Replies

Mr. Graham's sterling reputation as a healer and bridge-builder was so at odds with Mr. Haldeman's account that Jewish groups paid little attention, especially because he denied the remarks so strongly.
"Those are not my words," Mr. Graham said in a public statement in May 1994. "I have never talked publicly or privately about the Jewish people, including conversations with President Nixon, except in the most positive terms."

That was the end of the story, it seemed, until two weeks ago, when the tape of that 1972 conversation in the Oval Office was made public by the National Archives. Three decades after it was recorded, the North Carolina preacher's famous drawl is tinny but unmistakable on the tape, denigrating Jews in terms far stronger than the diary accounts.

It is especially repugnant that he would bear false witness. There is no excuse for what he said nor how he lied about it. I wonder if his own past had anything to do with his defense of Bill Clinton. At least he is admitting the truth and repenting now.

There is no excuse for what he said nor how he lied about it

The article doesn't quote his remarks in full. But why is it "antisemitic" or beyond excuse to say 1) that Jewish people are disproportionately represented in the media - - that's simply a statement of fact - - - and 2) that Jewish people in the media tend to be very liberal. I agree with Graham that liberals in the media (whether Jewish or Gentile) ARE undermining this country - - they certainly helped speed our defeat in Vietnam, which was the crisis when Graham made his remarks. If Southern Baptists dominated the media, it wouldn't be anti-Baptist to point out that fact - nor to point out that the media would be conservative as a consequence.

As far as "he lied about it," what he has been quoted as saying (on tape) in the article and what he denied saying years ago, are different quotes. Note that the article writer, David Firestone, uses a journalistic "slight of hands to get around that FACT as shown in bold below:

It seemed impossible, when H. R. Haldeman's White House diaries came out in 1994, that the Rev. Billy Graham could once have joined with President Richard M. Nixon in discussing the "total Jewish domination of the media." Could Mr. Graham, the great American evangelist, really have said the nation's problem lies with "satanic Jews," as Mr. Nixon's aide recorded?

..... "Those are not my words," Mr. Graham said in a public statement in May 1994. "I have never talked publicly or privately about the Jewish people, including conversations with President Nixon, except in the most positive terms."
That was the end of the story, it seemed, until two weeks ago, when the tape of that 1972 conversation in the Oval Office was made public by the National Archives. Three decades after it was recorded, the North Carolina preacher's famous drawl is tinny but unmistakable on the tape, denigrating Jews in terms far stronger than the diary accounts.

The fact is, what Haldeman's diaries quoted Nixon as saying isn't an accurate rendition of what Billy said on the Nixon tapes. So Firestone uses a journalist slight of hands by saying "Far stronger than the diary accounts. " Yeah, Firestone, slick move, but intellectually dishonest. From http://chnm.gmu.edu/chnm/clio.html:

The great triumph of the CD-ROM is that it highlights and deepens (if such a thing is possible) that Nixonian shallowness. Who can resist typing "Jews" and "Jewish" into the search window? Within seconds, we have a list of the 64 relevant entries and are reading Nixon telling Haldeman that the Rev. Billy Graham "has the strong feeling that the Bible says that there are satanic Jews and that's where our problem arises."34
34 Graham has denied the quote, saying "These are not my words and this does not reflect the high view I hold for the nation of Israel and for Jewish people, many of whom are my close friends." Quoted in James M. Perry, "Book-CD Pairing is Sure to Start a Trend," San Diego Union-Tribune, June 7, 1994, p. 10.

One might acuse Graham of bias in his 1972 conversations, but don't pretend that the tapes have him saying what Haldeman quoted, I haven't heard it, and it isn't even in the article. If its in the tapes somewhere, fine, bring it on, and give it to us, and we can say Graham lied in his denial. But don't call the man a liar about one quote and then show as evidence totally different quotes. That too is lying.

A final note. If we had YOUR private conversations on tape, and picked out just one conversation, could we "prove" you were a bigot? Or have you never, ever, made a bigoted comment in your life? Yeah, right, lol....