Juan Williams who forks for NPR as a political analyst was fired for expressing a fear on the Bill O'Reilly show.
"Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."
Another example of hypocrisy and intolerance from liberals.
Well, he'll still be a regular well paid shill on Fox.
Thanks Ralph, I knew it would be okay with you for someone to get fired because they didn't spout the liberal agenda every minute. And apparently any liberal that dares to go on any considered "conservative" show should be fired. True colors showing -- HOLLA!
It is funny that a black guy is so removed from reality when he says he gets nervous being around Muslims. There used to be many people uncomfortable around blacks. I would think he would take issue with that. Don't you?
Don't you see how perverse this guy has become? Think about it.
What the hell does liberal have to do with it. If you feel he should not be fired okay. To put conservative and liberal is like saying "i like bread. " There are 100's of breads and 100's of DIFFERENT iterations of liberals and conservatives.
However, keep fighting for ism's if you must.
"What the hell does liberal have to do with it."
Have you ever listened to NPR?
If not try it and you will get your answer.
Right is right and wrong is wrong!
If I slap you, do you care what political affiliation i am?
Can I assume your reaction was the same when NBC fired Phil Donohue for questioning the wisdom of invading Iraq? Or the same for the Smothers Brothers who were fired by CBS for criticizing our folly in Vietnam? And what about Pete Seeger being banned from network TV for ten years?
Private companies can do what they want. NPR receives public money, once that is cut off, they too can do whatever they want.
I seriously considered addressing this thread but realized that I do not have the time or desire to weigh into an argument about the fate of Juan Williams, none the less, here goes. He was terminated from an organization devoid of integrity with a rapidly shrinking audience and finds himself left with a relevant, powerful news channel whose audience is growing daily. He will reach a much larger audience and be paid handsomely for doing so. The great tragedy is that he will remain foolishly liberal and thus reduce the value of Fox News by further "dumbing down" its opinion programing. There is little value arguing with liberals or entertaining their opinions. No liberal can fully embrace reason, fact or history because eventually they must resort to fallacy and emotion to protect the ego investment they make in poorly thought out opinions
You are right 2 million dollar contract with FOX.
I think Fox also guaranteed that there would actually be someone listening.
How so? You seem to have things backwards.
What he expressed was bigotry, even though, as bigots like to do, he prefaced it with a "Well, I'm not a bigot, but...".
Again, thank you for proving to me that the liberal definition of bigotry has really extended to political correctness. Bigotry is defined as "stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own".
Thank you for proving to me once again the hypocrisy of the loony left. HOLLA!
And thank you for reminding me why you're impossible to reason with.
That's right I give you the correct definition of bigotry and you think I'm being unreasonable
You have to leave facts out of your reasoning or they don't understand.
Try it like this.
"Juan Williams is in fact a bigot because he has a different opinion than me"
See, they can understand that because it makes zero sense.
After all they think this guy is intelligent.
He said something his bosses didn't like, and he was fired.
Just as with this sitution here.
It's nothing new, and nothing worse than what happens every day.
Kanye West had his album thrown out of WalMart because it offended them......see? Happens all the time.
Wal-Mart and NPR can do whatever they want.
I don't care.
What did Rick Sanchez say that got him fired?
He made fun of John Stewart!
Ahhhhh---there we have it!
Sanchez is a bigot because he says Jews are not the down-trodden in America. But Williams is treated unfairly because he has the right to be scared of muslims.
"Jews not an oppressed minority"= bigot
"I'm afraid of muslims in garb"=common sense
Is this what you are saying?
In other words, to be afraid of muslims is only natural, not bigoted.
But to say that Jews are powerfu in America is good reason to be fired.
I think you can see clearly right here the problem with righty's!
Why don't you explain it to me, instead of flying these little "I'm so much smarter than you" insults around?
What is the difference between the Williams and Sanchez firings?
Think about what was said and the context.
Sanchez was not insulting him. He was laughing at an absurd statement.
it is quite absurd to say that Jews in the media are an oppressed minority! Come ON!
Look at the coverage of Operation Cast Lead.....all they showed was Obama golfing!
Whereas Williams was implying that muslims in garb were somehow a threat to him. Like a typical white person will move across the street if they see a group of young black men coming their way...right?
Okay, now I see where YOU are coming from.
There's really nothing to explain here to you.
Flightkeeper, read my post above. He can't say this kind of stuff because there are many people who would apply the same fear and logic to him because he is black. Think about it.
Honesty and mild bluntness = bigotry
Gotta love it
What he expressed was a natural reaction that most people have these days. But I guess the truth is not allowed by NPR. It seems that whenever you have an opinion that is different Liberals always break out the race card that has been completely overplayed , it is starting to sound like the boy that cried wolf.
On Air personalities have been fired or get in trouble for "controversial" statements before. Shock Jocks often rile up enough people that eventually they have to "issue an apology" at some point. It's what makes them "popular", as they say controversial stuff, but just not too controversial.
"Another example of hypocrisy and intolerance from liberals."
Rather, it shows that they won't make excuses when one of their own expresses bigotry.
Though, at the same time, I don't think the dude should have been fired for it.
People should notice that to the loony left any honest expression of a concern or fear against a minority is considered bigotry. Please remember the true definition of bigotry. Again, fight against political correctness, People! -- and the liberal attempt to silence you.
Almost as if a couple of military men handcuff you and detain you for asking a question, huh?
Political correctness is nothing more than an insistence that the rules of common courtesy apply to people who are different from you, and that when you say something rude (even if it's rude to people who are different from you), an apology is warranted--whether you were "just joking" or not. That's all.
Why is that so scary?
Oh so now you define political correctness as being rude?!!!
Good grief, it's worse than I thought. Are you listening people, now rudeness is part of being politically incorrect. And he doesn't see that as scary. Is anyone paying attention?
Yeah....where have you been? You are JUST now getting it?
Howard Stern was fired for the same reason.
It's no better or worse just cause it happened to a conservative.
Neither Stern or Williams are conservative And you really don't see the difference between the Williams situation and the Stern situation?
Gads, why do I keep trying.
No, there is no difference. They both were fired because their views disturbed the wrong people.
