View Full Version : Juan Williams
The Third Man
10-21-10, 03:28 PM
OK someone has to ask. Was Juan Williams fired from NPR because he told his truth? I don't think I have to post any link. Everyone is aware of the situation by now.
Where is the NAACP stepping in on the behalf of Juan? A black man being fired for making an honest statement reguarding his uneasiness is now an offence deserving termination? What about the ACLU?
Didn’t Barack Obama relate a story reguarding his erstwhile mother crossing the street to avoid what she saw as a threat, ‘typical white woman’?
AVGWarhawk
10-21-10, 03:31 PM
Post the link for posterity reasons.
Takeda Shingen
10-21-10, 03:32 PM
Actually, I'm not familiar with the story at all. I don't watch cable news, and I don't listen to NPR. I gather from what you have said that he was fired for comments of some sort, but I don't really know anything about the guy other than he is a cable news commentator. Didn't know he was on NPR.
What do you think about his firing?
AVGWarhawk
10-21-10, 03:32 PM
And no he should not have been fired.
The Third Man
10-21-10, 03:35 PM
NPR on Juan Williams.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130712737
AVGWarhawk
10-21-10, 03:37 PM
Where is Al Sharpton? Will he not defend this man? Will he agree to the firing? What is if this was a white person who spilled out his real feelings?
The Third Man
10-21-10, 03:37 PM
Actually, I'm not familiar with the story at all.
I'm not aware that Barack Obama is POTUS. Please don't insult the membership's intellagence. It is insulting.
AVGWarhawk
10-21-10, 03:39 PM
I'm not aware that Barack Obama is POTUS. Please don't insult the membership's intellagence. It is insulting.
If he does not know about the story he does not know. I just happened to see it this morning and read it quickly. If I had not I guess I would be insulting.
Get off the high horse. :O:
Takeda Shingen
10-21-10, 03:40 PM
I'm not aware that Barack Obama is POTUS. Please don't insult the membership's intellagence. It is insulting.
I was not insulting anyone. I don't watch or listen to any of his programs, and I haven't seen any news today, so I really didn't know anything about it. This is something that you find strangely offensive. So much for attempting engagement.
The Third Man
10-21-10, 03:42 PM
If he does not know about the story he does not know. I just happened to see it this morning and read it quickly. If I had not I guess I would be insulting.
Get off the high horse. :O:
It is hard to be on a high horse when so often accused of being disengenuos. But those who are on the high horse are given a pass.
The Third Man
10-21-10, 03:44 PM
I was not insulting anyone. I don't watch or listen to any of his programs, and I haven't seen any news today, so I really didn't know anything about it. This is something that you find strangely offensive. So much for attempting engagement.
Well then I am your news source. lol
Takeda Shingen
10-21-10, 03:45 PM
Well then I am your news source. lol
I would not be surprised if you were to have a newsletter.
AVGWarhawk
10-21-10, 03:45 PM
Well then I am your news source. lol
I think I will wait for the 4th man instead. :O:
The Third Man
10-21-10, 03:46 PM
I would not be surprised if you were to have a newsletter.
news letter. too slow.
AVGWarhawk
10-21-10, 03:46 PM
It is hard to be on a high horse when so often accused of being disengenuos. But those who are on the high horse are given a pass.
And....back on topic. I think the man should have kept this job but then it would have created a double standard no?
The Third Man
10-21-10, 03:47 PM
I think I will wait for the 4th man instead. :O:
Should I give you possible future names now? lol
Takeda Shingen
10-21-10, 03:48 PM
Should I give you possible future names now? lol
No, that would ruin the future fun.
The Third Man
10-21-10, 03:49 PM
Will Juan Williams be able to see his psychiatrist to help him get over his truth problem now that he has been fired from NPR?
Takeda Shingen
10-21-10, 03:50 PM
news letter. too slow.
Nope, newsletter.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/newsletter
The Third Man
10-21-10, 03:56 PM
And....back on topic. I think the man should have kept this job but then it would have created a double standard no?
Not only a double standard. But a double standard that could be defended, by Juan's contribution to FNC. It is the left's not liking free speach.
Molon Labe
10-21-10, 04:00 PM
PC run amok. It keeps getting worse every year.
I'll take honesty and candor over mealy-mouthed mush from someone who's afraid to seem insensitive.
