It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NPR fires Juan Williams for Muslim remarks on Fox

page: 12
27
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
Your response is about as partisan as a response can be. You know as well as I do, that if Juan Williams had said that, HE still would have been fired.


Partisan? Isn't Juan Williams a liberal? Are you accusing me of being anti-left or something? I'm not sure how my position is partisan. Can you explain? Thanks.

And Totenberg didn't say that someone's grandchildren SHOULD get aids. I'm not defending what she said, I'm saying there's a difference between what she said against one person and what Juan said about an entire religion. And I don't agree or support firing of EITHER of them. Now, tell me how that's partisan again...


Originally posted by pavil
Does it make rational sense, no. Do I still do it? Yes. It's one of those chances that I'm not willing to take being oblivious to where a threat might come from.


But if you were a news analyst, would you reveal this piece of information on national TV? I don't fault Juan for having these feelings. Hell, I am prejudiced against certain segments of our society, too. But as a public figure, I wouldn't announce it on national TV, knowing what a controversial situation might result - KNOWING I might lose my job (he had previous warnings).

After reading all the sources here, I think Williams may have done it on purpose. Maybe HE wanted to get away from NPR and join FOX full time. I don't really care, but I don't feel sorry for him either way. He is a wealthy man for his words.

Remember, NPR gets NO direct federal Funding!
edit on 10/23/2010 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 



I'm saying there's a difference between what she said against one person and what Juan said about an entire religion.


Juan didn't say anything about an entire religion. You are just as guilty of applying your own out of context rationale as his accusers.

Refresher:

"But when I get on a plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they're identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."


He is speaking of of specific instances when traveling by air here. Not all Muslims dress in traditional attire.

Mind numbing!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 10:57 AM
link   
And so goes our freedom of speech. If speaking your mind can get you fired, where are we?



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skid Mark
And so goes our freedom of speech. If speaking your mind can get you fired, where are we?


Getting fired has ALWAYS been a possible consequence of speaking one's mind. You can't just say anything you want without consequences. I don't know where people are coming up with this.


The legal protections of the First Amendment are NOT challenged here. To refresh your memory:



Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Show me that Juan got arrested or placed in jail for expressing his opinion and then I'll agree with you. We are not guaranteed the right of no consequences for speaking our minds.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
But if you were a news analyst, would you reveal this piece of information on national TV? I don't fault Juan for having these feelings. Hell, I am prejudiced against certain segments of our society, too. But as a public figure, I wouldn't announce it on national TV, knowing what a controversial situation might result - KNOWING I might lose my job (he had previous warnings).



He wasn't on Fox as a news analyst, that's NPR's title for him, which BTW they didn't even want him to identify himself as being employed by NPR when he appeared on Fox. I would make the assertion that his "job" on fox was not to be a news analyst but a commentator. As such, shouldn't he speak his mind, not be PC about things? That was part of his whole point, we have become too PC. Are you contending he should have self-censored himself, to please his employer? I give him props from speaking his mind, even though he himself didn't like admitting how he felt. A lot of people feel the same as Juan does.

If he had said those comments on NPR, then they would have had cause/reason to fire him. They are basically firing him for a job he does outside of NPR. Such is the world we live in, I guess. I agree that he is better off being "free" from NPR.

Btw, he subbed for Bill O last night, boy does he sound pissed off at NPR. I am sure this isn't the end of this story.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Well,. it's official. He now appears to be working for FOX.

I wonder if this was all a ruse designed to give him massive press time just before he pulled the switch?

He doesn't appear to have his own show YET (I would imagine coming soon though) but was standing in for Bill O'Reilly's Comedy Hour (my name for 'The Factor') the other night.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 


He has been busted for his comments just as he has busted others for their comments. PC thinking has put the muzzle on everyone.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by inforeal
 


House Negro? Really? wow, that's very...

...(can't use that word...)

...(nor that one...)

...condescending of you, sir. How dare he not parrot the standard PC phraseology. He's not supposed to have a thought of his own?

By all appearances that's exactly what you want him to be, but only on your terms. Y'know? In retrospect, condescending was the correct word...

Now I may not find his words especially helpful in this climate of "blame the Muslim for everything" that seems to permiate throughout American political thought these days. But it does reflect the thinking of many. ...and he has every right to express those thoughts.