Simple as that. Nothing new under the sun.
I think the far bigger issue is a candidate for public office uses force to shut up a reporter....
That is real dangerous...because he wants to represent US. WE would pay his salary.
Williams and Stern have to kind of represent the companies that pay them.
I'm sorry what you said was funny and no I'm not surprised that you don't see a difference.
And wasn't it The White House who didn't talk to Fox for a long while because they didn't consider it a real news organization.
No. It's you who are defining political correctness as being rude. I was saying exactly the opposite of that, but perhaps I was unclear. Let me try again.
What I said was that this political correctness movement that you're so scared of is nothing more than an insistence that everybody deserves to be treated with common courtesy, whether they're like you or whether they're different from you.
Why is that a) scary to you and b) difficult for you to understand?
"is nothing more than an insistence that everybody deserves to be treated with common courtesy,"
That may be very true but most liberals have a long way to go before they master there own creation.
So that's how you define political correctness - it's a matter of manners? Talking about a really low common denominator and an obfustication of a political agenda.
Things have gotten so bad that a liberal can't express a fear or a concern on a "conservative" show and get fired -- you don't think people should talk about it? Nah, I guess for liberals that's not worth talking about.
"...you don't think people should talk about it?"
Not even close. Talk about it all you like, but let's do it honestly.
For example, what you said just here, "a liberal can't express a fear or a concern..." is a (deliberate) obfuscation. He wasn't expressing a concern that, say, the overhead compartments are too small for most carry-on bags, or something like that. He was expressing a concern about people's open, and non-coercive, profession of faith, implying that people who openly and non-coercively profess that faith somehow become scary when they get on a plane.
If he wants to just be scared of Muslims, fine, I guess, an he can avoid them if he wants to in private life. But to go on the air and talk about how scary Muslims are is a bit rude. Not worth getting canned over*, but certainly worth someone calling him on it.
*And I'll say this again and again and again until it sinks in. Juan's comment, though rude, wasn't worth getting canned over.
Talk about obfustication and talking honestly. Williams said he gets nervous when he gets on a plane and sees a man in muslim garb. He didn't say muslims are scary.
Did you ever study English in school? There's these things we have in English, and they're called "synonyms." That's a fancy word we use to describe words that are different, but have nearly the same meaning.
For example, I could have, say, a roast, a brisket, a sirloin, a filet mignon, or a hamburger, but I'm still eating beef.
Or, if that's not clear enough for you, I could feel nervous, worried, apprehensive, or 'a bit leery,' but I'm still scared.
But it's clear to me that I'm in one of those proverbial rassling matches where you both get dirty, and one of you likes it. And with all this talk of beef, I've made myself pretty hungry. Time for a lunch break.
(and I still don't think Juan should have gotten fired.)
None of the Media practices free speech...NONE of them!
This wasn't the first instance where he crossed the line. Fox's announcing him as "NPR Correspondent Juan Williams" had become an embarrassment to NPR.
"Another example of hypocrisy and intolerance from liberals."
It works both ways...amd your side has a long way to catch up on the "silenced" front.
Hmmm, the liberals control most of mainstream media in print, television, and radio...
Murdoch is liberal???
Could have fooled me.
from a blogger:
Only in a fanatically extreme neo-nazi country (like the US) would those right wing corporate media puppets be considered left wing!
So sad how your country has become so very extreme that anything even vaguely centrist is considered dangerously left wing"
To you this firing of Williams for his opinions is a big thing.....
We Liberals are used to it.
You poor liberals, I so feel for you ... Murdoch controls everything in the US ... and your poor liberal New York Times and television networks and local television are all being run over by Fox news, I'm just crying buckets of tears for you guys...NOT!
No one is asking you too...just stop acting like a martyr yourself.
Well actually, he expressed his bigotry. His fear is a generalization about a entire cross section of society. Generalizations are based on ignorance.
Yes, it's good that he got fired.
Muslims are not the problem, intollerant people no matter where they live are the problem. If you fear a person because of the way they look, then you obviously missed something in your upbringing that can be fixed with therapy.
I fear no man, judge no one, and love all no matter their religion, race or orientation. The world will be a better, safer place when we all teach tolerance and acceptance to our children to our childen.
So you have a problem with reading comprehension too huh?
Why are you constantly accusing people who disagree with you of not understanding English or having a reading comprehension problem?
It's insulting and rude.
How many times have I told you that it's not about agreeing or disagreeing? People can't comprehend what they are reading. They interpret all sorts of things on it. Shadesbreath's last post got it right and people still don't get it. Sheesh!
you just took the word out of many of our mouths.
why do people make threads if they're not willing to consider other views? it is rude and a huge reason people don't like to engage in the political forums.
the OP is rude.
You think I'm rude because you are not understanding what you're reading. I can't comprehend it for you.
no, I think you're rude in the way you respond to anyone who doesn't share your view. you can't tell someone they aren't comprehending what they're reading. ??
which has nothing to do with my comment anyway. if you want intelligent discussion in the threads you start, then allow people to say what they feel. you come off as being the know all, which is rude. maybe you're not, but to shut people down is tiring to read.
Of course I can tell someone they can't comprehend what they're reading. I'm not agreeing with how they're interpreting what Williams is saying. That's not being rude, that's being honest and you have a problem with that. I fully agree with what Shadesbreath is saying. That you choose to misinterpret Williams shows a lack of comprehension.
"Of course I can tell someone they can't comprehend what they're reading. I'm not agreeing with how they're interpreting what Williams is saying."
"That you choose to misinterpret Williams shows a lack of comprehension."
Heh, there it is. You disagree with me, you obviously don't fully understand. If you understood the situation correctly, clearly, you would agree with me.
Look, people of goodwill can, and often do, arrive at different conclusions about the same facts. Good discussion can happen when the people assume the best of each other and examine the thought processes behind each other's (and their own) reasoning, and try to decide if they reached their positions for good, sound reasons. If not, then perhaps their positions ought to change.
Funny, it would appear that your description is the goal of parents in America. somehow, people get older and you come to find out, they STILL have not grown up yet.