Rockstar
10-21-10, 04:11 PM
OK someone has to ask. Was Juan Williams fired from NPR because he told his truth? I don't think I have to post any link. Everyone is aware of the situation by now.
Where is the NAACP stepping in on the behalf of Juan? A black man being fired for making an honest statement reguarding his uneasiness is now an offence deserving termination? What about the ACLU?
Didn’t Barack Obama relate a story reguarding his erstwhile mother crossing the street to avoid what she saw as a threat, ‘typical white woman’?
NPR like FOX, MSNBC, CBS They are out to make money, if you give an opinion that offends the majority of the listener's then out you go because its a. either bad for business or b. they are trying to drum up business. They know quite well who their audience is, they format their shows by that knowledge, it makes money.
The Third Man
10-21-10, 04:12 PM
It is PC run amok. Juan Williams was the most unapologelic leftist view on Fox News. Now where the leftist view come from? I bet the lefties are after Mira Laisson next.
The Third Man
10-21-10, 04:15 PM
NPR like FOX, MSNBC, CBS They are out to make money, if you give an opinion that offends the majority of the listener's then out you go because its a. either bad for business or b. they are trying to drum up business. They know quite well who their audience is, they format their shows by that knowledge, it makes money.
Nothing wrong about making money. If the opinion is outside the mainstream the money will flee. All the sources you list make money on advertise'rs money. Not on purely political lean.
Nothing wrong about making money. If the opinion is outside the mainstream the money will flee. All the sources you list make money on advertise'rs money. Not on purely political lean.
NPR also gets subsidized by the government. When the Republicans have some say over their funding, NPR is left of center, but very close to the center. Since they've not had to worry the last few years, they've drifted farther left IMHO.
Note that I listen to NPR every single morning, it's the only broadcast media I hear (or see since I don't watch TV news) every day. I'm pretty aware of how the broadcast "feels" on a day to day basis. I have a friend at NPR, too (and Bloomburg, and the NYT (know a lot of reporters, lol)).
That said, you are right, NPR takes adverts like any other, they just call them "contributions" and pretend they are above it all. They also get in-kind contributions, too (notice how they rank high on google... accident? Um, no.)
Tribesman
10-21-10, 04:48 PM
Juan Williams was the most unapologelic leftist view on Fox News.
Would that make him slightly to the right of Pinochet then?:rotfl2:
The Third Man
10-21-10, 05:17 PM
Would that make him slightly to the right of Pinochet then?:rotfl2:
It would make him on par with NAACP, as shown by is books. And with NOW, by shown by is books. His views were left. And was more on the side of NPR than not.
Would that make him slightly to the right of Pinochet then?:rotfl2:
:har::har::har::yeah:
The Third Man
10-21-10, 05:32 PM
Fox News Chief Executive Roger Ailes handed Williams a new three-year contract Thursday morning, in a deal that amounts to nearly $2 million, a considerable bump up from his previous salary.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-juan-williams-20101022,0,4294425.story
Tribesman
10-21-10, 05:51 PM
Lets face it when someone starts by saying ...I am not a bigot but.....it usually indicates that they are going to say something dumb and bigoted.
Juan certainly followed that pattern.
The Third Man
10-21-10, 05:53 PM
Lets face it when someone starts by saying ...I am not a bigot but.....it usually indicates that they are going to say something dumb and bigoted.
Juan certainly followed that pattern.
But all his previous works, both in print and on NPR shows he isn't bigoted except for blacks.
Tribesman
10-21-10, 06:02 PM
But all his previous works
So what?
A commentator is only as good as his last noticed comment, he said something dumb and it got noticed.
Simple isn't it.
Bubblehead1980
10-21-10, 06:57 PM
Not a thing wrong with what he said.Williams wasn't saying Muslims should not be allowed to fly, he simply said that given what happened on 9/11 when he sees Muslims on a flight that he is aboard, he gets a little nervous.The man was just being honest, not a bigot, a justified feeling.The Left uses the PC crap to try and stifle free speech.I hope Williams fights NPR on this, not to get his job back but just on the principle.The reason the left has been able to institute this pc crap on our society is it went unchecked for so long due to guilt but people are fed up.
