Hi, my name is Anna, often spelled “A N N A”. You might remember me from my past roles as “Mutineer # 3”, “Only Vagina in the Bunker”, “Over-dressed-brown-girl-at-Bhangra-Blowout”, “The abnormal, Vegetarian Mallu” and “Token”.
These days, I am consumed with my nifty new job as a reporter with D.C. NPR-affiliate, WAMU, 88.5 FM, where I write and curate the DCentric blog. Precisely because of my dream job, I have received emails from some of you asking me to opine about Juan Williams, who was recently let go from NPR because of comments he made on FOX’s “The O’Reilly Factor” about Muslim people and their garb freaking him out. To those readers who have reached out to me, I would like to say two things:
1) Aw, thanks! I’m flattered you care what I think…
2) ARE YOU INSANE? If I get fired, I ain’t gettin’ $2 Million from FOX.
Instead of wading in to this controversy, I will point you towards this HILARIOUS Tumblr called, “Pictures of Muslims Wearing Things”. And if you insist on a Desi connection, check this out:
This unfortunate Muslim is wearing Ed Hardy. He is called Salman Khan.
I will also add that this wasn’t the first time NPR had issues with Juan (he did, after all, call the First Lady “Stokely Carmichael in a designer dress“). Hey…is it just me, or does Juan Williams seem really preoccupied with what people wear…
ARGH. I accidentally published this post twice, and when I deleted the dupe, I chose the wrong one– KXB, I accidentally nuked your comment, because of this. Sorry, sorry, sorry. 🙁
Anna posts = awesome sauce. =)
lol. this comment thread should be “interesting.”
Over the years I have won more money from arrogant numbnuts wearing ed hardy than any other t-shirt brand….its the weirdest thing!
Anna,
No problem – it happens.
My original post was not that good anyway. But, my point was that while Williams’ comments were dumb, it was a mistake for NPR to fire him. By doing so, it creates a false story. And, over the past month, there have been too many stories where the media just spends their time reporting on what is happening on other media outlets. A couple of weeks ago it was Rick Sanchez, last week it was The View, and this week it was Juan Williams and NPR. Indeed, if you add Helen Thomas urging Jews in Israel to go back to Europe (cause they were treated so well there) and Octavia Nasr being canned for tweeting about Hezbollah – 2010 has turned out to be a rather bloody year in the media business.
The problem is that when the media reports on itself, it tends to ignore more important stories – an observation made by Jon Stewart as far back as his Crossfire appearance. Plus, is it a good idea for someone to lose their job over what they say in another forum? I know that NPR has been on Williams’ case about appearing on Fox News in the past, but their timing is lousy.
As far as what Muslims wear – the page needs to add the following Muslims post haste – Yasmeen Ghauri, Tabu, & Sania Mirza.
KXB Media reports on other media because its ‘safe’, the info has been vetted and if its wrong…well someone else takes the fall….safety keeps people from getting fired… Williams knows this Anna joked about it. Think of how much so called ‘news’ content is recycled Associated Press pablum.
Buahahaha, well played, Anna, well played. I almost choked on my water bottle at the Salman Khan picture. My other favorite is Rashid Wallace in a medieval ensemble.
I was trying to remember who Reza Aslan is, and when I typed Reza Aslan into Google it suggested I add ‘married’ or ‘girlfriend.’ I thought this was hilarious. Go, Aslan, go!
“Iman, Muslims who wear jeans.”
ha! thanks for the link and the laughs, anna! signed, -the girl who also wears jeans and rainbow colors and red lipstick =)
KXB Media reports on other media because its ‘safe’, the info has been vetted and if its wrong
i think the media is interested in the media. that’s part of the issue, and why people in the biz didn’t foresee that brill’s content didn’t have a broad-based audience.
the smart thing for NPR to do was wait, and fire him later on another pretext. it’s pretty obvious that they weren’t comfortable with williams’ prominence at fox news for years. there has been some discomfort with mara liasson‘s contributions to fox news too.
as for the substance, i’m an open islamophobe who’s not very comfortable with people who are dressed more-muslim-than-thou. it’s not rational in a proximate sense, i just don’t have good associations with conservative muslims (nor frankly with mormon fundamentalists and other sects-apart). i’m also not too comfortable with jews who dress in a way to indicate how frum and jewish they are because of past prejudical experiences (i used to be moderately involved with jewish groups/events in college because of my circle of friends, and the orthodox ones often exhibited prejudice against me cuz they assumed i was an anti-zionist muslim because of my look & name). but i agree with talkingpointsmemo that there are all sorts of double standards at work. though perhaps i think there are more out there than TPM would admit.
