Islam Watch

Introduction to Handbook For Refuting Islam Apologists' Myths and Claims.
[Last update: Feb. 14, 2007.

Nov. 3, 2007. Note: The Handbook Project has been postponed until further notice. Also, since the Forum has been closed, it is no longer possible to post. You may direct your questions or comments about anything posted at Islam-Watch to the contact link on the website's main page]

 

 

                                                                         

                                                    Introduction

1. What is this project?

• We are assembling a handbook that refutes the many popular claims, myths, and partial-truths that are typically expressed by Islamic apologists, the mainstream media, and the politicians. Using the handbook should enable anyone to easily and effectively refute the apologist claims.
  
• The handbook is intended as a handy reference containing reliable information referenced from more extensive journalistic or scholarly works on Islam, Islamic history, and current events.
• The Handbook itself may be educational for the user, but is not intended as a substitute for a basic knowledge of the core Islamic texts.
  
• We seek the help of volunteers in producing and editing the handbook.
  

2. What are its goals?

• The handbook is a debating tool designed to help educate the public about Islam. Our goal in this project is to produce a well-organized, factual, reliable, and efficient resource for this purpose. Armed with this handbook, the user should be able to deliver the key rebuttal points effectively and verbally.
  

3. Who are the users of this handbook?

• Generally, users of this handbook would already know about many of the problems associated with Islam. They would be using it as a comprehensive, handy resource.  In addition, people who have some reasonable concerns about Islam, but who may not be familiar with all of the specific problems in Islam, will find this handbook to be a helpful resource.

4. Who is the target audience?  Where would it be presented?

• The target audience members are those who, through lack of knowledge or erroneous assumptions, do not yet recognize the negative impact that Islam can have on society.
  
• Once the user knows the contents of the handbook, he or she can then use that information in daily conversations, in debates, and in writing letters and emails to media outlets and politicians. In most of these settings, one's expressions must be brief, relevant, and accurate.  Therefore, having the salient points handy is essential.
  

5. What are the topics being covered?

• Topics range widely, including rebuttals to such claims as "there is no compulsion in Islam" and "Islam forbids the killing of innocent people." For the extensive list of topics, see here.

6. How can I help with the project?

• By authoring or co-authoring a rebuttal for one or more of the topics.
• By adding your comments, criticisms, suggestions, or useful references, in reply to the draft rebuttal articles posted for this handbook project.
• By contributing your ideas and comments to the on-going general discussion.
• By testing a drafted rebuttal (whether your own or someone else's) through presenting it and obtaining feedback.

7. How do I get started?

• If you wish to write a rebuttal, go to the Handbook Index and choose a Topic that is available. For that topic, think through how you will deal with it in the context of this project and its goals. Then write up a brief outline (perhaps 100-300 words) of your proposed rebuttal, preferably in point-form. (Please do not include extensive quotes, nor paste-ups, nor large blocks of text, at that stage). Present your brief outline for consideration from other posters in the Handbook Discussion thread. If your outline is approved* then go ahead and work on it. When you have completed a presentable draft that fits as much of the criteria as possible that are listed in #10, below, then post your draft in this "Tools for Debates with the Islamists" Forum (to post, you click on "New Post" and add your text in the text box). An example of a brief rebuttal is here and a lengthier rebuttal is here.  Once your draft is posted, you will be able to edit your text in response to comments from other posters, as well as respond to them in the thread. *[Note: Approval will likely involve reaching an agreement between the author and at least 2 other participants who are acting as editors. Editors must have written at least one draft rebuttal in this project, or have contributed in other ways to the project, or have previous knowledge or experience writing or editing articles about Islam].
  
• If you wish to contribute comments, criticisms, references, ideas, or wish to test out a rebuttal that is already fairly complete, you may begin once you have read the above and have understood the purpose and nature of the project.

8. Which topics do you recommend I tackle? 

Pick an argument that you

• Have some interest in attacking;

• Have enough preliminary knowledge such that the research phase is not too lengthy and that you can produce a strong, well-supported rebuttal.

9. Can one add another topic that hasn’t been addressed?

• One can suggest it, and if it hasn’t already been covered by the existing topics, it may be included.

10. Is there a template I should follow in constructing a rebuttal?

The following template should be applied:

• A condensed statement of the myth-claim to be rebutted.
  
