"There are no taxes in Islam, but rather there is a limited Zakaat [alms] totaling 2.5 percent. So beware of the deception of those with the capital. And with your earnest reading about Islam from its pristine sources, you will arrive at an important truth, which is that the religion of all of the Prophets (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them) is one, and that its essence is submission to the orders of Allah Alone in all aspects of life, even if their Shari’ahs [Laws] differ.” -- from the speech of Osama Bin Laden
In the crazy hodge-podge that makes up his Invitation to Islam (to be followed by an Invitation to a Beheading) Osama Bin Laden has decided to appeal to the low-tax voters, liberatarians, ronpaulites, admirers of dinesh d'souza. Bizarre, of course.
Muslims traditionally have lived off the non-Muslims in the lands they conquered. Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus paid the Jizyah. In India after tens of millions of Hindus had been killed, the Mughal rulers ceased to engage in such wholesale slaughter. And also, once they had a sufficient local population of Hindus who had been forcibly converted -- out of fear, out of a desire to avoid the miserable condition of dhimmi (or zimmi) -- they allowed the Hindus to be treated as if they were People of the Book, and remain alive so long as they fulfilled the duties of a dhimmi. In that way the Muslim rulers could continue to live on the Jizyah paid by these "zimmis."
They also relied, when full-scale military conquest of Infidel territory was no longer possible, on constant raiding parties, up and down the coasts of Europe, even as far as Ireland or, in one case, Iceland. They looted, they killed, they kidnapped non-Muslims and brought them back to be enslaved. In the west, as well as in the east, raiding parties would seize Slavs (hence "slaves") and also Georgian and Circassian women for the harems.
And now Muslim states exist either on the manna of oil wealth, which they did nothing to deserve and which is merely the result of an accident of geology. Or, where oil is lacking, they exist on the disguised Jizyah of aid from Infidel states (instead of other, but rich, Muslim states). And within much of Dar al-Harb, the Lands of the Infidels where Islam does not yet rule, many Muslims have settled and taken every conceivable advantage, legal and illegal, of the extensive benefits offered by the generous, and innocent, states of Western Europe -- and indeed, raise huge families on those benefits paid for by Infidel taxpayers, while those Infidels, given the expense in Western Europe of raising a child, and the widespread unsettlement and unrecognized apprehension over this same growing Muslim population, have fewer and fewer children themselves. And thus demographic conquest by Muslims continues, unopposed and indeed inadvertently supported by Western welfare states.
"No taxes"? Ask once the Infidels cease paying the Jizyah, or that oil ceases to be quite so abundant. Then the Muslim states will undoubtedly return to the condition of wretchedness that they were in when the Infidels did not supply, as they have for the past century at least, good government, stability, encouragement of agriculture (see the Maghreb, see Egypt under Cromer), the rule of law, and all the other things that allowed economic development and that will not take place, cannot take place, under Muslim rule -- insofar as those Muslims remain devotees of inshallah-fatalism.
Just look at the Muslim oil states. They have received ten trillion dollars, entirely without any effort on their part, since 1973 alone. What have they done with it? They remain hopelessly dependent on armies of foreign wage-slaves. They have failed to create modern, self-sustaining economies. They live on oil, and on the rents from oil. They produce nothing. They offer no services. They do not share their wealth with other, poorer Muslims, but always expect the Infidels to support those other Muslims -- and the Infidels, so far, have been insanely happy to oblige.
"There are no taxes in Islam..."
Osama Bin Laden will apparently try anything. Go ahead. Read His Lips. Give him your vote. Show how impressive you found his campaign speech for the Islam Party, its workers tirelessly treading the True and Shining Path, the sendero luminoso, fi sabil Allah.
Most of the work in the world today is done by those who work too hard; they comprise a "nucleus of martyrs."
-from Hyman Rickover’s Thoughts on Man’s Purpose in Life Address.
http://nielsolson.us/Writing/RickoverRotaryAddress10FEB77.html
Food is getting more expensive. Oil might have doubled, but corn has tripled:
http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/CN/M
One day the Problem of Overproduction will run its course. It sucks to be a tapeworm without a host.
Off topic: Shalit's kidnapper kidnapped!
