NPR fires Juan Williams for Muslim remarks on Fox

Juan Williams, Fox news house negro, a supposed “liberal” commentator on Fox, known for sucking up to the notorious liar Bill O’ Reilly was fired from NPR [NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO] for remarks he made on O’ Reilly’s show and for just being there:

Williams had been a contributor and analyst at NPR for decades, but his dual role on Fox News -- where he has also been a longtime and frequent contributor -- drew so many complaints from NPR's listeners that it asked Fox News to stop identifying Williams as an "NPR News Political Analyst" in 2009

www.huffingtonpost.com...

I'm not someone who believes that journalists should lose their jobs over controversial remarks, especially isolated, one-time comments. But if that's going to be the prevailing standard, then I want to see it applied equally. Those who cheered on the firing of Octavia Nasr, Helen Thomas and Rick Sanchez -- and that will include many, probably most, of the right-wing polemicists predictably rushing to transform Juan Williams into some sort of free speech martyr sacrificed on the altar of sharia censorship -- have no ground for complaining here.

www.salon.com...

I regret that he was fired but this is another example of him sucking up to O’Reilly and this time it got him fired from NPR. NPR, a moderate liberal station wants to keep that image intact and often has been chided by it’s listening audience of Williams’s antics on Fox News as the avove external content quote mentions.

Eventhough I am not a fan of Juan Williams, I really hope Fox news gives the guy a job.

After having review the clip and the articles about this incident, there are a few things that can be stated:
Mr. Williams is an intelligent person, he did go to college, had a sucessful carreer, and is a person, who was asked about his opinion. He did not state he did not like muslims, nor stated that they are evil, but he did state and underlieing issue that is begining to hit this country hard, and that is that this one group, is identifing themselves as Muslim first and a nationality second. This is starting to go around the world, and when it is combined with reports from different parts of the world, countries that should have been either peaceful or stable and it comes out that a group, who are extremist or terrorist, using a relgion as an example, gives the whole a very bad image and name. The old saying a few bad apples will spoil the bunch is very much true about fruit as it is about people. Take a look around, and the same could be stated about any group of people who idenitify themselves as one thing or another. The lists would go to fill a book far greater than a set of encyolpedias.
Now there are several questions that should be asked, as it comes to the forefront. The first is, as Mr. Williams did work for NPR, and thus was there anything in his contract with them, that would state what he could and could not state on the record. Public officials and all sorts of jobs have very specific guidelines on what can and can not be stated to the press. Most jobs, from those working at fast food, all of the way up the the federal government, there are guidelines that are put out, to let those who work for the different organizations, what is and is not permissible to state to the press.
But lets take a look at the comment itself, was it taken out of contex by NPR, or was the actions by NPR justified. So if you take out the word Muslim and replace it with another group, would it seem as offensive? If he stated, that if he sees a bunch of say, rednecks getting on the plane, he would be nervous and worried? Is there justification of reason to actually state such? Right now, the reality is, that there is an open and armed conflict with those who are using Islam to justify acts of terror and attacks.
Was he on his own time, or was NPR paying him to be there? If he was on his own time, then this is a matter of the freedom of speech, but that is a gray area, as it did mention that he worked for NPR, and thus his comments would be associated with them. What is NPR's policies?
And why does none of the other producers of the different shows realize that by appearing on a program where the commentory could be considered inflamatory, are shocked on what comes out?
But put that all to the side, and look at the baseline issue. Take away race, and just look at 2 things culture and nationality. Ultimately, the really sad part of this entire thing, is that it points to a underlieing problem and issue that is tearing apart any nation these days, and leads to conflict and violence, including the US, is that more and more minorities, idenitify themselves as culture or religion first and nationality second, and that will lead to discrimination and further tensions in the long run, than if they idenitified themselves as a nationality first and culture second.

reply to post by hinky

I am surprised at the different groups coming to his defense. Left, right, conservative, or liberal doesn't matter. All these groups see this for what it is. Suppression of a free thought by over zealot PC management of a tax payer subsidized entity.

Exactly, even the women of the pew, I mean view.

There is no doubt in my mind that Juan is one of the good guys and a gentleman.

CAIR Asks NPR to Address Analyst's Remarks on Muslims
www.breitbart.com...

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

If we never hear from you again it will be too soon.

Right back at you.

Where was all the Hoopla and protests when Sanchez was fired for a much milder statement? OR Helen Thomas?

Double standards betray ulterior motives.

www.lucianne.com...