Juan Williams was a suck-up, a junior grade Tim Russert. The most that can be said for Juan is that he's not as obnoxious as Don Imus.
If he get's nervous when a muslim gets on a plane with him, that's his right. After the events that unfolded, maybe it is even a justified fear. He didn't promote intolerance, he merely said that's how he felt.
I'm not defending the man, or his point of view, I am defending the right os someone to talk freely. Plus I reallly hate teh amount fo propaganda that comes from stations like fox.
He can talk freely. He can even talk about his irrational fear of other people, and even try to justify it. He will not be thrown in jail for it. His First Amendment rights are still intact.
But when you're a news analyst and when your capacity to report on and analyze news depends on a certain objectivity, then you shouldn't cry about losing your job when you undermine your own credibility with an obvious display of bias. The First Amendment doesn't prevent you from losing your job for saying certain things.
Of course, I'm not suggesting Williams is crying; he just got a $2 million deal with Fox News, where anti-Muslim bias is not a problem, and, in fact, is celebrated.
"He can talk freely. He can even talk about his irrational fear of other people, and even try to justify it. He will not be thrown in jail for it. His First Amendment rights are still intact."
I don't think you are following this.
His freedom of speech IS NOT intact.
He was fired for speaking freely.
His opinion no matter how irrational or justified is protected speech.
Its protected everywhere but NPR.
Because liberals want to shut down any dissent because they are about having power and exercising it as a blunt object.
Liberal ideas are getting rejected and instead of arguing the merits they have started to resort to personal attacks.
Excellent! I couldn't have said it better myself! The true colors of liberalism and it's oppressive philosophy are coming to the fore, because they are being rejected..... and just when they thought they were so close with the election of Obama and a progressive congress! Go riddance libs! Remember you can still move to Cuba!
"His freedom of speech IS NOT intact."
Yes it is.
"He was fired for speaking freely."
True, but he doesn't have the Constitutionally guaranteed freedom from the consequences of his speech.
Imagine you work at McDonald's, and you get an obnoxious customer in your line, who whines about the price of a big mac and tries to get a discount, and then when you give him one, complains that it's not big enough, and so on and on. You get fed up, and tell that customer that he's being obnoxious, creating a back-up in the line, and you want him to go away. (All of which is true!) He tells your manager. Boom, you're fired for being rude to a customer. This happens every now and then.
Is McDonald's (or wherever) infringing on those burger-slingers' free-speech rights? Nope.
And come to think of it, aren't conservatives meant to be big on the freedom to hire and fire whoever you want for whatever reason you want?
The Constitution guarantees us the freedom of speech. It doesn't guarantee us freedom from the consequences of our speech.
I think NPR has pretty strict guidelines regarding politics. They don't want to risk unbalanced reporting etc. As a regular listener, I appreciate that. So, if it's in an effort to have what is probably the most unbiased political reporting out there, then ok.
Wayne, if you listened to the rest of Juan's part in that O'Reilly segment, there would have been nothing that the liberal would have objected to.
He got fired for being honest. All this proves is that it doesn't matter who you are, you must always keep what you really feel inside.
Political correctness is thin veneer covering honesty. The correct thing for Williams to do was think his thoughts quietly, like everyone else does.
There was a Muslim comedian who came to the local college here who joked about how HE gets nervous when he sees Muslims get on planes. Humor does not come from nothingness. Humor is truth made palatable.
Frankly, Williams getting fired is NPR drying to dodge the PC bullet rather than standing up for the fact their proven, dedicated, intelligent and highly qualified (and yes, liberal) journalist was honest on TV.
Am I the only one who sees the irony of FIRING A JOURNALIST FOR BEING HONEST?
NPR apparently has a policy that does not allow people to share their personal bigotries on air and then expect to be respected as a news analyst. I don't know who else has been let go due to this policy, but it seems reasonable to me and I have a hard time imagining it being restricted to conservative (which apparently means bigoted towards minorities these days) bigotries.
There is a difference between honesty in reporting and analyzing the news, and mistaking the microphone for your psychologist's couch and emptying your brain of all its irrational thoughts on air.
Your continuous attempts to keep calling Williams a bigot for expressing a fear doesn't amaze me.
People, please recognize true intolerance in political correctness and fight against it as much as you can.
No, Juan Williams isn't a bigot. Or maybe he is. But it doesn't matter whether or not he is a bigot. The important thing is what he said, not how he feels deep in his heart. We don't know what's deep in his heart, and we don't need to. We do know what he said. There's a difference, and it's made pretty clear here.
I still don't think Juan should have gotten fired.
So what is it that he said that prompted you to say "one of their own expresses bigotry"?
"...when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."
He said when he sees people wearing traditional Muslim gear it triggers a fear reaction in him. Identifiable Muslims are scary, basically.
Do I think that comment warrants his firing? Nope.
But at the same time, I'm not going to let someone say something like that to me without calling them on it.
Yeah, and what are you going to call them?
I'm gonna say something like, "Dude, what exactly do you mean by that? Do you assume that because they're open about being Muslim that they're somehow a threat to your safety? 'Cos it sounded like you were saying that you think Muslim equals threat."
No need to call someone a bigot. I don't even care if they are a bigot. What they are can't be proven, and doesn't matter. It's what they said that was rude and/or prejudiced, and it's what they said that needs to be addressed.
Oh, that's so nice of you not to call him a bigot. But why do you think he should not be allowed to express a fear?
I'm afraid of snakes, fine. I'm afraid of heights, fine. I'm afraid of my home being burgled when I'm on vacation, fine. I'm afraid of being eaten by lions, well, that's strange in suburban USA, but still, who wants to be eaten by lions?
I'm afraid of Muslims? You're going to have to explain that one to me, 'cos it sounds like you think Muslims are something to be scared of.
Is someone who expresses a fear of (someone different) a bad person? No, they're just a scared person. But people sometimes do bad things when they're scared. It's that bad action that I hope to prevent by pointing out when someone says something that sounds prejudiced, to make it clear that there's nothing to be afraid of, and I'm not going to let prejudiced (that is, rude) remarks slide by.
Reading comprehension really means nothing to you does it?
