🚀 go-pugleaf

That was no "Bigoted Anti-Semite". It's a known fact. Why deny it?

"KarmaKop" <none@none.no> wrote in message
news:Z4Xf8.498$mE1.253121@news.uswest.net...
>
> WASHINGTON (AP) - The Rev. Billy Graham apologized Friday for a 1972
> conversation with former President Nixon in which he said the Jewish
> ``stranglehold'' of the media was ruining the country and must be broken.
>
> The conversation was among 500 hours of Nixon tapes released by the
National
> Archives. Most were recorded between January and June 1972.
>
> ``Although I have no memory of the occasion, I deeply regret comments I
> apparently made in an Oval Office conversation with President Nixon ...
some
> 30 years ago,'' Graham said in a statement released by his Texas public
> relations firm. ``They do not reflect my views and I sincerely apologize
for
> any offense caused by the remarks.''
>
> In the conversation with Nixon, the Southern Baptist evangelist expressed
> disdain for what he saw as Jewish domination of the media.
>
> ``This stranglehold has got to be broken or this country's going down the
> drain,'' Graham said, agreeing with Nixon's own comments earlier in the
> conversation.
>
> ``You believe that?'' Nixon says in response.
>
> ``Yes, sir,'' says Graham.
>
> ``Oh boy. So do I,'' Nixon agrees, then says: ``I can't ever say that but
I
> believe it.''
>
> ``No, but if you get elected a second time, then we might be able to do
> something,'' Graham says, reassuring the president.
>
> Friday, Graham said his legacy has been one of working for stronger bonds
> between Jews and Christians.
>
> ``Throughout my ministry, I have sought to build bridges between Jews and
> Christians,'' Graham said. ``I will continue to strongly support all
future
> efforts to advance understanding and mutual respect between our
> communities.''
>
> Graham, 83, has been in frail health for years.
>
> The friendship between Graham and the president began during the
Eisenhower
> administration, when Nixon was vice president.
>
> At a later point in the conversation, when Nixon raises the subject of
> Jewish influence in Hollywood and the media, Graham says, ``A lot of Jews
> are great friends of mine.''
>
> ``They swarm around me and are friendly to me. Because they know that I am
> friendly to Israel and so forth. But they don't know how I really feel
about
> what they're doing to this country, and I have no power and no way to
handle
> them,'' Graham says.
>
> Nixon says: ``You must not let them know.''
>
> On the Net:
>
> National Archives: http://www.nara.gov
>
>
>

In talk.atheism Otho <Othon@uall.com> wrote:
: That was no "Bigoted Anti-Semite". It's a known fact. Why deny it?

Because people often deny things that are total bullcrap.

"Otho" <Othon@Uall.com> writes:

> That was no "Bigoted Anti-Semite". It's a known fact. Why deny it?

Because sometimes facts do not fit the Politically Correct(tm)
irreality and have to be denied in order to appear PC.

-- 
Tapio Erola (txr@tols17.oulu.fi)    No mail to txr@rak061.oulu.fi please!

		"I hope I die before I get old"
		   --The Who, My Generation

So Billy Graham now becomes some sort of enemy of the people in the eyes
of those he tried to save.

I didn't agree with him then and I doubt if I'd agree with what he has to
say now much of the time

But I think he deserves a little more respect as a senior citizen.

We all get old one day if we live long enough

In article <Z4Xf8.498$mE1.253121@news.uswest.net>, "KarmaKop"
<none@none.no> wrote:

-WASHINGTON (AP) - The Rev. Billy Graham apologized Friday for a 1972
-conversation with former President Nixon in which he said the Jewish
-``stranglehold'' of the media was ruining the country and must be broken.
-
-The conversation was among 500 hours of Nixon tapes released by the National
-Archives. Most were recorded between January and June 1972.
-
-``Although I have no memory of the occasion, I deeply regret comments I
-apparently made in an Oval Office conversation with President Nixon ... some
-30 years ago,'' Graham said in a statement released by his Texas public
-relations firm. ``They do not reflect my views and I sincerely apologize for
-any offense caused by the remarks.''
(Wondering if  you were even BORN 30 tears ago)

So  from the title of this thread, does that mean that  you feel people
cannot change?

