The public image of Islam

Several months ago, I suddenly began receiving regular e-mail news packets from the Council on American–Islamic Relations. They have been absolutely fascinating.

The Council on American–Islamic relations is a large public relations organization (it refers to itself as a “civil rights and advocacy group”). One of its news releases listed 10 executive staff who could be called by the media after office hours for official comment. It has 15 local chapters throughout Canada and the United States, and expects to open another 12 in the next year.

CAIR has a program which is in the process of donating “library packages” (containing 18 books and other items explaining and defending Islam) to all 16,000 libraries in the US. CAIR funds this program by seeking donations from North American Muslims; and so far over 5000 packages worth $150 US each have been donated.

CAIR has also begun a formal year-long ad campaign in newspapers across the US. The ads depict positive images of American Muslims – Girl Scouts, educated women and people of various nationalities. The ads seem designed to counter common criticisms of Islam in North America, such as the charge that Islam oppresses women.

In addition, CAIR issues news releases to local and national media, CAIR staff write letters to the editor and opinion pieces for various media, and CAIR lobbies politicians, government officials and police agencies.

The news packet I receive is sent out almost daily, and often contains a couple of dozen items, including official CAIR news releases and reprints of news stories, letters to the editor, opinion pieces and interviews from various media around the world. The news stories especially contain much valuable information. (One was a Washington Post story about Mennonite Central Committee sending relief kits to Iraq, some of which were donated to MCC by American Muslims.)

Effective

My initial observation is that this public relations effort has been very effective. The news packets often contain feedback from the public regarding various CAIR efforts. Police and politicians seem to be taking CAIR quite seriously, and CAIR seems to be succeeding in convincing them to treat Muslim Americans more respectfully.

Particularly effective has been CAIR’s effort to collect news reports of incidents of hate crimes against Muslims in the US. These incidents (beatings, bombings, vandalism, threats, insults and I think at least one murder) are what we would label persecution if carried out by Muslims against Christians in Middle Eastern countries. These incidents are far fewer and less severe than those that are perpetrated against Christians in many Muslim countries; they are countered by reports (some in the CAIR news packets) of North Americans going out of their way to defend American Muslims; and American police seem to be prosecuting the offenders vigorously (in contrast to many Muslim countries, where police not only are slow to protect Christians but also sometimes participate in the attacks). Nevertheless, these incidents are evidence that the US has become a less tolerant society since 9/11 and the beginning of the war against Iraq.

Also effective has been CAIR’s reporting on the Patriot Act, a set of new laws put into place by the US government after 9/11 which give police and other government agencies sweeping powers – such as the power to arrest and hold some people indefinitely without trial and to conduct secret trials – which have seriously infringed on human rights. (In its fear of terrorism, the US is in some danger of becoming more like the oppressive states it says it is opposing overseas.)

Like all public relations efforts, CAIR’s bias distorts its reporting at times. A few times, CAIR has been too quick to allege hate crimes when Muslims were actually random victims of crime. Once CAIR reported a “hate crime” when a car accidentally slid off the road in a snowstorm and scraped the side of a Muslim mosque. CAIR has exaggerated some incidents and has sometimes seemed too quick to defend Muslims who have been arrested for various things or fired from their jobs. Mostly, however, CAIR reports news fairly, especially since it is using news reports from accredited media. It has issued updates (although no apologies that I recall) when it has been in error.

The effectiveness of CAIR’s efforts is especially obvious in contrast to Jewish public relations efforts. The Israeli government sends me official news releases at a rate of one or two a month. These are usually sterile, carefully worded statements by Israeli government officials, and not very effective. The graphics on the Israeli material are somewhat better, although unimaginative, but the content is far less impressive. (In recent weeks, I have also started receiving news releases from Maharishi Mahesh Yogi outlining how his Natural Law/Transcendental Meditation religion can bring harmony and peace to the world; the graphics on these releases are good, but the releases themselves are not very effective because the content seems so divorced from reality.)

Or not?

On the other hand, this massive public relations effort is not always as effective as CAIR hopes.

In the first place, it is obvious that it is a public relations effort. Moreover, the sheer scope of it – the task of collecting dozens of news stories from around the world every day is itself a massive undertaking – raises the question of funding. Surely North American Muslims cannot fund such an effort on their own, and one suspects substantial funding support from Muslim governments in other countries using oil revenues.

Second, the daily news packets often begin with a “Hadith of the Day” – a quote from the Quran or some other Muslim document, usually relating something that Muhammad said or did. The thing that comes across in these quotations is Muhammad’s humanity. For instance, one of his wives was asked what Muhammad did at home, and she replied, “He used to work for his family and when he heard the (call to prayer), he would go out.” Another contains this statement of Muhammad: “A woman was punished (by God) because of a cat. She had not provided (the cat) with food or drink, nor had she set it free so that it might eat the insects of the earth.” A lot of these quotations seem to offer sound advice and encourage moral living, but, in contrast to the Gospel accounts of Jesus, there is nothing of the divine about them. I have found them surprisingly lacking in power.