Muslims traditionally have lived off the non-Muslims in the lands they conquered. Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus paid the Jizyah.
as they now live off oil revenues unlike in Israel the only manufacturing they seem doing is that of weapon and in some areas producing opium to sell to the infidels in the West and in looking at Muslim history since the time of Muhammad and it looks like any of the so-called advances in science were made by recent converts to Islam and not by any second-generation converts it seems like this cult and its tradition of soulless and submission to the pagan moon god they claim is the only true God discourages the freethinking needed for a people to advance in the sciences because of the will of allha
an allha will provide attitude one prime example is how poorly the land in Palestine was before Israelis made the land produce Muslims have done nothing but once Israelis showed how the land could producethey tried to steal it as it seems to be the only thing that Muslims are good at enslaving those who are better than them and living off them like the lazy good for nothings they are I wonder just how many welfare checks are resident Muslim nassem here on jw is pulling from the infidels she is probably living off of
Dear Hugh,
While agreeing with you 100%, as the saying goes great minds think alike. Unfortunately for us a muslim cleric got there before both of us. This is a translation of a sermon Sheik Yousef Al Qaradhawi held in Qatar a few months ago. While we might disagree with him on a few point, his observation seem perceptive enough, I don't think he would agree with you concerning Arabic fatalism, more like a lack of resolution. It is nice to see a muslim cleric blaming themselves for the situation instead of blaming everybody else. Here is the sermon
We use trains and planes, but they are not our trains or planes. The (Westerners) manufacture them and export them to us. True, we can buy the most magnificent things in the world, products for our homes and for ourselves. Our people can buy the most luxurious cars, Rolls-Royce or Mercedes 500 or 700, models S, M, and L with all the luxuries. We own them, but we don't manufacture them. We don't even produce a single nail in any of these cars. Others do this for us.
The income of the entire Arab world, including the oil-producing countries, does not reach the that of a European country, such as Spain. Spain – let alone Germany, France, Britain, or Italy. Just Spain, which is at the bottom of the list of industrial countries... The income of the entire Arab world does not reach it. How come? Because we don't work, and if we do work, we don't do it professionally.
They conducted a survey of the average time that a government employee spends working in a certain Arab country. The average was 27 minutes a day. 27 minutes! The rest of the time he drinks coffee, reads newspapers, and goes on errands here and there. Only a small number of people work. The rest do not.
In the mid 1970s I went to Germany. We arrived during in the morning. I asked the guy who took me from the airport to the convention hall… As I was passing through the empty streets, I asked him how come the streets were not busy, like in our countries. He said: "People are at work." After 7 p.m. he took me back to the hotel, and the streets were empty. I said to him: "What's going on, the streets are empty again." He said: people are back home from work, and they are exhausted. All they want is to eat their dinner, watch the news, and then go to bed, because early next morning they have to wake up for hard work. They commute more than an hour to work and back, and spend an hour at lunch. They work non-stop.
We are a nation that doesn't work. How can we develop if we don't work? When we do work, we don't do it professionally. We keep saying "Don't worry, later, later…" Islam teaches us to do things professionally. Doing things professionally is a religious duty. The Prophet said that Allah ordered to excel in everything. He imposed excellence and professionalism. Professionalism must be followed in everything. "If you kill, do it properly, and if you slaughter, do it properly." Even when killing, you must do well.
Unfortunately, we do not excel in either military or civil industries. We import everything from needles to missiles. This is our nation. We still haven't manufactured an engine in our Arab countries. We assemble parts, but have no manufacturing industries. India has manufactured a car, and even a plane, while we still go around in circles like a bull in who turns a grinding mill or a water weal until it reaches exactly where it started.
How come the Zionist gang has managed to be superior to us, despite being so few? It has become superior through knowledge, through technology, and through strength. It has become superior to us through work. We had the desert before our eyes but we didn't do anything with it. When they took over, they turned it into a green oasis. How can a nation that does not work progress? How can it grow?
If you kill, do it properly, and if you slaughter, do it properly." Even when killing, you must do well.
This is one thing that muslims at the head of the class. They are the world experts at needless and profane killings.
Hugh sez:
" raise huge families on those benefits paid for by Infidel taxpayers, while those Infidels, given the expense in Western Europe of raising a child, and the widespread unsettlement and unrecognized apprehension over this same growing Muslim population, have fewer and fewer children themselves."
