You're not very bright are you?

First...the dude is a radio talk show host...he is paid by his employers to talk....if he talks badly or if they don't like his show they can fire him....same way if a firefighter puts out fires badly he can get the sack. His employers obviously don't like the content of his show, therefore he got fired.

His employers can fire him because they disagree with him. The first amendment does not protect your status as a radio host. He is still free to spout his hate speech on a soapbox on the street corner, he just no longer has another person's radio station to do it with. see the difference?

Howard Stern is a shock jock, he is paid by his employers to shock people, hence his penchant for tasteless and inappropriate conversation. When he says something shocking about Columbine his employers make more money and he gets a riase.

As for Pat Robertson, he's a multi-millionaire courtesy of the stupid people who send him money every month. He owns his TV station so nobody is going to fire him.

He should be arrested though for inciting violence. He should also have his broadcasting lisence revoked. He is using the public airwaves to call for the murder of another human being....what else do you have to do to get your lisence pulled?

---

----------------------------------------------------------
"A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy."
John Sawhill

Except for civil rights laws, employment contracts, unions and other laws affecting terms of employment, you can be fired for just about any reason, or for no reason.

---

-------------------------------------
Steve Perkins

yeah Steve, I am clear on that. My argument isn't about legality of the firing. I know you are free to be fired for any reason

Well then I guess I don't understand you point. They guy said something the station wanted him to apologize for, and he refused. Seems like they had every reason to let him go.

---

-------------------------------------
Steve Perkins

"just out of curiosity, do you believe in the content of his statement? "

There's no real clear yes or no clear cut answer.

But his statement does have more truth to it than many care to admit and many others even realize. Study the basics of the religion and the way it's religious leaders interpret it and look at where almost all this terrorism is coming from and his statement, while may not be all encompassing isn't that far from the truth either.

The sooner everyone realizes this the more understanding of the nature of the threat can be understood, which leads to better comprehension of what measures may be needed.

"The sooner everyone realizes this the more understanding of the nature of the threat can be understood, which leads to better comprehension of what measures may be needed."

Like genocide?

---

-------------------------------------
Steve Perkins

kangaroo, you're Hindu, aren't you? Either Hindu or a Catholic from South East Asia.

My point is the ONLY reason he got fired was because of CAIR, which has issues of its own. For the record here is the full context of what he said:

"Because of the mix of Islamic theology that - rightly or wrongly - is interpreted to promote violence, added to an organizational structure that allows violent radicals to operate openly in Islam's name with impunity, Islam has, sadly, become a terrorist organization. It pains me to say it. But the good news is it doesn't have to stay this way, if the vast majority of Muslims who don't support terror will step forward and reclaim their religion."

I don't think you should get fired for that and I wouldn't apologize for it either. His statement is right on the money.

I think that's an oversimplification. Perhaps CAIR was the catalyst. But he got fired because he refused to apologize as he was ordered to do by his superiors.

If I insult a co-worker, and my boss tells me I'm fired if I don't apologize, and I refuse, I can hardly argue that it's unfair. Same thing here. Boss decided he needed to apologize. He refused. Case closed.

---

-------------------------------------
Steve Perkins

it is simplified but that is the boiled down issue. Would you apologize for something you said if you felt it was correct? Would you apologize if you felt the request was fueled by pressure from an outside group like CAIR?

The analogy isn't the same but regardless he does have to live with his choice not to apologize and I am sure he knew that when he refused to do it.

It's not the ONLY reason he got fired - as has been pointed out already, he had been previously reprimanded for insensitive comments.

---

_______________________________________________

Just curious, did you read the full text of what he said? I posted it above and that comment is not enough to warrant being fired, it was not the comment but the pressure from CAIR that got him fired. If you want to believe it was not I am ok with that.

I read the text.

I posted it above and that comment is not enough to warrant being fired


Says you

it was not the comment but the pressure from CAIR that got him fired

Says you

And what caused him to be reprimanded in the past?

---

_______________________________________________

Again, if you think he should be fired for that comment then fine, I am obviously a minority on this board on this point. I don't think what he said was wrong or near grounds for firing. That aside, I don't know what he was reprimanded for in the past and I don't even know it would matter.

I don't think what he said was wrong or near grounds for firing.

Hold on a minute, way up in this thread I asked you if you were supporting the content of what he said and you denied it, now you're saying you don't think what he said is wrong! If Islam as a whole is "a terrorist state", then do you also advocate a war in Islam in general??? Should all who practice Islam be considered to be enemies of the U.S.???

So basically this thread is about your support of anti-Islamic rhetoric. That is profoundly sad.

---

_________
kangaroo -- please do not read or respond to any of my posts

wow nice jump! What I said above, to be clear, is that my opinion of what he said didn't matter and that remains true.

First, I haven't called Islam a terrorist state.

Second, I don't (nor did he) advocate a war on Islam

Third, I didn't say (nor did he) anything about everyone who practices Islam being enemies of the US. Read below "if the vast majority of Muslims who don't support terror will step forward and reclaim their religion"

Read the comment again and try to climb down off the wall...

Because of the mix of Islamic theology that - rightly or wrongly - is interpreted to promote violence, added to an organizational structure that allows violent radicals to operate openly in Islam's name with impunity, Islam has, sadly, become a terrorist organization. It pains me to say it. But the good news is it doesn't have to stay this way, if the vast majority of Muslims who don't support terror will step forward and reclaim their religion."