• Bullet points up front to summarize salient rebuttal points;
• Elaborate on the myth-claim, describing and explaining it for readers.
• State the rebuttal points.  They should consist of any combination of the following:

1. Relevant Verses, Hadith, Sira, tafsir, etc. (main ones of importance quoted in full, some long hadiths can be chopped down, sometimes parts of tafsir need to be quoted to support a claim about what a verse means)
2. Islamic Laws.
3. Examples from Islamic history.
4. Present situation and policies, and recent history.
5. Statistics and other evidence.

• Reasoning laid out and organized so as to defeat the Islam apologist claims thoroughly. Rebuttals should address pre-emptively any Islam apologist objections that are likely to arise in debate.
• Finish the rebuttal with a conclusive statement.

11. How is a submitted article finalized?  Will there be peer review?

• The author should work on his own computer and prepare a draft that (s)he is completely satisfied with, or at least to the point where (s)he determines that (s)he needs the input of the larger group. Once the author has a first draft ready, he/she will then post it in this forum ("Tools for debates with the Islamists"). There will be peer review and suggestions, but the author’s decision is final.  For this reason, please ensure that any facts being used, such as historical, are either known to be factual, or at least supported by authors (preferably reputable) who can be cited.

12. What if I’m not satisfied with somebody else’s submission?

• The author’s discretion is final (unless he/she is factually wrong about something or has departed significantly from the suggested template).  As a user, you can re-write the topic you object to and use it yourself, but it won’t make its way into the handbook without the author’s acquiescing.

13. Where can I find some of the material I’ll need on the Quran, Hadith, Tafseer and other Islamic sources?

• See here.

14. How did you arrive at these decisions?

• The on-line discussion history (warning: it is very lengthy!) can be found here and here. [Note: It is not necessary to read that material, though some people who are curious may wish to browse through it]. Basically, we compiled a long list of Islamic apologist myth-claims that we thought should be rebutted. Then we discussed rebuttal format and content.
  

15. If I don’t like this template, can I make my own here?

• This template is flexible enough to accommodate the preferences of individual authors. Nevertheless, we believe that adhering to the common general template suggested will be most effective.

16. Is there a timeframe by which we are planning to complete this?

• The time until completion will depend on a variety of factors. The most important factor is probably the number of people writing rebuttals. The more people who are working on the project, the sooner the project will be completed. Our overall goal is to complete this by [early 2007]. “Complete” means that each rebuttal for each topic has been reviewed and is in working order (i.e., can be put into use). While this deadline isn't written in stone, neither do we want to encourage a seemingly open-ended time frame for completing the project. In general, we think that some topics are circumscibed enough in their scope that they could reasonably be completed in 1-2 weeks. On the other hand, we would anticipate that other topics have an intrinsically broader scope or require more research which might take 2-4 weeks to accomplish.
  

• Participants should feel free to select a topic which comports with the amount of time they have to give. If someone wants to take on 4 short topics and complete them all in a month, that is welcome. Others might need a month to complete a longer topic or someone with very limited time, who nevertheless wants to participate, could choose a shorter topic but still take a month to complete it. All of these levels of commitment to the project are welcome.

• As people sign up for topics, it would be helpful for them to indicate up front a tentative target date so that we can keep track of the overall progress of the project and whether it is generally staying on track.

17. What material can be posted in this forum, and where can it be posted?

• Only drafts are posted as "New Posts"; all other postings should be made under an existing thread in this forum (Note: This forum is "Tools for debates with the Islamists").
  
• Comments on drafts can be posted in specific threads for those Posts.
• Draft outlines and comments on those outlines, and general comments or discussion about the project, should be posted in the Handbook Discussion thread. If necessary, comments on the Introduction, Index, or Resources can be posted in those respective threads.
  
• Normally, raw materials, lengthy quotes, etc., should not be posted unless they are incorporated within a draft, or posted in response to a draft. Wherever possible, links should be used instead of lengthy quotes, or the link should be accompanied by only a brief title, description, or key part of the quote.
  

18. I'd like to participate, but I have questions that were not answered above.

• If you are sure your question was not answered above or through exploring the "Important Links" shown at the bottom of this page, click on "Reply" at the top of this page to post your question in this thread below. We (Archimedez, Infidel Pride, Caroline) will try to answer.