‘the smart thing for NPR to do was wait, and fire him later on another pretext”
that would imply the presence of forethought and planning…
Well, I think we all know what he really meant. Practically all of France is afraid of what Muslims wear, and I think we should have a serious discussion over it. All the horse-shit that Sarkozy spews about womens-lib and french-morals is just a thinly veiled fear of Islam.
What sort of democracy allows government to meddle in what people wear?! I expected the French Fraternité to defend Liberté. I got nothing. Instead, they’re now revolting on the retirement age going up by two years. wtf france. Lady Liberty is facepalming right now.
Government = garment (phonetically, in the cow belt manner)
Yes, but that Muslim is an Indian Muslim, which, as history is evidence, makes a big difference. Just ask Thomas Friedman.
what do you mean? i don’t understand your reference…
That’s kind of how I feel about this entire conversation… “huh?” “what?” “who?”.. I guess this means I have to go back to writing my paper… argh…
Ed Hardy has the power to get you Laid though…
and a big big BIG Yay ANNA j is back writing for SM! 🙂
and thats R-E-S-P-E-C-T
“Ed Hardy has the power to get you Laid though…”
yes by this…( not butters 🙂
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Y0ANRHiijk&feature=related
When I hijack planes, I always try to look as Muslim as possible–not like those stupid 9/11 guys who were all clean-shaven and shit, in jeans and shirts. I wear a hijab over which I put a turban. I affix everything with a minaret. I wear those Saudi robes OVER the Iranian robes. I go bare feet to show my tribal affiliations, and because I hate having to take off and on my shoes.
There, Juan Williams, you should like totally fear me.
if I ever see Juan Williams, I’ll prolly clutch my purse tighter to me and cross the street…no offense, buddy. Don’t wanna get raped and robbed.
Juan Williams should have been fired — in 2002, when he made a complete hash of things as the host of “Talk of the Nation”.
When are we going to talk about what Muslims dont wear?
Move over Salman. http://wallpapers.oneindia.in/v/album01-Bollywood-Actors/imran-khan/imran-khan09.JPG.html
I just saw “I hate luv storys” on netflix, and this guy has such dreamy eyes! Dreamier than Robert Pattinson in some scenes.
Imran Khan is the only guy much younger than me that I swoon over. Dharmendra is the only guy much older than me that I swoon over. They’re both Muslims.
The other side of the discussion – what 9/11 terrorists wore – http://i.imgur.com/ic4ae.jpg
Ironically, most of the “muslims” featured in that website are people who most conservative muslims will not consider as one of their own. Prime example is Sania Mirza who has half a dozen fatwas in her name because she wears short skirts when playing tennis (and sometimes when not).
Maybe Schiller is taking Shirky’s advice and getting aggressive with human resources management, “Arrrgh, termination for cause that will be explained differently every time it’s questioned! SCHILLER SMASH!!!”
I was discussing this farcical, “what do muslims wear” thing with a friend and Ed Hardy shirts came up almost immediately. Good work, Anna, on realizing that thought bubble.
Anna,
You are the only commentator so far to remind us that the Juan bloke trash talked Michelle. What a snipe Juan is. Good riddance.
I was discussing this farcical, “what do muslims wear” thing with a friend and Ed Hardy shirts came up almost immediately.
this is all over my facebook too. i can see where it’s coming from, but it seems too clever by a half. when you say “islamic dress” i think people get a sense of the general trend you’re talking about. as a point of fact the majority of the world’s muslims aren’t wearing “islamic dress” on any given day, but they’d have a sense of what dressing religiously would mean. or at least they’d acknowledge that a substantial number of their co-religionists believe that pious dress has to exhibit certain parameters. the broadest guidelines i’ve heard is that women shouldn’t show any skin above their wrist and ankles, and men shouldn’t show any above knees. there are more specific interpretations about beards and not mustaches, etc. granted, all this is disputed among believers in the islamic religion, just as jews, sikhs, and even christians (conservative protestants in the USA sometimes debate dress just like muslims), dispute what attire is appropriate in keeping with their religious traditions.
