Ronald Kessler, of Newsmax, writes: “Reading Williams’ book, you wonder if he is talking about America or about the old Soviet Union. When Williams interviewed President Bush, he tried to graciously soften a question by saying that Americans pray for him but don’t understand some of his actions or policies. Ellen Weiss, NPR’s senior vice president for news, criticized Williams for the reference to prayer because she claimed it meant he was soft on Bush.
“NPR management did not like Williams’ previous book “Enough,” which criticized what he called phony black leaders and a black “culture of failure.” One NPR news executive told him privately that ‘having on staff a black man with conservative social views who was personal friends with conservatives infuriated NPR’s old guard.’
The executive confided that NPR had wanted to fire Williams for years.
“I did not fit their view of how a black person thinks — my independence of thought, my willingness to listen to a range of views, and my strong journalistic credentials be damned,” Williams observes.
NPR’s agenda is evident in a Washington Post opinion piece that ran yesterday by its former ombudsman Alicia Shepard. She said that in 2007, the Pentagon wanted to pull NPR’s credentials in Iraq after Williams “incorrectly” said on Fox that Gen. David Petraeus “had asked the White House for permission to go into Iran.”
A quick check reveals that was a misrepresentation of what Williams had said on the Oct. 21, 2007 Fox News Sunday show. He said that “Gen. Petraeus has been saying he wants the ability, if necessary, to cross the border from Iraq into Iran to stop the idea of weapons flowing from Iran into that theater.”
Journalists are constantly reporting that the Pentagon has contingency plans to invade Iran and any other country that could be a threat. For the Pentagon not to do that would be news. Williams subsequently reported Petraeus’ denial on the air.
The fact that Shepard had to reach back to 2007 to claim an error and then baldly exaggerated what Williams actually said to the point where a correction is now in order shows how desperate NPR management has been to besmirch unfairly Williams’ reputation.
“NPR executives would say things like, ‘You’re surrounded by more conservatives at Fox,’ and I would say, ‘Yeah, but I’m surrounded by more liberals at NPR,’” Williams says.
“They would say, ‘Well, aren’t things edited and slanted at Fox?’ and I would say, ‘Listen, I don’t see that,” Williams says. “In fact, I’m there, and I say what I want to say. On the contrary, here at NPR you guys are always saying let’s not say this. You are editing things to fit your prescribed view of the world. I don’t see that at Fox.’”
Indeed, Fox has a rule that for any political debate, both Democrat and Republican guests must be invited to appear.
The smoldering dispute over what Williams could or could not say became public when he said on Bill O’Reilly’s “The Factor” what most Americans, including many Muslims, feel: that when getting on an airplane and seeing passengers dressed in Muslim garb, he feels apprehension.
After checking with NPR CEO Vivian Schiller, Weiss called him around 5 p.m. to fire him. She said Williams had violated NPR’s standards for editorial commentary.
Weiss ignored the fact that Williams went on to say that we must distinguish between moderate Muslims and Muslim terrorists and protect the rights of the vast majority of Muslims who are peace-loving.
Nor did she refer to the fact that NPR is perfectly happy to have correspondents like Nina Totenberg on the air when they make outrageous left-leaning comments, such as her observation that if there is “retributive justice,” Jesse Helms (Republican NC) will “get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it.”
When Ailes met with Williams at 10 a.m. the day after he had been fired, he said he didn’t want him to have to go home to his wife Delise and tell her he had lost money because of NPR’s actions. In the Newsmax TV interview, Williams tells for the first time how he had to tell Delise he had been fired.
Her response, she tells me, was to use a pejorative swear word to describe NPR executives. As noted in my story “Juan Williams’ Wife: NPR Liberals are Hypocrites,” she had stopped going to NPR social gatherings because she found they consisted only of whites who treated her as if she did not exist. In contrast, she says, Fox News gatherings are racially diverse, and she feels welcomed.
Juan Williams book “Muzzled: The Assault on Honest Debate” deals with the “open-minded” folks at NPR. There is a reason that bloggers are now able to italicize the words open and minded when it comes to liberals, and it is that liberals are only open-minded to beliefs that are similar to theirs.
Most conservatives are no longer surprised when they encounter the confrontational aspects of liberal “open-mindedness”. Juan is not there yet. He is not as accustomed to the nasty nature of liberals as we are. Juan is a liberal. Yet, Juan is an intellectual liberal who, for the most part, attempts to defeat conservatives on an ideological basis. He attempts to defeat conservatives on the issues, intellectually and on a rational basis. He probably lives by the antiquated adage “treat others the way you want to be treated, and they will act in kind” that our fathers taught us. Juan, these are not your father’s liberals. It’s probably why he was surprised by the emotional hysteria of the “open-minded” crowd when he didn’t follow them in lockstep.
Liberals are sympathetic to the plight of the black man, as long as that black fits the stereotype that they’ve created. Or, as Juan Williams states, “I did not fit their view of how a black person thinks — my independence of thought, my willingness to listen to a range of views, and my strong journalistic credentials be damned.”
Liberals are sympathetic to the plight of the female gender, as long as that female is down for their struggle. When you pass the litmus test of being pro-choice, audibly angry at males for your plight in life, and agree with the fact that you don’t need a man to raise a child regardless of the child’s need for a balanced influence from a man and a woman. If you agree with that, and all of the other tenants of modern feminism, you’re in, and they are open-minded to your plight in life, but the minute a woman decides to formulate independent though she—like the black man—is castigated. As the NPR news executive told Juan Williams privately, ‘having on staff a black man with conservative social views who was personal friends with conservatives infuriates’ liberals.
Juan Williams joins the list of Sarah Palin, Clarence Thomas, Christine O’Donnell, Condoleezza Rice, Allen West etc, etc., who have dared to exhibit independent thought that differs from theirs on the issues. All of these individuals, and others, have been subject to special flogging from media types for daring to exhibit thoughts independent of the “minority viewpoint” that liberals believe they should have. I won’t mention the names they call them, because I deem them inappropriate for my blog, but suffice it to say that liberals don’t honor the politically correct speech codes they inflict upon us when they heap their scorn on what they deem traitors to their race and gender.
Most liberals will tell you that conservatives are closed minded, because conservatives cannot be convinced of their point of view. Most liberals will tell you that your point of view is too simplistic, but they don’t have an alternative solution to the problem, but you are a racist, homophobe, sexist, xenophobe, and close-minded for believing that you may have a solution. They also believe that you are a racist, homophobe, sexist, and xenophobic person because you won’t accept the fact that compared to them you’re closed-minded. They’re usually hysterical at the point where you enter their core, and there’s usually no turning back to the friendship you once had with them, so most conservatives walk away and leave them with their “open-minded”, wonderful masks for the sake of harmony in the work place.