Important Links:

Handbook Index. Contains the Topic List with links to Rebuttals.
Handbook Discussion. General discussion about the Handbook projects.
Handbook Resources. Contains Links to Islamic texts and other relevant Sources.

Resources Index. Contains Notes, Quotes, and Links on major Islamic subject areas.
Handbook Forum Page.  A.k.a. "Tools for debates with the Islamists" forum.
General Forum. The Islam-Watch forum page.
Main Page. Islam-Watch's front page. (News, Articles, Op-Eds, etc.).

Also see Islam Watch's Publishing Guidelines, which also apply to posting.

(The Introduction above was written by, or with contributions from, Infidel Pride, Archimedez, Caroline, and Television).

---

-Arch

New posters: If you have any remaining questions that were not answered in the Introduction (or links) posted above, please post them below in this thread.

---

-Arch

Archi,
I am willing to be part of this endeavor. But I didn't see exactly how to propose new topics/false propositions about Islam.  So I would like to propose:
- terms like  martyrdom, martyr, justice, corruption, peace,  mercy, etc., mean the same for Muslims as they do for Jews, Christians, for Western civilization, for Hindus, Buddhists, etc.

-- Arab Muslims never knew anything about Jewish rights to the Holy Land. [see Quran, 5:20-22]
-- Muslims in the Holy Land have always treated Jews equitably, hence the Jews are being ungrateful by maintaining a Jewish national or religious state in the Holy Land [or "palestine"]
-- Muslims, Arabs in particular, are innocent of any participation in the Nazi Holocaust, which of course they deplore.
-- "Antisemitism" is strictly a Western phenomenon. The Arabs were never antisemitic, and racially they could not be.
-- Arabs oppose Israel because it is a state based on religion [as if all Arab states with the possible exception of Lebanon were not based on Islam; not to mention Pakistan]
--  The Jews never had any holy places in al-Quds. There never was a Jewish Temple there.

-- The Muslims have always treated Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. fairly and kindly and generously in countries under Muslim rule.
-- Armenians were always kindly treated in the Ottoman empire until they betrayed the Ottomans by helping Russia in WW One
-- Islam is opposed to slavery
-- Slaves living in Muslim countries have always been treated kindly. Slavery in Muslim countries was historically much milder than in the American South for instance.
Best Wishes,
Eliyahu

Eliyahu,

Greetings! Thanks for visiting us.

Archi,
I am willing to be part of this endeavor. But I didn't see exactly how to propose new topics/false propositions about Islam. 

Yes, somehow I think I had forgotten to add the statement about adding new topics in the Handbook Index thread.

So I would like to propose:
- terms like  martyrdom, martyr, justice, corruption, peace,  mercy, etc., mean the same for Muslims as they do for Jews, Christians, for Western civilization, for Hindus, Buddhists, etc.

We have something like this for our Glossary of Islamic terms...though I see you've added some more terms for us.

-- Arab Muslims never knew anything about Jewish rights to the Holy Land. [see Quran, 5:20-22]
-- Muslims in the Holy Land have always treated Jews equitably, hence the Jews are being ungrateful by maintaining a Jewish national or religious state in the Holy Land [or "palestine"]
-- Muslims, Arabs in particular, are innocent of any participation in the Nazi Holocaust, which of course they deplore.
-- "Antisemitism" is strictly a Western phenomenon. The Arabs were never antisemitic, and racially they could not be.
-- Arabs oppose Israel because it is a state based on religion [as if all Arab states with the possible exception of Lebanon were not based on Islam; not to mention Pakistan]
--  The Jews never had any holy places in al-Quds. There never was a Jewish Temple there.

-- The Muslims have always treated Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. fairly and kindly and generously in countries under Muslim rule.
-- Armenians were always kindly treated in the Ottoman empire until they betrayed the Ottomans by helping Russia in WW One
-- Islam is opposed to slavery
-- Slaves living in Muslim countries have always been treated kindly. Slavery in Muslim countries was historically much milder than in the American South for instance.
Best Wishes,
Eliyahu

Those are all good. You've suggested some specific ones there that we didn't have yet, though some of them we do have (e.g., slavery), and some of them are under more general headings. I will try to fit in the more specific ones you've listed because some of them are clearly projects in their own right.