The Shirley Sherrod remarks were examples of real bigotry, but she had an apology from the President in addition stood up for by the media etc because she is a black woman and prob a Democrat, more than likely a Liberal.Williams is a moderate who does not subscribe to the ignorant victim mentality that people like Jackson or Sharpton exploit, plus he works for Fox, thus he is an uncle tom etc in the eyes of trash like Sharpton, Jesse Jackson or NAACP(Now days , tThe Black version of the KKK but without the hoods)
Williams should take legal action and once Republicans take back Congress, should cut ALL funding to NPR.
AVGWarhawk
10-21-10, 08:15 PM
The Shirley Sherrod remarks were examples of real bigotry
She was misquoted to the hilt and what she said was cherry picked to show she was some kind of bigot. Truth be told when the full content of what she said was presented it was quite the different picture then what was attempted to be painted. In short, the women was railroaded for no good reason and yeah...she deserved the apology from all involved right up to the White House.
nikimcbee
10-21-10, 08:31 PM
Time to boycott NPR for racism.:woot:
The Third Man
10-21-10, 08:34 PM
Lets start by taking away the 2% tax payer funding from NPR .
nikimcbee
10-21-10, 08:53 PM
Lets start by taking away the 2% tax payer funding from NPR .
Deal.
Not a thing wrong with what he said.Williams wasn't saying Muslims should not be allowed to fly, he simply said that given what happened on 9/11 when he sees Muslims on a flight that he is aboard, he gets a little nervous.The man was just being honest, not a bigot, a justified feeling.The Left uses the PC crap to try and stifle free speech.I hope Williams fights NPR on this, not to get his job back but just on the principle.The reason the left has been able to institute this pc crap on our society is it went unchecked for so long due to guilt but people are fed up.
Yeah, he said what any rational person actually thinks. Anyone who doesn't is lying, plain and simple. This reminds me of when Jesse Jackson got some bad press for saying that if he was walking alone at night and there were black guys behind him, he'd feel more nervous than if they were white guys. His larger point, that there was a cultural problem that made this unfortunate, and that they needed to fix it made sense, but the remark at face value got all the press.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/250613/juan-williams-and-double-standards-victor-davis-hanson
^^^ excellent observation.
I don’t agree with a lot of what Williams argues, but I like and respect him a great deal because he is intellectually honest, judicious, and logical, and always brings a certain dignity and calm to his opinions. NPR should know that by now. In sum, I wager that if Williams had had a second job at MSNBC or PBS, this would not be an issue. His Fox affiliation clearly is the subtext of the entire controversy.
The Third Man
10-21-10, 09:29 PM
So what?
A commentator is only as good as his last noticed comment, he said something dumb and it got noticed.
Simple isn't it.
That was NPR's opnion and is certainly the force of cross the aisle comfort which the left is often wanting.
That was NPR's opnion and is certainly the force of cross the aisle comfort which the left is often wanting.
If NPR was "regular" news, it would be their right to fire him for whatever reason they liked, frankly.
They take government money, which IMO makes them beholden to the voters. They should have to vet all their stories with a bipartisan commission before airing them.
Oh wait, that's absurd.
Remove all public funding for NPR/PBS. That includes frequencies, etc.
nikimcbee
10-21-10, 09:44 PM
If NPR was "regular" news, it would be their right to fire him for whatever reason they liked, frankly.
They take government money, which IMO makes them beholden to the voters. They should have to vet all their stories with a bipartisan commission before airing them.
Oh wait, that's absurd.
Remove all public funding for NPR/PBS. That includes frequencies, etc.
I say, if you donate to them, when "the hand comes out" tell them no, I don't donate to racist organizations. I think it's time these lefty purveyors of PCness get a hefty dose of their own medicine.:yeah:
The Third Man
10-21-10, 09:46 PM
If NPR was "regular" news, it would be their right to fire him for whatever reason they liked, frankly.
They take government money, which IMO makes them beholden to the voters. They should have to vet all their stories with a bipartisan commission before airing them.
Oh wait, that's absurd.
Remove all public funding for NPR/PBS. That includes frequencies, etc.
My point is that NPR hurt themsevles by dismissing Juan Williams. Now he is Fox News for $2 millions.
Tribesman
10-22-10, 01:34 AM
The Shirley Sherrod remarks were examples of real bigotry, but she had an apology from the President in addition stood up for by the media etc because she is a black woman and prob a Democrat, more than likely a Liberal.
You really do live in a bubble seperated from reality.
Yeah, he said what any rational person actually thinks.
Actually what he says lacks rationality which is the problem with what he said.
