NPR Fires Juan Williams

[Night Strike]

I don't believe anyone has said anything near what you're trying to say. I certainly am only saying that his boss absolutely has the right to fire him for those statements. I'm pretty sure that's what thegreekdog is saying, as well. It's not a liberal/conservative issue in the slightest, no matter how hard you try to paint it as such. It's a "don't embarrass the company" issue.

Except that as Juan pointed out in his opinion page, his NPR contract had a specific statement that the views he shares on other programs are not indicative of the positions of NPR. His contract already recognized that he was not acting as an agent of NPR, so he should be protected from recourse for what he says in other roles.

You're missing the point...you guys keep claiming that businesses being able to make their own decisions without government interference is a great thing. But when a business makes a decision that you happen to disagree with, you want the government to get involved. You can't have it both ways, guys.

No, I said the government needs to get out of NPR if it's supposed to be run on free market principles. The government provides NPR, so they have no right to fire someone for sharing a different viewpoint, especially when that person wasn't even acting in his role at NPR. It is a sample of what happens in state-run media: opposing viewpoints are shoved out of the arena.

No. There were no legitimate facts. The majority of Muslims have never attempted to fly a plane into a building. It is an irrational fear, and the fact that he voiced it as a rational fear is why he got fired.

So are we supposed to always go around minding our own business and forget that there are extremists out there who want to kill us? That's what the PC crowd wants us to do, but that's not how reality works. Muslim extremists have spent the last 9 years attacking us, so why should we ignore that they're out there?

[Metsfanmax]

So are we supposed to always go around minding our own business and forget that there are extremists out there who want to kill us? That's what the PC crowd wants us to do, but that's not how reality works. Muslim extremists have spent the last 9 years attacking us, so why should we ignore that they're out there?

I didn't say we should ignore the threat. I just said that most Muslims are not that threat, so it's unfair to say that they are.

[Phatscotty]

I feel nervous when a Crip sits next to me on an airplane. That statement only expanded on GREEKDOGS analogy. However, in both cases, the person (bandana/muslim garb) is making a statement about themselves for all to see. if, through one persons experience, had crip members murder their whole family and stole all the money, might feel differently about the crip, nervous even,as opposed to you who might wonder if the crip is a good crip or a bad crip, simply because you can not judge someone just by them hanging a blue flag out of their pocket....

Likewise, A person whos whole family was murdered by people yelling "allah akbar" on 9-11, might feel a bit different about a person who is dressed in muslim garb as opposed to someone else who may be convinced that 9-11 was Bushes fault. When people begin to couple that with the fact that muslims are the only ones trying to highjack and blow up airplanes right now (in America), alongwith 16,479 other attacks around the world since 9-11 made in the name of Islam, to try to scare someone into not going with their gut or natural instincts is thought policing at it's finest. and completely anti-first amendment.

the conclusion. Juan getting fired, hey, that's within the companies right. That message Juan Williams broadcast may be totally against the companies goals of policing thought. It's their right. WE can speak freely, but that does not mean there are not consequences. The only thing we are free from considering the first amendment is the GOV"T stopping you from speaking freely.

conclusion, soundbyte version: You can not judge a book by it's cover, but you can and should be able to make an educated guess.

[Woodruff]

.....and here I was thinking that people could actually read that I was talking about the public's reaction to NPR

Guess those reading comprehension skills only work selectively

No, I understood that. That is the risk that NPR takes in taking the action to fire him. That is a business decision on their part, as are all "don't embarrass the company" decisions.

[Juan_Bottom]

THIS THREAD IS MAKING ME ANGRY. I AM JUAN.

And in Juan's case it wasn't a derogatory statement about those Muslims, he was merely stating how it made him feel IN LIGHT OF 911!

Jay, I can see your point here. I don't agree with it, but I can respect this enough not to nitpick or argue with it.



Firstly, my GF is Muslim, and I'm an Atheist. Let me tell you, I'm not always comfortable with the way people look at her in public.

Secondly, I'm not afraid in any capacity of "terrorists." They moniker has become America's new 'Communists, Salem Witches, Indian Savages,' or what have you. Politicians maintain that fear you have of terrorists despite the rational that there is actually little to fear. It's all in a successful effort to control you and your money.

Finally, I liked Juan_W. I didn't always agree with the guy, but he was alright in my book. But I suspect that NPR was alluding to the fact that his comments bordered on prejudicial and could later be used by critics against NPR's sterling record of integrity.

That's the difference between conservatives and liberals: conservatives will stand up for the rights of the people they disagree with while liberals want to force everyone to change their beliefs if they are in disagreement.

Seriously? Conservatives are the ones who unite to trample the rights of everyone who doesn't think (or historically - look like) they do. We could make a long list of recent events from gay rights to constantly shoving Christianity in my face.

