Juan Williams: I'm not a bigot. NPR: Yes you are

[Anonymous]

I think an employer can fire you for any reason that is not illegal. So they can fire you if they think something you have done or said "does not reflect well on the company". UNLESS the thing that you did is a protected thing, like religion (say they find out you're a wiccan) or in dc, sexual orientation (they find out you have a partner).

So the question is, can your employer fire you for something that you SAID. We live in the land of free speech. And you are free to say whatever you want. But the consequences of your statements may include getting fired because your employer decides your statements reflect badly on them. You are free to keep talking, just not as an employee of that company.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:... While it is true that not all Muslims are terrorists, it is equally true that all 911 terrorists who hijacked and ran planes full of our family, neighbors, coworkers and friends into buildings were Muslim.

Yes, and all Oklahomians should be fearful of white christan males. All jews should be fearful of all catholics. the entire african population should be fearful of christian missionaries. Your ability to lump a religion that is practiced on almost every continent, of varying races, cultures and ethnicities is dumbfounding.

PP what part of the bolded sentence did you not understand?

I'm not PP, but your bolded sentence is as enlightening as the analogous "While it is true that not all DC residents live on my street, it is equally true that everyone who lives on my street is a DC resident." Sure it's correct, but am I supposed to stop every DC resident I see and ask if they live in the house on the corner?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:Williams didn't just apologetically admit his fear of Muslims, he provided a justification for it.

I believe it is fairer to state that he admitted his uneasiness with Muslims who wear traditional Muslim dress (self identifying as Muslim) on an airplane. You get fired for admitting you think something these days? No actions - he didn't DO anything, encourage anyone else the DO anything, he simply had a thought. This was in the context of OReilly's Muslim comment on the View. While it is true that not all Muslims are terrorists, it is equally true that all 911 terrorists who hijacked and ran planes full of our family, neighbors, coworkers and friends into buildings were Muslim.

Yes, and all Oklahomians should be fearful of white christan males. All jews should be fearful of all catholics. the entire african population should be fearful of christian missionaries. Your ability to lump a religion that is practiced on almost every continent, of varying races, cultures and ethnicities is dumbfounding.

PP what part of the bolded sentence did you not understand?

New poster here. Imagine if he were a white guy who said, "I'm no bigot. But when I get on a plane and see a bunch of people who really dress and talk black, I get really nervous?" Would he be more justified if the year was 1968, a year with 19 hijackings to Cuba, and he was speaking about Hispanics?

The reason that these and the current situation are unacceptable is that we know that a very, very few muslims are involved in airline terrorism. To admit to such a fear and not at least qualify it by acknowledging its irrationality is problematic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think an employer can fire you for any reason that is not illegal. So they can fire you if they think something you have done or said "does not reflect well on the company". UNLESS the thing that you did is a protected thing, like religion (say they find out you're a wiccan) or in dc, sexual orientation (they find out you have a partner).

So the question is, can your employer fire you for something that you SAID. We live in the land of free speech. And you are free to say whatever you want. But the consequences of your statements may include getting fired because your employer decides your statements reflect badly on them. You are free to keep talking, just not as an employee of that company.

Agreed. I've been thinking about this all day in a larger context -- of Nasr, Helen Thomas, and Sanchez. It seems as if journalism is getting incredibly blurred with opinion. Fox News seems to be almost all opinion, for example, and very little straight news. I assume MSNBC is similar (don't watch it). But that trend seems to have made journalists forget where the line is drawn as far as their "personal" opinion is concerned.

I used to work for a state legislature, and we weren't allowed to get involved with politics at all, not even on our own time. No yard signs, no bumper stickers, and certainly no campaigning or fund raisers. My boss jokingly used to say that if they could, they'd take away our right to vote. It was extremely important that we remain non-partisan, or else the legislators wouldn't trust our work. Violate it, and no matter how valuable you may be, you'd be gone. I can see a journalist position being very similar. In a job where you have to remain objective, you immediately lose credibility once you make it personal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this bigotry? He didn't say he got nervous in a restaurant if he saw a group dressed in Muslim dress. I get nervous, too, when there's group of Muslims on a plane. Then I talk myself out of it. Maybe Williams does, too. If he were really a bigot, he'd get off and take another flight.

As Jeff mentioned, if he does that he should have said so. But leaving that part out makes it look like he endorses bigotry. If he really feels that way, he should have known better than to omit that part.

[Anonymous]

This would be a good time for radical muslims to kill Americans.....we are too scared to fight back. This is Bin Ladens stated plan. He says America is a 'paper tiger" with no stomach for a long term and difficult war...he is right...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This would be a good time for radical muslims to kill Americans.....we are too scared to fight back. This is Bin Ladens stated plan. He says America is a 'paper tiger" with no stomach for a long term and difficult war...he is right...

If it is such a good time to kill Americans, and if this is Bin Laden's stated plan, then ask yourself this: why are we still here? It's been nine years. If his stated plan is to succeed in attacking us every decade, it's not much of a plan.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:This would be a good time for radical muslims to kill Americans.....we are too scared to fight back. This is Bin Ladens stated plan. He says America is a 'paper tiger" with no stomach for a long term and difficult war...he is right...

It is never a good time to kill Americans. Only deranged right-wingers have such thoughts. How come you are so eager to see your fellow countrymen killed?

[Anonymous]

we are too weak to fight back

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:we are too weak to fight back

Speak for yourself.

[Anonymous]

see if you have the guts to publically make fun of or critisize Muhammad. You all have the freedom to critisize Christians of make fun of Jesus all you want since Christians are peaceful. Try it with Muhammad weaklings...thats right...better roll over for Islam and accept it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:see if you have the guts to publically make fun of or critisize Muhammad. You all have the freedom to critisize Christians of make fun of Jesus all you want since Christians are peaceful. Try it with Muhammad weaklings...thats right...better roll over for Islam and accept it.

It's hard to take you seriously when you can't even spell.

By the way, excessive use of the ellipsis is a sign of a weak argument. Now go look up ellipsis.

[Anonymous]

thats right...good job....you rolled over real purty.

[Anonymous]

just like the South Park writers. You have all been put into your place real nice.

[Anonymous]

Like Israel is a Jewish theocracy.

Anonymous wrote:Yes, but let's look at the facts on the ground. As Samuel Huntington noted, "Islam has bloody borders."

Let's take the example of Iran, since you raise it -- Iran is a threat, and it is one because it is run by *Islamic* revolutionaries. It is an actual Muslim theocracy, and there is no disputing that point -- how can you then claim that Islam has nothing to do with the threat posed by Iran? Yes, Iran is an even bigger threat to its own (Muslim) people and its own (Muslim) neighbors than it is to us, but that is a function of proximity and relative power.

The same is true for Pakistan -- we're not talking about 1000 radicals in a cave somewhere, we're talking about a state where radical Islam has many sympathizers in the military and security services of a nuclear-armed state.

Obviously, most Muslims are not violent or terrorist-sympathizers, but why is everyone so invested in pretending Islam has nothing to do with the threats we face?

We've had this argument before, I guess, and I'm never going to persuade you, but if you really think that Christianity is similarly situated to Islam in terms of the overall risks of violence today, you're ignoring reality -- and this can be true even if the large majority of Muslims are not violent or in sympathy with violence.