GE pulls plug on Paul Harvey!

[jmarie]

GE Turns Out the Light on Paul Harvey

By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Morning Editor
December 23, 2003

(CNSNews.com) - General Electric, in response to Muslim complaints, has decided to pull its lighting advertisements from Paul Harvey's syndicated radio show, at least for the time being.

On Dec. 4, the 84-year-old Harvey was describing cockfighting in Iraq when he made the following comment on-air: "Add to the thirst for blood a religion which encourages killing, and it is entirely understandable if Americans came to this bloody party unprepared."

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Muslim civil rights group, objected to the phrase "a religion which encourages killing," and it demanded an apology.

About a week later, Harvey issued a statement through a fill-in host. He didn't apologize, but he did say that Islam is a "religion of peace."

On Monday, CAIR distributed an e-mail that General Electric's Corporate Feedback Team sent to a Muslim who complained about Harvey's remark.

"Thank you for your recent inquiry on ge.com," the email read.

"We have received your E-mail about the comments of Paul Harvey on December 4, 2003. GE certainly doesn't endorse the comment and regrets any offense that it may have caused. While we look into the matter further, we have pulled GE's advertisements from Mr. Harvey's show. We appreciate voicing your concerns to us."

A GE spokesman was quoted as saying that the company hasn't yet decided whether to resume its advertising on Harvey's syndicated radio show.

I believe that GE was wrong in pulling it's advertisments on Paul Harvey. I hope that you all will agree with me enough to use the following link https://www.ge.com/ge/feedback.htm to register a complaint. I wrote and told them that until they resotre their advertising to Paul Harvey, that I will not purchase their products. What you say is up to you.
Thank you and HAVE A GOOD DAY!
Joyce

[ellamay]

I think Paul Harvey is the one who is wrong for making such a boneheaded, predjudicial comment, but that's JMHO.

[greta]

i don't have a problem with GE pulling the advertising...though i would have had a problem if paul harvey's show was cancelled soley because of his comments, no matter how ignorant and uninformed i think they were.

the one problem i DO have is that most likely the same people (not you in particular, joyce) who would be outraged at the action of GE, would have celebrated when clear channel banned the playing of the dixie chicks after natalie's comment about bush. they would probably be the people who destroyed the dixie chicks cds.

partisan politics and ideology amazes me sometimes. if people were more open minded, and could look at the situation if roles were reversed, we'd live in a much more accepting society.

wow, i did say i wouldn't post on any more "political" threads, didn't i?!?! ;)

[Molli526]

Originally posted by greta

wow, i did say i wouldn't post on any more "political" threads, didn't i?!?! ;)

It can be a New Years Resolution ;) ;)

btw: your post was well written

[Grace]

Originally posted by greta
no matter how ignorant and uninformed i think they were.



At risk of being completely unpopular around here (which I probably already am! :rolleyes: ), I don't think his comments were ignorant or uninformed at all. Quite the opposite. Anyone who has studied Islam, knows that part of their religion DOES call for the killing of "infidels" (non-muslim-believers). Don't take my word for it, research it for yourself.

So his statement was factually accurate. It is a religion that encourages killing. Deciding that it is "ignorant and uniformed" because you don't like it, or because your own belief system is so different, that you can't believe it to be true is what I consider ignorance.

That's not to say that I believe every Muslim walking down the street wants to kill non-muslims. FAR from it. But facts are facts, and I don't think anyone should be chastised for telling the truth.

[greta]

grace,
i should have bolded the "i think" part--because that's exactly what i meant. it would have been an entirely different story if i left that part out. i didn't say that joyce IS ignorant, or paul harvey IS ignorant--like you implied my decision is.

and by the way, i HAVE researched islam in great depth, and have talked to many muslims from around the world...

i've also talked with many christians from the league of the south, and i would never take their interpretation of the bible and of christianity and broadly stroke all christians with the same brush. their FACTS are very different from many of the FACTS other christians may state.

facts and opinions are very different things...

i must admit, i really thought my post wasn't at all combative or disrespectul to joyce--i can't really say the same of yours. i don't understand what i did to incite such criticism. although i don't agree with your opinion, i would never call you ignorant.

greta

[Grace]

I think we're just misunderstanding one another here. I think I misunderstood your point about thinking Paul Harvey's comments were ignorant and uniformed - now I read it as you didn't necessarily think they were, but in the hypthetical "even if you did". I admit that I did originally think that you thought his comments were ignorant and uniformed. For that I profusely apologize.

But I didn't mean my post to sound combative, nor did I think your post was disrespectful to Joyce, nor did I interpret your post as saying Joyce was igonrant. I didn't think Joyce had anything to do with it. My point was only to say (and wasn't necessarily directed at you, even though the way I posted with your quote made it seem like it was - so sorry about that too), a more general, I don't think people should be chastised for telling the truth just because one may not like it.