[Phatscotty]

THIS THREAD IS MAKING ME ANGRY. I AM JUAN.

And in Juan's case it wasn't a derogatory statement about those Muslims, he was merely stating how it made him feel IN LIGHT OF 911!

Jay, I can see your point here. I don't agree with it, but I can respect this enough not to nitpick or argue with it.



Firstly, my GF is Muslim, and I'm an Atheist. Let me tell you, I'm not always comfortable with the way people look at her in public.

Secondly, I'm not afraid in any capacity of "terrorists." They moniker has become America's new 'Communists, Salem Witches, Indian Savages,' or what have you. Politicians maintain that fear you have of terrorists despite the rational that there is actually little to fear. It's all in a successful effort to control you and your money.

Finally, I liked Juan_W. I didn't always agree with the guy, but he was alright in my book. But I suspect that NPR was alluding to the fact that his comments bordered on prejudicial and could later be used by critics against NPR's sterling record of integrity.

That's the difference between conservatives and liberals: conservatives will stand up for the rights of the people they disagree with while liberals want to force everyone to change their beliefs if they are in disagreement.

Seriously? Conservatives are the ones who unite to trample the rights of everyone who doesn't think (or historically - look like) they do. We could make a long list of recent events from gay rights to constantly shoving Christianity in my face.

making fun of them is by no means trampling their rights...

MSNBC and Media Matters trying to interfere with the permit processes for 8-28, most definitely attempting to trample on rights

[Woodruff]

I don't believe anyone has said anything near what you're trying to say. I certainly am only saying that his boss absolutely has the right to fire him for those statements. I'm pretty sure that's what thegreekdog is saying, as well. It's not a liberal/conservative issue in the slightest, no matter how hard you try to paint it as such. It's a "don't embarrass the company" issue.

Except that as Juan pointed out in his opinion page, his NPR contract had a specific statement that the views he shares on other programs are not indicative of the positions of NPR. His contract already recognized that he was not acting as an agent of NPR, so he should be protected from recourse for what he says in other roles.

NPR may recognize that fact, but NPR also recognizes that the PUBLIC won't necessarily recognize it, because humans being humans, they will tend to tie him to NPR. It's wrong that they do so, I will agree, but I don't think anyone's ever gone broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.

You're missing the point...you guys keep claiming that businesses being able to make their own decisions without government interference is a great thing. But when a business makes a decision that you happen to disagree with, you want the government to get involved. You can't have it both ways, guys.

No, I said the government needs to get out of NPR if it's supposed to be run on free market principles. The government provides NPR, so they have no right to fire someone for sharing a different viewpoint, especially when that person wasn't even acting in his role at NPR. It is a sample of what happens in state-run media: opposing viewpoints are shoved out of the arena.

Ok, keep glossing over the point if you'd like to. We'll just suffice to say that you DON'T believe that businesses should be able to make any decision they feel is justified from a business perspective and leave it at that.

No. There were no legitimate facts. The majority of Muslims have never attempted to fly a plane into a building. It is an irrational fear, and the fact that he voiced it as a rational fear is why he got fired.

So are we supposed to always go around minding our own business and forget that there are extremists out there who want to kill us? That's what the PC crowd wants us to do, but that's not how reality works. Muslim extremists have spent the last 9 years attacking us, so why should we ignore that they're out there?

No, that's NOT what the PC crowd wants you to do. I spent several years of my life fighting Muslim extremists, and I fall under that "PC crowd" you're talking about. What the "PC crowd" wants you to do is not lump all Muslims in with the Muslim extremists, because all you're doing is MAKING THEIR JOB EASIER.

[Woodruff]

I feel nervous when a Crip sits next to me on an airplane. That statement only expanded on GREEKDOGS analogy. However, in both cases, the person (bandana/muslim garb) is making a statement about themselves for all to see. if, through one persons experience, had crip members murder their whole family and stole all the money, might feel differently about the crip, nervous even,as opposed to you who might wonder if the crip is a good crip or a bad crip, simply because you can not judge someone just by them hanging a blue flag out of their pocket....

All Crips are criminals. There is no such thing as a "good Crip". That is a fact. All Muslims are not criminals. There absolutely ARE "good Muslims". I cannot believe you are still even trying to hang onto this horridly failed comparison.

conclusion, soundbyte version: You can not judge a book by it's cover, but you can and should be able to make an educated guess.

Absolutely...and an educated individual would not consider all "Muslims in Islamic garb" to be potential terrorists, IF ONLY FOR THE REASON THAT A TERRORIST WOULDN'T ANNOUNCE THEMSELVES LIKE THAT.

[PLAYER57832]

Not a valid comparison jay.

