According To Michael Graham
Michael Graham now has a job. That didn't take long, did it?
Nevertheless, a few aspects of Graham's firing from WMAL still need exploring. A few days ago, Michael Graham wrote on the matter of his dismissal from WMAL in an article which I found buried in my inbox.
Some excerpts from "How To Get Fired" by Michael Graham:
"If I had called the Catholic Church a haven for pedophiles because I believed their doctrine of priestly celibacy caused pedophilia, I would still have my talk-radio job today.Graham is correct about CAIR's connections to Hamas . In the exact words from an article in WorldNetDaily,
"If I had called the Christian faith a terror-sponsoring organization because of abortion-clinic and Olympic bomber Eric Rudolph, I would still be an employee of the ABC Radio Company. I know, because I hear these arguments made in the media nearly every day....
"When I was suspended without pay a month ago, my smartest and closest friends told me, 'Graham, relax. This is all going to blow over. They are never going to fire you over this. C'mon-this is CAIR we're talking about!'
"And it's true that few public advocacy groups have as little legitimacy or credibility as the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Some of their members have been jailed for terrorism. Others have been deported. They are still reluctant to criticize Hamas and Hezbollah, and it took them three weeks after 9/11 to condemn Al Qaeda!"
"CAIR is a spin-off of the Islamic Association For Palestine, identified as a 'front group' for Hamas by two ex-FBI counterterrorism chiefs."For additional information as to why CAIR may be reluctant to condemn two organizations which have been designated as terrorist in orientation, see Matthew Epstein's testimony before the United States Senate Judiciary Committe Subcommitte, Saudi Support for Islamic Extremism in the United States.
Continuing now with Graham's commentary:
"Here's the bizarre part: I started my on-air conversation about the unique, tragic relationship between Islam and terrorism on the day of the second London subway bombing. No one at ABC Radio objected to my comments.What's that? Not a single advertiser pulled ads? ABC must have had an attack of conscience, then. I thought that talk radio usually based their hire-and-fire decisions on the ratings factor and on the financial support of the sponsors. Wasn't Graham hired by WMAL in the first place because he already had a reputation for outspoken controversy? I believe that WMAL enjoyed the ratings which Graham delivered--until he "crossed a line," apparently. Who drew that line? CAIR?
"I repeated the comments on Friday. Again, no problem. Same thing on Monday. Tuesday, I spent my entire three-hour show – at the request of ABC management – talking about modern Islam as a terrorist organization.
"And for that, I was suspended and fired. What happened? How did the words that were insignificant one Thursday suddenly become unforgivable the next?
"It was all about CAIR. Late that Monday they sent out press releases, called advertisers, complained of my 'hate radio' to ABC. By Thursday, ABC had capitulated and suspended me, and CAIR immediately sent out a press release insisting ABC hadn't gone far enough and I had to be fired. Eventually, I was.
"Meanwhile, more listeners stood by me, not a single advertiser pulled their ads..."
Later in his article, Graham continues:
"Think about this: Dan Rather went on the air with a story based on a fake Air National Guard memo, lied about the steps taken at CBS to 'authenticate' it, and after he was caught dead in a lie, still maintained that the bogus story was true…and he kept his job!Michael Graham is already employed elsewhere, and his dismissal from WMAL has received some attention from the mainstream media.
"I gave an honest, reason-based opinion about the challenges facing Islam, quoted facts, polls and public comments accurately – and I was fired...."
I'm guessing that the Michael Graham story will soon fade away. Americans' memories are notoriously short.
What has CAIR learned from the Michael Graham story?
Will the power of CAIR soon fade away? Not without a push.
Now, before you go thinking, "There goes AOW again! She a real Janie-One-Note. She's repeating herself and writing another blog article about Michael Graham," read the following August 24, 2005 information from Michael Graham's web site:
"I almost choked on my Irish Breakfast tea this morning while being interviewed by Jimmy Barrett at WRVA in Richmond, VA. He told me that CAIR is now saying they never demanded I be fired and that they had nothing to do with ABC's decision. Well, that's interesting. Let's rewind the tape to Friday, July 29th, the day after I was suspended:Readers, you will have to chose whom to believe--Michael Graham or CAIR, an organization with ties to Hamas. Your call.
"DC Radio Host Suspended Over Anti-Islam Remarks; CAIR Applauds WMAL's Move, Says Graham Should Be Fired
"7/29/2005 10:40:00 AM
"To: National Desk
"Contact: Ibrahim Hooper, 202-488-8787 or 202-744-7726 or ihooper@cair-net.org, Rabiah Ahmed, 202-488-8787 or 202-439-1441 or rahmed@cair-net.org, both of the Council on American-Islamic Relations
"WASHINGTON, July 29 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today applauded a Washington, D.C., radio station's decision to suspend without pay a talk show host who stated repeatedly that 'Islam is a terrorist organization.'
"CAIR said WMAL-AM morning host Michael Graham should be fired for his Islamophobic remarks, for other statements made before and after the most recent controversy and for his refusal to apologize for those comments.
"OK.....what am I missing here?
