An example of "tolerance"

[Veritas]

He said on TV that he gets nervous when Muslims are on his plane.

A view shared by most American's and probably Europeans. The point of all this is that there is no such thing as "free" speech. Clearly Juan's firing will serve as a warning to other journalists with public radio/TV that you better watch what you say.

Thankfully, as I had predicted, Roger Ailes of Fox offered Jaun a nice $2 million contract and an increases role at Fox News. Shame on NPR, it's there loss.

 

[KIYX]

Personal example: I don't take my information about homosexuals from homophobes.

Hi, you can either answer my question or retract your statement.

People with a primarily Muslim identity scare him, and his admitted bias against them colors his reporting.

Please give us examples.

I'm still waiting for your examples where his bias has shown through in his reporting regarding muslims.

 

[mpok1519]

And that's intolerable? How so?

Crack open a dictionary. Look up "xenophobic". Then look up "racist".

"I was fired because I was just giving my honest opinion!" Yes, you were fired because of that. Sure, you make no mention that your honest opinion is also racist and xenophobic, but thats what the sane portion of the world is for, to point out the racism and xenophobia.

 

[HerbieHeadley]

Good question. BHO said his Grandma was a "typical white person", and he was elected President.

Could it be that NPR felt that Juan was acting like a "typical white person", all that hanging out at faux and all?

 

[variant]

Another fine example of the general rule that if you have to qualify your statement with "Look I'm not a bigot." you should not finish your statement.

Essentially he knew that what he was about to say was likely to lead people to believe he was a bigot and he said it anyway.

Juan’s statement is silly because people obviously proudly displaying their Muslim identity are also less likely to do anything to you. Being scared of random Muslims is similar being scared of random black people.

 

[BoltNut]

Apparently, since you made a point of calling it out in the OP. If their supposed liberalness is not an issue why was the claim made?

I make the statement that I feel that NPR is liberal, possibly one of the most liberal outlets. NPR says that they are unbiased an honest. They are supported by our tax dollars to stay in existence. It is their self proclaimed high ethical standards that supposedly enables them to continue to get tax money in order to stay on the air. Yet when one of their analysts makes an statement like this in an open and on-going conversation, he gets sacked. It's not so much that I or anyone else thinks NPR is liberal or not. It's their own statements, policies and now actions that condemn them. They obviously are not the tolerant, unbiased and open forum they claim to be.

 

[BoltNut]

Another fine example of the general rule that if you have to qualify your statement with "Look I'm not a bigot." you should not finish your statement.

Essentially he knew that what he was about to say was likely to lead people to believe he was a bigot and he said it anyway.

Juan’s statement is silly because people obviously proudly displaying their Muslim identity are also less likely to do anything to you. Being scared of random Muslims is similar being scared of random black people.

I repeat, he said "on a plane". It is not the same thing. He's not talking "random" anything. He's being rather specific. Anyone who has listened to Williams over the years knows he is not a bigot. Whether someone is wearing a berka or some otherwise identifiably Muslim "garb" doesn't suddenly make them benign. The ones who blow themselves up in the name of Allah do it proudly. They want everyone they are about to kill to know that they are Muslim.

 

[KIYX]

Another fine example of the general rule that if you have to qualify your statement with "Look I'm not a bigot." you should not finish your statement.

Essentially he knew that what he was about to say was likely to lead people to believe he was a bigot and he said it anyway.

Juan’s statement is silly because people obviously proudly displaying their Muslim identity are also less likely to do anything to you. Being scared of random Muslims is similar being scared of random black people.

Right because bigots believe you shouldn't hold a majority of people responsible for what a minority of people did.

 

[BoltNut]

Crack open a dictionary. Look up "xenophobic". Then look up "racist".

"I was fired because I was just giving my honest opinion!" Yes, you were fired because of that. Sure, you make no mention that your honest opinion is also racist and xenophobic, but thats what the sane portion of the world is for, to point out the racism and xenophobia.

So now Juan Williams is a xenophobe???? A racist???

No wonder this country is in such a mess.

 

[variant]

I repeat, he said "on a plane". It is not the same thing. Anyone who has listened to Williams over the years knows he is not a bigot.

Yeah, and if he said he was scared of black people on the subway it would have been a similar sentiment.

Take a look:

Williams responded: "Look, 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 subway, I got to tell you, if I see black people I think, you know, I get nervous."

Whether someone is wearing a berka or some otherwise identifiably Muslim "garb" doesn't suddenly make them benign. The ones who blow themselves up in the name of Allah do it proudly. They want everyone they are about to kill to know that they are Muslim.

It makes them stand out, which means that it is a poor tactic to use when trying not to arouse suspicion.

 

[variant]

Right because bigots believe you shouldn't hold a majority of people responsible for what a minority of people did.

You would have to expand on that statement to have it logically make sense to me considering what you are quoting.

Edit. Never mind I get it. No, saying that lumping people together is incorrect after you just lumped them together doesn’t make it better.

 

[crishmael]

Hi, you can either answer my question or retract your statement.









I'm still waiting for your examples where his bias has shown through in his reporting regarding muslims.

So the idea that the reports of someone who openly admits to fearing a group of people might not be reliable has no credence with you? Someone can fear libertarians and they can be trusted to reliably give unbiased information about them? You, sir, are a trusting soul.

And no, I won't retract a reasonable statement. I don't need to find specific examples of an individual's faults to contradict a reasonable principle.

 

[JustOneWay]

Thoughts?

Yes. Why is it that anytime one liberal or liberal group does something that the right believes is intolerant, it is put on display as if each and every liberal or liberal group has to be tolerant?

NPR is an organization, and it fired an employee because that employee said something which appeared (to them) to be insulting toward Muslims. This makes NPR intolerant of insulting speech from their employees

Fox news has employees (Kilmeade, O'Reilly to mention a few) who have said insulting things toward Muslims, and Fox News does not fire them. This make Fox tolerant of insulting speech from their employees.

Simply put, NPR cares about what the Muslim community thinks about their company, Fox does not.

 

[eldermike]

I do not want my tax money going to NPR, I never did. This might do it.

 

[childofGod1]

Simply put, NPR cares about what the Muslim community thinks about their company, Fox does not.

Simply put, NPR cares about what their listeners think (all both of them).

 

[Ringo84]

You have the right to say almost anything that comes to mind. You don't, however, have the right to say almost anything that comes to mind and stay gainfully employed.
Ringo

 

[childofGod1]

You have the right to say almost anything that comes to mind. You don't, however, have the right to say almost anything that comes to mind and stay gainfully employed.
Ringo

I haven't heard anyone propose a court case. This thread is about NPR's (and the wider group of those who think as they do) double standard and lack of tolerance.

 

[Ringo84]

Where's the double standard?
Ringo

 

[kiwimac]

In the minds of some of the right-wing listeners.

 

[Belk]

I make the statement that I feel that NPR is liberal, possibly one of the most liberal outlets. NPR says that they are unbiased an honest. They are supported by our tax dollars to stay in existence. It is their self proclaimed high ethical standards that supposedly enables them to continue to get tax money in order to stay on the air. Yet when one of their analysts makes an statement like this in an open and on-going conversation, he gets sacked. It's not so much that I or anyone else thinks NPR is liberal or not. It's their own statements, policies and now actions that condemn them. They obviously are not the tolerant, unbiased and open forum they claim to be.

I noticed. I am wondering why? While I do not see things the same as you you have always struck me as a thoughtful and intelligent poster and this seems out of character. I'm wondering if this is simply an example of the "gotcha" politics that seems to be so popular on both sides recently or if you really think that a single instance actually means something here?