most those of us who aren’t religious accept that when people give a sincere religious rationale for their behavior they get more hearing. just how it is. e.g., if you have dietary constraints because of your religion and you’re a prisoner you’re going to get some hearing as to the validity of your claim based on whether your claim is in line with your religious tradition. if you claim you can only eat meat because you’re hindu, people would obviously laugh you out of court. on the other hand, if you claim you have to have to be a vegetarian diet cuz you are hindu, people would listen more seriously. obviously not all hindus are vegetarian (and hindus in kerala even eat beef), but vegetarianism is perceived to a prototypical hindu behavior (even among many non-vegetarian hindus).
additionally, the dress of particular religious groups has both individual and communitarian rationales. the individual ones we know, like modesty. but why do some hasidic jews dress like polish nobility from the late 17th century? is this grounded in the torah or talmud? obviously not. but the particular attire was agreed upon as a way to mark a community off, and also halt the assimilation which was occurring via the jewish enlightenment. a particular dress would then mark off jew from gentile. the amish in the USA did the same “freeze” for reasons of marking themselves off the from the unsaved majority (the “english” as they say). similarly, attire and personal grooming can set off muslims from non-muslims (zoroastrian women in iran used to leave their hair uncovered in rural areas to signal that they weren’t muslims; not feasible today in iran obviously).
the way you dress then is more than just personal caprice or fashion sense. it isn’t arbitrary. as a matter of fact this seems to be in the spotlight mostly because of women in a muslim context, but it matters for men too. one of my uncles in bangladesh dresses in a particular way to signal to people that he’s a pious man, a member of the tablighi jamaat and always on the prowl for dawah. when someone dresses in a way at variance with the norms of the majority society they are making a stand, and sometimes that stand has social-political valence. someone who has a lot of tattoos in some societies is conforming. someone who has a lot of tattoos in the USA isn’t. though perhaps in some subcultures (e.g., you live in parts of southeast portland, oregon) they are. in egypt a muslim woman who leaves her hair uncovered may be making a political stand today, while in in the 1960s a woman who covered her hair may have been making a political stand then.
i have a friend who’s a white guy from texas, and lives in brooklyn. kind of a hipster. but he’s also a scientist. anyway, he let his beard grow out so much that he looked a lot like john walker lindh. when he was in a more formal context and not dressed as a hipster, he did get some weird looks around town, or at least perceived that people treated him a bit differently. this was just a false positive effect.
juan williams was expressing an atavistic and irrational sentiment. but the idea that we don’t judge people by dress, and that particular social, political, and religious groups don’t dress in a ways so as to signal their assimilation or lack thereof, to the society as a whole seems to me to be disingenuous.
First of all, what did you expect from the O’Reilly show? Secondly, if you look at his full comments, it seems like he is voicing his opinion, vs bigotry. Yes, one can do another Shirley Sherrod, and fous & highlight only one comment…but firing from NPR?
Anna, it is awesome of you to plug that new tumblr, Pictures of Muslims Wearing Things !! It makes a great point and so simply, too. I hope more people find/follow it through SM. (and no, I am not running the Muslims Wearing Things tumblr, I surprisingly do not know who does…)
Irrespective of Juan Williams’s personality or his political proclivity, federally funded NPR had no business firing him. If NPR does not want to honor the First Amendment, NPR should lose all gov’t funding and become 100% private. Also, the PC- Islam is a “religion of peace” crowd may like to bury their heads in the sand, but many,many folks all over the world (Americans, Europeans, Indians, Israelis, Thais et.al) are plain fed up of Islamic intolerance and bigotry. Juan simply articulated what many Americans feel privately.
PS: Before the “you are a white racist” crowd show up, my wife is from India.
First amendment provides protection from government actions. Freedom of speech guarantees that you can’t be thrown in jail by the government(federal, state or district) for anything you might say. It does not say that you cant get fired at your place of employment, even if that place of employment is federally funded, if its not directly part of the federal government. Just because I’m entitled to freedom of speech does not mean I am allowed to go thru the halls of my highschool shouting obscenities. Even though my school is a public school, it has a right to take actions. In this case this guys views might be construed as the views of NPR, and it has a responsibility to take actions against him.
Before the “you are a white racist” crowd show up, my wife is from India. Your views about muslims certainly is racist. Your wife being from India doesn’t help that argument, unless ofcourse she too is a Muslim.