Further, Juan does have a right to his opinion. He does not have the right to a job, however (although, the way things are going that may change someday).

...and NPR does not have a right to be taken seriously by the public as a news outlet that allows diversity of viewpoints

It requires its reporters to be as objective as possible. And, yes, it does present a diversity of opinions. When I compare what is said about conservatives on NPR to what is said by conservatives on conservative stations, they compare well. When I compare what is said about liberals on conservative stations, it does not compare well at all. THAT is what diversity means. It means you actually present varied opinions. NPR does and they maintain that by taking steps like this removal.

[PLAYER57832]

I read this and I agree with the firing. What if he had said, "Honestly Bill, it frightens me when black people sit next to me on the plane." He would be fired. Because it's racist.

If he was basing it on some historical or legitimate personal experience than he would not be racist. He would simply be saying how he felt. JW said his legitimate feelings based on legitimate facts and he got fired for it. This is EXACTLY HOW THE MEDIA HAS BEEN FILTERING OUT CONSERVATIVES FOR YEARS (And in this case Juan is actually a liberal who just did not tow the liberal line to their satisfaction). He needs to sue NPR for unjust termination and we Americans need to stop paying our tax dollars for another liberal indoctrination system.

The media has been filtering out the conservative opinions for years?? Lord help us, if people truly believe this, then we are headed for Nazism, becuase you cannot get much further right without encroaching on that type of extremism.

[Juan_Bottom]

making fun of them is by no means trampling their rights...

MSNBC and Media Matters trying to interfere with the permit processes for 8-28, most definitely attempting to trample on rights

Don't ask Don't tell, Gay Marriage, ect.

[bradleybadly]

.....and here I was thinking that people could actually read that I was talking about the public's reaction to NPR

Guess those reading comprehension skills only work selectively

No, I understood that. That is the risk that NPR takes in taking the action to fire him. That is a business decision on their part, as are all "don't embarrass the company" decisions.

No, I don't believe you did. Would you like to try again?

[Woodruff]

THIS THREAD IS MAKING ME ANGRY. I AM JUAN.

And in Juan's case it wasn't a derogatory statement about those Muslims, he was merely stating how it made him feel IN LIGHT OF 911!

Jay, I can see your point here. I don't agree with it, but I can respect this enough not to nitpick or argue with it.



Firstly, my GF is Muslim, and I'm an Atheist. Let me tell you, I'm not always comfortable with the way people look at her in public.

Secondly, I'm not afraid in any capacity of "terrorists." They moniker has become America's new 'Communists, Salem Witches, Indian Savages,' or what have you. Politicians maintain that fear you have of terrorists despite the rational that there is actually little to fear. It's all in a successful effort to control you and your money.

Finally, I liked Juan_W. I didn't always agree with the guy, but he was alright in my book. But I suspect that NPR was alluding to the fact that his comments bordered on prejudicial and could later be used by critics against NPR's sterling record of integrity.

That's the difference between conservatives and liberals: conservatives will stand up for the rights of the people they disagree with while liberals want to force everyone to change their beliefs if they are in disagreement.

Seriously? Conservatives are the ones who unite to trample the rights of everyone who doesn't think (or historically - look like) they do. We could make a long list of recent events from gay rights to constantly shoving Christianity in my face.

making fun of them is by no means trampling their rights...

I don't think the issue regarding gay marriage really falls under just "making fun of them", Scotty.

[Woodruff]

.....and here I was thinking that people could actually read that I was talking about the public's reaction to NPR

Guess those reading comprehension skills only work selectively

No, I understood that. That is the risk that NPR takes in taking the action to fire him. That is a business decision on their part, as are all "don't embarrass the company" decisions.

No, I don't believe you did. Would you like to try again?

You mean my explicit statement that it was the risk that NPR was taking by firing him? That didn't have anything to do with the public's reaction to the firing? You'll have to explain how it doesn't...

[PLAYER57832]

No. There were no legitimate facts. The majority of Muslims have never attempted to fly a plane into a building. It is an irrational fear, and the fact that he voiced it as a rational fear is why he got fired.

So are we supposed to always go around minding our own business and forget that there are extremists out there who want to kill us? That's what the PC crowd wants us to do, but that's not how reality works. Muslim extremists have spent the last 9 years attacking us, so why should we ignore that they're out there?

No, that's NOT what the PC crowd wants you to do. I spent several years of my life fighting Muslim extremists, and I fall under that "PC crowd" you're talking about. What the "PC crowd" wants you to do is not lump all Muslims in with the Muslim extremists, because all you're doing is MAKING THEIR JOB EASIER.

EXACTLY people who keep insisting we have to see all Muslims as enemy are comfirming what Al Queada and other Muslim extremists.. that the west is out to get every last Muslim and will not settle for peaceful coexistance, which is why they must fight us.

