Summary Of The Article 'The Problem-What Is Wrong With The Islamic World' By Mark Humphryss

Mark Humphrys’ article “The problem - What is wrong with the Islamic world?” goes all over the place, but it does its job in answering the question posed in the title. Humphrys starts off by providing a table that ranks the political freedom and civil liberties of the main Islamic countries in the world. The table, made by U.S. based non-governmental organization Freedom House, only lists one country as fully free (in terms of political freedom and civil liberties): Israel. Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, and Tunisia are “partially” free. Additionally, Egypt was considered “partially” free up until 2013, but changed to “not” free the next year. By starting off with factual evidence, Humphrys appeals to ethos logos. He quickly builds himself up as

He makes an interesting argument on “how little soul-searching there has been in Islam since 9/11.” (CITE). Muslims have not taken time to consider what could have produced radical Islamic terrorism, and to a certain extent, why the Middle East has fallen so far from grace. Here, Humphrys provides links to multiple videos and articles from moderate Muslims acknowledging that other members of their religion have not made any attempts to this. In particular, Abd Al-Hamid Al-Ansari, an Islamic scholar, has a very compelling argument: “Why don 't we want to acknowledge that these young people [who carried out 9/11] were the sons of a culture that is hostile toward the world... No one enticed them, and they did not suffer from oppression, repression, or poverty. They carried out the operation because of their belief that it was Jihad and martyrdom." The angry, biting tone used by Al-Ansari is a reflection of the tone of the entire article. By quoting and linking to reliable sources who, in a sense, agree with his argument, Humphrys builds upon his credibility and

His article on Islam is long, but informative. In itself, the article was published on his own politics-focused website-- markhumphrys.com. This does affect his article by making it seem more personal-- which it was. For one, Humphrys is very “pro-israel,” and asserts that multiple times in his article. While that’s certainly not a bad thing, it makes his article seem less objective overall. Additionally, there are times in his article when Humphry goes on micro-attacks against people that have offended him, or even have blocked him on twitter. But he does make up for those things somewhat by providing accurate visual evidence for some of his claims. His “Muslims against Islamism,” “Denial and obfuscation,” and “Fatwa against Terrorism” sections-- arguably the most important parts of his article-- link to multiple videos and articles that support what Humphrys writes. The tone of this paper is very critical of Islam, and even with the subjective style of writing, Humphrys raises valid points. All in all, Humphrys intended for his audience to be general, and even writes at the bottom of his website that he is open to disagreement and debates about his opinions from