Does it make you feel better to think that someone who disagrees with you is not very smart? 'Cos it's starting to look that way.
By the way, that's a great psychological defense mechanism. You can assume that you're right, and that your ideas are great, because only stupid people disagree with them, and at the same time you absolve yourself of any need to clarify your statements or to re-examine your ideas.
Must be nice.
Well since you have a reading comprehension problem, it's about actually understanding what you are reading and not about who agrees or disagrees.
"it's about actually understanding what you are reading"
That's funny, because you've been either genuinely or deliberately misunderstanding most of what I've posted on here today.
I've been assuming that the misinterpretations were deliberate, that you're pushing an ideology, and that you're trying to score debate points rather than have an honest conversation.
Could it be that you don't understand not only what you're reading on this forum, but also what you're writing here?
Okay so on top of giving out psychological assessments , all along you've been misinterpreted. You didn't say that Williams thinks that Muslims are scary. You didn't say that Williams is prejudiced. You didn't say that Jim Hunter equates Muslims with animals. Etc.
Not all Muslims have killed someone.
Not all bears have killed someone.
Would you get nervous if a grizzly showed up at your picnic?
Now be politically correct in your answer.
Bears have feelings too.
So a Muslim is analogous a grizzly bear? Dude, that was pretty rude.
No, what you said was pretty insulting.
On one level your analogy implies that it makes sense to fear Muslims the same way it makes sense to fear grizzly bears.
On another, it equates Muslims with animals.
Do you see how that was an insulting thing to say? Or not?
Uh oh Jim, you're attempts at logic misfired and it was too much to expect that they'd follow it. Pretty soon they'll hurl out their favorite B word.
"Jim, you're attempts at logic misfired"
It sure did, because it was a crappy analogy: it wasn't a logical one.
A better one might have been something like,
Not all Muslims have killed someone.
Not all soldiers have killed someone.
Would you get nervous if a soldier showed up at your picnic?
See, 'cos Muslims and soldiers are both people. Whereas grizzly bears aren't people at all; they're predatory animals, and not analogous to Muslims, soldiers, accountants, or even conservative Hubbers.
Bad logic, and insulting to boot.
Jim, he doesn't like your choice of analogy either. I think you'll have to consult with him in the future That way it's politically correct thru and thru.
So in other words...if you express what you're thinking it's bigotry. However why wasn't the rest of what Juan said considered, before NPR gave me the boot? I've always felt Juan's views to be more liberal. All it teaches our children is don't have an opinion of your own. We as a country have become so CRAZY!
Thanks Flightkeeper....that's a show I missed. I may not agree with Juan Williams view...But he certainly has the right to be honest with his thoughts and fears. It just makes the next person afraid to speak out.
So true. And Williams is one of the more open-minded liberals and willing to work for Fox to express the liberal point of view!!!
I feel the pain of all the liberals out there...NOT!
As is already the case if you speak out about Israel, and has been for a long time.
Oh I do get it...you play the martyr for your side because Williams got fired for speaking against muslims....yet, when someon gets fired for speaking against Israel.....you say what?
No you don't get it. You think what Williams said was bigotry.
When did I say that? He spoke out against muslims.
Flightkeeper, he would have taken issue to anyone saying they were uncomfortable being around blacks. Think about it. He can't be saying stuff like this. He is essentially denying Muslims rights that he demands for himself.
How is he denying Muslims their rights? And no the total irony of Williams and NPR doesn't escape me. In fact there's a part of me that thinks this is a hilarious illustration of liberal hypocrisy.
Flightkeeper, you're trying to use logic with this bunch.
Its not gonna work.
Are you and Flightkeeper dense? People used to say they were uncomfortable being around blacks. He would never tolerate that. Yet he can do the same thing to other?
You guys had your coffee this morning?
"How is he denying Muslims their rights?"
He isn't. He only said that he's prejudiced. It's not as if he was trying to get Muslims banned from flying or something.
Owning up to that prejudice doesn't warrant dismissal from his job, though.
Well you can correct bgamall, hopefully you can help him sort it out.
You might want to consider the meanings of "bigotry" and "prejudice". They mean an unreasonable and unwarranted fear of someone or something without knowing the facts.
Juan, like you and everyone else, knows the facts.
It does surprise me, though, that liberal NPR would eject one of their own liberals. Makes no sense, unless they're just trying to deflect again, to make some sort of controversy or statement that will overpower the subject of the upcoming mid-term Elections.
"They mean an unreasonable and unwarranted fear of someone or something without knowing the facts."
And Juan's fear of Muslims in traditional garb on planes is both unreasonable and unwarranted. Neither he nor I nor "everyone else" knows all the facts about those Muslims sharing an airplane with Juan. (Other than he must have been scared for no good reason, since exactly none of those Muslims blew him up.)
That's the essence of prejudice.
He still shouldn't have been fired.
Juan was sucking up to O'Reilly and the knuckle-dragging cretins who watch Fox.
But it's ok for Obama to call his grandmother a typical white person, and the police of course acted stupidly?
Grandmothers are in play.
At least his was.
Too bad it was the grandson who turned on her.
But we expect him to be on our side.
How silly some people are.
Which side are you on?
You can't slam Obama for saying typical white person, and then let Williams slide when he says muslims in garb make him nervous.
Why accept one stereotype, but not another?
One is bigotry and one is not.
I'm sure you will figure which is which.
Banned for what?
Are you afraid of conservative moderators?
There aren't any here.
There are only liberal moderators here so take care.
Thats not true.
They are middle of the road moderators.
The road just happens to be on the extreme left of the world.
Okay, I'm going to stop before I'm banned. I think even starting this thread would get me banned.
How many times you been banned?
Any?....cause you have said some very personally insulting things.
Just because you take it personal doesn't mean it was meant that way.
When I say what is the point in having a conversation with you I mean you are totally in the tank for any socialist agenda.
You have nothing but disdain for conservative ideas.
So, whats the point?
How many times have you been banned? I have seen many examples where you should have, and were not.
No, afraid of really speaking my mind....that's the way it goes. Hubpages owns it, I just rent space.