Actually, its worse: While educated, wealthy Europeans, Britons, Dutch & Germans for the largest part, are leaving in the thousands each month, their socialist ratbag politicians back home are replenishing the indigenous electorate with a Muhammedan proletariat. Look at George Galloway, Jack (the burka) Straw and many others! Look at Keith Ellisson in the States, who will do just about anything to expand his power base.
Might be something well worth writing about, Mr. Fitzgerald!
Should read Muhammedan migrant proletariat...
wonder how many euros will support islam now with this latest video? i have read many blogs openly slander bush yet state that bin laden makes more sense.
Hugh: Osama Bin Laden has decided to appeal to the low-tax voters, liberatarians, ronpaulites, admirers of dinesh d'souza. Bizarre, of course.
(In a tone of dry sarcasm...) Imagine if the primary article contributor on one of the most important Islam-exposing websites weren't a proponant of looting my pockets and negating the concept of private-property by raising gasoline-taxes. THEN it wouldn't be quite so easy for bin Laden, et al, to find credulous ears for their arguments among those despicable "low-tax voters (and) libertarians, (etc)."
If someone characterizes a tax on gasoline as "negating the concept of private property" instead of as a useful instrument to lessen OPEC's take, and hence diminish the Money Weapon of jihad, there is little I can write or say that is likely to change that someone's mind about all kinds of things, including the necessity and rightness of some taxes, for certain purposes and not for others.
Since Elric has been so kind to send so many of you to my blog... primarily because he does not think that there are any moderate Muslims, and that we never see any Muslims speak out against Radical Islam... I thought you might be interested in this story.
http://eaglespearlsofwisdom.wordpress.com/2007/09/08/where-are-those-moderate-muslims-here/
For those of you who have taken the time to comment on my blog. Thank you
It appears that the American left finally has a reason to dislike OBL. He has proposed something that they consider to be unspeakably evil - a tax cut.
Stop these islamic leaches from sucking more money from productive societies, stop the jazyia tax welfare programs to desperate economics states like Egype, Gaza, and pull out of Iraq. Let them suck off each other, stop supporting these hostile terrorist supporters. Best of all, declare them all 'terrorist supporting' states, like Iretrea, Sudan, so no more money flows either in or out of them into the West. Drag the net around them, and stop paying them anything, watch them starve. They are incapable of running an economy so islamists live off plunder only, like our oil.
I have heard that the demographic advantage has been eroding. It has been claimed that while the rate of population increase among people in and from Islamic countries is still high compared to Europeans, it is falling and doing so at a rate that is faster than European rates fell. I am not a demographer so I have no means to confirm or deny this claim but if it is true then the number of young Muslims compared to old ones will soon result in an aging population. Aging populations can not afford to encourage jihad among their young people.
Saudi Arabia and the UAE have huge numbers of immigrants, most are non-Muslim, many of whom are Christians from the Philippines and Hindus from India. Saudi Arabia already has a large population of "over stayers" living in the nation. China's interest in Africa has lead to Chinese communities springing up in Egypt, Sudan and other places.
Wouldn't it be ironic if, while the Imams were stirring up young Muslims and wearing out Islam's welcome in Europe, the Islamic world was being changed into a place more like the Europe they had sought to Islamize? North Africa is second only to sub-Saharan Africa for the rate of cell phone growth. I won't even go into the increasing urbanization and the rate of increase of Internet penetration. All is not status quo in the Ummah these days.
In Islamic sharia, there are no capital gains taxes. But it's the decapitation tax that will kill you.
In the latter Roman Empire just before fall many inhabitants of the outer provinces prefered rule by the Germanic barbarians to that of Rome as taxs levied by barbians where far lower
I have come to the conclusion as well from reading many books, that those making all of these wonderful discoveries and translating the works of the ancients were either Christians, Jews, or Christian or Jewish converts to Islam. Not long ago Arabs in Lebanon were wondering why their states are such a mess; why aren't they leading the world as they once did? The answer was clear to me: they took credit for other peoples' work in the past, and have never been creators,only co-opters. After the re-comquista in Spain, many of the converts re-converted. They teach their children to hate and commit suicide to kill others. How do they expect to progress?
Hugh> If someone characterizes a tax on gasoline
Hugh> as "negating the concept of private property"
...they're telling truth to principle. That gasoline rightfully belongs to SOMEBODY who isn't YOU.