And I want to reiterate, that I truly do not believe all muslims are trying to kill non-muslims. I kind of liken it to (as an example) the Catholic church being against birth control and divorce. Does that mean no Catholics use birth control or get divorced? Certainly not. Does that mean anyone who does isn't a good catholic? Certainly not. But it doesn't change the fact that it's the official position of the catholic church.

Again, I didn't mean to offend, and certainly didn't mean to "pick on you" personally. I hope you'll accept my apology.

[ellamay]

I am going to have a hard time explaining this but I'm going to give it a shot anyway.

I think what Paul Harvey said, which according to the news story was:
a religion which encourages killing
was an overgeneralization that characterizes the Muslim religion as bloodthirsty. I don't think that's true. I am aware the Muslim religion calls for the killing of infidels, just as the Christian religion calls for the killing and/or persecution of some groups of people. However, I would characterize neither religion as "bloodthirsty." I don't think extrapolating one belief of a religion into a general characteristic of a religion (i.e., Muslims believe in killing certain people, therefore their religion encourages killing) is a sound logical argument. That's like saying that because someone believes in the death penalty, that person believes killing should be encouraged. Logically, that's a fallacious argument.

I took offense to Paul Harvey's statement not because there were no kernels of truth to it, but because it was a somewhat insensitive overgeneralization. I certainly wouldn't want someone to say "All New Mexicans are reckless drunks" because we have a problem with drunk driving in this state. It has nothing to do with what I like or want to hear. I just think generalizations are usually a bad idea, and in this case the generalization Harvey made was tactless and hurtful, and I don't blame Muslims for being upset about it or GE for pulling its advertising from the show. Religious tolerance applies to non-Christian religions also.

[SandyM]

Originally posted by Grace
Anyone who has studied Islam, knows that part of their religion DOES call for the killing of "infidels" (non-muslim-believers). Don't take my word for it, research it for yourself.

So his statement was factually accurate. It is a religion that encourages killing.

I'll see what I can find in a search, but if anyone has factual information to back this up, I'd love to see it. Thanks.

[Grace]

Ellamay, the difference I see, is you're not distinguishing between the religion itself and the people who follow it. He did not say all MUSLIMS are bloodthirsty, but that the Muslim religion encourages killing (which doesn't automatically assume that everyone does it). Big difference IMO. Also, if you can point me to the part(s) of the Bible that call for killing or persecution of any people I would like to see it. That's not something I've heard of before.

And Sandy, I'll try to dig something up for you. Maybe someone else will beat me to it.

[greta]

grace,
apology accepted...misunderstanding over!

sandy,
i have found that certain verses in the bible, koran, torah are interepreted in different ways by different people--many times to serve their own purposes. i've seen it way too often, in each religion. i have a copy of the koran, and i'll try to post the parts that seem subject to interpretation--depending on who you ask.

again, with the league of the south as an example, i'm amazed at quotes they take out of the bible to support their views (same can be said for the kkk and such).

[ellamay]

Ellamay, the difference I see, is you're not distinguishing between the religion itself and the people who follow it. He did not say all MUSLIMS are bloodthirsty, but that the Muslim religion encourages killing (which doesn't automatically assume that everyone does it). Big difference IMO. Also, if you can point me to the part(s) of the Bible that call for killing or persecution of any people I would like to see it. That's not something I've heard of before.

You're obviously trying to pick a fight with someone, but unfortunately I don't have time because I have to get home and start getting ready for our New Year's Eve dinner tonight. Also, I'm just not emotionally invested enough in this to want to argue with you about it. I was trying to explain my point of view, but you're not interested in hearing about that -- you'd rather just fight with someone. Sorry, I don't have time. Maybe someone else will indulge you. I'm going now. Thanks and Happy New Year! :)

[Grace]

Goodness gracious. No one is picking a fight. A conversation about an emotionally charged issue does not mean a "fight". You and Greta are both right that passages can be taken out of context and twisted to fit one's beliefs. Of course, I don't agree with that way of thinking.

I also want to be informed of the (many) things I don't know, or am not aware of. This board is so full of people who know so many different things - I come here pretty much exclusively for all my information.

So if you (or anyone else) have passages of the Bible that call for killing or persecution of people, I truly want to see it! Knowledge is power. I don't see how this is picking a fight.

Good, honest debate and sharing of information, views and ideas is a good thing. I guess not everyone sees it that way.

I hope you have a Happy New Year, and enjoy your celebration. No "fighting" intended on my part.

[hollysmom]

Regardless of what/how he said/meant, the man is at least 85 and therefore, should be given some latitude out of respect for his age. I don't expect my 79-year-old dad to be P.C. either.