It’s too easy to say “bigot.” Calling someone a bigot is just as easy as calling that person some other racial epithet. By dumping everything that person is and stands for into one label and dismissing anything like nuance and the reality that personal truth and personal identity are far more complex than that, you are doing exactly what you think you are defending against. You are over-simplifying people.
An Internet forum is probably not the place to bring this up. But, whatever.
Pretending that nobody but Juan Williams (and other “bigots”) have, even for the tiniest moment, spotted someone in Islamic dress on a plane and made a note of it is ridiculous and, I would say for many, saying so is an outright lie, whether they will admit it to themselves, much less out loud, or not. Saying so would get you tossed out of the PC club.
The problem is one of idealistic truth and realistic truth not being put together properly. Good people tend to be good because they LOOK for and SEEK TO CORRECT the things in themselves that are less than noble (the premise for most religions). They acknowledge that, as humans, we are fearful, aggressive and flawed. We do judge, not even on purpose, it just happens. But, if we are idealistic AND honest, we know what it is that we humans do because we read history, and so we don’t pretend everyone is egalitarian, we don’t pretend WE are egalitarian. Egalitarian is the ideal. We strive for it, which means being vigilant for those moments when we are not acting or thinking according to our ideals. Being a good human starts with not pretending we are always good.
Calling people “bigots” is an oversimplification that will only serve to polarize, driving candor underground.
We should recognize the situation, and if we have fear, accept it as a human reality and say, as reasonable people who learned from the experience of the Japanese internment camps, “Hey, we are aware that there are tensions between two cultures. We are currently in two wars attesting to and exacerbating that fact, and we are also aware that one of the favorite weapons of extreme Islam over the last 50 years is blowing up planes. Those realities create the basis of a plausible logic that can set off survival instincts in our human neural wiring that our intelligence and reason must over-ride because we realize that we are lumping all Muslims in with the extremists, which goes against our ideals.”
Pretending the second part comes without the first part is Utopian. Good humans are flawed humans who face their flaws straight on, take ownership of them and try to fix them. This includes facing them out loud so that others can have the courage to face theirs too, even if they don’t know that’s what they are doing when they say something “bigoted.”
Williams seems quite paranoid, nevertheless he just reiterated what many people already feel and know, dis-respective of their political affiliation. It was chiefly a personal fear, and he should have learned how to keep it out of a political discussion. Despite that, firing him for expressing such a commonly view is absurd. It probably goes a lot deeper than the two remarks that are listed here.
You cannot promote cultural tolerance with ideological intolerance.
"Very powerless people," he laughed. "He's such a minority, I mean, you know… Please, what are you kidding?…I'm telling you that everybody who runs CNN is a lot like Stewart...the people in this country who are Jewish -- are an oppressed minority? Yeah," he said.
If he hadn't added Jewish people I would have thought he was talking about assholes.
John Stewart certainly fits that category.
Wasn't it Obama who said his grandmother was a typical "white person"....guess it's ok for the Libs to call the kettle black!
Based on this definition, I don't see that Juan Williams exhibited bigotry. He did not express "stubborn and complete intolerance" for the Muslim creed.
What he did was be honest about his own fears. Fears based on real events that really happened -- and threats that continue and will continue. These events and threats happen to be perpetrated by extremists who happen to be Muslims.
Would it be any better/word or different if the extremists were little blonde girls? Thus Mr. Williams' comment would change to "When I see a little blonde girl on a plane I get nervous?"
Did anyone ever think that keeping us locked in silent fear is a big part of their strategy? What glee those who seek to destroy us must feel when they observe us infighting amongst ourselves about being bigoted or racist if we speak out, or PC if we shush others.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you! (not sure whose quote this is or would attribute it).
BTW, meant to compliment you on your Halloween avatar, FK.
Thank you! I thought I might have overdone it with the hair dye but it came out OK.
It turns out that Mr. Williams wasn't fired for just a one time lapse in judgment. This is from NPR's website:
"Williams' presence on the largely conservative and often contentious prime-time talk shows of Fox News has long been a sore point with NPR News executives.
His status was earlier shifted from staff correspondent to analyst after he took clear-cut positions about public policy on television and in newspaper opinion pieces."
Personalities in the media work under contract, so they have less protection from state labor laws. This sounds like less a question of bigotry and more an issue an employer having the right to terminate someone who is causing them damage by his/her actions.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor … mp;ps=cprs
I always thought that was weird. Williams was on the show to express usually the liberal side and yet, NPR is upset with him just for being on a conservative show. It just proves the intolerance of the liberal media.
He wasn't liberal. Liberals think that Obama is a bankster. So do the libertarians. And so do I.
But "conservatives" don't think he kisses the banksters asses enough.
And again, he would not tolerate people saying they were uncomfortable around blacks, and I am sure there are closet people who think that way.
Yet he turns around and does the same thing to muslims.
Americans have become so sleepy in their thinking.
You also have a problem with reading comprehension, but if English is not your first language it's understandable.
"he would not tolerate people saying they were uncomfortable around blacks"
You don't know what he would tolerate.
It might be he is uncomfortable around black people.
Or blond girls.
Thank you! You would be hard pressed to find a real liberal anywere in the media....just read an article that stated even "liberal" media such as Mother Jones and Democracy Now, are Ford Foundation stuff--same place Obama's mom worked...and Geithners dad was her boss. Controlled opposition they call it. Who Knows?
All I know is you are right...where are the true liberals? Name me one I can watch or listen to!!!
Wheras, we are bombarded with loonatic right and wimpy left.
And sell-out Americans.
I think NPR now stands for Nutty and Politically-correct Radio. Frankly it's NPR's loss and Williams doesn't have to worry about a media channel that nobody really pays attention to.
So the man is honestly bigoted. He got in trouble for the bigoted part, not the honesty part. He is saying tha he thinks anyone who presents themselves in a clearly Muslim way is dangerous. That's not okay no matter how 'honestly' he feels it.
That's not what Juan said at all.
What he said was that it made him "worried" and "nervous".