Hugh> instead of as a useful instrument to lessen
Hugh> OPEC's take, and hence diminish the Money
Hugh> Weapon of jihad
This is merely the excuse of yet another THIEF....
Hugh> there is little I can write or say that is
Hugh> likely to change that someone's mind about
Hugh> all kinds of things, including the necessity
Hugh> and rightness of some taxes, for certain
Hugh> purposes and not for others.
....who describes, as thieves always do, his thieving as "necessary".
You're no different than they are, Hugh, *in principle* -- you both think other peoples' stuff belongs to you. Where you differ is merely in terms of SCALE. I.e., how far you are prepared to go to TAKE other peoples' stuff after first having determined that it's yours for the plundering.
-- It's just one big merry-go-round of crooks, secular and fanatic alike, all swinging around and around and around and around, hands darting out to grab every bit of loot they can.
I won't even go into, save to mention it, the ABJECT _STUPIDITY_ of supposing that anyone in this government, Demoblican or Republicrat, is going to spend an extra wheelbarrow full of swag yanked out of the hides of the American taxpayer on anything remotely resembling an anti-Islamic platform.
They claim there are no "taxes" in Islam.
(And conveniently call them something else.)
But I know there are no brains in Islam.
(Because the first line of the Koran forbids them.)
"That gasoline rightfully belongs to SOMEBODY who isn't YOU." ...from post above
We could argue about who rightfully owns the oil from which that gasoline was refined, but it is unfortunately controlled by jihadists who would like to enslave you and me. They have traditionally priced that commodity in a manor that ensures that alternative energy sources are always kept just barely non-competitive, and have an army of paid agents in Western governments to to ensure that it stays that way. The idea is to keep the $trillions in unearned wealth flowing in until the oil is gone. Each $70 barrel costs the jihadists about $2 to 'produce', if we can call it that. That's the "other people's stuff" you refer to. The tax we are talking about is not to support 'big government', my friend, it is to fund alternative energy sources while at the same time making jihadist's oil much less competitive. So you have fewer $billions to put a wahabbi mosque on every street corner in the civilized world, and fewer $billions to corrupt our political processes, our academy, and our news media. And, as an added bonus, without the oil revenues to prop them up, some of those mullahs, 'kings' and princes might reap much of the hatred they have instilled in their populations, too.
Like you, I'm not a fan of confiscatory taxes and big government, but this idea makes sense to me.
The low taxes is a part of the Koran blessed lying machine.
I initially mis-read that headline, Hugh, as "There are no Taxis in Islam!".
LOLOL!
"The Individualist" who belongs to the "taxes-are-socialism" herd has no idea what an "individualist" really is, from soup to nuts. He has one hobby-horse, and that hobby-horse is money, or rather, taxes which to him are of no conceivable benefit and he can find no reason, apparently, why any taxes, on anything, make sense. It's back to the Hobbesian state for him, I presume. No police, no army, no schools, no roads.
W he would bring back has a certain attractiveness, as long as you forget reality. Try it -- lots of people seem able to do it, just fine. I suspect that I dislike far more than he does the mass democracy (emphasis on "mass") and the idiocy all around us. But that idiocy goes far beyond what is, or is not done, with our poor little taxes.
Pazzesco.
Hugh's proposed additional tax on oil ('our oil' in my above) makes sense to me. But whose oil is it really?
We developed the technology for drilling, we developed the technology to use the products from plastic to gasoline, and we provide technological support for keeping those wells operational; further it is we who keep the world market systems going so this oil can find its way from dirt to your gas tank. We keep the engines of industry running, not Arabs. So whose oil is it really?
Theirs, where it lay deep in the dirt millions of years before allah whispered in Mohammud's ear? Or ours, since we went in there, found it and developed it, and used it, for a rent-fee 'Royalty' to the landowner's of allah's largesse? The oil is on their lands, but the mineral rights by rights of discovery and royalty payments are ours. So if we tax this oil imported from Mid East islamic states, we are taxing our own product, same as taxing our own taxpayers, which means recycling the costs back into the economy for another purpose, from social security and medicare, to homeland security, and to development of alternate resources to make us less dependent on oil. A tax on imported oil is then for the same reason of 'social good' as an income tax taken out of your paycheck. We are taxing our own product by right for our own use to better ourselves by weaning off the oil tit.