SSM

[jjsooner73]

I just want to say that I follow what Grace is saying completely and agree with her points. She just said it much better than I would have.

Pretty soon, noone is going to be allowed to say what they think, because it's always going to be stepping on someone's toes.

[jjsooner73]

Originally posted by hollysmom
Regardless of what/how he said/meant, the man is at least 85 and therefore, should be given some latitude out of respect for his age. I don't expect my 79-year-old dad to be P.C. either.

SSM

Good point. I agree.

[JenniferJJ]

I agree fully with what Grace said.

[Jazzmatazz49]

I agree with Hollysmom. Paul Harvey could officially be categorized as an old geezer. There is a school of thought that anyone who is that old can say anything they like. However, he does have a fairly wide audience.

My big problem with Paul Harvey is some of the products he endorses so heartily, such as vitamins that will cure macular degeneration.

I kind of like the old geezer, though!:p

[JHolcomb]

I think GE can do whatever it wants. If it feels it's in the company's best interest to pull advertising, fine. Someone else will probably step in to fill their place that feels it's in their best interest to do so. Paul Harvey has a right to say whatever he wants, but GE has no obligation to support him or his opinions if they disagree with him. IMO, of course.

Grace, are you sure you want Bible passages relating to commiting acts of violence against others? We might be here all day...I have examples, but it may take me a while to dig up specifics, like Book and Verse. I know there's the story in Genesis where Dinah is raped and her brothers go into the town and kill every male; there are numerous instances in Numbers and Leviticus relating to smiting of enemies (like the Philistines...wasn't Goliath a Philistine??)...once we get past O.T. I'll need help, since my N.T. knowledge is limited, but bascially, yeah, there are lots of places where there is prescribed violence against those who are non believers. Heck, David killed Goliath and he wasn't punished by God----in fact, he was made a big deal king.

[leebee]

Okay, so Paul Harvey is an old geezer & he can say what he wants. Fine. But shouldn't he take responsibility if there is fallout from his comments? If he made a comment that a segment of the population found offensive, and his advertiser is worried that it will have a negative effect on sales, then they have the right to pull their sponsorship. If Paul Harvey feels that his comments are correct, he has the right to say them, but then has the obligation to deal w/ what happens next. I mean, if Alpo was his largest sponsor, and he made comments that dogs were dirty, a nuisance, and altogether stupid, the advertiser would pull their sponsorship. In this situation, he made a BROAD comment in a negative manner about a group of PEOPLE. Substitute the word Christian, Bhuddist, Jew, or Zoroastrian for Muslim & see how you would feel...just because we CAN say something may not mean we SHOULD. This is such a charged topic, and there is no way one person will have that magic phrase to get everyone on the same side of the line. I personally feel he deserves a hand-slap. That wasn't a good thing to say in these times--I am not going to argue that this is/isn't accurate. I have my opinion. Okay, small argument. Anything can be taken out of context. This is in the bible:
when I sharpen my flashing sword
and my hand grasps it in judgment,
I will take vengeance on my adversaries
and repay those who hate me.
42 I will make my arrows drunk with blood,
while my sword devours flesh:
the blood of the slain and the captives,
the heads of the enemy leaders."

43 Rejoice, O nations, with his people, [1] , [2]
for he will avenge the blood of his servants;
he will take vengeance on his enemies
and make atonement for his land and people.

...and I think that you can read into it what you want. Does one passage, or 5 or 20 or 100, make the bible a document that subverts peace, tolerance, love? No. It is an interpretation, and accounting, and I think there is an awful lot that can be argued about ANY document that is over 2000 years old! We should not base our judgements of a culture on isolated interpretations of texts that were are largely unfamiliar with.

CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?
Happy New Year to all--be nice to each other!

[Grace]

Jen, I do want real passages, but not what you mentioned. I realize fully that there is plenty of violence in the Bible, and not much of it is condemned. But those were passages where facts about what men did in a situation are related to the reader. What I'm looking for is similar passages to the Koran where God is in fact directing people (as a mandate) to go out and kill people who don't believe in the Christian God (as an ongoing edict).

Here is a link to a University website that gives direct quotes from the Koran on topics relating to war. It's very interesting.

http://campus.murraystate.edu/academic/faculty/kevin.binfield/KoranWarPassages.html

And here is something written by Howard Owens - a journalist, I think, from HowardOwens.com . He sums up exactly my viewpoint.

When the Koran says kill unbelievers, it isn't saying kill them only in this particular context; it is saying, KILL THEM. Period. The OT passages are all about historic battles, specific contexts that carried no weight of ongoing commandment. You couldn't even find an Amorite or a Hittite today if you wanted to kill one. But you can find plenty of infidels.

