BF2S Forums NPR analyst fired over Muslim comment

Turquoise wrote:

Ticia wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I agree with that, honestly.  It makes sense.  It's like how profiling sometimes works for law enforcement.

I'm still not seeing how Williams said something so gravely offensive so as to get fired.

Apparently he does.
You've been defending Williams’s right to express his fear of Muslims when he is the first to admit his feelings are racist.

Common sense becomes bigotry when hats become a formula for figuring out who is a danger to me

I guess I'm a bigot then.

Above all else, this fear-generating "nexus" is what must be protected at all costs. This is the "troubling" connection -- between Muslims and terrorism -- that Williams lent his "liberal," NPR-sanctioned voice to legitimizing.  And it is this fear-sustaining, anti-Muslim slander that NPR's firing of Williams threatened to delegitimize.  That is why NPR's firing of Williams must be attacked with such force: because if it were allowed to stand, it would be an important step toward stigmatizing anti-Muslim animus in the same way that other forms of bigotry are now off-limits, and that, above all else, is what cannot happen, because anti-Muslim animus is too important to too many factions to allow it to be delegitimized.

Turquoise wrote:

Ticia wrote:

According to Juan Williams? Yes you are.

Well, I find it somewhat practical.

Ticia wrote:

Basically about this issue I agree with this guy, Glenn Greenwald

Above all else, this fear-generating "nexus" is what must be protected at all costs. This is the "troubling" connection -- between Muslims and terrorism -- that Williams lent his "liberal," NPR-sanctioned voice to legitimizing.  And it is this fear-sustaining, anti-Muslim slander that NPR's firing of Williams threatened to delegitimize.  That is why NPR's firing of Williams must be attacked with such force: because if it were allowed to stand, it would be an important step toward stigmatizing anti-Muslim animus in the same way that other forms of bigotry are now off-limits, and that, above all else, is what cannot happen, because anti-Muslim animus is too important to too many factions to allow it to be delegitimized.

The real danger from NPR's firing of Juan Williams

It's not slander if there's truth to it.  There is a considerable connection between Islam and terrorism.  Don't mistake my disdain of Islam for supporting other religions though.

I would prefer a world without religion, but I know that human nature unfortunately mandates its existence.

I don't support a specifically "anti-Muslim animus" -- I support an "anti-religion animus."  If people are uneasy with public figures making connections between Islam and terrorists, then maybe the Islamic World itself needs to move further away from extremism in general.

For the time being, however, I support criticisms of Islam and of religion in general.

In truth, if there's anything that makes me feel "nervous," it's the fact that so much of humanity places faith in the unprovable and the improbable to base their lives on.  Some people (like fanatical Muslims) go so far as to kill people over it.

And when you examine how Jihad is a key part of Islam, how can you not be somewhat nervous when considering the possibilities that varying interpretations allow for?

Granted, Christianity also makes me nervous for similar reasons when I see the kind of fanatics my own country produces.

The point is...  Williams's anxiety is based somewhat on reality.  There is a connection between Islam and terrorism.  However, he even went so far as to recognize that most Muslims aren't fanatics.  But that wasn't good enough for the PC patrol.

Turquoise wrote:

EVieira wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Not sure where there was any "agenda" in what Williams said.

But you seem sure the NPR has an "agenda"? Maybe they just don't like having in their payroll people who make public declarations that lean toward profiling and racism. Like I said, it would be the same as any TV anchor made anti semitic comments. The diference here is that it as directed at arabs.

I can't see this as an overreaction. Its a decision and a statement the NPR decided to do, with every right to do so.

NPR does have an agenda.  It's left-leaning.  This is why a lot of people have demanded the end to public funding for it.

Besides, having a publicly funded news source is a bad idea to begin with.  Any funding that goes toward media should be voluntary -- not mandatory through taxes.

Turquoise wrote:

Ticia wrote:

Well you're not going to have me argue about the wonders of religion.
The same can be said about connections between Mormons and bigamy, Catholicism and pedophilia, Judaism and violence, and so on.

Our feelings on this are biased not so much by our experiences but more by what we hear on the media everyday.

I can agree with that.  Ideally, I would like to live without any prejudice at all, but that's extremely difficult partially because of the media's love of sensationalism.  I admit that I'm not immune to it, nor is anyone really.