His statement was entirely rational. In it he was describing a feeling that was largely irrational. A rational statement about a partially irrational feeling. It's rational to have a 2d look at someone who is Muslim on an airplane in the modern world. Is that thought entirely rational? No, as Williams basically said, it is not. Still, it's just rational enough a worry that any sensible person would have it even if they properly assign it a low order of probability.
So Williams is in trouble for saying the entirely rational (me paraphrasing), "I have this basically irrational fear since 9-11 of Muslims on planes. That doesn't mean that they are terrorists—in fact the vast majority clearly are not, but I think about it."
Rich Lowry has good points:
I know Williams a little from my own commentary gig at Fox, and can say he’s exactly what he appears — a likable, calls-them-as-he-sees-them liberal who, on most things, defends the Obama administration, sometimes passionately, always civilly. If Juan Williams is outside the bounds of polite discourse, then those bounds have collapsed to the point of suffocating constriction.
What Williams said on The O’Reilly Factor is that when he gets on a plane, he’s worried if he sees people “in Muslim garb” who are “identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims.” In this, he was simply acknowledging an anxiety that is felt by millions of Americans who fly.
This may not be entirely rational (the odds of being victimized by terrorism are very small), and Muslim garb is an unlikely marker of a terrorist in a U.S. airport anyway (a terrorist is likelier to try to fit in). But the connection between Muslims and terrorism exists in the public consciousness because Muslim extremists do routinely carry out acts of terror in the name of their religion. This can’t be said of Catholics, Anglicans, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Jews, Quakers, Confucians, Rastafarians, or even worshipers of the Aqua Buddha.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/250665/closing-npr-s-mind-rich-lowry
Tribesman
10-22-10, 11:39 AM
His statement was entirely rational.
The statement was entirely irrational.
A rational statement about a partially irrational feeling.
An irrational statement about irratrional feeling.
If he had said he got nervous on a plane when he saw a normal looking person in a FDNY baseball cap and a Go Navy hoody with a Stars and Stripes badge pinned to it because they might be a really sneaky terrorist going over the top to blend in then it would be a rational statement about a rational feeling. But to have it over someone who dresses like they might be a muslim is pure bollox and totally irrational no matter which way you look at it.
AVGWarhawk
10-22-10, 12:05 PM
The statement was entirely irrational.
An irrational statement about irratrional feeling.
If he had said he got nervous on a plane when he saw a normal looking person in a FDNY baseball cap and a Go Navy hoody with a Stars and Stripes badge pinned to it because they might be a really sneaky terrorist going over the top to blend in then it would be a rational statement about a rational feeling. But to have it over someone who dresses like they might be a muslim is pure bollox and totally irrational no matter which way you look at it.
Perhaps it was rational stereotyping? Whatever the case...the man should not have been fired. End.....
Bubblehead1980
10-22-10, 01:21 PM
You really do live in a bubble seperated from reality.
.
No, quite in tune with reality, thanks.
Sherrod admitted to not helping a white farmer and automatically thinking he was racist etc. Now the video was unfairly edited to not show the entire speech but what the woman said was racist and I have no doubt she still feels about the same, except she did remark its not just about race, she saw its about rich and poor also, so she added some class warfare views also.
Maybe she did change, but the point is what she said was racist and admitted while performing her job to letting her views influence her work.Yet the media stood up for her bc she is a black woman, a Democrat and Liberal to boot.
Williams simply said he feels nervous when he sees a muslim on a plane, guess what?? Most people in US do and there is nothing wrong with that, at all.Now is someone were saying Muslims can't fly because of this, it would be different that was not said.
O Reilly last night asked why Sharpton etc are not coming to his defense, Williams said because he is not "the cookie cuter angry black liberal" and that is very true.Williams does not let his skin color define him, he thinks for himself, he doesnt have a victim mentality that morons like Sharpton etc exploit.
AVGWarhawk
10-22-10, 02:07 PM
Maybe she did change, but the point is what she said was racist and admitted while performing her job to letting her views influence her work.Yet the media stood up for her bc she is a black woman, a Democrat and Liberal to boot.
The media stood up for her because she was wrongly beaten about the head and neck. It was the worst knee jerk reaction I have seen in a long time. Fired immediately. Chastised right up to the White House in a matter of minutes. She was completely and utterly railroaded for no good reason other then speaking the truth and how she actually handled the personal issue she was having. It had little to do with her being a black women or a democrat liberal to boot.
