Replies

I never heard his father, Billy, ever say one negative word against any other belief.

Not publicly, but like father like son...

Graham: "This stranglehold [Jews' control of the media] has got to be broken or the country's going down the drain,"

Nixon: "You believe that?"

Graham:"Yes, sir,"

Nixon: "Oh, boy, so do I. I can't ever say that but I believe it."

Graham: "No, but if you get elected a second time, then we might be able to do something."

Later...

Graham: "And they're the ones putting out the pornographic stuff."

Later...

Graham: "A lot of the Jews are great friends of mine. They swarm around me and are friendly to me. Because they know I am friendly to Israel and so forth. They don't know how I really feel about what they're doing to this country."

I used to think that Billy Graham was one of the only decent Christian leaders around. But I couldn't care less what he or his family says now. Yeah, Billy apologized. But if he's sincere, what does that say his about earlier comments? Was he wrong?

I'm not going to dispute the fact that there are some radical Muslims out there that want to destroy us. 9/11 proved that without a shadow of a doubt. But all this fear mongering is sheer stupidity. Franklin has no credibility.

Well then, don't listen to Franklin Graham. Listen to any number of others who speak the truth about islam.

It's not fear-mongering. One shouldn't discount the truth just because the messenger is unacceptable.

Take a look at this link al taqiyya which has a lot of information about why we should not believe what moslems in general say to us about jihad.

But don't ignore the truth because you don't like Graham.

Have you never badmouthed a friend in a conversation with someone in a position of power? Not even once in your entire life?

Billy Graham apologized, and that's good enough for me. When someone sincerely apologizes, I am honor bound to lay the matter to rest and not bring it up again.

Billy's comments with Nixon bothered me a lot, too (my wife is Jewish), and I tried to figure out how he could have been saying such things. Finally I came to the following conclusion:

Maybe he was speaking in a larger context, but a narrower scope. The fact of the matter is that Hollywood, TV, popular culture and the news media have all been highly secularizing, coarsening and morally corrosive influences in our society, and these "institutions" have an extraordinarily high level of participation by Jews, albeit, NON-religious Jews. Maybe he was somehow refering to these folks as "Jews" since Jews have been so commonplace among them.

It reminds me of the conundrum of the New Testament, in which "the Jews" is a group aften cast in a negative light, whereas "the people" are spoken of much more positively---yet "the people" are the JEWISH people!