Hahaha is this the new “My best friend is black!”? But I agree, you are not a racist, because islam is not a race, although I wouldn’t be surprised if you thought it was, considering you threw in your wife’s race as an afterthought.
And what about this video? Should give Juan Williams a fright.
First amendment provides protection from government actions. Freedom of speech guarantees that you can’t be thrown in jail by the government(federal, state or district) for anything you might say. It does not say that you cant get fired at your place of employment, even if that place of employment is federally funded, if its not directly part of the federal government
You cannot get fired from a federally funded company either for exercising the first amendment. If NPR wants to maintain their right to fire at will, they can go 100% private, but as long as they are using my tax money, they have no right to censor.
Just because I’m entitled to freedom of speech does not mean I am allowed to go thru the halls of my highschool shouting obscenities.
Ummm, wrong analogy. Juan Williams certainly did not shout obscenities. He merely expressed an opinion, which has some justification
In this case this guys views might be construed as the views of NPR, and it has a responsibility to take actions against him. Well, NPR could have simply said that NPR does not endorse or encourage Juan’s views.
Your views about muslims certainly is racist.
“Muslim” is a race? who knew? For the record I mistrust a blond blue eyed Muslim from Kosovo as much as a black Muslim from Somalia
Your wife being from India doesn’t help that argument, unless of course she too is a Muslim.
My point was that, I am an open minded person, but damn right to suspect Muslims because of their terrible track record of peaceful co-existence. Except Turkey (where the army enforces secularism), every other Muslim nations treats non-Muslims like trash. Unless Muslims demand and execute democratic liberal (real liberal not “liberal”) reforms in their countries and stop whining about imaginary discrimination in the West, I and many of my countrymen will always look on them with suspicion.
a. i don’t know what exercising the first amendment means (are you using it in the dr. laura/sarah palin sense of the term?) b. you are wrong (private universities can and do restrict speech all the time, despite receiving funding from the govt). and this has been decided at the scotus level. npr is not acting as part of the govt and therefore the first amendment is not at issue.
I was wondering when the trolls would appear.
You know who has the worst track record? Whites and Christians and Jews. From the 16th century onward, they have colonized and brutalized people from all over the world, wiped out entire groups of people from all over the Americas and Australia, and to this day it is Christian and Jewish troops all over the WORLD. How many Muslim army bases are there around the world compared to what you have. And your troops have killed a million Iraqis in 9 years and have aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, are occupying a stolen land in palestine and creating a country out of thin air for European Jews–a continuation of British colonization…the list goes on.
Here’s the non politically correct version that you might like: American soldiers are rapists and torturers and murders and occupiers, and they are doing what their ancestors have been doing for centuries, to native americans, to blacks, to Indians, to Africans, to aborigines, to Vietnamese, to Koreans, to Laotians, to Japanese. There is no other consistently warmongering group of people than JudeoChristians. that’s a historical fact.
I feel sorry for your Indian wife, who is probably Indian Hindu, upper caste, and we all know what those Indians treat people.
Muslims don’t want you on their land–period. We don’t need your pseudo-democracy–which is nothing more than a sham of lobbyists and the military war complex. You make your money off of occupying and stealing from others. You want Muslims to leave you alone? Get your fucking rapist troops out of other people’s countries.
Also, try paying for the TRUE price of oil–when not subsidized by war and bloods of innocents. Then see how long your great democracy lasts. You should be paying 100/gallon not 3 dollars.
Start learning Mandarin, sweetie–your country isn’t too concerned about democracies when it needs to borrow trillions from the Chinese to fund its wars.
Lrn2History
Here is another Muslim looking dashing in Versace gear. William’s remarks were irrational. His odds of being harmed or not by a Muslim have nothing to do the said Muslim’s garb. If anything, someone plotting a violent act would most likely try to blend in (see pic above) I don’t think he should have lost his job for making an irrational statement. The question of whether obvious display of religiosity makes one nervous and uncomfortable is worthy of debate.
Na
And then you appeared, and answered your own question.
If you had any brains, sweetie, you wouldn’t be looking forward to China replacing America as the global hegemon. They are FAR more ruthless and efficient in taking care of their Muslim threat.
Why don’t we ever hear pakistanis ranting and railing against China for doing to muslims in Xinjiang what India is doing to muslims in Kashmir? Not a single peep…..