"...Apparently CAIR believes that the mainstream media are so in the bag that CAIR can deny the existence of their own press releases and get away with it...."
posted by Always On Watch @ 8/25/2005 10:19:00 PM
16 comments
16 Comments:
Remember the good old days, when we killed the enemy rather than anguish mindlessly over what might offend the enemy?
It'll be interesting to see how WMAL's ratings go after this.
After all, how many Islamic terrorists do you think listen to WMAL vs. talk-radio buffs?
If it were a station in my town, I'd never listen to it again, and I'd make sure that their advertisers knew it.
Beamish has a point - pithy and valid.
When Graham gets his new gig (I think that's what they call it) let's support him. He's got my ear. Hopefully, we can listen over the 'net if we are out of reach of his new station.
CAIR twirls the mainstream media on it's finger the way Meadowlark Lemon could with a basketball.
It is disgusting, isn't it?
I watched Aaron Brown's interview (CNN) with Graham, and no matter how many times Graham attempted to explain the underlying issue of his statement, Brown kept going back to the issue of "racial intolerance." And apparently, O'Reilly hasn't a clue either.
We could argue that making statements about Muslims isn't racial profiling because Islam isn't a race. We could also argue that truth is truth, whether perceived as intolerant or not. We might even ask, why should anyone be tolerant of terrorists? But of course, such questions are simply reflective of the conservative variety of common sense.
Anyway, I was so disgusted with Aaron Brown that I vowed to boycott his program for as long as the grass grows, the wind blows, and the sky is blue. What a dipshit.
The problem with bagging the Saudis is that they are so well in, in Washington.
O'Reilly isn't all that impressive against anyone but babbling leftists, but that's the nature of having a 20-to-1 brain cell advantage.
A saavy marketer would produce a series of Bill O'Reilly vs. Al Franken video games and action figures for these two to bolster their flagging careers upon.
There is hope. One day Fox will replace O'Reilly with somebody.
you mean Air America isnt a raging success?
AOW, have you heard a webcast or anything from Graham since he is supposed to be on KFI-AM in LA?
Mr. Beamish,
Oh, for the good old days! As you put it, "when we killed the enemy rather than anguish mindlessly over what might offend the enemy."
LOL at your comment about O'Reilly's brain-cell advantage!
Pastorius,
You make an excellent point about CAIR's manipulation of the media. Taquiyya in application?
Your analogy is an apt one.
Exile and Unaha-Closp,
How can we go about finding out just how much Saudi controls CAIR?
Exile, Jason, and G (and anyone else),
I've never been much of a talk-radio listener as I prefer listening to audio books while I'm driving.
I guess that I'll have to learn how to listen to the radio via my computer.
Brainstorming here...
1. WMAL is owned by ABC, which is owned by Disney, right?
2. Who's making the hire-fire decisions at Disney affiliates?
3. Is Saudi heavily invested in Disney?
I would imagine that donations to CAIR are public knowledge. We'd just have to get through all of the fronts until we traced it back to the Saudi's. That may (or may not) be difficult.
However, given Saudi support of Wahabiism worldwide, I would be very, very surprised if they didn't have a hand in it somewhere. After all, CAIR seems to be spreading the same word (although not when speaking to the Western media, which happily goes along with them)to Muslims as the Wahabii's.
Yes, WMAL is owned by Disney. From what I gather, the hire/fire decisions are made locally, but that doesn't mean that pressure from the top couldn't be put on local managers.
I doubt that the Saudi's are invested in Disney. Disney is just politically correct and, therefore, afraid to offend anyone who isn't white.
Anyone know when the last Disney cartoon/movie came out that featured a white male as the hero?
The only one that I can think of (and I have a six-year-old daughter, so I've seen them all) is called "The Black Cauldron" and, though I can't seem to find a date on it, it would seem to be at least 20 years old (just looked it up. I was right: 1985).
Since then, all heroes are either female or non-white. Now, I'm no "white-power" kind of guy, but don't you think that, if they weren't being politically correct, Disney might have found a white, male hero to portray in the last 20 years?
That right there explains why Disney, like all politically correct organizations, caved to CAIR. Like all idiotic PC groups, they're more worried about offending a tiny minority than their huge base.
The Left has no logic, even in business decisions.
I previously taught with a gent who was born in Croatia. Nice enough guy, but a little eccentric. For one thing, he claimed that the holocaust was nothing more than anti-German propaganda -- it never happened. Thankfully, he wasn't teaching history. But he also claimed that Disney was racist because the characters in the animated film (Lion King?) clearly showed prejudice between the lions and the hyenas.
Yeah, he was an amazing guy.
Exile,
What has me puzzled is the sudden change in Chris Berry's position on Graham's controversial comments. At first, he supported Graham--according to both the Washington Post and Michael Graham. Pressure must have come down from the top, on either the part of ABC or Disney.
I don't know much about the modern Disney films.
Have you seen Aladdin? I haven't, although I love the music from that film.
After what I learned about Project Hope, I may be inordinately suspicious of the "Muslim" connection. See my article @
http://northernvirginiastan.
blogspot.com/2005/08/
muslim-origins-of-
project-hope.html
Mustang,
Are you serious about that fellow from Croatia? I myself have met a few deniers of the Holocaust, but "prejudice between the lions and the hyenas" is quite strange. Is there some symbolism which I'm not seeing?
Post a Comment
<< Home