The Boston bombers who were killed and captured do not have Arabic names and do not come from an Arab country. But they are Muslims, from Chechnya, and their faith is causing the sorts of problems American Muslims were afraid of: that the perpetrators would be Muslims motivated by anti-American sentiment. Muslim Americans awaited the identity of the perpetrators with particular dread, for it would feed into the perception that Muslims are terrorists. Fear of association following a crime is a phenomenon known to nearly every minority in the world. But given the scale of 9/11, some American Muslims say they are particularly concerned about their faith being associated with the mass killing of innocent people. It took a number of Muslim American groups days to respond to the Sept. 11 attacks. Within hours of the Boston bombings, however, every major Islamic association in the United States had issued a statement offering condolences and expressing outrage. The swiftness and unambiguous Muslim response to Boston, while correct, probably did not make a dent. Even before the bombers were caught some were immediately pointing the finger of blame in the direction of Muslims. Guest commentators on right-wing American TV shows blamed Muslims for the bombing, spewing forth: “Let's kill them; Jihad in America; Don't talk to me about religion of peace – the way Muslims describe their faith – no way; No American citizen blows up random people; that's a Middle Eastern scene.” Actually, Americans do on occasion kill Americans en masse. An American was behind the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. But before Timothy McVeigh was apprehended, many widely believed Muslims were responsible. In the shootings in Newtown, the Oak Creek, and Aurora, the white men responsible for those tragedies were described as being mentally ill, an aberration, not representative of an entire culture or race. If recent history is any guide, if the Boston bombers had ended up being white anti-government extremists, the attack would in all likelihood been portrayed as just an isolated incident — one that has no bearing on any larger policy debates. It will probably be much different now that the bombers are Muslims from the developing world. America often cites such assailants as proof that entire demographic groups must be targeted, and that a more vigorous response is warranted. At that point, it's easy to imagine conservatives citing Boston as a reason to block immigration reform defense spending cuts, and the Afghan war withdrawal, and to further expand surveillance and other encroachments on civil liberties. It's a familiar scene for Muslim groups. In the months after 9/11, the FBI reported a 1,600 percent increase in anti-Muslim hate crime incidents. And though the number of complaints soon tapered off, other kinds of biased complaints are on the rise. Allegations of anti-Muslim bias in the workplace are higher than ever. Department of Justice figures also suggest that anti-Muslim "zoning bias" — where towns refuse to grant building permits for mosques — is a growing problem. In 2011, neighbors of a proposed mosque in Tennessee challenged the permit on the grounds that Islam "was not a religion entitled to First Amendment protection, but rather a political ideology committed to turning America into a Shariah state." The judge dismissed the case. It will probably do no good explaining to Americans that just because the Boston bombers are Muslims Islam is a religion of hate and violence. Americans have pretty much convinced themselves what Islam is.