Wow…. this conversation just got down to what people really feel… crazy.
KellyUSMC- you obviously don’t know very many Muslims.. if you did, you would know that your stereotypes are, um, stereotypes.
Na- I think you bring up a lot of good points about the way of things in the world– I think people need to realize what the U.S. (among others) are actually doing around the world, and how they are viewed by many people. But you are also kind of angry, in a scary way.
Last question– are they trolls, or people who are actually just expressing their real opinion… ?
“Hey…is it just me, or does Juan Williams seem really preoccupied with what people wear…”
Well, clothes ARE an extension of the skin. Are you saying clothes do not matter at all?
Marshall McLuhan made very interesting observations of how people use clothes as 1. A uniform, to mark identity and belonging to a group; 2. A kind of “armor” (we feel protected by the clothing itself) 3. A ritual garb (clothing used for special occasions, such as a carnival or pilgrimage).
Normally I would delight at any NPR setback because I think blogs like sepia mutiny (and for that matter, GNXP and most academic blogs) are the real thing and NPR is the equivalent of those sterile Africanized Killer Bees (not a bad metaphor for Juan Williams, but really I mean the middlebrow quality of analysis and even entertainment, not the uncle thomishness).
However, I can’t really delight at it now that I know NPR indirectly subsidizes Sepia Mutiny commenters like A N N A to engage in the real, but nonlucrative epistemology/entertainment here.
Why is NPR so shitty? I guess the obvious answer is that there’s an audience that prefers shitty yet liberalish. I can think of better, smarter, and more entertaining versions of every NPR personality, but I imagine they’d lack the audience of NPR.
Lindsey,
Thank you for your response. Yes, I guess I came across as angry. I am not angry, just frustrated. Also, I had just finished reading a few stories from the latest Wikileaks, and it is absolutely disgusting the atrocities being committed by American “heroes.”
Also, the narrative of hate that has become mainstream in America is disgusting, and no one dares to counter for fear of being labeled unpatriotic. The world is angry, and the world is hurting, and teabaggers like KellyUSMC who present these vile views, are the bottom of the barrel for me.
But no, I am not angry, just fed up with the lies that are used to prop up the Military Industry that is in nothing more than the business of murdering innocent people.
People–Americans–should be angry at how our nation has been hijacked by these hateful groups, and how hate has become mainstream.
Historically if you look at at document from these warmongering nations, you will find that all non-whites who have resisted have been labeled “terrorists” — from native americans to the japanese to the vietnamese to koreans to communists to chinese to Arabs to Muslims to blacks. American and European expansion is predicated on that foundational concept of The White Man’s Burden and that is just warspeak for oppression.
At some point, those lies that are used to create this sense of self-entitled justification to murder others needs to stop. How long will the American economy last if one paid the real cost of things? Not very long.
Americans need to pay for the real price of oil. They need to give farm laborers–most of them migrant workers–a decent wage, and then pay the REAL cost of a head of lettuce, not the one based on slave labor, cheap imports, and subsidized control of the world’s resources.
Na does make some good points. Moslems certainly have their issues, but is the West much better? The West has historically also been warmongering, colonizing and subjugating. They are still throwing their weight around now in Afghanistan, Iraq etc. I think people would do well to question these things a little more.
“But no, I am not angry, just fed up with the lies that are used to prop up the Military Industry that is in nothing more than the business of murdering innocent people.
People–Americans–should be angry at how our nation has been hijacked by these hateful groups, and how hate has become mainstream.”
Very good points NA
All very good points, Na, like others have pointed out. Truly It’s all a Jewish and Christian conspiracy. And also of the cunning Hindus who collude with them, marry them, and act as their minions and underlings. Of course, the Muslims are a homogenous
groupnation, like Japan and Vietnam, of repressed vegetarian freedom fighters who practiced Ahimsa through their history,and never lifted a sword for anything other than slicing vegetables. Oil was used by them as a source of energy since the times of Hammurabi, before being cruelly snatched by these bigoted JudeoChristians, leaving countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE languishing in Sub Saharan levels of poverty. And of course Muslims don’t need pseudo democracy- Turkey, Indonesia, Bangladesh and Malaysia are actually nations of Jewish, Hindu and Ahmediyya imposters; proxies of the rapist, imperialist, capitalist, sadist west, who believe in evil concepts like freedom of speech, minority rights and women’s empowerment.Anger and/or frustration are the least of your problems, brave revolutionary…
Well said. It is annoying and baffling how Moslems often try to project themselves as some really oppressed group historically and in the present. As if they are the Aborigines of Australia, the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto, the Aztecs besieged by the Conquistadors etc. In history, Moslems have generally been invaders, marauders and colonists. The Palestinians are the one pretty legitimate cause, though that is really an issue of displacement, and needless to say,the terrorism a few of them indulge in can’t be justified.