Even Bill OReilly offered an apology. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/22/bill-oreilly-apologizes-t_n_655411.html
An irrational statement would be to—describing his irrational feelings—"I like popcorn! Muslims scare me on planes!"
Instead, he rationally described a partially irrational fear. It is only partially irrational. It would be irrational to fear his own kids, or mother, for example (unless he knows they have been involved in terrorism). Muslims on planes, however, are more likely to be terrorists than, say, Quakers.
What % of intentional airline disasters in the last 30 years have involved muslims? I rather imagine they are grossly over-represented.
Anyway, he was not irrationally discussing his feeling, he was in fact rationally dissecting them.
The statement was entirely irrational.
An irrational statement about irratrional feeling.
If he had said he got nervous on a plane when he saw a normal looking person in a FDNY baseball cap and a Go Navy hoody with a Stars and Stripes badge pinned to it because they might be a really sneaky terrorist going over the top to blend in then it would be a rational statement about a rational feeling. But to have it over someone who dresses like they might be a muslim is pure bollox and totally irrational no matter which way you look at it.
Thats true that its stupid statement and in many cases terrorist don't look like terrorists(generally speaking) but you should see a faces of regular people when an Arab with big bag would enter a bus in a period of time when Israel signed peace treaty with PLO and buses blew up almost every week.
Thats a BASIC instinct that happen to be with most if not all of people.
Tribesman
10-22-10, 05:07 PM
Williams simply said he feels nervous when he sees a muslim on a plane
No he didn't, which is why his statement is even more irrational.
Bubblehead, if you want to comment on what he said then comment on what he said, not what you in your alternate reality think he said.
An irrational statement would be to—describing his irrational feelings—"I like popcorn! Muslims scare me on planes!"
No, its an irrational statement he made as its neither reasonable or logical.
It's entirely reasonable. If I'm walking down a dark street, and look back upon hearing footsteps and it's two guys (white or otherwise) wearing business suits, I'd instantly become less nervous (for good reason). If instead, it was two gangbanger looking minorities... I'd be fearful. They might just be wearing the style, but the chances of them being criminals are worlds higher than the guys in suits.
My reaction would be appropriate if "irrational." Note that we've evolved emotional reactions because they are adaptive.
Being nervous with muslims aboard is certainly not entirely irrational.
It's entirely reasonable. If I'm walking down a dark street, and look back upon hearing footsteps and it's two guys (white or otherwise) wearing business suits, I'd instantly become less nervous (for good reason). If instead, it was two gangbanger looking minorities... I'd be fearful. They might just be wearing the style, but the chances of them being criminals are worlds higher than the guys in suits.
My reaction would be appropriate if "irrational." Note that we've evolved emotional reactions because they are adaptive.
Being nervous with muslims aboard is certainly not entirely irrational.
Dude you know that he's just going to disagree with anything you say. I don't know why you or anyone even bothers...
In any case Juan Williams has the last laugh here. He ends up with a 2 million dollar contract and NPR and the liberal viewpoint they represent comes off looking biased just before election. Game, set and match.
True. The dark street analogy is courtesy of Jesse Jackson, BTW, I cannot take credit for it (he made the "gangbangers" simply "black youths" so I made mine less ambiguous).
When I get on a plane with my family, I absolutely have a situational awareness I lacked entirely before 9-11 (like on 8-11-2001 when I was flying into JFK from Casablanca and helped a young guy fill out his immigration form and he didn't even know what college he was going to though that was his claim. Anyway, I look around, and have a rough plan just in case (including likely guys to get to help). I see other guys doing the same, there is usually a sort of guy nod when we realize what we're doing, lol.
Tribesman
10-22-10, 06:37 PM
I don't know why you or anyone even bothers...
Maybe because not everyone is closed minded like the few nuts you mention at every opertunity:yeah:
So its august the troll on his usual rants again
It's entirely reasonable.
Look at the statement he made.
Being nervous with muslims aboard is certainly not entirely irrational.
Look at the statement he made
It makes no sense.
Take two west africans both wearing their sunday/friday finest on a wednesday, which one is the muslim and which is the christian?
Now take two or three Indians, look at their clothes, which one is the muslim?
Do the same with a couple of arabs....see it makes no sense.
That is why it lacks even the flake of rationality that could make the statement he made rational.