The REAL answer is to show that we can live peacefully together, not bow down to hatred.

[Phatscotty]

making fun of them is by no means trampling their rights...

MSNBC and Media Matters trying to interfere with the permit processes for 8-28, most definitely attempting to trample on rights

Don't ask Don't tell, Gay Marriage, ect.

whoa whoa whoa. to be clear, what about DADT? GM? please rephrase the actual point. rather than me interpret incorrectly. sorry if you already stated earlier, but that was not at me...

[Juan_Bottom]

The media has been filtering out the conservative opinions for years??

I somewhat agree that more conservative opinions get filtered out of legitimate liberal news shows, but that (I believe) is because it's more often biased than the liberal one. That's not meant to be an offensive opinion. The huge portion of Conservative loyalists choose to be that way because of their religious views. I've never met a liberal who wanted to put a copy of the ten commandments up at the local court house.

[Juan_Bottom]

please rephrase the actual point.

The point was that Conservatives, through the Republican party, do more to damage to individual rights than liberals do.
Conservatives target specific groups of people who don't look or think like they do. I'm not arguing with you, or anything, I suspected that you missed my point.

[bradleybadly]

.....and here I was thinking that people could actually read that I was talking about the public's reaction to NPR

Guess those reading comprehension skills only work selectively

No, I understood that. That is the risk that NPR takes in taking the action to fire him. That is a business decision on their part, as are all "don't embarrass the company" decisions.

No, I don't believe you did. Would you like to try again?

You mean my explicit statement that it was the risk that NPR was taking by firing him? That didn't have anything to do with the public's reaction to the firing? You'll have to explain how it doesn't...

I don't believe I have said anything near what you're trying to imply. I haven't said so in a way to be taken as a non-explanation. I certainly am only saying that the statement could be interpreted as explicit if it was explicitly stated as such. Since it wasn't, then you are reading into something and need to show where the explicitness diminished in its original meaning.

[PLAYER57832]

Liberals are the least diverse. I would never attempt to silence a liberal. .

You just label them all "socialists" and refuse to even consider anything they say.

[Phatscotty]

please rephrase the actual point.

The point was that Conservatives, through the Republican party, do more to damage to individual rights than liberals do.
Conservatives target specific groups of people who don't look or think like they do. I'm not arguing with you, or anything, I suspected that you missed my point.

missing and dismissing are 2 different things

I just dont agree, but I would look at your evidence, and if I could not debunk or at least argue with credibility against them, I would re-consider my position.

[tzor]

This past week, the place where I work put a whole bunch of webpages on the "DO NOT VIEW FROM WORK" filter. C*C happens to be one of them. This is why I have not made a comment on this thread or posted in a week. To all of you who try to excuse the bigots of NPR's executive circle on this subject, I have only one thing to say.

f*ck you all.

Thank you and have a nice day.

[Woodruff]

.....and here I was thinking that people could actually read that I was talking about the public's reaction to NPR

Guess those reading comprehension skills only work selectively

No, I understood that. That is the risk that NPR takes in taking the action to fire him. That is a business decision on their part, as are all "don't embarrass the company" decisions.

No, I don't believe you did. Would you like to try again?

You mean my explicit statement that it was the risk that NPR was taking by firing him? That didn't have anything to do with the public's reaction to the firing? You'll have to explain how it doesn't...

I don't believe I have said anything near what you're trying to imply. I haven't said so in a way to be taken as a non-explanation. I certainly am only saying that the statement could be interpreted as explicit if it was explicitly stated as such. Since it wasn't, then you are reading into something and need to show where the explicitness diminished in its original meaning.

Ok, let me say what I THINK you were trying to say, and you can correct me where I'm wrong. You were saying that you were talking about the PUBLIC'S reaction to NPRs decision to fire Juan Williams. Am I wrong here?

[Phatscotty]

Liberals are the least diverse. I would never attempt to silence a liberal. .

You just label them all "socialists" and refuse to even consider anything they say.

thats ridiculous. I have put hours into you. we just think different and are unable to communicate. I think we both have honestly tried, although I do accuse you of making shit up flat out and saying things I do not think you truly believe. I just do not agree with barely a single thing you say. Not so much about right and wrong, just more right or more wrong.

[Woodruff]

This past week, the place where I work put a whole bunch of webpages on the "DO NOT VIEW FROM WORK" filter. C*C happens to be one of them. This is why I have not made a comment on this thread or posted in a week.

That sucks...seriously. But no internet at home?

To all of you who try to excuse the bigots of NPR's executive circle on this subject, I have only one thing to say.
f*ck you all.
Thank you and have a nice day.

So you don't believe that businesses should be allowed to make business decisions either?