Moslems in the present glorify the violence and military conquest that Moslems indulged in, in Asia, Africa and Europe, as if this was some grand noble, humanistic project. How many Moslems in the present, for example, condemn the heinous atrocities of Mahmud of Ghazni, Babur and Aurangazeb, among scores of others in the Indian subcontinent, to say nothing of conquerors in other parts of the world. It’s as if Moslems can’t even think, to say, wait a minute, those conquests were accompanied by enormous killing, destruction, looting, rape and displacement, so perhaps we shouldn’t praise those marauders, even if they did spread Islam, and bring huge areas under Islam. Incidentally, why is ‘bringing huge territory under Islam’ something to be proud of? Asking this of Moslems may be asking for the moon!
I’m pretty sure JW wasn’t debating the general question of obvious displays of religiosity.
That said, it seems to me that why he was fired was because the folks at NPR were already ticked off at him and this was the last straw. Personally, I don’t think this statement itself was a firing offense, and given the optics, if NPR was not happy with him, they were better off reprimanding him internally, and firing him at a later time when it would not have been correlated directly with this incident.
And Ashok and others, remember that all this concern, anxiety, paranoia etc about Moslems, justified or not, is taking place in an environment where no violent partition has taken place, no violent separatist movement is going on( Kashmir), no repeat successful serial bomb attacks have been enacted( Mumbai, Delhi, Hyderabad, Ahmedabad), no personal laws of Moslems being legal, and Moslems, for all intents and purposes, still being small in overall numbers!
Contrast this with what India has gone through( oh, and add 4 wars with a military dominated Islamic state next door, and millions of non-Moslem refugees flowing in from neighbouring countries) and India looks like a shining beacon of restrain, tolerance and patience.
Well said Varun, absolutely correct.
India, for all is perceived faults, has one of the closest things to what a truly free state should look like. There is democracy, no state-defined religion, all types of religions get their holidays off (including Christians, Muslims, Sikhs etc). Non-hindus are at all levels of government and all other areas of the country (film industry, sports, business etc). This despite the fact that the country is 80%+ Hindu. Also, conversion to any religion is not banned like it is in other countries (Japan and China).
Yet people still complain. Clearly, India has problems, but one should not hesitate to highlight the positives also.
I find a particular trait amongst Indians to put India down – particularly amongst NRIs and second gen immigrants and particularly on the global stage. I’m not quite sure why this is, since, in my experience, no other nationality in the world puts itself down as much as India does. By all means, highlight problems in the country and discuss them within the country as this is what will ultimately change it, but there is no need to overplay those problems to a worldwide audience.
Every country has problems, find time to look at the positive as well. No harm in trumpetting successes along the way, while India is getting to where it needs to be.
Good one, “Yes”. Some of the worst of these India critics you refer to are supposedly respectable writers- Pankaj Mishra, and Somini Sengupta of the NY Times. And many others of course. They don’t seem to understand that there is really no other country that India can look to in totality for advice, succour and inspiration. Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Saudi Arabia or China cannot be called models for India, though there are individual qualities about these countries( except Saudi) that India can learn from. But none of them possess India’s mix of democracy, freedom, pluralism, poverty and immense diversity all rolled into one. Of course, at the same time, we should acknowledge that India has problems per se, and that there should be movement and progress in dealing with those issues.
If you believe “Indian” is a “race”, you have little room in presuming someone else’s ignorance.
Oh, don’t be intentionally obtuse. He stated “before the you are a white racist crowd shows up my wife is from india”. Indian is obviously an ethnic group distinct from whites. Clearly his point there was he shouldn’t be accused of racism since his wife is of a different race than he is. Now everyone could easily figure that out so i’m not sure what your point was. Unless you just think it’s fun to go online and tell people about their own ethnic group. Gee, thanks Paul, I didn’t know!
