The Michael Graham Page
Continuing reports of how Michael Graham lost his wingnut radio host job for lying and spreading hate.
AUG 22, 2005
Graham Won't Be Back at WMAL
but he's still playing his supporters for fools
The hot news is that Michael Graham sent out a presss release to a massive email list shouting "Free Speech Loses" because he no longer works at WMAL. Quite a matyr, this Graham.
But first of all, Michael Graham didn't get fired, according to the radio station and his own report. He refused to negotiate and go back to the station.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Sunday, August 21, 2005
Contact: Michael Graham
CAIR WINS, FREE SPEECH LOSES AT ABC RADIO
Radio Station Gives In To CAIR Demands, Fires Host For Comments Regarding Islam
The following is a statement from Michael Graham, former mid-morning host at ABC Radio's 630 WMAL in Washington, DC:
The First Amendment and I have been evicted from ABC Radio in Washington, DC.
On July 25th, the Council on American-Islamic Relations demanded that I be "punished" for my on-air statements regarding Islam and its tragic connections to terrorism. Three days later, 630 WMAL and ABC Radio suspended me without
pay for comments deemed "hate radio" by CAIR.
CAIR immediately announced that my punishment was insufficient and demanded I be fired. ABC Radio and 630 WMAL have now complied. I have now been fired for making the specific comments CAIR deemed "offensive," and for refusing to
retract those statements in a management-mandated, on-air apology. ABC Radio
further demanded that I agree to perform what they described as "additional outreach efforts" to those people or groups who felt offended.
I refused. And for that refusal, I have been fired.
It appears that ABC Radio has caved to an organization that condemns talk radio hosts like me, but has never condemned Hamas, Hezbollah, and one that wouldn't specifically condemn Al Qaeda for three months after 9/11.
As a fan of talk radio, I find it absolutely outrageous that pressure from a special interest group like CAIR can result in the abandonment of free speech and open discourse on a talk radio show. As a conservative talk host whose
job is to have an open, honest conversation each day with my listeners, I believe caving to this pressure is a disaster.
I for one cannnot apologize for the truth and I cannot agree to some community-service style "outreach effort" to appease the opponents of free speech.
If I had made a racist or bigoted comment -- which my regular listeners know goes against everything I believe in -- I would apologize immediately, and
without coercion. When I have made inadvertent fact errors in the past, I apologized promptly and without hesitation.
But we have now gone far beyond that, with demands that I apologize for the ideas my listeners and I believe in. It is not a coincidence that, after my suspension on July 28th, WMAL received more than 15,000 phone calls and emails protesting my removal from the airwaves.
Why such a huge response? It wasn't about me; The listeners I spoke to said they felt betrayed by my suspension because the vast majority of them agree with me on the subject of Islam. By labeling my statements as unacceptable, these listeners felt that WMAL management was insulting them, too.
I cannot speak for anyone else, but I care about the listeners of 630 WMAL. I respect them and I appreciate the amazing support they have given me.
I could not dishonor their principled support for free speech by giving into these demands. I cannot join ABC Radio in bowing to CAIR's wishes. And I
will not apologize for my opinions or retract the truth.
The whole point of the Michael Graham Show is what my listeners and I call the "natural truth," those obvious facts about modern life that the p.c. police and mainstream media believe should never be discussed. That includes the tragic, but undeniable relationship between terrorism and Islam as it is constituted today.
The conversations my listeners and I had on this subject were not offensive or bigoted in the least. In fact, Ibrahim Hooper of CAIR (who has appeared on my show several times) credited "criticism from talk radio" in part for the recent fatwa against terrorism issued by a group of US Muslim scholars.
Ironically, it was issued the day before I was suspended.
That's the real tragedy here. The people who most need free speech and open dialogue on the issues facing Islam today are America's moderate Muslims. These are people of good will who have the difficult job ahead of reforming and rescuing their religion. They need all the help they can get.
The decision to give CAIR what it wants-a group with well-publicized ties to terrorists and terror-related organizations--will make it harder for the
reformers to successfully face Islam's challenges. Still worse, silencing people like me will make it easier for Islamist extremists to dismiss all sincere
calls for reform as mere "bigotry."
When CAIR is able to quell dissent and label every critic a "bigot," the chilling effect is felt far beyond ABC Radio and 630 WMAL. If anyone is owed an apology, it is the moderate, Muslim community who have been failed once again by the mainstream media.
Second, Graham wasn't in trouble for telling the "truth" as he is claiming -- in fact, there were out-and-out lies involved. And these lies were in the service of an extremist message that was the equivalent of yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theater.
Some of the lies and issues, enumerated...