If he had said he gets nervous if there are muslims on a plane then irrational as it may actually be then it is slightly rational, but to say its if he sees people dressed like what he thinks muslims dress like it makes him scared then he has an irrational fear based on an irrational concept.
What you have been doing tater is attempting to explain the rationality of a statement he never made instead of dealing with what he said.
What you have been doing tater is attempting to explain the rationality of a statement he never made instead of dealing with what he said.
And what you have been doing is imagining that anyone here actually cares for your constant and uninvited criticisms. Do you come to this board for any other reason than to try and prove to yourself how superior you are over everyone?
Try bringing something to the conversation besides your usual egotistic crap and people might stop seeing you as the troll you are.
Tribesman
10-23-10, 03:21 AM
And what you have been doing is imagining that anyone here actually cares for your constant and uninvited criticisms
well August why are you reading it?
Join the other pillocks using the ignore function.:woot:
Perhaps I could then add a little tag line to my sig space, "proud member of augusts ignore list".
But then again I am sure have read similar signatures before on this forum.
Try bringing something to the conversation besides your usual egotistic crap and people might stop seeing you as the troll you are.
So you are unable to address the fact that people are managing to defend the statement only by changing the statement which implies they are unable to defend it at all.
So that means you bring nothing to the conversation at all which is possibly worse than those who are defending the content of the comment by changing it to something else.
Actually since nothing in your last post even touches on the topic in question doesn't that make it pure trolling again on your part:yeah:
UnderseaLcpl
10-23-10, 08:13 AM
Lets face it when someone starts by saying ...I am not a bigot but.....it usually indicates that they are going to say something dumb and bigoted.
Juan certainly followed that pattern.
Does it? And here I was thinking it was indicative of the fear of litigation that PC society has fostered. Certainly, you've read legal "intellectual property" disclaimers enough to understand how desperate people are to avoid the perception of association, bias, neglect, misinterpretation, and so on and so forth. Why, then, should it follow that someone would not precede their opinion with a disclaimer? Unless, of course, you are of the opinion that everyone should be posessed of universally nonoffensive opinions, something which you are clearly incapable of.
What Williams said is that the Muslim extremists have generated a fear of Islam for him, personally. That's it. If he were to say that Muslim Fundamentalists have generated a condemnation of Islam by him for their treatment of women, would this be an issue? That stance doesn't seem to affect many Women's Rights groups. Why is it such a big deal now?
---------------------------------------------------------------
All this is ignoring the fact that NPR has no justification for being a Federally-funded institution in the first place. For those who disagree, I invite you to argue for Federal funding of my favorite station, 92.1 KTFW "Country Gold" radio, which regularly provides updates on commodity prices for the agricultural economy and a wide selection of classic country music between the news breaks. Surely, it performs just as valuable a community service as NPR does. Unfortunately, the Federal government has absolutely no business funding it or regulating its content beyond the FCC, which is itself, in any case not relating to bandwith, a dubious extension of the ICC. Providing a political or value-based message cannot ethically be interpreted as being within the realm of a fiat power.
Personally, I'm not a fan of Williams. Even with his conservative views, he's a bit too liberal for me. He supports rent-control and the like. Nonetheless, he doesn't deserve this kind of publicly-funded censorship. He should be able to say whatever he wants to say in whatever publicly-endorsed venue he wishes. For a public institution to condemn his opinion is tantamount to an abridgement of free speech.
Bubblehead1980
10-23-10, 09:49 AM
[QUOTE=Tribesman;1520113]No he didn't, which is why his statement is even more irrational.
Bubblehead, if you want to comment on what he said then comment on what he said, not what you in your alternate reality think he said.
I watched the show when it occured and during the recap etc, thats all he said.Muslims on a plane make him nervous....
Tribesman
10-23-10, 10:19 AM
Does it?
what did he say?
Did he say anything that relates to your mitigating factors?
No...simple, plain as, dealt with:know:
I watched the show when it occured and during the recap etc, thats all he said.Muslims on a plane make him nervous....
Oh god save me from the dumbasses.
If you think that the words he spoke are relative to the words you wish he spoke then you are nuttier than a sack of almonds.
Look at the words he said, from the start of this topic numbnuts have been trying to justify the words used by using words that were not used even in the slightest on a wet wednesday in a month of sundays even by a huge stretch of the imagination.
