The Nature of Islam

Radio talk-show host Michael Graham has created a firestorm with a recent column of his in which he says that "Islam is a terror Organization"

I take no pleasure in saying it. It pains me to think it. I could possibly lose my job in talk radio over admitting it. But it is the plain truth:

Islam is a terror organization.

For years, I’ve been trying to give the world’s Muslim community the benefit of the doubt, along with the benefit of my typical-American’s complete disinterest in their faith. Before 9/11, I knew nothing about Islam except the greeting “asalaam alaikum,” taught to me by a Pakistani friend in Chicago.

Immediately after 9/11, I nodded in ignorant agreement as President Bush assured me that “Islam is a religion of peace.”

But nearly four years later, nobody can defend that statement. And I mean “nobody.”

Certainly not the group of “moderate” Muslim clerics and imams who gathered in London last week to issue a statement on terrorism and their faith. When asked the question “Are suicide bombings always a violation of Islam,” they could not answer “Yes. Always.” Instead, these “moderate British Muslims” had to answer “It depends.”

You can read the rest of his column by clicking on the above link, but I think his point is clear. Also posted on his website are excerpts from some emails and callers attacking his position:

Having gotten their noses bloodied by making the "There is no connection whatsover between Islam and terrorism" argument, angry Graham haters have turned to a different line of attack. They are seizing on a comment I made regarding the much-feared, oft-predicted but rarely seen "backlash against Muslims." I wish there WERE a backlash against moderate Muslims in the sense that I wish they felt more social pressure, more embarrassment over what is happening in the name of their faith. I wish they felt bad around their co-workers and neighbors about Islam-inspired terrorism, because that pressure might encourage more moderate Muslims to take action against terror instead of offering CAIR-like denials about there being a problem in the first place.

CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) has called for Mr Graham to be fired. Unfortunately for CAIR, their ties to terror are well documented by Daniel Pipes, and FrontPage magazine, among others. Even Senator Chuck Shumer has declared that "We know [CAIR] has ties to terrorism."

So What of Islam?

Is Islam a terrorist organization, as Michael Graham says? I think he goes to far. More precisely, he misstates the problem.

Millions of Muslims lead peaceful lives, and are not at all moved to violence. But at the same time, to say that "Islam is a religion of peace" is also misleading. It is how the religion is practiced that matters. At our current point in history there is no concensus on how it is to be practiced.

To say that "most Muslims are peaceful and condemn violence" is also misleading, and frankly largely untrue. For all the talk we hear about "moderate muslims", I see two problems:

One, these moderates, and they do exist, far varying reasons are largely keeping their silence. There is a huge problem within Islam, and it is called "tolerance for those who commit violence". Pro forma statements after terrorist attacks will not suffice. What we need is is a full-blown campaign against the radicals. And this we have not seen.

The second problem becomes clear when one listens to some of these moderates for any length of time. I've listened to many angry Muslims call Graham's show, and all too often the calls follow the same format: the caller starts out with "I condemn terrorism". So far, so good. With only a little bit of prodding by the host, however, the caller starts right in with the excuses; "we've been persecuted", "what about Israel", "there is no problem within Islam", "you will inspire a violent backlash against Muslims", on and on. You get the point.

So the root cause of the problem is simply that most Muslims don't see that there is a problem. They are still engaged in the "we are victims" routine; of western imperialism, the crusades, Israel, you name it.

Until Muslims root out and expose the radicals within their midst, the problems will remain.

Update I

I'm sure most of you have heard about this by now, but a recent poll of British Muslims shows that one-in-four "sympathize with the goals of the terrorists. From the Telegraph:

...six per cent insist that the bombings were, on the contrary, fully justified.

Six per cent may seem a small proportion but in absolute numbers it amounts to about 100,000 individuals who, if not prepared to carry out terrorist acts, are ready to support those who do.

Moreover, the proportion of YouGov's respondents who, while not condoning the London attacks, have some sympathy with the feelings and motives of those who carried them out is considerably larger - 24 per cent.

A substantial majority, 56 per cent, say that, whether or not they sympathise with the bombers, they can at least understand why some people might want to behave in this way.

YouGov also asked whether or not its Muslim respondents agreed or disagreed with Tony Blair's description of the ideas and ideology of the London bombers as "perverted and poisonous".

Again, while a large majority, 58 per cent, agree with him, a substantial minority, 26 per cent, are reluctant to be so dismissive.

Lovely. Actually, it's even worse than than the Telegraph portrays it. In response to the question "Do you think the bombing attacks on July 7 were justified or not?"

6% On balance justified
11% On balance not justified
77% Not justified at all
6% Don't know

In response to the question "How loyal would you say you personally feel towards Britain?"

48% Very loyal
33% Fairly loyal
6% Not very loyal
10% Not at all loyal
4% Don't know

But this one is the most revealing, and concerning, of all: "Which of these views comes closest to your own?"

1% Western society is decadent and immoral, and Muslims should seek to bring it to an end, if necessary by violence
31% Western society is decadent and immoral, and Muslims should seek to bring it to an end, but only by non-violent means
56% Western society may not be perfect, but Muslims should live with it and not seek to bring it to an end.
11% Don't know

There are more questions, but I think you get the point. The bottom line; most Muslims are loyal Britons (although Tony Blair is doing his darndest to destroy that concept), but there is a significant minority that is a danger to society.

Update II

Michael Graham has been "suspended" from broadcasting on WMAL, as I discovered this morning. From his personal website:

FIRST, CAIR JUST WANTED ME SUSPENDED....Now that I have been, they've taken the next step and now want me fired. Is anyone surprised? When you encourage the enemies of freedom, they always come back for more.

Read CAIR's newest statement on the Hot Sheet.

DOUBLE-SECRET PROBATION? Much is being made by some that my suspension from the radio waves was "supposed to be secret."

Sorry, folks, but what does that MEAN? When has a media personality ever been ordered off the air "in secret?" What's the point?

Everyone who works with me obviously knew why I was off the air. Who was supposed to be left in the dark? Only...the listeners?

Was the point of the "double-secret" suspension to keep it a secret that CAIR was getting what they want? To not let the conservatives who overwhelmingly support me--know that CAIR matters more than the listeners do? I don't know. You'll have to answer that question for yourself.

I can't find anything about it on the WMAL website, although I could just be missing it. The discussion on the air today was about nothing but the suspension. Not to bore you with the travails of a local radio host, but it seemed important to keep up on the story. And I just like to post, but that's no surprise to anyone.

While I have made it clear that I disagee with Michael over the issue at hand, what he said is hardly so bad as to warrant "suspension" or termination. It smells like a cave-in to a pressure group to me.