Does that mean that you should be held accountable for every wrong
thought/action you have ever head?

Does that mean that the next time you apologize to someone, they should
just assume you are a lying sack of horse feces?

If not, why not?

Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian

The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://www.geocities.com/ninure

The world's second most subversive document
http://www.geocities.com/ninure/declaration.html
-
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.ufmcc.com

To send e-mail, remove nohate from address

In article <Neddy-0203022249360001@ppp163.dyn147.pacific.net.au>,
PharLap <Neddy@Horseraces.com> wrote:

> So Billy Graham now becomes some sort of enemy of the people in the eyes
> of those he tried to save.
> 
> I didn't agree with him then and I doubt if I'd agree with what he has to
> say now much of the time
> 
> But I think he deserves a little more respect as a senior citizen.
> 
> We all get old one day if we live long enough

You mean, like Pol Pot and Stalin?

Sean C

In article <020320021702544674%redhawk@hvc.rr.com>, Sean C
<redhawk@hvc.rr.com> wrote:

> In article <Neddy-0203022249360001@ppp163.dyn147.pacific.net.au>,
> PharLap <Neddy@Horseraces.com> wrote:
> 
> > So Billy Graham now becomes some sort of enemy of the people in the eyes
> > of those he tried to save.
> > 
> > I didn't agree with him then and I doubt if I'd agree with what he has to
> > say now much of the time
> > 
> > But I think he deserves a little more respect as a senior citizen.
> > 
> > We all get old one day if we live long enough
> 
> You mean, like Pol Pot and Stalin?
> 
> Sean C

No I mean that Billy Grahams worst error was to lower the intellectual
standards of Christianity so far that fools and bigots could delude
themselves that they were Christians

I don't share his political opinions either any more than I share his
populist theology and eschatology - I believe he has done a great deal of
spiritual damge with all three.

Billy started a trend of declining educational, scholastic and analytical
standards in Christianity replacing reason and progressive thinking with
superstition and political reaction. 

In this he might rightly be blamed for the continuing and spiralling trend
downhill in Christianity.  In seeking to popularise the faith he has
destroyed it for many like myself who were once sincere members.

And eventually this trend may destroy the religion itself

Short of a new reformation

But I forgive him for it.

In article <Neddy-0303021048520001@ppp150.dyn20.pacific.net.au>,
PharLap <Neddy@Horseraces.com> wrote:


> No I mean that Billy Grahams worst error was to lower the intellectual
> standards of Christianity so far that fools and bigots could delude
> themselves that they were Christians

If being a real Christian requires a degree in theology, than most
people who call themselves Christians will fail to make the grade. This
is a common dodge for many Christians, particularly Catholics and
Protestants in mainstream demoninations: those fundies aren't "real"
Christians because they have not received theological training or been
ordained by a credible seminary or other religious institution.
Therefore, what they preach is wrong, is not True Christianity(TM), and
does not accurately reflect God's Will(TM). They are solely and
completely responsible for all the bad thing that have been done by
Christianity, and the subsequent bad feelings that followed.

The idea that someone's invented theology about an imaginary being is
somehow more credible than someone else's simply because it is more
codified and academic is completely ridiculous. People who read Harry
Potter books, belong to fan clubs or study the books academically are
better qualified to discuss Harry Potter than those who just saw the
movie, but that doesn't make Harry Potter any more real.

And crack a history book, and see what horrors and evil the more
"academic" and "scholastic" versions of Christianity, like Catholicism
or Anglicism, have wrought in this world. Billy Graham is a lightweight
by comparison.

> I don't share his political opinions either any more than I share his
> populist theology and eschatology - I believe he has done a great deal of
> spiritual damge with all three.

And people are defecting in droves from the other denominations, which
have also done extensive damage in the form of laying guilt trips on
people over normal human activity, the repression of intellectual and
personal freedom, and alienating people from their fellows who, in this
sphere of reality, are their only real hope of salvation.

> Billy started a trend of declining educational, scholastic and analytical
> standards in Christianity replacing reason and progressive thinking with
> superstition and political reaction. 