In fact doesn't it make the whole "looky what he said"vtopic nothing more than a strawman who is lo0oking for his brains in somewhere that sure ain't Kansas.
well August why are you reading it?
Because I wanted to give you a chance to answer the one question you ignored:
"Do you come to this board for any other reason than to try and prove to yourself how superior you are over everyone?"
Personally I think that is your only reason but here's one last chance to prove me wrong. Isn't that what you love to do so much?
Tribesman
10-23-10, 10:25 AM
Personally I think that is your only reason but here's one last chance to prove me wrong. Isn't that what you love to do so much?
Please august can't I pinch the "proud member of ignore list" line? after all a troll like you should relish in it eh:har:
Please august can't I pinch the "proud member of ignore list" line? after all a troll like you should relish in it eh:har:
I see you have dodged the question once again. I'm actually starting to pity you.
Tribesman
10-23-10, 10:32 AM
Come along darling, have you anything to say on the subject in hand?
Oh I see you attribute a claim to myself that I have never made...much like the topic about a statement that was never made.
At least you are consistant
So August, do you have a problem with reality?:har:
Come out from under the bridge you wingnut in denial.
Go on let me put your "proud member of" tag in a sig.
Maybe because not everyone is closed minded like the few nuts you mention at every opertunity:yeah:
So its august the troll on his usual rants again
Look at the statement he made.
Look at the statement he made
It makes no sense.
Take two west africans both wearing their sunday/friday finest on a wednesday, which one is the muslim and which is the christian?
Now take two or three Indians, look at their clothes, which one is the muslim?
Do the same with a couple of arabs....see it makes no sense.
That is why it lacks even the flake of rationality that could make the statement he made rational.
If he had said he gets nervous if there are muslims on a plane then irrational as it may actually be then it is slightly rational, but to say its if he sees people dressed like what he thinks muslims dress like it makes him scared then he has an irrational fear based on an irrational concept.
What you have been doing tater is attempting to explain the rationality of a statement he never made instead of dealing with what he said.
I'm dealing with exactly what he said.
I said his STATEMENT was rational. Read. Not that his FEELINGS were rational.
I've said this every time.
He was rationally discussing his IRRATIONAL feelings. He said:
“When I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”
He means what in the US is "political" muslim clothing. Hijab, burqua, robes, etc. Not West Africans, not people from the subcontinent, but Arab garb (when your typical American muslim dresses like... an American. Those that dress like Arabs on domestic flights are doing so as a demonstration.).
In his statement he is RATIONALLY discussing his feelings. His feelings do not have to be rational for his statement about his feelings to be rational.
Schizophrenics have cycles of lucidity. If during a sane, lucid period, a schizophrenic discusses his feelings from a period when he WAS "crazy" his statement is NOT irrational. He could say, "I felt like everyone was talking about me when I was out in public." He can go on to say he knows that's crazy, NOW. His feelings at the time were irrational. His statement about those feelings later NOT IRRATIONAL.
Williams was not being irrational on Fox. He was rationally discussing partially irrational feelings. On the plane, when he's feeling that, then he's not being entirely rational, he's being emotional. In the studio... the situation is hypothetical.
So again, he got in trouble for rationally discussing partially irrational feelings. And they are only partially irrational. I welcome proof of recent intentional airline disasters caused by non-muslims.
Tribesman you tying so hard i think even jesus would crusify you.
Come back in 2000 years.....
UnderseaLcpl
10-23-10, 12:24 PM
what did he say?
Did he say anything that relates to your mitigating factors?
No...simple, plain as, dealt with:know:
Um... yeah, actually.:-? He said quite a bit about that. In fact, he specifically mentioned that not all Muslims are extremists and cautioned others against making generalizations. Did you even watch the whole thing?
Come along darling, have you anything to say on the subject in hand?
Oh I see you attribute a claim to myself that I have never made...much like the topic about a statement that was never made.
At least you are consistant
So August, do you have a problem with reality?:har:
Come out from under the bridge you wingnut in denial.
Go on let me put your "proud member of" tag in a sig.
Dodge, dodge, dodge. :roll:
Tribesman
10-23-10, 07:53 PM
Dodge, dodge, dodge
Troll troll troll ,but hey you have problems with english so you do deserve some pity:har:
He means what in the US is "political" muslim clothing. Hijab, burqua, robes, etc. Not West Africans, not people from the subcontinent, but Arab garb (when your typical American muslim dresses like... an American. Those that dress like Arabs on domestic flights are doing so as a demonstration.).