The hadiths also reveal quite clearly that Islam is a religion in which salvation is earned by works, as is illustrated by the following examples: “If you guarantee me six things on your part, I shall guarantee you Paradise. Speak the truth when you talk, keep a promise when you make it, when you are trusted with something fulfill your trust, avoid sexual immorality, lower your gaze (in modesty), and restrain your hands from injustice.” “No fatigue, nor disease, nor sorrow, nor sadness, nor hurt, nor distress befalls a Muslim, even if it were the prick he receives from a thorn, but that God expiates some of his sins for that.” While these teachings show Islam as a moral religion, they show little understanding of God’s grace and forgiveness. Islam talks of Allah as being gracious, but also apparently teaches that forgiveness needs to be earned. The quotations remind me of the ultimate failure of any “moral” religion without the indwelling power of Jesus Christ to live out that morality.

Third, CAIR’s public relations efforts show how moral Islam is, but also reveal it as legalistic and intolerant, a religion in which there is no separation of “mosque and state” and government is expected to enforce Muslim morality. For instance, in talking about the incidents of persecution of Muslims in the US, CAIR has insisted that defending Muslims against hate crimes should be a “priority” of the FBI and that the perpetrators should be punished severely. A recent CAIR news release had the usual heading “In the Name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful”, but then declared, “Muslims decry leniency” (for a Jewish man in Florida who faces up to 15 years in prison for plotting to blow up mosques – he was turned in before he actually made any attempts). In contrast, as far as I can see, CAIR has nowhere suggested that defending Christians should be a “priority” of police forces in Muslim countries.

Similarly, when commenting on Christian leaders who have criticized Islam, CAIR often insists that they “should not be allowed” to receive government funding or to speak at public events and that they should be “repudiated” by the US government. CAIR has also reported with approval statements by Muslims in Michigan that televangelist Pat Robertson should not have been invited to speak at a Jewish synagogue since he is critical of Islam. Such attempts to control others’ speech sounds eerily like the rigid control over religion and speech which many Muslim governments exercise.

When two Republican representatives walked out of the Washington state legislature rather than listen to a Muslim prayer opening a session, CAIR insisted that Republican leaders should “repudiate” such examples of “Islamophobic hate” and that “Americans must not allow” the actions of these representatives to divide the nation on religious lines. The two representatives were eventually pressured into apologizing. Given that the prayer was to “Allah, the one God”, the action by CAIR amounts not to enforcing tolerance for Islam but to compulsory participation in an Islamic religious activity. While CAIR insists that the American government should be strictly neutral on religion, it also insists that any legitimate government in Iraq must be closely tied with Islam. CAIR states that it would be inappropriate, indeed “a severe offense”, for evangelical Christians to take the gospel to Iraq – all while mounting a massive campaign to promote Islam in North America and praising North Americans who have converted to Islam.

There is in the CAIR news packets some ambiguity, which is not surprising given that they are a collection of documents from a variety of sources. However, there is also ambiguity in CAIR’s own statements. For instance, one of CAIR’s ads proclaims, “Islam, Christianity, Judaism and many other faiths share the basic values necessary to create a world where tolerance and peace prevail. We have an opportunity to build bridges between our faiths and challenge those who attempt to repeat history by dividing humanity along religious and ethnic lines.” CAIR news releases have praised inter-faith worship services and other inter-faith initiatives. CAIR has also criticized Christians for preaching hate and intolerance. Some of the statements by Christian leaders in the US have indeed been hateful, intolerant and unfair to Islam. However, CAIR has also listed as inciting hatred a comment by National Religious Broadcasters chair Glenn Plummer that the Bible says the only way people can reach God is through Jesus, not Muhammad, and a statement by John MacArthur that “The theology of Islam is false. It’s the wrong God. It’s the wrong view of Christ”, which MacArthur defended by quoting John 14:6. These statements are not expressions of hatred but simply expressions of orthodox Christian faith. Christians believe that Christianity is the only true religion, just as Muslims believe that Islam is the only true religion. The hypocrisy of CAIR’s position is evident in the fact that CAIR has also strongly defended the “first pillar” of Islam, which says, “There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is the last Messenger of Allah.”

So, while I continue to read the CAIR news releases with interest and I have learned a lot, they have on the whole failed in their object of convincing me to take a more favourable view of Islam. If anything, they have reinforced my knowledge of the weaknesses in Islam and strengthened my commitment to Jesus Christ.