It would be nice if those critical thinking skills could be applied to
either demonstrating God's existence and proving that he is in fact the
author of all the theology surrounding him, or admitting that we really
don't know if he exists or not, and what he wants if he does exist.

In the absence of such proof, it is a moral and intellectual sham to
pretend that the matter has been resolved scientifically and through
reason, and any claims to scholastic acuity on the God question are
pure pretense, and nothing more.

> In this he might rightly be blamed for the continuing and spiralling trend
> downhill in Christianity.  In seeking to popularise the faith he has
> destroyed it for many like myself who were once sincere members.

You might want to ask why God, if he exists, would allow one man to
sabotage the One True Faith(TM).

> And eventually this trend may destroy the religion itself

One can only hope...

> Short of a new reformation
> 
> But I forgive him for it.

For peddling ignorance, fear, bigotry and mindless groupthink for
years, he gets as much forgiveness from me as his imaginary, ruthless
deity would give any infidel: none.

Sean C

In article <Neddy-0203022249360001@ppp163.dyn147.pacific.net.au>,
PharLap <Neddy@Horseraces.com> wrote:
>So Billy Graham now becomes some sort of enemy of the people in the eyes
>of those he tried to save.
>
>I didn't agree with him then and I doubt if I'd agree with what he has to
>say now much of the time
>
>But I think he deserves a little more respect as a senior citizen.

Why?

On 3 Mar 2002 11:18:35 -0500, tjabine@polaris.umuc.edu (Thomas P.
Jabine) wrote:

>In article <Neddy-0203022249360001@ppp163.dyn147.pacific.net.au>,
>PharLap <Neddy@Horseraces.com> wrote:
>>So Billy Graham now becomes some sort of enemy of the people in the eyes
>>of those he tried to save.
>>
>>I didn't agree with him then and I doubt if I'd agree with what he has to
>>say now much of the time
>>
>>But I think he deserves a little more respect as a senior citizen.
>
>Why?

Old people tend to get a greater default respect than the neutral
default everybody else gets. But respect is a two-way thing. Too many
church leaders expect respect without earning it. In their case they
have to show respect which means _not_ presuming their doctrines apply
to everybody else, and certainly not slandering those outside their
religion. 

              From: "KarmaKop" <none@none.no>
           Subject:  - Rev. Billy Graham Bigoted Anti-Semite ...Typical
Christian !
             Lines:  61
       Organization: --/\--
          X-Priority: 3
  X-MSMail-Priority:  Normal
      X-Newsreader:  Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
       X-MimeOLE: oduced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
       Message-ID:  <Z4Xf8.498$mE1.253121@news.uswest.net>
              Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 19:49:08 -0700
 NNTP-Posting-Host:  65.100.166.24

              From:  "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li>
          Subject:  Re: => Hey you suck-shits, Spammers are winning ...!
             Lines: 333
       Organization: <|||x-x|||>
          X-Priority: 3
  X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
      X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
      X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
       Message-ID:  <avOe8.12$Li7.34030@news.uswest.net>
              Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 09:12:59 -0700
 NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.100.166.24


-- 
C. Moore

"Front Toward Enemy" <clay_moore@kaboom.com> wrote in message
news:3C82542C.16D37D5C@kaboom.com...
>
>               From: "KarmaKop" <none@none.no>
>            Subject:  - Rev. Billy Graham Bigoted Anti-Semite ...Typical
> Christian !
>              Lines:  61
>        Organization: --/\--
>           X-Priority: 3
>   X-MSMail-Priority:  Normal
>       X-Newsreader:  Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
>        X-MimeOLE: oduced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
>        Message-ID:  <Z4Xf8.498$mE1.253121@news.uswest.net>
>               Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 19:49:08 -0700
>  NNTP-Posting-Host:  65.100.166.24
>
>               From:  "- Vox Populi �" <vox@popu.li>
>           Subject:  Re: => Hey you suck-shits, Spammers are winning ...!
>              Lines: 333
>        Organization: <|||x-x|||>
>           X-Priority: 3
>   X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>       X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
>       X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
>        Message-ID:  <avOe8.12$Li7.34030@news.uswest.net>
>               Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 09:12:59 -0700
>  NNTP-Posting-Host: 65.100.166.24

Yep, same gateway ... almost Sherlock.


