately "British Asian". I wouldn't like to be refered to as a Pakistani, Bangladeshi or Indian simply because I wasn't born in any of those countries. Only that I am of an ethnic origin from an Indian subcontinent. If I refered to a white person as English even though they may have not come from England and might be American, Welsh, Scottish, Irish, or from some other white dominant country, that wouldn't exactly be polite.

 

well, if you refered to a welsh, irish or scottish person as english you may get a smack in the mouth

 

@ Shoshino. Your reply although true was very hostile. I do not see why anyone would need to "smack" me or get physical over it. Diplomacy should always be the first step. Should I "smack" someone if they gave a racist remark ? Pointless. If thats your way of thinking then no wonder there is so much hostility in the world. People who think this way need to be seriously educated and learn that there are more important things in life. And if anyone wanted to try to "smack" me I will return the favor. That is human nature.

[ August 23, 2006, 03:21: Message edited by: Deadman ]

 

May if you insisted on it after they corrected you. If somebody called me English I would correct them that I'm a New Zealander but I would obviously understand their assumption.

If it walks like a duck...