Nobody likes taxes because they are naturally confiscatory. But somebody has to pay for all services, some ill advised like welfare-ism, if society is to hold together. Whether or not Islam has 'taxes' or calls it something else is not the issue. They already demand 'booty' for our oil in their dirt, and we pay through the nose. Would it not be better to get off the oil tit with our own social tax to support alternate energy?
'And also, once they had a sufficient local population of Hindus who had been forcibly converted -- out of fear, out of a desire to avoid the miserable condition of dhimmi (or zimmi) -- they allowed the Hindus to be treated as if they were People of the Book, and remain alive so long as they fulfilled the duties of a dhimmi. In that way the Muslim rulers could continue to live on the Jizyah paid by these "zimmis."'
The same was true of the Ottomans. The early Turkish conquerors of Anatolia were generously eager to share the "blessings" of their faith with the conquered population and eventually succeeded in converting most of them. The later Ottoman Turks were a bit smarter in their conquest of the Balkans. They allowed the indigenous Churches to administer local affairs thereby preserving the continuing existence of non-Muslims. The Ottoman elite must have realized that without the existence of a large non-Muslim population there would be no financial or intellectual resources on which to parasitize. This undoubtedly accounts for the long life of the Ottoman state when compared with those of other Muslims.
Dhimmi, dhimmi never gets,
have you paid you jizyah yet?
Infidel33> We could argue about who rightfully owns
Infidel33> the oil from which that gasoline was refined
There isn't any argument at all over the fact that Hugh doesn't own any of it before he buys it at the pump like everybody else. (I'm assuming Hugh doesn't own a refinery or any oil-wells.)
Hugh> "The Individualist" who belongs to the
Hugh> "taxes-are-socialism" herd....
"Taxes are theft" herd, if you please.
Hugh> has no idea what an "individualist" really
Hugh> is, from soup to nuts.
On the contrary, Hugh; I think you, at least subconsciously, believe that I know exactly what individualism is -- and that's what bothers you in your quest to have everybody else pay for the stuff you want (see end).
Hugh> He has one hobby-horse, and that
Hugh> hobby-horse is money....
Actually, it's liberty, Hugh. Intregal to the concept of liberty is being able to own things without every crook on earth asserting a right to dive in for a pinch.
Hugh> or rather, taxes which to him are of no
Hugh> conceivable benefit and he can find no
Hugh> reason, apparently, why any taxes, on
Hugh> anything, make sense.
If the things taxes buy were as beneficial to me as you assert they were, I would freely buy them with the money I have before your government steals it.
Hugh> It's back to the Hobbesian state for him,
Hugh> I presume. No police, no army, no schools...
...because Hillary's tax-funded Chill Dren propaganda-mills are so much more desireable to me than the Greater Universal Caliphate's jizya-funded madrassas for its own young skulls full of mush?
Hugh> ...no roads.
"Barefoot Fallacy": "If government didn't exercise control over the manufacture, distribution, price and sale of shoes we would all go barefoot!!!"
--//--
History records only one viable tactic in dealing with homicidal death-cult religions, and that is burning down the temples and killing the bloody-dagger-clutching priests. If you (A) maintain that Islam is a totalitarian evil which must be fought, then proposing a gas tax -- when the primary recipient of those taxes will be a Leviathan with a trillion-dollar military which it not only refuses to use in confronting Islam (i.e., Saudia Arabia), but to *protect* it, -- is not only the height of folly, but an admission of flaccid impotence.
Battle_of_Tours> Nobody likes taxes because the are naturally confiscatory. But
Battle_of_Tours> somebody has to pay for all services, some ill advised like
Battle_of_Tours> welfare-ism, if society is to hold together.
That's what MARKETS are for, BoT.
If you think codified thievery is the glue that holds "society" together, you need to check your premises.
You don't expect your local congresscritters to buy your next computer or cell-phone, do you? Of course not -- that would be silly!
So....why do you suppose it's any different with anything else? The only reason you THINK these various markets are different is because you've likely been *conditioned* to by a twelve-year stint in a government propaganda-mill called a "public school", in which the lesson most earnestly taught is that government is the solution for everything and that everyone must obey government at all times because it has a Divine Right to Rule us pathetic peons. (Or something like that equally spurious.)