He made no distinctions about their nationality, or what particular flavour of muslim garb so once again you are trying to justify the statement by changing it.
Though your statement there actually makes it worse since its even more ludicrous .
Um... yeah, actually
And how does that relate to the comment in question?
Troll troll troll ,but hey you have problems with english so you do deserve some pity:har:
No, not a troll at all, just asking a simple question which you obviously won't answer. The fact you have to resort to childish insults just illustrates that quite well don't you think?
Tribesman
10-23-10, 09:13 PM
No, not a troll at all, just asking a simple question which you obviously won't answer.
:har::har::har::har::har::har:
Simple question:har::har::har::har::har::har:
Your question is nonsense august and you should know that as its such obvious nonsense.
Though your pesistance might suggest that you don't realise its nonsense
:har::har::har::har::har::har:
Simple question:har::har::har::har::har::har:
Your question is nonsense august and you should know that as its such obvious nonsense.
Though your pesistance might suggest that you don't realise its nonsense
Dodge, dodge, dodge... :roll:
Tribesman
10-23-10, 09:16 PM
No dodge at all you troll, the answer is that your question is silly.
No dodge at all you troll, the answer is that your question is silly.
Silly or not you still can't answer it. :hmm2:
Sailor Steve
10-23-10, 11:36 PM
Tribesman, you showed your true colors when you called him "darling". Why is it that every discussion you become involved in devolves to this level? And why is it that half the time your very first post is for no other purpose than to insult somebody?
Tribesman
10-24-10, 04:55 AM
Tribesman, you showed your true colors when you called him "darling".
Do you think I should have been more affectionate?
Why is it that every discussion you become involved in devolves to this level?
That would be a generalisation wouldn't it.
And why is it that half the time your very first post is for no other purpose than to insult somebody?
Well in this case I thought Pinochet would be a more fitting and relevant measure than Ghengis Khan.
Silly or not you still can't answer it.
When did it become a requirement to answer silly questions?
Though I did read the other day that the Dems are rethinking their idea of not responding to silly questions as so many people are unable to see the sillyness of the questions being made.
So back to Tater.
After his opening words which actually were not relative to the incident or to the previous episode they were discussing, he then goes on to make a comment which he immediatly shows to be wrong. So at what point then does he rationalise his comment that caused the stir?
And no it isn't at the later point as then he is talking about comments by the others not his own one that didn't make sense.
Then back to Sailor Steve in case he has any input into the actual topic.
Why do you think the only way many people are able to justify the comment is by changing the comment?
Sailor Steve
10-24-10, 09:01 AM
Do you think I should have been more affectionate?
Cute. But not helpful.
That would be a generalisation wouldn't it.
Would it? It may be an overstatement, but I wouldn't have mentioned it if it wasn't so common.
Well in this case I thought Pinochet would be a more fitting and relevant measure than Ghengis Khan.
Again, cute, but my point still stands - you tend to snipe at people before you say anything real. Some of the earlier posters on this particular thread desverve it, but Tater and August are usually less one-sided in their arguments than those others, and than you as well.
When did it become a requirement to answer silly questions?
Though I did read the other day that the Dems are rethinking their idea of not responding to silly questions as so many people are unable to see the sillyness of the questions being made.
On the other hand, declaring a question silly is a good way to avoid answering it. Declaring it so doesn't make it so.
Then back to Sailor Steve in case he has any input into the actual topic.
Point taken. I haven't commented thus far simply because I don't consider myself qualified to. That said, a large part of this thread has consisted of people taking potshots at each other, and your "comments" have devolved to name-calling and dismissal.
So here's my comment:
Why do you think the only way many people are able to justify the comment is by changing the comment?
How exactly was it changed? I've just now watched the entire clip, and Williams and O'Reilly were arguing with each other for most of it. Within the context, I don't see Williams' comments as irrational at all.
I enjoyed the comments from the far left:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTfQyzlVsyU&feature=related
So, I'm surprised you think Williams was irrational, especially considering his very liberal stance for the rest of the segment, and I think NPR's action was entirely political.
XabbaRus
10-24-10, 09:40 AM
I'm closing this thread as it long turned into a personal battle and away from discussing whether williams did anything wrong and should or shouldn't be fired.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.