1. One blatant falsehood that Graham knowingly repeated on his show is "If the problem is 'extremism' and not Islam as it is currently constituted, why are ALL of the suicide bombers Muslim?" But the fact is, not only are all suicide bombings not by Muslims, but MOST aren't. Most suicide bombings have been done by the Tamil Tiger rebels, a secular, Hindu-based group in Sri Lanka. Graham was corrected on air about this, reacted as if he already knew, and then went on to repeat it again anyway.
2. Another blatant falsehood he constantly repeated is that the Islamic community and leaders implicitly condone terrorist violence by not condemning it. Even before the recent fatwa, Muslim organizations in the US and around the world have condemned terrorism constantly and overwhelmingly since 9/11. There's one long list at http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/terror.htm and at http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php there is a list Muslim leaders worldwide condemning terrorism (including previous fatwas).
3. And how about these quotes?
- "That is another sad fact about Islam today, that a moderate Muslim is just someone who wants to kill the Jews". ("Fact"?)
-"I will gladly take the violence against Muslims versus the violence from Muslims over the past five years."
And he made this off-the-wall charge against the Council for American Islamic Relations:
-"because as they tell you at CAIR, you know who runs the media, the J-O-O's." (i.e. meaning "Jews".)
So his arguments were based on lies and reverse Jew-baiting, and all during a message of incitement (one bomb threat to CAIR and one assault against a Muslim woman within WMAL's broadcast area occurred during the height of Graham's manufactured controversy). It is a clear abuse of the public airwaves and his responsibilities as a broadcaster. He's not much of a free speech martyr, unless you call putting a "kick me" sign on your own ass and then getting booted an assault against the Bill of Rights.
In emails he never responded to any of these points above except the "I will gladly take" statement from point 3 above, and that was to rephrase it until it would mean something completely different (except that it was nonsensical. From Graham: "I, personally, would rather suffer the level of violence suffered by Muslims in America since 9/11 rather than me, personally, having to suffer the level of violence Americans have suffered at the hands of Muslims since 9/11. Wouldn't you? In other words, far more Americans have died at the hands of Muslims here in America than vice versa."). No expression of regret that someone might have taken the statement as it sounds, and he never bothered addressing the other falsehoods that came out of his mouth.
It looks like Graham enjoys getting fired and proclaiming himself a hero, since it has happened to him more than once before (Graham supporters may not realize they're backing the kind of personality who started making jokes about the Colombine shooting victims before the bodies were even cold.) Either that, or he just does this all on purpose to get publicity, in which case he is playing his supporters for fools.
Website Revisionism and Morose Fans
Speaking of problematic quotes on your own website, fans of Michael Graham, the disgraced WMAL-AM talkshow host currently under a seemingly never-ending suspension for gross acts of incitement and lies, were momentarily cheered today when they saw Graham's personal website was back online after disappearing for several days. But they must have realized there was something missing, and that the entire contents of his homepage, which once included the blog featuring his oft-repeated falsehoods such as "all" suicide bombers are Muslims, had been wiped clean of all evidence of the statements that got him kicked off the air in the first place (still cached here).
Is Graham, author of “Redneck Nation” (now available for $1.76), no longer proud of his lie-to-provoke strategy that has got him fired once again? Could two hate-attacks within one week during the height of the controversy he manufactured have caused him to regret his wanton romp into extremist land? Graham supporters, who may not have realized they were backing the kind of personality who started making jokes about the Colombine shooting victims before the bodies were even cold, are starting to post less and less on the website (which, kid you not, has the address themartyr.fatcow.com) that was set up to cheerleader the war cheerleader, and their posts are sounding more and more desperate (how can a radio station ignore loony zealots in need of a life? how?) -- in other words, like a lot of laptop warriors sound after getting reality checks. All those Graham Crackers out there better keep wearing their Free Michael Graham T-shirts (and covering their asses) while they can, because they are quickly going out of style.
Michael Graham is/was a WMAL-AM talkshow host and is/is just another loudmouth who gets paid by the Fox propaganda empire to spew dumbed-down bile onto the airwaves in order to cultivate more and more knee-jerk yahoos in the U.S of A. But Graham went a bit too far for a DC-based jock and got suspended after spending a few shows on the general topic of “Islam is a terrorist organization.” The Council for American-Islamic Relations took great offense, launching a campaign against him. How successful has it been? Major advertisers on WMAL publicly distanced themselves from Graham, his blog containing proud notations of his Daniel Pipes-spattered ideas was taken down from WMAL website and going one three weeks now he hasn't been heard on the station, though his slot is still called the “Michael Graham show” and still appears in the station's program guide. As of today even his personal website is offline and “under construction” -- posting his resume?
