Four Views of Michael Graham from the Right

Michael Graham made a number of television and radio appearances on 23 August 2005, and each exposed some of why America is having trouble dealing with the Muslim Menace.

If anyone does not know by now, Michael Graham used to be a talk radio host on Washington, DC's, formerly venerable WMAL-630 a.m. station. In July 2005, he began giving diagnostic details about Islam as the root cause of terrorism. His station had no trouble with what he was saying until CAIR (Council for American-Islamic Relations) started intimidating the station, at which point WMAL "got religion."

WMAL suspended Mr. Graham, but CAIR insisted that Graham be fired, and WMAL kowtowed. WMAL is owned by ABC which is owned by Walt Disney Company. Graham was fired because he would not retract or apologize for telling the truth, and he would not engage in some compensatory "community service" demanded by WMAL in order to bootlick Muslims in the Washington, DC, area. Graham walked away, head held high, in a state of moral integrity, while WMAL, ABC, and Disney slipped into complete dhimmitude.

We have focused from the beginning of this saga on the vast ramifications of this incident and the way the Right have almost shunned Mr. Graham. CAIR sought raw power with which to assault the First Amendment to the Constitution, to control speech, and to intimidate the corporate world further, and WMAL/ABC/Disney handed it over to them without even a whimper. CAIR and its ilk seek to inculcate the mental state of dhimmitude in order to end all resistance among Americans to America becoming another Muslim enclave, with all of the advanced civilization which has so characterized Muslim societies for 1400 years.

As we have stated previously, after reviewing what Mr. Graham said and wrote, we find ABSOLUTELY NO ERRORS OF DIAGNOSIS OR PRINCIPLE ABOUT ISLAM in anything he said or wrote. His tiny historical mistake pales in comparison. Mr. Graham was fired because he dared tell the truth. That should seriously disturb every American and everyone from all countries who advocate truth and freedom.

On 23 August 2005, Mr. Graham appeared on three Fox News television programs and on one talk radio program that we saw and heard. In every case, he demonstrated that he really "gets it" with regard to Islam and terror. He has been doing homework. Furthermore, what he "gets" has integrated with his moral code because he sees the threat that Islam poses to his, yours, and our values.

Interviewing hosts demonstrated just how far America has to go before it starts to be able to defend itself at the level of root principles, instead of superficial assumptions.

Mr. Graham's first appearance of the ones we saw was on John Gibson's "Big Story." Gibson's approach was superficial. His response to Mr. Graham was that Mr. Graham had been saying things one is not supposed to say in polite company, but Gibson, almost winking, inferred that he was glad that Michael Graham had been some sort of "wicked little boy" saying these socially unacceptable things.

Next, Mr. Graham appeared on Brit Hume's "Special Report." Hume had none of the subrosa enjoyment of Graham's "wickedness," as conveyed by Gibson. Hume's demeanor conveyed that he was not pleased that Graham had spoken things not supposed to be said in polite company. Here the cognitive lesion of the Right was clear: One never criticizes another's religion for any reason at any time--presumably, even while another's religion's practitioners are cutting off one's head. Hume's approach to Graham was superficial at best.

Bill O'Reilly finished the televised interviews that we saw. O'Reilly represented the procrustean Right. He contested everything Graham said with his "beliefs" about Islam and Muslims, beliefs which apparently have not been augmented by knowledge. O'Reilly "just knew" that Islam has been hijacked, Islam is a great religion, etc., and so on, ad nauseum. When Michael Graham had time to say anything, he spoke the truth.

Finally, Lars Larsen interviewed Michael Graham on his syndicated radio talk show. Larsen gave Mr. Graham time to speak. He asked good questions about Muslim, Islam, and terror, and Mr. Graham rejoined with facts and principles which showed how well armed he is intellectually. Larsen could not go the whole distance with Graham. As O'Reilly, Larsen could not separate Muslims from Islam. That there are presumably some peace-loving Muslims blocked his seeing the nature and principles of Islam, despite the facts offered by Mr. Graham.

All four hosts are on the Right, and, in our view, represent the vocal Right. Most of the chattering class Right remain mute. It is a credit that they had Graham on their programs. That they apparently have never picked up a single book out of the many outstanding books available to learn the factual and principles truth about Islam stains them. They are disarmed. They have never armed. They do not know it, or, if they know it, they do not care.

Were we a rich as King Croesus, we would hire Mr. Graham in a flash. He needs to be in a high profile position, getting the truth out, in a CAIR-free environment .