You have probably done some work on many of those. I noticed on your blog you have been returning to the word "peace." I wrote a brief piece on the meaning of the word peace in Islam for this project. I was thinking that if you are writing about some of these topics anyway on your blog, then it would mainly be a matter of making some modifications or additions to your previous or on-going work.

One thing I was thinking about when we started this project is that each of us has some pockets of knowledge here and there, but also a lack of knowledge in other areas. I think if we can combine our knowledge, this will add a thoroughness or comprehensiveness to the work, and would give us all some more education at the same time.

Is there one topic either in your list above or in the Handbook Index that you''d like to start with?

---

-Arch

archimedez:

Eliyahu,

Greetings! Thanks for visiting us.

Archi,
I am willing to be part of this endeavor. But I didn't see exactly how to propose new topics/false propositions about Islam. 

Yes, somehow I think I had forgotten to add the statement about adding new topics in the Handbook Index thread.

Eliyahu

Welcome - I was hoping we'd get you to join us at some point.  On adding the topics, it was suggested in item 9 above - namely,

'One can suggest it, and if it hasn’t already been covered by the existing topics, it may be included.'

New contributors are therefore welcome to propose new additions, like you have done below: that can either be done here, or in the handbook discussion section

archimedez:

So I would like to propose:
- terms like  martyrdom, martyr, justice, corruption, peace,  mercy, etc., mean the same for Muslims as they do for Jews, Christians, for Western civilization, for Hindus, Buddhists, etc.

We have something like this for our Glossary of Islamic terms...though I see you've added some more terms for us.

Yeah, it was one of the things that we discussed at the beginning.  In my initial draft on Islamo-Fascism, I addressed some of those, but it's something that we've reserved for the introduction, since a lot of topics are going to be re-using these terms, which is why it is important that the user have them at the back of his/her mind.  One suggestion - take a dictionary definition of a term, and then modify it suitably to lay out the Islamic meaning, taking care to have the two meanings side be side, maybe in a column format.

Below, I mention some of the topics that seem to echo the ones you lay out in navy color - we have the option of re-wording those to match what you had in mind.  Check out the Handbook Index, and let us know if we are off in a big way.

archimedez:

-- Arab Muslims never knew anything about Jewish rights to the Holy Land. [see Quran, 5:20-22]
-- Muslims in the Holy Land have always treated Jews equitably, hence the Jews are being ungrateful by maintaining a Jewish national or religious state in the Holy Land [or "palestine"] <- 4.5?
-- Muslims, Arabs in particular, are innocent of any participation in the Nazi Holocaust, which of course they deplore.
-- "Antisemitism" is strictly a Western phenomenon. The Arabs were never antisemitic, and racially they could not be. <- 8.8
-- Arabs oppose Israel because it is a state based on religion [as if all Arab states with the possible exception of Lebanon were not based on Islam; not to mention Pakistan]
--  The Jews never had any holy places in al-Quds. There never was a Jewish Temple there.

-- The Muslims have always treated Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. fairly and kindly and generously in countries under Muslim rule. <- 4.5?
-- Armenians were always kindly treated in the Ottoman empire until they betrayed the Ottomans by helping Russia in WW One
-- Islam is opposed to slavery <- 3.6
-- Slaves living in Muslim countries have always been treated kindly. Slavery in Muslim countries was historically much milder than in the American South for instance.
Best Wishes,
Eliyahu

Those are all good. You've suggested some specific ones there that we didn't have yet, though some of them we do have (e.g., slavery), and some of them are under more general headings. I will try to fit in the more specific ones you've listed because some of them are clearly projects in their own right.

You have probably done some work on many of those. I noticed on your blog you have been returning to the word "peace." I wrote a brief piece on the meaning of the word peace in Islam for this project. I was thinking that if you are writing about some of these topics anyway on your blog, then it would mainly be a matter of making some modifications or additions to your previous or on-going work.

One thing I was thinking about when we started this project is that each of us has some pockets of knowledge here and there, but also a lack of knowledge in other areas. I think if we can combine our knowledge, this will add a thoroughness or comprehensiveness to the work, and would give us all some more education at the same time.