Because Williams expressed his opinion on FOX, which has nothing in common with NPR, was it still okay for NPR to fire him? It seems like NPR reached the boiling point with Williams and this was the last straw for them. Unless he made lots of horrible and out of line comments on NPR, I don’t understand why he was fired. Unfortunately, FOX seized the opportunity to make Williams a shining example of how liberals are close minded, etc.
I don’t agree with Williams’ comment one bit, but I don’t know if he should have been fired. I think a severe warning would have sufficed. (Of course he should be terminated if he violateds NPR’s policy once more after the warning. Or did he violate any policy of NPR while he was on air with NPR? His job title was news analyst and I think that means someone who is not supposed to give their opinion of the news, etc. Maybe this case is like a teacher in a parochial school who moonlights as the main attraction in a local gentleman’s club or whatever?)
Williams was acting as a news analyst on Fox and NPR what he said was something you might share over a beer with your friends but he was in his role as news analyst and he crossed the line with his personal comment. He is supposed to play it neutral. He could have gotten away with saying that he knows people who are uncomfortable flying with someone wearing traditional Muslim garb etc., but he made it first person – unprofessional. NPR did the right thing but mishandled it. As for my own local NPR station, they received far more financial support during their campaign last week because of the firing of Juan Williams.
So what you’re saying is it’s ok to think like/ be an idiot/ racist etc as long as you do it privately and not in public? There is obviously a serious error in the reasoning there…
“As for my own local NPR station, they received far more financial support during their campaign last week because of the firing of Juan Williams.”
This line of argument is bad. You should do things because they are the correct things to do, not because you get money out of doing them.
Money wasn’t the motivation. NPR “doing the right thing” is what motivated some to give to their local NPR affiliate station. That, plus some were motivated to counteract Fox’s calling for an ending of all govt. funds to NPR. Though NPR is not federally funded. (NPR applies for competitive federal grants that’s about 2% of its annual budget.) It’s the local NPR affiliates that will be hurt if all govt. funding is cut.
Since Williams expressed his opinion on FOX, then maybe he should have been dismissed from FOX in addition to NPR. Has Williams broadcast any opinions that are more in line with NPR’s views and gotten reprimanded for making an opinion – whether it was a leftist/right/correct/incorrect statement?
Or, the station management could just change his title to whatever the station calls its people who give opinions and avoid the hassle of firing someone.
I guess the whole discussion started w/ Bill O’Reilly offending two of the hosts and other people on the View a few weeks back. This led to a discussion between Bill and Williams – then Williams offending NPR management and others. Which led to Vivian Schiller offending Juan Williams (and perhaps some portion of psychiatrists and their patients) with some slur about his real or theoretical or imagined psychiatrist. She later apologized for the way Williams’ dismissal was handled, etc.
“They are still throwing their weight around now in Afghanistan, Iraq etc. I think people would do well to question these things a little more.”
People do question such things. But the argument is always along the lines of “I am the victim, I am the underdog, I have the moral high ground, so shut up already”. In reality, no one has the moral high ground. Let us take Na’s casual reference “she’s probably an upper caste Hindu, and we know what they do to people” Well, I am an upper caste Hindu, and I thought to myself, “Muslims were a superpower in the middle ages, in the days of Akbar and Aurangazeb. They were mean to us Hindus. They will be mean to us again if they reinvent themselves, and become powerful once again. They already are mean to Hindus in Kashmir where they are a majority and in a position to enforce their will. Why shouldn’t we kill them all when we have a chance now?” You see, Na is afraid of me, an upper caste Hindu, and I am afraid of him, a Muslim. In the end, all these religious-political debates and wars are about our fears. By not addressing the fears, politicians, historians, columnists, and bloggers do us all a disservice.
uncomfortable,
You are of course absolutely correct. The real solution to this problem is a changing or evolution of human consciousness to a point where we can all see the world as one and thus unite. I’m actually not joking.
I often find myself reacting to the standard western refrain simply because it is so one-sided and it is what I hear the most. Therefore I try and present the counterpoint to that.
Ultimately though, perhaps Gandhi’s idea of being the change you wish to see in the world is the way to go. Perhaps we should all be working on ourselves a little more and pointing fingers at others a little less.
“Gandhi’s idea of being the change you wish to see in the world”
This is the alpha and omega right here…nothing else matters.