|
he
one thing critics of Billy Graham have failed to come up with is a single
act, a single syllable in the public career of Mr. Graham that could be
interpreted as anti-Semitic. There can't be another living American whose
day-by-day life has been more minutely examined. When did he say anything
anti-Semitic? When did he egg on critics of the Jews? When did he by inflection,
let alone declaration, seek to undermine the Jewish state?
When the words quoted in the Haldeman diaries were released in 1994, nobody
paid any attention to them, and Graham said about them only that they
could not have been his own words. Well, they were his own words, because
the tape recording released a fortnight ago established this, so Mr. Graham
was reduced simply to apologizing for having said them, and reiterating
that manifestly they did not reveal sentiments he ever acted upon.
A few coordinates are worth looking at:
1) The words were spoken in the private company of the president of the
United States. It is a human tendency to humor chiefs of state, and one
way of doing this is to sort of go along with their moods and line of
thought. Students laugh at headmasters' jokes. If President Nixon was
going on about the Jews (as we know he sometimes did), you would expect
the courtier impulses of his intimates to piggy-back along. Leonard Garment
and Henry Kissinger, if ever they are detected as having laughed at an
anti-Semitic presidential joke, should be thought of as socially self-abnegating,
rather than as anti-Semitic, always leaving room for the possibility that
it was a good joke.
2) Mr. Graham's repudiation of what he said was terribly overdone. "I
have never talked publicly or privately about the Jewish people, including
in conversations with President Nixon, except in the most positive terms."
The trouble with saying something like that is that it is simply unbelievable.
It sounds like Clarence Thomas saying he had never discussed Roe
v. Wade or had any thoughts about it. You'd have to be a castrate
never to have talked "publicly or privately" about the Jewish
people. How can you, without talking about them, intone some such sentiment
as, "Those . . . lovely Jews voted 85 percent Democrat again!"
Or, for that matter, "Those stupid Jews won all the Nobel Prizes
again, as usual!"
3) Several people who know Graham intimately enough to have written his
biography (William Martin of Rice University), or occupied a chair named
after him (Lewis Drummond of Samford University), have given their opinion
that the Nixon remarks to Graham were certainly centered about the subject
of pornography. "They're the ones putting out the pornographic stuff,"
Mr. Graham said, "after agreeing with Mr. Nixon," in
the account of David Firestone of the New York Times "that
left-wing Jews dominate the news media." Now on this matter, a bit
of research might be worth the trouble, research designed to explore whether
stereotypes here were invidious. The conversation took place on February
1, 1972. Why did Nixon say that pornography was substantially a Jewish
enterprise? What data, if any, was he relying on? Why did Graham agree
with him? Was there in fact a top-heavy investment in pornography by Jewish
entrepreneurs?
Since the Supreme Court, with the acquiescence of the majority of the
American people, apparently deems pornography nothing more than an expression
of free speech, what else can be said of those who engage in it than that
they are swinging with the market? To have said in 1972 that pornographic
entrepreneurs were heavily Jewish is different from saying such a thing
as, "Only Jews would engage in pornography," which would be
on the order of saying, "Only priests engage in pederasty."
That would indeed would be anti-Semitic, but that sentiment was not recorded.
4) The reaction of Abraham Foxman, the head of the Anti- Defamation League,
was reliably melodramatic and self-serving. "What's frightening is
that he (Graham) has been so close to so many presidents, and who knows
what else has been saying privately." Like what? That the Protocols
of Zion should be adopted in the curriculum of public schools? That Israel
should be cut up and given to Syria?
Mr. Foxman urged Billy Graham to return the award he won in 1971 from
the National Conference of Christians and Jews. If they did that to Billy
Graham, after his lifetime of service to tolerance and charity and love,
then you'd get something the impact of which would be anti-Semitic. I
am proud to have an award from the Anti-Defamation League. If Graham returns
his, I'll volunteer the return of mine.
|