"Our people can buy the most luxurious cars, Rolls-Royce or Mercedes 500 or 700, models S, M, and L with all the luxuries. We own them, but we don't manufacture them. We don't even produce a single nail in any of these cars. Others do this for us."
The nails are in your bombs, not the Mercedes, Mo.
We should accept him on his terms.
We pump the oil from the Muslim lands where they do nothing and would be nothing if it weren't for our capital, our technical knowledge, and our willingness to work.
In exchange, the lazy Muslims of the world can continue to sit on their butts and collect a 2.5% Jizya on the oil we pump from the ground. Fair payment -- Islamic terms.
Let these desert vagabonds spend their unearned wealth on gold plated pimp mobiles, and hash-hish in hookahs.
> In exchange, the lazy Muslims of the world can
> continue to sit on their butts and collect a 2.5%
> Jizya on the oil we pump from the ground....
Collecting payment on the sale of your own stuff isn't jizya. You're using that term incorrectly.
I'm not a big fan of confiscatory taxation or much sub-prime lending. But anyone who thinks that the anwer to these issues is to embrace living in a Shari'ah state would be an idiot.
Personally, I don't think they'll have a lot of takers on these grounds.
After all, everyone knows how much discretionary income was available for business investment in Taliban-led Afghanistan, and what a high rate of private home-ownership they had there. Hey, if you ran into a problem there paying your sub-prime mortgage, you could always give the lender your underaged daughter.
There are no taxes in Islam!...There's lots of tax money in Islam...ours...
"ronpaulites?" Not quite understanding this term I googled it. Do the same and see how much sense you can make of the results.
I'm not the most intelligent person here so I probably gave up too early - but if I did so, then how many others did the same and are left quite unenlightened and confused - as I am?
What the Hell are 'ronpaulites' (apart from some geographical, or topographical, feature - perhaps an obscure mineral crystal seldom found in nature)?
Some enlightenment, please!
Oliver: Ron Paul is running for president. You can see him on Qube.tv or Youtube. He is about as interesting as a topographical feature, though.
gravenimage> I'm not a big fan of confiscatory taxation or much sub-prime lending.
"(S)ub-prime lending"? What on earth leads anyone to conclude that taxation is similar to voluntary lending *right after* they stipulated that taxation is "confiscatory"?
gravenimage> But anyone who thinks that the anwer to these issues is to embrace
gravenimage> living in a Shari'ah state would be an idiot.
Is the argument here that, since I don't approve of anybody looting my pockets, I must therefore approve of clitoridectomies? Because, presumably, the entity which would loot my pockets intends to do something about it? (You know, robots on Star Trek and Doctor Who episodes explode into pieces after going "Error! Error!" when they're tricked into that kind of illogic.)
Even assuming (erroneously) that anybody has a right to confiscate your property to alleviate their "needs", where is there any evidence whatsoever that the U.S. Government has any interest in combating the blight-like spread of Shari'ah beyond cursory and instantly forgotten lip-servive inbetween sending fat checks to Saudi Arabia?
-- And you want to authorize this demonstrably incompetent and/or corrupt entity with stealing even MORE funds?
That's just, plain stupid over and beyond the unethicality of it.
Perhaps Mr. Fitzgerald, with his famed polyglot shows of erudition, can explain what "tax voters, liberatarians [sic], ronpaulites" have in common with both Dinesh D'souza or Osama bin Laden. I would think that replacing the John Lockean-inspired U.S. Consititution with sharia law would be the most Un-Libertarian/Ron Paul-esque act concievable.
Of course, Mr. Fitzgerald is taking advantage upon the average American voter's ignorance of the acutal positions of both the Libertarian party and Repbulican candidate Ron Paul so that he may insert caluminous political commentary, like a catty polticially-minded Oscar Wilde (perhaps Hugh is the pen-name of Gore Vidal?) to denigrate, through (false) association, a political view he doesn't agree with, but somehow feels threatened by. It is an election year, after all.
All this, even after Mr. Spencer's call for a united front against Islamism. I am bewildered as to why Mr. Fitzgerald would seek to alienate those who most clearly see and understand the threat Islamic sharia law poses to the Western tradition of liberty and property rights.
Or is all this just because you still hold a grudge with Reason magazine's Cathy Young?
Meshuga.