>
>
> --
> C. Moore

Ah, our inbred dipshit from south of the Mason Dixon line strikes again ...


--
"Why of course the people don't want war ...
It is the leaders who determine the policy and
it is always a simple matter to drag the people along...
all you have to do is tell them they are being attacked
and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger. It works the same
in any country.
                                     - Hermann G�ring

"Christopher A. Lee" <chrisalee@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3qj48u8e4rjph6t2ij9q2gdlarqr578jdj@4ax.com...
> On 3 Mar 2002 11:18:35 -0500, tjabine@polaris.umuc.edu (Thomas P.
> Jabine) wrote:
>
> >In article <Neddy-0203022249360001@ppp163.dyn147.pacific.net.au>,
> >PharLap <Neddy@Horseraces.com> wrote:
> >>So Billy Graham now becomes some sort of enemy of the people in the eyes
> >>of those he tried to save.
> >>
> >>I didn't agree with him then and I doubt if I'd agree with what he has
to
> >>say now much of the time
> >>
> >>But I think he deserves a little more respect as a senior citizen.
> >
> >Why?
>
> Old people tend to get a greater default respect than the neutral
> default everybody else gets. But respect is a two-way thing. Too many
> church leaders expect respect without earning it. In their case they
> have to show respect which means _not_ presuming their doctrines apply
> to everybody else, and certainly not slandering those outside their
> religion.

Right you are, and the fact that a reprehensible act is discovered 30 years
after the fact renders the wrong no less reprehensible and no less worthy of
denunciation, despite the advanced age of the wrongdoer.

To hear The Reverend Dr. Graham's squirmy response you would think he
believes the statute of limitations has run.

I can no longer respect Billy Graham in the slightest, although I have at
times thought that as a TV preacher he was the only example who wasn't
thoroughly sleazy.

"Larry Smith" <dbrigman3@charter.net> wrote in message
news:u84sn0it8vddd9@corp.supernews.com...
>
> "Christopher A. Lee" <chrisalee@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:3qj48u8e4rjph6t2ij9q2gdlarqr578jdj@4ax.com...
> > On 3 Mar 2002 11:18:35 -0500, tjabine@polaris.umuc.edu (Thomas P.
> > Jabine) wrote:
> >
> > >In article <Neddy-0203022249360001@ppp163.dyn147.pacific.net.au>,
> > >PharLap <Neddy@Horseraces.com> wrote:
> > >>So Billy Graham now becomes some sort of enemy of the people in the
eyes
> > >>of those he tried to save.
> > >>
> > >>I didn't agree with him then and I doubt if I'd agree with what he has
> to
> > >>say now much of the time
> > >>
> > >>But I think he deserves a little more respect as a senior citizen.
> > >
> > >Why?
> >
> > Old people tend to get a greater default respect than the neutral
> > default everybody else gets. But respect is a two-way thing. Too many
> > church leaders expect respect without earning it. In their case they
> > have to show respect which means _not_ presuming their doctrines apply
> > to everybody else, and certainly not slandering those outside their
> > religion.
>
> Right you are, and the fact that a reprehensible act is discovered 30
years
> after the fact renders the wrong no less reprehensible and no less worthy
of
> denunciation, despite the advanced age of the wrongdoer.
>
> To hear The Reverend Dr. Graham's squirmy response you would think he
> believes the statute of limitations has run.

I come from a long line of Orangemen, and when I was *very* young I believed
what I was taught to believe.  As an adult I changed my opinion on the
abortion issue.  If someone produced a tape of something I said, but no
longer believe, even if I didn't remember the conversation, I *would*
remember that I once believed those things, and held those opinions. It
would seem then, that the thing to do was to renounce the error of my
previous ways, and explain my present position, with a full explanation of
*why* I was wrong.  To say he doesn't remember, and to aplogoze for any fuss
caused dodges responsibilty, and shows a complete lack of remorse.
>
> I can no longer respect Billy Graham in the slightest, although I have at
> times thought that as a TV preacher he was the only example who wasn't
> thoroughly sleazy.

Well said.