Is there one topic either in your list above or in the Handbook Index that you''d like to start with?

Woohoo! Eliyahu!. Someone hooked a big fish.:-)

I see that someone (Arch I presume) has added Eliyahu's topics to the list. At one point in this process we already had the Myth that anti-semitism is a western influence and doesn't come from Islam. Somehow that must have gotten lost in the sorting process because I don't see it now but it most certainly belongs in the outline. (I think we may have originally had it under the "Root causes" classification) However, 11.5 and 11.6 IMO are really part of 2.2 (subthread Judaism. Rewriting history and ignoring what is sacred to other religions reflects intolerance). There should be a good way to make it clear for myths 2.2, 4.1 and 4.2 (which all say "all religions"), that it is permissable to [insert one religion here] or in other words, create a subthread devoted to rebutting the claim for just one religion only rather than taking them all on. We shouldn't proliferate myths to handle those issues. Rather, we should (as IP did) carefully read through the existing structure to see where new proposals might reasonably belong. On the other hand, I reckon that in the end that we can always re-sort rebuttals into an outline where they properly belong so it's not really that big a deal (which, I suppose, is the advantage of this whole approach!)

IP, Caroline,
 thanks, I have taken your comments into account and made a few notes and adjustments. I don't want to hide too many specific topics, otherwise new people are going to keep proposing them. So I left some specific ones up there with a (cf ) linking related items. Also the statements at the bottom indicate that some topics could be joined, and other large individual topics subdivided. I will add another note asking people to try and avoid duplicating subject matter that is covered elsewhere.

Let me know if you have any further suggestions.

---

-Arch

9. Can one add another topic that hasn’t been addressed?

I Think there should be an section that describes the tactics and type of warfare that the Islamist are using aginst us. What follows is an example of what I'm saying. It's from a two part post I will start on Monday at The Gathering Storm.

War is not about defeating an enemy’s army or destroying their economic ability to wage war, it’s about defeating the enemy’s ideology. World War II was about destroying the Axis, Japan and her allies. The war on terror is about wiping out the Islamist ideology, not just Al-Qaida. Fighting only Al-Qaida means the war would have no end. Only by eliminating and defeating the governments, organizations and individuals who support the Islamist ideology can we have peace.

If we are to win this war against a vicious ideology, we need to understand all of its dimensions – and its history. Once understood, we can create plans to counter each tactic used by the enemy. The only tactic being used now is to fight the militant arm of this ideology in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In one form of another a three part strategy emerged to confront and successfully deal with the technological supremacy of the non-Muslim powers. The Islamists knew they could not defeat a superior technological enemy on the conventional battlefield so they turned to a strategy of fighting an asynchronous war. Asynchronous warfare is related to the term asymmetrical warfare (the use of dissimilar weapons or force to offset a superior military force and technological advantage. One famous Chinese strategist, Chang Mengxiong, compared asymmetric warfare to "a Chinese boxer with a keen knowledge of vital body points who can bring a stronger opponent to his knees with a minimum of movement"). Asynchronous warfare is where both parties do not combat each other within the same 'time-frame', e.g. in cases of guerilla groups that attack the opponent by surprise and at unexpected locations – 9-11 is an example.

But the use of asynchronous warfare combined with asymmetrical warfare includes not just its violent tactic of terrorism, but also the non-violent tactics of intimidation, infiltration and disinformation. These asymmetrical tactics are the much larger war - the war being waged against our very culture and its most valued principles. We will not win this war until the root support of the violent jihadists is eliminated and its ideology defeated. We must confront this asynchronous war if we hope to win, and not focus our attention entirely on the asymmetrical war that the jihadists want us to fight and slowly bleed us of our troops, wealth and freedoms.

