Chris Graham Twitter problem

[chilledbear 16]

The media in this country don't have the balls to publish cartoons etc. about anything controversial.

[Frankie 8,652]

Is Chris Graham getting some 'payback' for his stance towards many in the media? Undoubtedly in my opinion. When you've been as strident as he's been about reporting standards and quality you set yourself up as a target. There's revenge at play here and those who offered him the position should have seen that coming.

 

However that doesn't make this story on him wrong. It was an insane thing to 'tweet' and demonstrates a staggering lack of judgement, that alone should throw a question over his new role. Every right thinking person was horrified and disgusted by the Charlie Hebdo attacks but most of us didn't choose to draw something crude and deliberately provocative and send it to a Muslim cleric, whatever our view of his 'beliefs'.

 

There are an estimated 1.6 billion Muslims in the world, the vast majority of who would have found that drawing deeply offensive, that after all was its aim. It's all very well championing freedom of speech but that doesn't take away personal responsibility. Had someone drawn a crude cartoon deliberately mocking the Ibrox disaster how would we feel if two months later that person was made a director of a senior football club? I've a feeling we wouldn't be defending his freedom of expression.

 

I've no idea what Chris Graham's views are on Islam and I'd have little difficulty accepting this was a knee-jerk reaction done in the heat of the moment and with perspective he might now regret it. But he needs to say that and see what the fall out is. Either way if (and I think it highly likely) an intelligent and reasonable muslim commentator criticises him for this he'll come under huge pressure to step down.

 

As I replied to Andy, I understand your position and I'm glad we have some reasonable criticism of what's happened. However, I'd like to quote a post from a muslim bear on FF:

 

Lets talk about the tweet itself. First of all, it was a retweet, he didnt make the tweet up himself, he retweeted it aimed at a hate preacher who has disgraced the name of ordinary muslims across the UK by preaching hate and brainwashing converts to kill people.

 

I think if you ask Chris just now if he regrets retweeting it he will agree that he does, but he wasnt being anti islamic or targeting normal muslims. I know most on here dont have any time for Islam itself along with the rest of Britain due to current events worldwide. However Islam does not teach these disgusting things. Its idiots who hijack the religion paid by terrorist organisations to brainwash vulnirable muslims. Prophet Mohammed would not condone violence for these cartoons, he teaches peace and to discuss issues like this instead of violence. One of the big things in the Koran about the prophet is that he has a sense of humour which is ignored by the nutters.

 

What happened to freedom of speech? I watched the world join arms for freedom of speech and allowing to create cartoons against the prophet, so why is a guy being vilified for retweeting a cartoon? Freedom of speech only works to suit certain people and organisations agenda.

 

I stand with Chris and his right to freedom of speech!!!

 

OK, he's a bear and that may impinge his judgement but I enjoyed the honesty of the post and I think we should be standing by our own under clear attack from a media who will do anything to go for us while ignoring others.

 

Today it's Chris these hypocrites are attacking. Tomorrow it will be all of us.

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

This is insane. Charlie Hebdo was apparently attacked for drawing the Prophet. People died. Other people, including our governments & journalists march for Je Suis Charlie & freedom of speech. Chris retweeted a photo, depicting the Prophet. At worst it is crass.

Some of those howling about Chris, want Clarkson back on Top Gear. The proven racist, misogynistic Clarkson, after he has allegedly physically assaulted someone. The hypocrisy at play here is quite incredible.

 

That's it.

 

This is a witch hunt.

The situations are incomparable. Nobody would have sympathised with the Charlie Hebdo situation if they had done this. People on here aren't looking at this objectively at all.

Edited March 12, 2015 by Ser Barristan Selmy

[der Berliner 3,803]

The media in this country don't have the balls to publish cartoons etc. about anything controversial.

 

Unless they can chase an unwanted referee out of the job and country, that is.

 

Rangers should make a statement that they will deal with it internally, Chris shall make a simple apology as given above and that should be that. Likewise, you would hope that our PR and legal departments take note of these media people and make sure that access to our club remains limited. Unless media people stop being driven by their own agendas rather than impartial journalism, they should not get anything from our club.

[der Berliner 3,803]

The situations are incomparable. Nobody would have sympathised with the Charlie Hedbo situation if they had done this. People on here aren't looking at this objectively at all.

 

Just speak for yourself, please. I take it you have seen all Charlie Hebdo pictures? Stuff like this?

 

 

What did this impartial journalist say again ...

 

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

As relevant as ever, the image above had absolutely nothing to do with the January shootings.

[der Berliner 3,803]

Didn't take long ... "Chris Graham and the global Jihad Phil Mac Giolla Bhain (Weblog) 10:29". My first reaction reading this headline was thinking: Aye right, that sure advances your private jihad!

[der Berliner 3,803]

And to rub it all in, the Record adds that story about the nail-bomber why was spotted at Ibrox, smirking.

 

Fury as hate-filled Rangers fan who sent letter bomb to Neil Lennon is pictured back at Ibrox following his release from prison

 

Probably utterly coincidental that the word "Fury" is in that headline. Likewise, we did not hear much about the IRA-folk being invited to the Scumhut or pro-IRA singers get the chance to sing their bile in front of the Yahoo.

[BlueMazza 0]

The situations are incomparable. Nobody would have sympathised with the Charlie Hedbo situation if they had done this. People on here aren't looking at this objectively at all.

 

You're right they are not comparable. Charlie Hebdo DREW the cartoon, Chris retweeted it. Charlie Hebdo has a wide audience, Chris tweet AT a hate preacher who was saying the right to be offended trumped the right not to be murdered for drawing a fucking cartoon.

 

I don't know Chris, I see his twitter feed and some of his interviews. I don't agree with everything he says but I can be objective enough to know this is a witch hunt against someone who shows up the media cretins for what they are.

[andy steel 0]

Wow. If you equate what Graham has done with what everything that Easdale has done then you have a very strange way of looking at things (and that's putting it very politely).

 

Since I couldn't care less what your opinion is of me, feel free to put it how you like.

 

For the benefit of other posters who drew the same conclusion as the one above, though, I'll explain that it is the level of behaviour which is the same, in that it shows a lack of judgement. Easdale repeatedly dragged the club into the gutter; this episode, alas, does the same. That bothers me. If it doesn't bother others, that's their business.