Now, I would not have called it a terrorist organization with a broad brush like he did, but his points are well made. Those who practice Islam have lost control of it to these people and it has become a center point of their causes.

I am not anti Islam.

He said: Islam has, sadly, become a terrorist organization

You said: I don't think what he said was wrong, and then: I would not have called it a terrorist organization with a broad brush like he did, but his points are well made. Those who practice Islam have lost control of it to these people and it has become a center point of their causes.

I would make the case that your statements are bigoted, stereotyping hate speech. When the Catholic members of the IRA were engaged in terrorist acts in the UK, did you make statements like the ones above against all Catholics? There are millions, if not billions, of people in the world who practice Islam. You may not know a single one, but please try to refrain from lumping them all together with the terrorists.

---

_________
kangaroo -- please do not read or respond to any of my posts

GJS, I know you will not believe me but I will state it anyway. I am not lumping all of them together. I totally see that there are people practicing a religion they believe in and hold dear and that the same religion is being used as a catalyst for a certain group with in the religion. I am not anti Islam in general but I am against the versions that some people are teaching / following. I am very concerned that the people who are using it to justify their violence seem to be much louder and have more of a grip on the future of the religion.

This is exactly why I didn't answer your question above because I knew you would make it about me and it is not.

I'm not sure I believe that anymore.

---

_______________________________________________

Partial Genocide a-la Hiroshima and Nagasaki may not be that unrealistic. Let's say a few more 911's or even something similar on a nucleur scale. How do you combat an in grain mentality in so many? Good news is that the Democratic leaders sincerely do not want this and the tolerance is pretty high.

You may think this is harsh, but reverse situation, given the chance do you think them terrorists would even hesitate for a moment?

I certainly hope these Fundamentalists will diminish and not expand in numbers and determination and that Muslims as a whole can underatand that it is not Muslims and Ignorant Infedels despite what their religion says because if they don't change they may be unwittinly drawing themselves to such an end.

Haris you're off base. I am neither of any of the race or religions you are guessing. Yes I do reside in SE Asia for now and have been for the last 15 years and I am planning on returning to OZ. I come from from a Christian upbringing, mother is Methodist, attended school in an Anglican private boarding school.

Really have no liking for any institutionalized religion and seeing what's going around the world and comparing the mentalities of those from different religions which is all around me, I must say that my most unfavourite is Islam. My dislike of the mentality that this religion brings has absolutely nothing to do with ... because I am of this religion I don't accept that religion. This if you've seen some of my posts is the very thing I really dislike about religion, any religion as a whole ie the way religions cause divisiveness and conflict amongst mankind.

Well, cough, cough, perhaps some tolerance of the intolerant is called for, but a radio station has some public responsibilities, including regulatory ones, that individuals don't "enjoy".

If Graham had opined that all WASPS were Nazis, or that all Blacks were thieves, or all Jews were greedy, or all Poles stupid, would you have felt as sympathetic? I mean, lad, you've bothered to post a message in a public forum about THIS alleged abuse of free speech when so many other abuses are extant and readily available. Would we be errant if we conclude from this post that you think the comment has some merit?

Where and when you take a stand matters.

FWIW, I wouldn't have fired this fellow for his comment, but I also wouldn't have hired such a bonehead in the first place.

-Robert

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

1) "Because of the mix of Islamic theology that - rightly or wrongly - is interpreted to promote violence, added to an organizational structure that allows violent radicals to operate openly in Islam's name with impunity, Islam has, sadly, become a terrorist organization."

Thing is the Koran is an exact photocopy of the one that is in heaven and has no room for interpretation only blind obedience word verbatim.

2) "It pains me to say it. But the good news is it doesn't have to stay this way, if the vast majority of Muslims who don't support terror will step forward and reclaim their religion."

From my interaction with Muslims even my modernized buddies, superbike racers and cyclists some I have known from years ago, I get the impression that the vast MAJORITY of Muslims are actually very empathetic toward the cause of the terrorists and are quite happy about 911 and other terrorist incidents. I find myself avoiding Muslims who previously I felt to be fairly close friends. As induividuals I still love them to bits but under the Muslim influence that is so much part of them I see very different persons. Religion in it's all powerful influence is craziness....literally a kind of mental disease that clouds one's judgement and shapes one's ideas deeply.

Robert, I am not sure what your point is regarding "my stand". In the end, what happens to this guy doesn't mean much to me personally, my life will go on. Sorry if I missed your point but the purpose was not to "take a stand" but to discuss it. It has been interesting to me to read most of the replies and read why they think he is wrong.

As for your statement about if he had opined that all WASPS were Nazis etc. I would ask you to go back and read the quote again. Please notice that he didn't say one word about all Muslims being anything, in fact he explicity refers to "violent radicals ". What he did do was make a comment about the current state of Islam as an organization. This, to me, is the same as people calling the Catholic church out for the pedophile scandal, there was no insinuation that all Catholics are pedophiles but rather the church was doing a horrible job of handling the situation and his quote is the same.

FWIW, I wouldn't have fired this fellow for his comment, but I also wouldn't have hired such a bonehead in the first place. This is an interesting point. I wonder what his reputation was when they hired him? I wonder if they knew he was likely to make controversial statements and hired him for that purpose? Maybe they liked his style and the revenue it created until they got a call from CAIR?

"Religion in it's all powerful influence is craziness....literally a kind of mental disease that clouds one's judgement and shapes one's ideas deeply. "

I aqree with that, and I think it's valid for all the religions.