The Radical American Street?

At times, we hear what the views are of "The Arab Street." A few days ago, Michael Graham of Washington, D.C.'s WMAL-AM talk radio publicly uttered the words which many Americans may be thinking. So far, the station's management has taken no steps to reprimand Michael Graham.

The story about Graham's controversial words appeared in the Style Section of the Tuesday, July 26, 2005 edition of the Washington Post:

"...The show host touched off the flap during a discussion of the Muslim community's response to recent acts of terrorism. Graham suggested the fault lies with Muslims generally because religious leaders and followers haven't done enough to condemn and root out extreme elements. 'The problem is not extremism,' Graham said, according to both CAIR and the station. 'The problem is Islam.' He also said, 'We are at war with a terrorist organization named Islam.'"

According to the Post article, Graham posted the following on WMAL's website:

"'If the Boy Scouts of America had 1,000 Scout troops, and 10 of them practiced suicide bombings, then the BSA would be considered a terrorist organization. If the BSA refused to kick out those 10 troops, that would make the case even stronger. If people defending terror repeatedly turned to the Boy Scout handbook and found language that justified and defended murder --and the scoutmasters responded by saying 'Could be' -- the Boy Scouts would have been driven out of America long ago.'

"'Today, Islam has whole sects and huge mosques that preach terror. Its theology is openly used to give the murderers their motives. Millions of its members give these killers comfort. The question isn't how dare I call Islam a terrorist organization, but rather why more people do not.'"

Whether or not the above comparison of the BSA and Islam is valid , Graham's words made me stop to consider what he was saying. He is taking the if-it-walks-like-a-duck-and-quacks-like-a-duck position, but goes further than using that old saw.

Is Graham implying violence against all Muslims? If so, are his words promoting hate crime? Do his words, in and of themselves, constitute a hate crime? If his words constitute a hate crime, then do the words of Wahhabists constitute a hate crime?

WMAL, owned by the Walt Disney Company (There's an irony!) and whose talk shows include the syndicated programs of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, takes the position that Graham's on-air words need to be considered in context:

"A station executive, Randall Bloomquist, said yesterday that Graham's comments were 'amped up' but justified within the context of the program....

"Bloomquist...went on to defend Graham, saying, 'Remember that this is talk radio. We don't do the dainty minuet of the newspaper editorial page. It's not "Washington Week in Review." It depends on pungent statements to drive it. Michael is rattling the cage. It's designed to start and further a conversation, and it has certainly done that.'"

Apparently, Graham has a reputation as an activist. The article provides the following information near the end of the article;

"Graham made waves earlier this year when he scuffled with Montgomery County police after he tried to attend an event for illegal immigrants while wearing a T-shirt that read "INS (I Need Border Security)." He also recently led a rally in front of The Washington Post's building in the District seeking the dismissal of Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff, who wrote a story that inaccurately reported on alleged abuses of the Koran in the military detention facility at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba (Newsweek is owned by The Washington Post Co.)."

Since the National Elections of 2004, WMAL has been having problems with its audience ratings--a drop of some 25%. Even so, statistical figures show that the station reaches 116,600 individual listeners every week.

Is Michael Graham attempting to resurrect the station's ratings? Or is he saying what he believes? And how many on the American Street agree with him?