House Negro? Truely very sad that political thought hasn't advanced any further than this...

...



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
I would make the assertion that his "job" on fox was not to be a news analyst but a commentator. As such, shouldn't he speak his mind, not be PC about things?


That's really up to NPR. They are the people who employed him and they are the people whose choice it was to continue to employ him. If they want to fire him for an ethics violation, that's their choice.

I SUPPORT him speaking his mind. I also support NPR firing him. Both parties exercised their rights. I'm not saying he was wrong. I am saying that he was stupid. (Sorry, Juan)


Are you contending he should have self-censored himself, to please his employer?


I'm contending that if he didn't want to lose his job, he should behave in a professional manner that they requested of him. When I was working, I censored my speech. I cuss like a sailor, but I sure didn't talk to my boss that way.
I censored myself. I censor myself every day. Because as much as I love my freedom of speech, there are consequences that I'm not willing to face. Then, of course, other times, my unpopular opinions flow like lava and I face the consequences.

I apologize for not taking a side on this issue.




If he had said those comments on NPR, then they would have had cause/reason to fire him. They are basically firing him for a job he does outside of NPR.


Which is also TOTALLY their right.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   
Juan Williams & the Unspoken Issues of the Dominant Forces in Muslim Politics

gulagbound.com...

The man who spoke with Megan Kelly,Ibrahim Hooper, cofounder of CAIR.


“I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future. But I’m not going to do anything violent to promote that. I’m going to do it through education.”
-Ibrahim Hooper, cofounder of CAIR.

“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.”
-CAIR chairman Omar Ahmad



Although much has been made of millions being given by George Soros to Media Matters, Huffington Post, and NPR, there is another side to this, much less reported. Just as if the song, You’re So Vain, were written to them, Glenn Beck and Fox think it is all about them.

In the next few days, Gulag Bound will reveal a very evil plot to dominate the message of the media including the Internet. This is being done in concert with attacks on Patriots to make examples of them and to silence them. See a very good breakdown of Saul D. Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, for a preface.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skid Mark
And so goes our freedom of speech. If speaking your mind can get you fired, where are we?




I'm not defending NPR's silly actions in this case. Just pointing out this isnt about 'Freedom of Speech'. NPR is not the federal Government. You can get fired at your job for saying something stupid. That is your employers right, yes?



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by babybunnies
Well,. it's official. He now appears to be working for FOX.

I wonder if this was all a ruse designed to give him massive press time just before he pulled the switch?

He doesn't appear to have his own show YET (I would imagine coming soon though) but was standing in for Bill O'Reilly's Comedy Hour (my name for 'The Factor') the other night.



I think you are onto something with that.

Guerilla marketing at its best!



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skid Mark
And so goes our freedom of speech. If speaking your mind can get you fired, where are we?


We are on a one way road to Hell my friend and we are near the point to where we see the sign that says

Abandon All Hope All Ye Who Enter Here

-The event horizon
-The point of no return

I am not a very religious man but I am beginning to think that truly only a miracle can save us from this disaster that is headed straight at us at about a ba-jillion miles per minute.

I had a conversation with my mother this morning who has called me a conspiracy quack since I first had my "3rd eye" blasted open in 1993.

Now she believes me and is starting to get really freaked out

My mom used to call me a crazy conspiracy theorist but now she sees what is going on.
It is amazing what happens to people when their entire retirement account is wiped out overnight.



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 06:32 PM
link   
I love how they fire Juan for this and his "past comments" yet they let Nina Totenberg say she hopes Jesse Helms contracts AIDS and she gets away clean.

Nope, were not aloud to be afraid of Muslims on planes



posted on Oct, 23 2010 @ 07:26 PM
link   
I disagree with the firing of Juan Williams on the terms that that NPR did. That being said, I think this backlash is ridiculous.

First off, yes NPR's largest listener base is "Liberal", however to call the network itself Liberal is ridiculous. A good amount of the news broadcast is BBC news, over which NPR has little control. You can tell when you are listening to good news when the reporter doesn't say anything you agree or disagree with. A reporter should not make direct statements. They should only cite facts, read questions, and quote others. An editorial is not new, it is an editorial.