Hi Winston, re your question about adding a topic, I think the main consideration for the purposes of this handbook, is What myth are you (or anyone proposing a new topic) addressing? Is there some way to reformulate what you're saying in terms of a myth you're refuting? Perhaps what you're getting at is the "myth" that we can win the war against terrorism by defeating al-Qaida when what we really need to defeat is the ideology of "Islamism". But if that is the myth you are proposing to address (which is certainly a step-forward from the notion that we're just dealing with al-Quada), I'm not sure that you're not actually perpetuating a myth, namely the notion that there is some ideology called "Islamism" which is somehow separate from the "real" Islam. On the other hand, when you refer to need for us to pay more attention to "non-violent tactics of intimidation, infiltration and disinformation" (to which one could add demographic conquest), then I certainly agree and think you are addressing a myth (which it does appear that we haven't explicity formulated) along the lines of, "If Muslims don't engage in terrorism or violence then we have nothing to worry about", which totally overlooks the ultimate goal of terrorism, which is ultimately to impose Sharia law and reduce us infidels to dhimmitude within an Islamic order. If that goal can be accomplished through non-violent means, the ultimate outcome is nevertheless the same. That whole point is something that will most likely come up under either myth 9.1 (the vast majority of Muslims may not endorse terrorism but that doesn't mean they wouldn't work nonviolently towards sharia law, which negates the notion that most Muslims are moderate, as there's nothing moderate about Sharia law) or under sections 10.1/10.2 - we have nothing to fear from political Islam (and the infiltration issue you raise is certainly related to 10.2).

(Sorry. Fonts gone wild again...)

I was mistaken to imply that "If Muslims don't engage in terrorism or violence then we have nothing to worry about" is a myth that is not already explicitly included in the outline. That's pretty much the major point of section 10.

OK - so maybe font size 3 is what we're aiming for? (test)

Caroline1:

I was mistaken to imply that "If Muslims don't engage in terrorism or violence then we have nothing to worry about" is a myth that is not already explicitly included in the outline. That's pretty much the major point of section 10.

Caroline

This is such a major topic, and one we have so often touched on in J/W, that I for one feel sheepish about not having thought of this earlier.  But I disagree with you above - it's not the same as the question of whether or not Islam is a threat to non-Islamic countries.  After all, even in Islamic countries, dhimmis would continue to be 2nd class citizens even if every terrorist outfit and Shariah police were disbanded, unless such countries consciously chose to become non-Islamic, like Kazakhstan.

This should be 10.3 (or 10.2, if the current 10.2 gets co-opted into 3.2 or 10.1.

Winston

Welcome, and thanks for bringing this up.

IP - I just rechecked the index list and see a 10.3: "10.3. Except for terrorism, we need to be concerned about political Islam."

That must be a typo - did you or Arch mean "we need NOT be"? (in order to phrase this as a myth we're rebutting)?

IP: "After all, even in Islamic countries, dhimmis would continue to be 2nd class citizens even if every terrorist outfit and Shariah police were disbanded"

Good point. But maybe that concern (about living in a majority Muslim culture) is already covered in previous sections, like #3, which cover sharia law? So section 10 appears to be addressing precisely the issue of whether non-Islamic countries need to worry about Islam, provided Muslims living there reject violent jihad. (I have seen this come up several times at JW in the context of so-called "moderates" publicly repudiating violent jihad but conveniently remaining moot on the point as to whether they would like to see Sharia law established). But then if this is indeed what we're getting at, then I'm not sure why we've added 10.3? Isn't that just the same thing as 10.0 ("Political Islam ...is not a problem")? Or maybe I'm just really not getting something here (entirely possible).

Winston,

Welcome! I like your blog--nice work. Thanks for the suggested topic. As I understand it, the myth-claim would be something like

"Except for terrorism, we have no need to be concerned about political Islam".

And the rebuttal to the myth-claim would be something like:

"There is a significant percentage of Muslims and Muslim organizations who are engaged in all kinds of  jihad (political, economic, cultural, interpersonal), or who are in support of it, and we need to have a healthy concern about them. Look at what they've already accomplished (examples 1, 2, 3, etc.). Their goal, after all, is to implement sharia, just like the terrorist jihadists. Unless we defend our values and way of life, they will have a clear road to success."

I think it should be included here. I've posted it in section 10. Caroline notes that it could be dealt with under section 10.

If you were willing to work on that topic, and make whatever format adjustments are needed for our handbook format, I would certainly welcome a draft outline from you on that topic


Caroline,

I agree it should be under section 10, though I think the specific myth needs to be stated explicitly. It is a very popular myth that arises in different variations. I think your point about overlap is justified. I will post a "(cf )" so that the author takes into account the other related topics.


IP,

I've posted it as 10.3.

---

-Arch