Just because some Muslims choose to ignore or reinterpret the "kill unbeliever" passages does not mean that those passages are not what inspire hardline Muslims. Clearly, the hardliners draw their inspiration from the Koran.

[Grace]

leebee - thanks for the verses!! I hadn't read those. I'm going to look at those carefully. I appreciate everyone's input - this is exactly what I was looking for. Do you happen to know which book they come from? I can find them from there.

And I think we ARE getting along! :D :D That's the beauty (IMO) of all of us being different, and we're all expressing what we believe and think in a nice, no-name-calling manner.

This is obviously a subject that interests me, the same as when we talked about Judaism at length on another thread not too long ago.

[leebee]

These particular verses are from Deut 32. There are quite a few similar verses in that Book, and some pretty wild stuff in Judges. I realize that a lot of these particular verses have an historical context...but I would imagine that oftentimes other religious texts do as well. I would like to suggest something radical & it is not intended to offend or to confront. I had a friend who presented a program on similarities in text betw the Bible & the Koran--that put a lot of the more extreme passages into that HISTORICAL context, which is IMHO, where many belong. Edicts on ritual, women's roles, wars (holy or not), and worship are to be found in all of these texts, and frankly, some of them seem a little loopy to me. A Muslim is a person, same as a Christian or any other. Extremists can be found anywhere, and it's something that will always be w/ us, and context plays so much a role in this life. So many extremists of any culture have suffered greatly (not all, I know, I know)from persecution, poverty, and they have no hope. The fanatical believer can be a frightening thing--they believe God speaks to them & whomever isn't w/ them is against them. It's been this way throughout our whole history, only our world is turning into a global community (which many people, especially a fundamentalist of any culture, may find vastly threatening) and weapons are no longer swords.

[JHolcomb]

Ok, Gracde, here's a specific edict to smite, via Lord our God, KJV:


Numbers 25
16 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
17 Vex the Midianites, and smite them:
18 For they vex you with their wiles, wherewith they have beguiled you in the matter of Peor, and in the matter of Cozbi, the daughter of a prince of Midian, their sister, which was slain in the day of the plague for Peor's sake.

Wiley Midianites.

Naturally, though, this puts me in mind of Ned Flanders. To paraphrase..."Why me Lord...I go to church, I keep the Sabbath holy, I even kept Kosher, just in case. Heck, I even did the stuff that contracdicts the other stuff you told me to do."

[Chefzhat]

HERE (http://www.danielpipes.org/article/1374) is an update to this whole debate (near the bottom of the article).

Jen, the Ned Flanders quote made me laugh :p

Grace, I always understand the points you are trying to make, and certainly did not think that you were trying to start a fight.

If the Muslim community did not like Mr. Harvey's comments they've got every right to complain. Here's my question though, and it concerns me a great deal: The muslim community must be huge in the United States, or why else would GE respond so quickly? Or, conversely, GE is running around responding to every tiny faction so that NO ONE (any possible consumer) gets their feelings hurt. From the above article, they certainly didn't pull their advertising for long (what, 2 days??). How far will political correctness go??

A comment was made earlier, and I agree - pretty soon we'll all only be able to sit around and smile at each other - because all our words will be offensive to someone.

Debie

[jmarie]

I POSTED THIS AND THEN KEPT CHECKING MY MAILBOX, BECAUSE I AM USUALLY ALERTED TO ANY THREAD I HAVE STARTED OR SUBSCRIBED TO, NEVER A WORD FROM CL.

(Sorry about the caps....Is there a way to highlight the caps and de-capitalized(if that is a word)them?

So, here is my take on this. I posted this thread so that if any of you wanted, you could send an email. I certainly did not mean to start a war of the words, although it has been completely enlightening.

Some do consider my ideas ignorant, I can't take that away from those who do....and I like wise...One thing I have learned about this board in the last year is that it is possible to be ignorant about some things, but not all. You can be ignorant and there is nothing bad about it....ie... ignorant about a specific subject. Just like when I posted something that mentioned a talk show host saying people were idiots if they took the flu shot. Some didn't like that. They saw the word idiot and that is what they responded to. His opinion, so what? I had taken the flu shot. But, after hearing his remarks, I did speak to a couple of doctors.
(Ralph even weighed in on it)I also did some reading regarding the validity of his statement. I didn't want to go blindly taking flu shots, if they were, in fact, bad for you....and I ended up forming the opinion that I will continue taking the flu shot. My point is that The talk show host got me to thinking and asking questions and so I became enlightened about it.

No one really knows me...So frankly, call me what you want...I know you are referring to my idea(s). I will not be offended if I present an idea and you oppose it...that is exactly what these boards are for to share ideas, I think.

Again, I apologize for not responding, I just had no idea there had been the first post. And I didn't see anything wrong with most of the exchanges.

HAVE A GOOD DAY!