Meanwhile, on “supportmichaelgraham.com” you can read many heartfelt arguments for the sanctity of free speech, including “will free speech take a hit from Political Correctness and Terrorist front groups?” and “***EAT MY ANUS***”.
Here is an excerpt from the debate, which we might as well call reasoning with the wingnuts:
submitted on August 15, 2005 10:43 AM EDT
Comments: This site was created to show our support for Michael. If you are not a fan or just have spare time on your hands to trash the supporters, I suggest you please set up your own blog or website and do so there! Please do not use this forum to make personal attacks on Michael's supporters. Thank you!
submitted on August 15, 2005 11:39 AM EDT
Comments: Ray, good idea to stop the personal attacks. But are you really cutting off all dissent? Because I would like for Michael Graham supporters to respond to these issues:
1.One blatant falsehood that Graham has knowingly repeated on his show is "If the problem is 'extremism' and not Islam as it is currently constituted, why are ALL of the suicide bombers Muslim?" FACT: not only are all suicide bombings not by Muslims, but MOST aren't. Most suicide bombings are by the Tamil Tiger rebels, a secular, Hindu-based group in Sri Lanka. So Graham has cited a total lie in order to propagate a message of hate and intolerance. (See University of Chicago political scientist Robert Pape's research for attribution.)
2. Another blatant falsehood he constantly repeats is that the Islamic community and leaders implicitly condone terrorist violence by not condemning it. Even before the recent fatwa, Muslim organizations in the US and around the world have condemned terrorism constantly and overwhelmingly since 9/11. For a long list of Muslim leaders worldwide condemning terrorism (including previous fatwas) see http://www.unc.edu/%7Ekurzman/terror.htm and http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php.
3.Would anyone want to defend these direct quotes? - "That is another sad fact about Islam today, that a moderate Muslim is just someone who wants to kill the Jews". ("Fact"?) -"I will gladly take the violence against Muslims versus the violence from Muslims over the past five years." And he made this off-the-wall charge against the Council for American Islamic Relations: -"because as they tell you at CAIR, you know who runs the media, the J-O-O's." (i.e. meaning "Jews".) Does it remotely bother Graham supporters that his arguments are based on lies and antiJew-baiting?
How did you hear about this site?
submitted on August 15, 2005 12:54 PM EDT
Comments: First and foremost, comparing the Tamil Tigers or the IRA for that matter to Islamic terrorists is an extremely flawed line of reasoning. Why? Their ideologies! The LTTE and the IRA are nationalists using terror to further their political motives and gain power in their respective regions. The Tamil Tigers do not invoke a religion when they go blow up a bus or, in the case of the IRA a shopping mall. They invoke nationalism to justify terror. As reprehensible as that is, their ideology is NOT based on a major world religion. Whenever a homicide bomber blows himself up in Israel or Iraq or any other place, their fundamental line of thought (if you can call it that), draws inspiration from a RELIGION. When the 9/11 killers flew their planes into the Trade Centre and the Pentagon, they were shouting Allahu Akbar, not 'long live the republic' or something along those lines. Kapeesh? Secondly, the LTTE and the Sinn Fein are localized within a PARTICULAR region of the world engaged in a localized conflict. Islamic fundamentalists are engaged in a GLOBAL fight against civilization that they term 'Jihad'. The fact that they draw inspiration from a major world religon and not some political ideology should worry all peace loving citizens of the world. Finally, and most importantly, we must be willing to examine Islam for elements that provide the ideological seeds for terror, because the War on Terror is every bit about ideology as it is about physically taking out the bad guys. Michael was trying to ignite this debate, and it was long overdue. You can continue to be an Islamic apologist, till the nuts strike again and again. Keep claiming that they are misrepresenting the religion of peace. Fanatics, fundamentalists, call them whatever PC name you can think of. The bottom line is, they want to destroy your nation and your way of life. And while that may not make you mad, it sure pisses me off like hell!
submitted on August 15, 2005 1:55 PM EDT
Comments: Ray, try to calm down. Citing the fact that Tamil Tigers are doing more suicide bombings than Islamic fundamentalists doesn't compare the motivations and religions of the two groups -- it just shows how glaringly wrong is Graham's constant repetition of the line, "All suicide bombers are Muslims". And to use such a glaringly false premise in an extremist message of such as "Islam is a terrorist religion" during a time of war is irresponsible, reckless and ill. Kapeesh? You never even addressed the fact that Graham is lying here, or the other points I made about the big lies he has been repeating (I numbered them for everyone's easy viewing). Do you defend the lies? Dismiss them? Support them?
submitted on August 15, 2005 2:01 PM EDT
Comments: You know what, my man? You go right ahead and believe what you like. I will continue to support Graham and those that stand by the truth! Good Day!