Considering the fact that male Islamic extremists have been known to have disguised themselves by wearing Muslim women's clothing, and considering the "underwear bomber", and considering the Fort Hood terrorist/shooter who stated his conflict of loyalties but was never evaluated and then wound up killing soldiers, and considering SEVERAL other incidences, both off and on America's airlines, it's obvious that Juan was simply echoing the fact-based fears of many Americans. Americans SHOULD be afraid when the way is so easily paved by the liberal agenda for extremists to hide under the umbrella of civil rights.
Right on Brenda, but liberals will not listen or look at that and consider that hate speech so we conservatives have to be careful about what we post, even if it's true because that's not really the point.
Well, by your own logic, given that Israel is giving Palestinian land away to Europeans, Helen Thomas was right to tell them to get the hell out of Palestine and go back to Germany and France.
This is truth.
This she hads to leave for. Political correctness.
Sanchez states that to say Jews are an oppressed minority in America is ridiculous---
This is alsoTrue.
He is fired. Political correctness.
No difference. Only it happens much more on this side of the aisle.
Many people differ with your view Brenda...don't think because you believe it, that makes it true. It doesn't.
And if he had said, I get nervous when I see a bunch of priests, and my kid is there...
or, I worry when I see a bunch of Rabbi's walking towards me....
Would he THEN be a bigot?
just as an aside...I got banned for calling you all bigots! Funny huh? You can throw it around willy-nilly....as long as it isn't "personal" wink wink
Considering the fact that Christians have been known to lynch people, and considering that Christians have been known to bomb abortion clinics and the churches of other Christians, and considering that Tim McVey was a Christian, and considering that Catholic (that is, Christian) Priests have molested many children while their church covered for them, and considering SEVERAL other incidences, Americans SHOULD be afraid of Christians.
Given all of the above, that's the conclusion you'd arrive at, right? Or would it be prejudiced of me to fear you, Brenda, simply because you happen to be a Christian?
Yes! I knew someone here would bring Christianity into it! Darn it I should have made a bet with Jim Hunter.
Yes, Yes, Yes! You should fear Christians so much that for your own safety, you should actually pack up and leave the country immediately, because Christians are that dangerous.
So the fact that some Christians have killed people doesn't mean that people should get nervous around Christians, but the fact that some Muslims have killed people means it's perfectly okay to get nervous around Muslims?
That's pretty inconsistent.
But I suppose people generally don't fear people who are like them. People generally bend over backwards to make excuses for people who are like them, or go out of their way to point out that not all (pick a group) are like the tiny minority who have killed someone.
What are you talking about, can't you read? I said people should not only get nervous but pack their bags and get out of the country because the Christians are dangerous.
You were serious!?
And here was me thinking you were being sarcastic. Huh.
Well they must be dangerous, you gave all those examples of all those lynching Christians doing terrible things. You never know when they'll attack. Aren't you nervous? You should be.
Oddly enough, nope. I'm not even a little bit nervous about all those Christians in our midst. Nor do the Muslims frighten me, not even a little bit.
Maybe you should try not being scared of people who are different.
I honestly can't tell anymore if you're being sarcastic or if you're being sincere. But if you're being sincere, I can honestly say that I hope you take your own advice.
Well good for you that you're not frightened by Christians or Muslims, given what you know of Christians. But again it's a lack of comprehension on your part which I'm surprised about since you gave Shadesbreath a standing ovation. Please read Shades' posts again. Maybe then it'll sink in.
I can only hope.
That's not what he said, and frankly, it is deceitful to say that it is. If you choose to twist his words into meaning that because you like thinking of people that way, it's fine for you, I guess. But that is NOT what he said. There is a big difference between being "made nervous" by a person wearing clothing that is suggestive of other people with whom your country is at war with and who have on many occasions blown up airplanes than there is saying, "Anyone who presents themselves in a clearly Muslim way IS dangerous." He didn't say he thinks everyone dressed like that IS dangerous.
He said it makes him nervous, and then the host of the show cut him off and didn't let him finish the point he was trying to make, which was obviously exactly the opposite of what he is being accused of. Then the media pounced on him, as you are, as NPR did, and the pack of you are ravaging him in a frenzy PC righteousness.
Not one ounce of concern for truth or what is right.
Fortunately, I believe calm and reason will prevail. The thousands of comments NPR is getting on the article are heartening. Everyone is sickened by this perversion of truth and reason.
Todd and Tom?
These are the right-wingers that are on 20 hrs a day.....at least here in the Boston area.
What would you call them? A poor unheard minority?
HA! Like a bullhorn that never shuts up. No freedom of choice. No free speech. You righty's FAIL at being American.
I am not sure how who a private network chooses to employ is about freedom of speech. That relates to being able to say what you want without government suppression, and not a statement that anyone is obliged to broadcast or indeed listen to everyine some person might want to spout off about.
No not really.
FOX,CNN,MSNBC,ABC,NBC and CBS are private companies who can silence whomever they choose.
NPR, National Public Radio accepts federal funding and what they have done is a violation of Williams first amendment right.
Hi Jim, you missed it. They dragged in all the horrible killings by Christians to show some moral equivalency.
Somebody has to work.
The libs arguments always revert back to Christianity or greedy republicans.
The greedy one always gets me.
I think its greedy that they want more of my money, ITS MY FRICKING MONEY NOT YOURS.
"They dragged in all the horrible killings by Christians to show some moral equivalency."
Okay, I don't want to make any assumptions, so I'll ask: between what things was the moral equivalency meant to be shown, do you think?
Well, guess what? The airwaves are PUBLIC too. PUBLIC airwaves, and as I wrote earlier,
Todd and Tom?
.....This is all I have to listen to. This does no represent my point of view. This is a totally one-sided expression of the truth. WHERE ARE MY FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS HERE? These are Public airwaves....they are violating MY rights!
I see the teabgger "brain trust" has another day off from work.
actually NPR has a large listening audience of well informed professional, politically active, socially aware people. 70% vote in federal and local elections. 69% have a Bachelor's degree.
27.2 million strong are listening.
"12 million strong are listening."
Yeah, but they aren't the real America.
That's actually small if you combine all the channels.
We are missing a very specific context here. He said he gets nervous when he sees people in Muslim garb on the same PLANE as he. He also referenced the comment in court by the Times Square bomber that this is "just the beginning..."