Figuring out what’s inconsistent with NPR’s editorial standards can be awful difficult. The network terminated the contract for Fox News contributor Juan Williams because of a comment about Muslims, but apparently has yet to take a similar action against Nina Totenberg. From Reason’s Michael Moynihan:Check out this clip, from way back in 1995, of NPR’s Nina Totenberg telling the host of PBS’s Inside Washington that if there was “retributive justice” in the world the (admittedly loathsome) Jesse Helms would “get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it.

Seems that the standards that NPR is protecting are not really worthy of protection.

Originally posted by inforeal
Juan Williams, Fox news house negro, a supposed “liberal” commentator on Fox, known for sucking up to the notorious liar Bill O’ Reilly was fired from NPR [NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO] for remarks he made on O’ Reilly’s show and for just being there:

Williams had been a contributor and analyst at NPR for decades, but his dual role on Fox News -- where he has also been a longtime and frequent contributor -- drew so many complaints from NPR's listeners that it asked Fox News to stop identifying Williams as an "NPR News Political Analyst" in 2009

www.huffingtonpost.com...

I'm not someone who believes that journalists should lose their jobs over controversial remarks, especially isolated, one-time comments. But if that's going to be the prevailing standard, then I want to see it applied equally. Those who cheered on the firing of Octavia Nasr, Helen Thomas and Rick Sanchez -- and that will include many, probably most, of the right-wing polemicists predictably rushing to transform Juan Williams into some sort of free speech martyr sacrificed on the altar of sharia censorship -- have no ground for complaining here.

www.salon.com...

I regret that he was fired but this is another example of him sucking up to O’Reilly and this time it got him fired from NPR. NPR, a moderate liberal station wants to keep that image intact and often has been chided by it’s listening audience of Williams’s antics on Fox News as the avove external content quote mentions.

Eventhough I am not a fan of Juan Williams, I really hope Fox news gives the guy a job.

What is sad in this posting is that people are so scared of hearing another viewpoint that they would complain to NPR.

News is news, regardless of political affiliation. I think everyone at NPR and their listeners miss the point.

reply to post by inforeal


I don't see why there are protests. He got fired. He didn't get arrested. He didn't get executed. He got fired. That's what corporations do. If any of you walked into your job and told them what you truly thought about any number of topics, you would probably be fired too.

That's just how it goes. That's how it is. He went from being an idiot to an unemployed idiot. That's all. There's nothing to protest.

Originally posted by PETROLCOIN

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
the only people I see blowing up airplanes as Muslims.

This statement is an opinionated assumption at best, incorrect statement at worst.

You are first assuming that Al Qaeda perpetrated the attacks on September 11th. Although I disagree, I will entertain that idea for the sake of my rebuttal. The men who hijacked the airplanes on September 11th were not Muslims. They were extremists. There is a difference. Anyone who puts them in the same boat with all Muslims does not understand Islam and it's prohibition of what they did - everything from the attacks to the strippers.

You are also assuming that incidents like TWA Flight 800 are simply "accidents". There have been many instances where airplanes have crashed or blown up under suspicions circumstances. You can take TWA Flight 800 and the flight that killed Polish President Lech Kaczynski as two examples. I can assure you these were not perpetrated by Muslims.

Bunching everyone together into one neat pile for the ignorant masses to comprehend more easily does not make the stereotypes and profiling of these individuals right, morally or logically.

You cherry picked one sentence in my post. please reread what i said.

9/11 was a false flag, a la Operation Northwoods.

But the average person does not understand it on those terms. So, in terms they understand....

Originally posted by PETROLCOIN
reply to post by inforeal

 

I don't see why there are protests. He got fired. He didn't get arrested. He didn't get executed. He got fired. That's what corporations do. If any of you walked into your job and told them what you truly thought about any number of topics, you would probably be fired too.

That's just how it goes. That's how it is. He went from being an idiot to an unemployed idiot. That's all. There's nothing to protest.

If he was a clerk down at the Toot'n'Totum it would be a different manner.

But he isn't. He is a journalist. What NPR did smacks of censorship. Being a federally funded organization, this creates real problems for me, as an American.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
You cherry picked one sentence in my post. please reread what i said.

I apologize. I misunderstood what you were saying.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
What NPR did smacks of censorship. Being a federally funded organization, this creates real problems for me, as an American.

I would venture to guess this was staged. He will get another job somewhere else and be right back in the spotlight. Example: Glenn Beck.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

If he was a clerk down at the Toot'n'Totum it would be a different manner.

