A blog by the magazine's editors and contributors


The wars of perception

"Nothing threatens Americas national security more than the perception that we are at war with Islam," I wrote four years ago in this magazine.It was a follow-up ("Disgrace") to a longer piece about the role that perceived abuse of religious items and symbols played in the memories of former Guantanamo detainees ("The Secret Weapon"). To my knowledge, those two articles still remain the most thorough treatment of the place of religion in U.S. detention facilities during the so-called war on terror. (A version with footnotes can be found in this excellent volume affiliated with the National Religious Campaign Against Torture.)Unfortunately, the false perception that the United States has some kind of official, national anti-Muslim stance has persisted, despite the efforts of both George W. Bush and Barack Obama.Just like the detainees I wrote about in 2008, the hunger strikers at Guantanamo -- eighty-six of whom were cleared for release years ago -- have claimed that the event catalyzing their activism was the mishandling of a Qur'an. And before you say So what?, recall, as I and many others have argued, that the proper Christian analogy of the Qur'an is not the Bible, but the person of Jesus Christ. And now today CBS News reports that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev left a note in the boat where he was hiding.

"Basically, the note says ... the bombings were retribution for the U.S. crimes against Muslims in places like Iraq and Afghanistan and that the victims of the Boston bombing were 'collateral damage,' the same way innocent victims have been collateral damage in U.S. wars around the world," said CBS News reporter John Miller, who is a former spokesman for the FBI. ... The note summed up with the idea that "when you attack one Muslim, you attack all Muslims," CBS News reported.

As I pointed out in my previous articles, there were several ways in which the United States did intentionally abuse the symbols and ritual practices of Islam in the early years of the Bush administration's "war on terror." These abuses were later cited by others as justifications for retaliation against U.S. troops and citizens.Granted, those who engaged in such un-American activities are no longer in charge of detainees, and as far as we know, the worst of the practices has ceased. But the wars of perception go on much, much longer. History has shown that the collective memory of religiously themed violence endures for generations.The very notion that a country could be at "war" with a religion of over 1 billion people that takes diverse forms and covers most of the globe is absurd. But we must continue to fight against that perception -- if not for a noble reason, then only for self-interest.

About the Author

Michael Peppard is associate professor of theology at Fordham University, author of The World's Oldest Church and The Son of God in the Roman World, and on Twitter @MichaelPeppard.



Commenting Guidelines

  • All

Michael Peppard: You've raised a number of points.I'm not going to try to respond to each and every point you've raised.In the spirit of playing the Devil's Advocate, I want to offer a few other considerations for you to consider.How would you characterize our American attitude toward Islam?For example, college-educated Americans of a religious bent somehow adjusted to using and thinking in terms of the hyphenated expression "the Judeo-Christian tradition."This adjustment occurred despite centuries of well-known anti-Jewish attitudes and sentiments and at times discrimination and at times persecution.But how many college-educated Americans of a religious bent have expanded their thinking so that they can use the expression "the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition"?Now, if many college-educated Americans of a religious bent have not taken up the expression "the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition," does the absence of this inclusive expression perhaps show that such Americans are not exactly comfortable with Islam and Islamic culture and tradition?Now, if we were to turn our attention away from college-educated Americans of a religious bent and turn our attention to the American government and its foreign policy actions in Afghanistan and Iraq, we might suspect that the American government does harbor a somewhat negative view of Muslims in those countries and perhaps in other countries.Nevertheless, you are basically correct in suggesting that hyperbole is involved in certain statements about a supposed war against Islam.However, the expression "war" is commonly used today to characterize any number of struggles, including political struggles and even political debates.If we were to substitute the term "struggle" for the term "war," then we would have the expression "struggle with Islam," instead of the expression "war on Islam."Put differently, the American government and the American people do not appear to be engaging in a charm offensive to win the hearts and minds of Muslims.As a result, when certain Muslims use the admittedly hyperbolic expression "war on Islam," I think they see themselves as sounding an alarm to alert their fellow Muslims about a real threat to Muslims.

As regards the religion of Islam, I have examined Islamic teachings about several issues and concluded that it (Islam) is substantially in direct opposition to certain fundamental principles that I hold dear:1) The Islamic teaching about how apostates ought to be dealt with.2) The Islamic teaching about how non-Muslims ought to be dealt with (something about dhimmitude).3) The position of women in Islamic culture.4) Certain aspects of sharia law (which, to a substantial degree, support the above).I do not, and will not, tolerate sharia law being imposed on any American citizen. In addition, music, art, and sculpture don't really do very well in Islamic culture.But hey, that's just me...

Add new comment

You may login with your assigned e-mail address.
The password field is case sensitive.

Or log in with...

Add new comment