Anyway, this is being discussed right this minute on CNN and I am going to listen.
"Tim McVey was a Christian,"
Jeff, did you know that Joe Miller's security service, Drop Zone Security is headed by a guy who was in the Michigan Malitia that McVeigh belonged to?
These are the guys (on-duty military!!) who cuffed and detained a reporter for asking Miller questions he didn't want to answer.
THIS is what we should be worried about!
20 OCTOBER 2010
"Revealed: Joe Miller hired security company whose owner is local commander and supplier of extreme Alaska militia, led by AIP-member Norm Olson"
Right on, Chris! I think Tim McVey was Catholic. Of course that must mean that Catholics bombed us that day in April!
Joe Miller is the spawn of Palin! He's an extremist nut! If his people took my liberty by handcuffing me, I'd be seeing them and him in court!
I have mixed feelings about this. It was an honest expression of feeling, which in most situations should be condoned. However, one thing that is sorely missing in current news reporting is objectivity, and Juan Williams just exposed his inability to be objective. If he is fearful of someone just because of the way they look, then he has a deep-seated bias that will inevitably affect his reporting when Muslims are involved. This is a serious problem for a reporter working for a news organization whose primary mission is accurate and objective reporting.
Well, there's more work tomorrow. Have a good night, it's been fun.
Hi Jim Hunter.
I can't stay and I fear you will be all by yourself with no one to argue with!
Just wanted to say hi/bye.
hmmmm-just saw a clip of Williams on O'Reilly. They are quite outraged that he got fired....wonder if they were outraged about Sanchez or Thomas?
Somehow I doubt it....somehow I'll BET they thought THAT was justified. Hyopocrits. No standards...just politics.
And btw...I though they were pro-business?? Doesn't NPR have the right to run it as they see fit?
This is no different that Stern, Sanchez, Thomas or anyone else. They just have their pants knotted because it happened to one of theirs. Too bad, This is the wold they created.
Boy, just imagine if libs owned talk-radio like they do...you'd never hear the end of their crying.
When you get Government funding even though it is a very small portion you are obligated to allow free speech. If they were a private corporation then it would be different.
Yes, free speech is allowed, but agencies who receive government funding also are required to hold their employees to the standards specified in their job description. I'm guessing objectivity is considered to be a requirement for reporting and analyzing news.
NPR has taken a hard left turn. They are no longer a public service media company, they are a liberal propaganda machine funded by George Soros and his foundations and as such they should no longer be eligible for public funding.
So, are you calling for no government funding for any program that is partially funded by grants from any foundation that is founded by either conservatives or liberals?
I hope so, otherwise your position would be nonsensical.
Government money, excuse me, TAXPAYER'S money, should not support any political view, right or left, nor any "foundation" whose purpose is political.
Your response makes no sense. NPR is supported by both public and private money. It is not a political foundation just because you say it is.
When it stifles free speech and portrays a one sided political dialogue it renders itself in-eligible for public funds.
You and Jim seem to be confused about free speech. Juan Williams is entitled to say whatever he wants. That doesn't mean that his words cannot be used to disqualify him from a position that requires objectivity and accuracy in reporting.
Ft. Hood, the panty bomber , the failed Times Square bomber who proclaimed at his sentencing that " This is only the beginning" Yes I guess Juans misgivings were irrational. And what about Nina Totenberg in 95 wanting Jessie Helms to get AIDS and his grandchildren too. And surprise ! Nothing happened to her.
Again he reported a fact about his feeling, he certainly didn't compromise his objectivity.
I find it really odd that liberals will not defend one of their own!
Are you saying that Juan was inaccurate when stating his feelings?
I assume he accurately stated his feelings. I'm saying that his statements reveal a bias that would be difficult to overcome in a position that requires objectivity.
And Nina Totenberg wishing Helms or his grandchildren would get aids, is okay, or Terry Gross' interview of Franken and O'reilly not revealing of a bias? Can you name any conservative voices on NPR? NPR clearly leans left and Williams just wasn't left enough for them. Soros who is unmistakeably a leftist has poured millions into NPR buying 100 reporters.
Once again, it's pretty hard to justify support of NPR with public funds, at this point I'd say it borders on criminal!
But what else is new with this administration whose Justice Department refuses to prosecute blacks that violate voting rights laws, and enforce that as public policy!
It's clear from your rantings that your issue is with NPR. I'm pretty sure you had those issues before the Juan Williams incident. You can correct me if I've made an erroneous assumption.
Anyway, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
"And Nina Totenberg wishing Helms or his grandchildren would get aids...."
LOL! I was waiting for that one! Parroting talking points already. Those comments were 15 years ago, which is apparently how long the right-wing blowhards had to go back to find something on NPR.
NPR CEO Vivian Schiller just released this statement:
"I spoke hastily and I apologize to Juan and others for my thoughtless remark."
That follows, as you'll see below, her comment earlier today that now-former NPR news analyst Juan Williams should have kept his feelings about Muslims between himself and "his psychiatrist or his publicist."
Maybe the CEO of NPR should resign for speaking her opinion of Mr. Williams.
Does it matter?
I could care less if NPR ceases to exist at all. I am not a Juan Williams fan. Is it appropriate for a CEO to personnally attack a former employee?
This will not play out well for ms Schiller IMO. The only people I see defending NPR is on these forums. Everyone else seems to disagree with the decision.
Oh, except George Soros!
Of course it matters. The whole point is not that Juan Williams was expressing his private thoughtless and bigoted opinion, but that he was doing so, justifying it, and then expected to be considered an objective news analyst for NPR.
As for a company to bash its former employees? Happens all the time.
When Sarah Silverman called Fox News a 24-hour-a-day racism engine, Fox responded with, "Sarah's anger is understandable having recently lost her television show. We sympathize with her need for attention considering her book is languishing near 300 on Amazon.com."
Pretty snarky, but no one, least of all you who are hyperventilating about Schiller's comment, berated Fox then.
Exactly my complaint about right wing talk radio....it's all you hear around here. There is NO other point of view. They are violating MY rights to be heard.