But he isn't. He is a journalist. What NPR did smacks of censorship. Being a federally funded organization, this creates real problems for me, as an American.

Excellent points!!!

For those who aren't familiar with NPR here is a link to their Wiki.

NPR produces and distributes news and cultural programming. Individual public radio stations are not required to broadcast all NPR programs that are produced. Most public radio stations broadcast a mixture of NPR programs, content from rival providers American Public Media and Public Radio International and Public Radio Exchange, and locally produced programs. NPR's flagships are two drive time news broadcasts, Morning Edition and the afternoon All Things Considered; both are carried by most NPR member stations, and from 2002–2008 they were the second and third most popular radio programs in the country.[4][5] In a Harris poll conducted in 2005, NPR was voted the most trusted news source in the U.S.[6]

That last sentence bears reading again.... "...most trusted news source..." A very, very important factor in all of this. People trust NPR to rise above the propaganda and rhetoric. They don't expect NPR to end up being at the heart of a story about "agendas".

~Heff

NPR is going to start a smear campaign against Juan,
watch.

Originally posted by inforeal
Where was all the Hoopla and protests when Sanchez was fired for a much milder statement? OR Helen Thomas?

There was hoopla.

reply to post by PETROLCOIN


I am not protesting at all. I don't like Juan Williams for sucking up to Fox news, and other things in the past.

Though that doesnt mean I want him not to have a job to feed his family.

Originally posted by PETROLCOIN

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
You cherry picked one sentence in my post. please reread what i said.

I apologize. I misunderstood what you were saying.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
What NPR did smacks of censorship. Being a federally funded organization, this creates real problems for me, as an American.

I would venture to guess this was staged. He will get another job somewhere else and be right back in the spotlight. Example: Glenn Beck.

LOL, you know, THAT would not surprise me.

I don't believe things like this happen on accident. Right down to Brett Favre and his dirty texts. Guaranteed, if anyone wanted him out of the league, that was how you do it. He will not "unretire" this year after his annual retirement announcement.

WOW
This story is really starting to take off.
CAIR was the foundation that brought up the complaint that got Mr. Williams fired.
Personally I do not see anything wrong with him talking about his fears. It was his opinion, HIS, he worked for NPR, they did not own him. They can not control his thoughts or fears.
I do not necessarily agree with what he said about Muslims and air planes. I do not think seeing someone in Muslim garb would worry me in the least.
If they are dressed in such a fashion then they really do not mind if it draws attention so more than likely they are not a threat. I think that if anyone was going to try to hijack, bomb, or fly a plane into a building they would try to fit in and dress like everyone else as not to draw attention to them selves.

Mr. Williams had every right to say what he said and I strongly support his right to speak out! NPR also had every right to fire his butt for making a public prejudiced statement. Everyone in this story is exercising their rights. That's a Good Thing!

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

If we never hear from you again it will be too soon.

You know, it becomes really clear who supports Free Speech around here and who would like to silence those with whom they disagree. My point must have hit home for you to make a post that was entirely directed at me. I'm flattered. Fortunately, Mr Weed, I support your right to have and express your opinion even though you would like to silence mine.

And if you don't want to hear more from me, I suggest you stop reading my posts or go elsewhere, because as the good members of ATS know, I'm very vocal and I'm not going anywhere.

BFFT, I didn't even think about the federal funding aspect. Good point.

In Wake of Williams' firing, Republicans want NPR Funding Examined

Mike Huckabee:

"It is time for the taxpayers to start making cuts to federal spending, and I encourage the new Congress to start with NPR."

I think this is pathetic. Juan Williams has been a civil rights scholar as well as an anlyst for years. This is a guy that has generally shown himself to be level headed and fair. I have not always agreed with his positions on current "civil rights" issues. However, I do believe his convictions are genuine.

I would call Juan Williams several things, but not a biggot. I think he has been unfairly penalize for expressing a commonly held view among Americans. I think this is an over reaction by a hyper sensitive group of people more interested in pushing an idealogy than news or understanding.

I can understand Sanchez being fired. He deliberately went after his own managers. He said he felt like he was held back because jews at CNN saw him as a token Latino. When you publicly bash your employer the employer has every right to fire you. You are creating a negative brand image and potentially damaging their market position. That is completely different than the Juan Williams case.

Of course equivocation is the new American past time. So, I doubt many people will openly recognize the difference.