Second, cut NPR funding all you want. Federal funding makes for very little of NPR's income. Most of their money is from private donations from listeners like me (and foundations/private grants etc.).

Third, I've never heard a reporter on NPR use a single one of these Logical Fallacies

I'm just saying, before you poo-poo it. Listen to Car Talk. Listen to Prairie Home Companion. Listen to Wait Wait, Don't tell me. I guarantee you will laugh at and enjoy at least one of them.

Listen to Science Friday and I guarantee you will learn one interesting fact.

Listen to NPR News and BBC News and tell me that you actually think its biased, and I will apologize for wasting your time. You actually have to listen to it though.
edit on 23-10-2010 by flanderis because: Spelling/Capitalization mistakes



posted on Oct, 24 2010 @ 06:27 AM
link   
I found an interesting article on the Associated Press dated 10/23 that makes me wonder a bit about this whole thing,,,

A few snippets:


NPR radio stations are independently owned and operated and, like the nation's public TV stations, receive government funding through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which got about $420 million this year from Washington.

As for NPR's headquarters operation, federal grants account for less than 2 percent - or $3.3 million - of its $166 million annual budget. It is funded primarily by its affiliates, corporate sponsors and major donors.


And that leads to this...


Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said he will introduce legislation to end federal funding for public radio and television.



In June, Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., introduced similar legislation in the House. He said the Williams firing will help his bill.



This isn't the first time public broadcasting has been in the crosshairs of conservative politicians. In 1994, then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich called for an end to all federal funding for public broadcasters.

NPR's Rehm warned that if Congress cut off funding, "stations across the country would be hurt by that and would have to make up that balance elsewhere. In many places that would be difficult to do."


AP Source

I have some very mixed feelings about this aspect of the situation. Ideally "public" broadcasting should not, in my opinion, receive any federal or corporate money. I am a purist in that sense. Influence is a commodity in our society which is purchased - one look at Congress shows how out of hand this can get. I like the idea of a news source that isn't beholden to that kind of "influence"

But the world we live in is, well, the world we live in... and I suppose that some corporate and governmental funding is part of that world. For a "political" opinion to result in the possible silencing of a voice - by way of NPR having to cut or limit services, which is implied in the article, is a horrendous thought to me.

In short... Juan Williams getting fired really isn't that big of a deal - as several posters have pointed out. But using his firing as a pretense to potentially restrict the public access to a news source?

Maybe this is more of a freedom of speech issue than we've wanted to believe...

~Heff



posted on Oct, 24 2010 @ 06:36 AM
link   
This reminds me of how Rick Sanchez was fired for making remarks about Jewish people...and their involvement in the MSM ( and I don't see how even that would merit him getting fired from CNN). And now Juan Williams gets fired from NPR for remarks (that many people share) regarding muslims?

Free speech doesn't exist in our MSM...our MSM is absolute garbage for the most part. The media on our TV represents a facade of political correctness, corporate interests and anything that can help advance the dumbing down of our society. They will very rarely cover any serious issues. Much less actually do any investigative work.
edit on 24-10-2010 by laiguana because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2010 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana
Free speech doesn't exist in our MSM...


Maybe there's confusion about the Free Speech issue because there are actually 2 definitions for it.

1. True Freedom of Speech (The freedom to speak without consequence, limits or censorship) does not exist. It's a concept... an ideal, but it does not exist in practice. No matter where you are, there are limits and consequences to what we say in public.

2. Free Speech (as protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution) DOES exist and has not been violated in this case. Juan Williams was NOT stopped from speaking his mind. He was not jailed and the government did NOT silence him or, in any way, try to stop him. His right was fully protected.

Any complaints about this being a free speech issue come from ignorance of what Free Speech really is.
edit on 10/24/2010 by Benevolent Heretic because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2010 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 

kudos!

it's humorously ironic to me how many people think 'freedom of speech' protects them at their privately-owned jobsite.



posted on Oct, 24 2010 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


I'm not arguing that...this is certainly true. As a private entity the media has a right to censor what they deem politically incorrect, even if these actions appear unreasonable. I just find it all too convenient to censor people's opinions and fire them based upon that.




top topics



 
27
<< 9  10  11    13 >>

log in

join