The air waves are PUBLIC, and belong to us all. The right has a monopoly on them.
Juan Williams is just another Lib thrown under the Obama Bus!...and when we call for defunding NPR...we hate the children...after all What will happen to Sesame Street?....
if Juan had said that some people are afraid instead of stating that he was afraid of Muslims then there may not have been an issue.
A reporter mustn't give their personal opinions and bias.Yes, I think he was wrong to do that,especially on the air.
I just read this headline:
"Fox News has given Juan Williams a $2 million contract after he was fired from the National Public Radio..."
I'll be this goes away rather quickly now.
Are you kidding? Fox will want to get its money's worth and will milk this thing as much as possible. Cue Juan Williams whining about mistreatment by those wicked liberals every 10 minutes for the next few months...
I think if you say you hate liberals it may PAY more!
BTW- Using labels like libeal and conservative to categorize certain organizations is very silly. Either what they do is wrong based on the merits of the act of there is no merit without the label.
IF NPR been considered "conservative" then what!?
Are you kidding? Conservatives will milk it for ever last drop of partisan rhetoric they can squeeze from their angry, red lips.
LOL, that was fun to type.
Its hard for you libs to actually discuss issues.
It has to be "conservatives are so angry".
The entire time you espouse it through clenched teeth.
Anger is not good for the heart so be careful.
Pick one of those democrat induced laws that you find so wonderful and urge your democrat congressman/senator to campaign on its merits.
Bet they won't.
That was fun to type.
Aw, Jim, if you'll notice, that post was addressed to someone who I wasn't actually debating in this thread. The remainder of my posts in this thread were responses to the subject at hand. Yet, you chose that particular one to respond to.
You're a funny guy, Jim!
In the court of public opinion NPR has already slit their own throat. Even Whoopi Goldberg hardly a conservative called them out. Juan won the battle. And now Vivian Schiller and Ellen Wiess will probably be looking for jobs. They did this during pledge week. Just dumb !
Williams is not a liberal. He works for Fox. Tha makes him a kook. A neo-kook with no objectivity and no way to see the world other than with a right-wing lense. In other words...more of the same!
Righty's Righty's all day long
Makes you think there's only one song
America's gone, least the one I used to know
Now it's all business, hatred and dough
You mean he isn't liberal enough and didn't walk lock step with the liberal Soros agenda for the destruction of America.
Williams is by no means a conservative and neither is Mara Liason who is next in line of the liberal oppression of free speech!
Let me start by saying I disagree with this firing and the way it was done (over the phone). The man expressed his opinion, and I think it should have been put up for discussion. Shutting him out of the debate and eliminating an opposing voice is bad for NPR.
I was also surprised today to learn that only a very small fraction of NPR's funding comes from the government. If the GOP takes over Congress this fall, they might eliminate funding to NPR, but that will hardly eliminate the radio station. If anything, they'll have to throw in a few more advertisements.
There is a difference between free speech as exercised by a citizen of the United States and a paid news analyst stating his personal opinions. Yes, as a private citizen Mr. Wiliams has every right to express pretty much any thought or feeling he has.
However, he was on the O'Reilly show in the capacity of his job.
His job requires impartiality and objectivity.
Fox may allow or encourage "opinions as news" but NPR does not.
Its reporters are expected to GIVE THE APPEARANCE OF impartiality.
Perhaps, being in the company of Bill O'Reilly, Mr. Williams momentarily forgot the rules of NPR and was acting on that old axiom "When at Fox, do as the Faux Newspeople do...."
So maybe it's a good thing that he's moving over to Fox?
Maybe, just maybe, this was all a calculated move to GET himself fired from NPR so he could take the lucrative offer from Fox. Hmm.
As to NPR's right to fire him. They had every right to do so.
The manner in which they did it was ham-handed and gauche. Reminds me a lot of the Shirley Sherrod fiasco earlier this year.
I heard Ms. Schiller's comment on CNN. It was shockingly unprofessional.
NPR gave itself a huge black eye on this one for the way they handled it. Not good.
The right-wingers complaining about Williams's firing are just a bunch of socialists who think everyone deserves lifetime employment.
"Perhaps, being in the company of Bill O'Reilly, Mr. Williams momentarily forgot the rules of NPR"
Hell, he actually had an audience listening for once.
what juan williams said quite possibly anyone of us could have said. i'm not a bigot nor rascist but, when you get up in the air or are going up in the air you consider anything that could go wrong or safeguards that may or may not have been met.
anything that we know about the terrorists , we have learned from the "media"! the MEDIA spread mass hysteria and fear of muslims and arab looking people. because i had no idea as to what to look for except from the information i received from the "MEDIA". now we have been taught 2 plus 2 equals 4. and the first time juan williams says it, he gets fired. i think, if there's a culprit it's the media
by qwark 9 years ago
Why are we "Americans" so damned sensitive about the way something is verbally expressed?Why not tell it like it is!?
by Nick Lucas 7 years ago
Do you think political correctness has gone to far and caused many problems?
by ga anderson 4 years ago
We are not equal, life is not fair, there are winners and losers - Deal with it.Forums of polite discussions. Threads of polemic rhetoric. Well, we can still be polite, but it is time to not be afraid to call a spade a spade. Or would you feel less offended if I did the... "a rose by any other...
by lostgirlscat 9 years ago
If you'd been a prosyletizing Catholic, Mormon, Jew or any other"orthodox" religion, the military would have evicted you from their ranks, but be a radical muslim, such as Major Nidal Malik Hasan and instead of providing therapy to PTSD soldiers, you can spend your time trying to convince...
by cjhunsinger 4 years ago
Recent CNN polls indicate that 70% of Americans believe the country is going in the wrong direction. Is this due to the efforts and promises of Obama to, "--fundamentally change America." and what, precisely does that mean? The foundation of America is the Constitution; is it the ambition...
by ga anderson 4 years ago
Specifically, was the Patent and Trademark Office wrong for rescinding the Washington Redskin's Trademark Rights? Which is a valuable property. Which amounts to taking private property?All by a government bureaucracy exercising censorship powers they do not have?If is said that the Washington Times...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|