Although, I gotta say...   As much as I find Mormonism insane, I don't think having multiple wives or multiple husbands should be illegal as long as it's done with consent (and all parties involved are at or beyond the appropriate minimum age).

I would never want to have multiple wives myself, but I don't think the government should get involved in who someone wants to marry, as long as that person is a consenting adult.

Turquoise wrote:

Ticia wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I can agree with that.  Ideally, I would like to live without any prejudice at all, but that's extremely difficult partially because of the media's love of sensationalism.  I admit that I'm not immune to it, nor is anyone really.

Although, I gotta say...   As much as I find Mormonism insane, I don't think having multiple wives or multiple husbands should be illegal as long as it's done with consent (and all parties involved are at or beyond the appropriate minimum age).

I would never want to have multiple wives myself, but I don't think the government should get involved in who someone wants to marry, as long as that person is a consenting adult.

Consent?
Raising girls to believe their solely role in life is to worship some older guy and have his babies while sharing him with another wife or wives and expect to when she turns 18 she'll be wise enough to know what consent is? That consent, you mean?

Oh wait…these are the Muslim ones, the ones is ok to fear, my bad.

Well, the Mormons you really have to worry about are the ones that run compounds and marry off their 14 year olds.

Marrying off 18 year olds is inevitable regardless of religion, because plenty of religions besides Mormonism will raise their daughters that way.  The only difference is whether or not they're marrying a man who's already got another wife.

Well, since you brought up Muslims in this context, some sects of Islam support having multiple wives just like the old school Mormons do.

Muhammad had multiple wives -- one of whom was 9 years old at the time of marriage.

Ticia wrote:

What bothers me are double standards, even more so than politically correctness.

FEOS wrote:

This.

And there was an incident where a news reporter made what were considered anti-semitic remarks (Helen Thomas). Because of those comments, she retired early/was dismissed from Hearst, IIRC. The key difference being, she made those remarks ostensibly in her role as the White House reporter for Hearst. Williams made his comment (which was not racist, btw--he didn't say he gets worried when he sees "arabic" people on planes) on Fox, not NPR.

So again...if he had made his comment on NPR, NPR would have been perfectly justified in using those comments as their rationale to fire him. He was not on NPR when he made those comments, he was on Fox. He was not representing NPR on Fox. Period. It's really that simple.

FEOS wrote:

And again, NPR certainly had the right to do it, just as Williams had the right to say what he did. That doesn't mean that NPR was right for doing it, any more that Williams was right for saying it.

Stingray24 wrote:

Ticia wrote:

What bothers me are double standards, even more so than politically correctness.

Not being able to state reality throughout society because we may "offend" someone is less dangerous than double standards?  I think not.

Turquoise wrote:

Ticia wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

Not being able to state reality throughout society because we may "offend" someone is less dangerous than double standards?  I think not.

Not being reasonable and fair because we can't pull our heads out of our asses and look at the bigger picture is what brought us here in the first place. So I think so.

Well, the double standard involved with NPR is that they fire commentators with an alleged conservative bias, but they don't fire the liberal ones.

Turquoise wrote:

Ticia wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Well, the double standard involved with NPR is that they fire commentators with an alleged conservative bias, but they don't fire the liberal ones.

What did they say?

See the link I posted earlier.  Cybargs also posted it a few pages back.

There have been numerous occasions where a commentator on NPR said something negative about Christians or conservatives -- and this was even while on NPR rather than on a different channel.

NPR would appear to be very protective of Muslims, but they apparently don't share the same concern for other groups.

Ticia wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Ticia wrote:

What did they say?

See the link I posted earlier.  Cybargs also posted it a few pages back.

There have been numerous occasions where a commentator on NPR said something negative about Christians or conservatives -- and this was even while on NPR rather than on a different channel.

NPR would appear to be very protective of Muslims, but they apparently don't share the same concern for other groups.

I read that according to this study Misperceptions, The Media and the Iraq War people who turn to NPR and PBS for news are actually considered better informed when it comes to the real facts on the war.

Is only one study so it proves nothing but when you see 80% of people who got their news from Fox got one or more of the 3 very basic questions about the Iraq war wrong and only 23% for PBS and NPR did, then makes you wonder if in a kingdom where ALL media is openly politicized the one-eyed man does in fact deserve to be king.