NPR fires Juan Williams for admitting he’s human

October 21, 2010

Yesterday, National Public Radio terminated its contract with liberal commentator Juan Williams over remarks he made on Bill O’Reilly’s show on Fox:

Here’s a transcript, courtesy of Big Journalism:

The move came after Mr. Williams, who is also a Fox News political analyst, appeared on the “The O’Reilly Factor” on Monday. On the show, the host, Bill O’Reilly, asked him to respond to the notion that the United States was facing a “Muslim dilemma.” Mr. O’Reilly said, “The cold truth is that in the world today jihad, aided and abetted by some Muslim nations, is the biggest threat on the planet.”

Mr. Williams said he concurred with Mr. O’Reilly.

He continued: “I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the 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.”

Mr. Williams also made reference to the Pakistani immigrant who pleaded guilty this month to trying to plant a car bomb in Times Square. “He said the war with Muslims, America’s war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don’t think there’s any way to get away from these facts,” Mr. Williams said.

And for that, Williams was fired:

NPR said in its statement that the remarks “were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”

So, let me get this straight. In an era when Muslims bent on jihad blow themselves up on crowded buses and in pizza parlors, when Muslims bent on jihad hijack planes and kill nearly 3,000 Americans in one day, when a Muslim bent on jihad takes to heart the Islamic doctrine of Wala’ wa Bara’ (“loyalty and enmity”) and guns down his fellow soldiers, when even the general manager of al-Arabiya television says

It is certainly true that not all Muslims are terrorists, however, sadly we say that the majority of terrorists in the world are Muslims.

… and on and on around the world: London, Edinburgh, Madrid, Beslan, Mumbai, Bali, Thailand, Nigeria, and on an on in a trail of blood blazed by Muslims bent on jihad…

…Juan Williams admitted to a very human failing: he gets nervous around Muslims. He’s not saying every Muslim is a terrorist; he is not saying he hates all Muslims or that all Muslims are jihadists. He is admitting to an instinctive reaction based on years of witnessing horrifying things done by Muslims waging jihad.

News flash: I was once robbed at gunpoint by a Black man. To this day, I still get a bit nervous when a Black male stranger approaches me on the street. It’s irrational, I usually ignore it, but it’s still there: a normal human reaction based on our survival instinct. And I bet if you look around hard enough, you’ll find Black men who have had bad experiences with White cops and get nervous when encountering another White cop.

Would NPR fire them, too?

What this really shows is how narrow the limits are on free speech at that bastion of liberalism, National Public Radio. Express an opinion beyond the bounds of progressive, multicultural orthodoxy and you get punished. And it’s another example of how the Left in general pays only lip service to intellectual freedom: you have the freedom to express any thought as long as it’s on the approved list.

Conservative women, minorities who stray off the liberal reservation, and Black liberal pundits who are honest about their feelings, on the other hand, can just shut up.

PS: Why in God’s name is the United States government giving taxpayer money to a media organization that punishes people for exercising their First Amendment right to free speech?

PPS: And how odd this happened right after “progressive” billionaire (and Nazi collaborator) George Soros’ “Open Society Foundation” a $1.8 million grant to pay for more reporters. Must be a coincidence.

LINKS: As you can guess, lots of sites are writing about this today. In addition to Big Journalism (and do read their post for a good survey of NPR’s “editorial standards and practices”), see also The Jawa Report, Fausta, Power Line, Legal Insurrection, Hot Air, and Michelle Malkin. On a related note, The Los Angeles Times’ Andrew Malcolm reports that most Americans feel political correctness has gone too far. I’ll bet Juan Williams would agree with that.

UPDATE: Sammy at Yid With Lid argues that Juan’s presence on Fox was NPR’s real problem, not so much what he said.

UPDATE II: Oh, now they’re after Mara Liasson, too.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Our good friends: Pakistani Intelligence behind Mumbai massacre

October 21, 2010

In late November, 2008, the world stood transfixed in horror as Muslim terrorists waging jihad (jihad fi sabil Allah) went on a murderous rampage in the Indian city of Mumbai. At the time, there was strong suspicion that the terrorists, who belonged to a jihad group called Lashkar e Taiba (LeT), had received some support from the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency. But the evidence, while suggestive, wasn’t considered conclusive.

Now it is. An American who became involved with LeT, David Headley, acted as a scout for LeT, picking targets and reporting to… the ISI:

Pakistan’s powerful intelligence services were heavily involved in preparations for the Mumbai terrorist attacks of November 2008, according to classified Indian government documents obtained by the Guardian.

A 109-page report into the interrogation of key suspect David Headley, a Pakistani-American militant arrested last year and detained in the US, makes detailed claims of ISI support for the bombings.

Under questioning, Headley described dozens of meetings between officers of the main Pakistani military intelligence service, the ISI, and senior militants from the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) group responsible for the Mumbai attacks.

He claims a key motivation for the ISI in aiding the attacks was to bolster militant organisations with strong links to the Pakistani state and security establishment who were being marginalised by more extreme radical groups.

Headley, who undertook surveillance of the targets in Mumbai for the operation, claims that at least two of his missions were partly paid for by the ISI and that he regularly reported to the spy agency. However, the documents suggest that supervision of the militants by the ISI was often chaotic and that the most senior officers of the agency may have been unaware at least of the scale and ambition of the operation before it was launched.

I’m not sure which is worse: that Pakistan’s intelligence service was involved in the operation, or that it’s so poorly supervised, fractured, and riddled with Islamists that it can run rogue operations senior officials are unaware of. Regardless, I’m wary of the “the bosses didn’t know” argument, as Pakistan has had a long history of using LeT and similar groups as proxy forces against India in Kashmir and have been suspected of facilitating other spectacular attacks inside India.

Pakistan’s possession of nuclear weapons prevents India from taking strong military action against Pakistan in retaliation (as they have every right to do), but we should nevertheless stay aware that our “ally” in the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban is quite willing to play a double or triple game and that it would be foolish to trust them completely.

Via Big Peace.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)