“Islamic teachings are consistent w many libertarian principles, such as tolerance, property rights & individualism,” the CATO Institute’s Libertarianism.org website tweeted recently. To support this claim that was immediately derided by Pamela Geller (“Let the laughter begin”) and others, the tweet linked to a website entry by Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad, a Muslim “libertarian” whose radicalism has long remained unexamined.
Ahmad, a Palestinian-American Harvard graduate with an astrophysics doctorate, runs the Washington, DC-area think tank Minaret of Freedom (MFI), an organization with extensive Muslim Brotherhood (MB) affiliations. By contrast, his Libertarianism.org entry reiterated Islamic proclamations of liberty that he has previously expressed at the other right-leaning venues like the Catholic Acton Institute. “Islam established a form of pluralism that, although not secular, was more extensive than anything before the American era.” Thus “religious minorities were allowed to follow their own religious laws in all matters internal to their own communities.”
To justify such benign understandings of Islamic subjugation of non-Muslim dhimmi minorities that would astonish, for example, many Middle Eastern Christians, Ahmad has often resorted to hackneyed Islamic apologetics. He has cited the ubiquitous superficial understanding of Quran 2:256 as a “flat and sweeping statement” against religious repression; equally shallow is his reference to Quran 5:32 as protecting individual human life. This “senior lecturer in the Honors program at the University of Maryland” and “adjunct lecturer for the Joint Special Operations University” has also made the common false argument that for dhimmis the jizya “poll tax is in lieu of military service.”
Ahmad’s various writings only offer more such halcyon praise for Islamic rule. He lauds the oft-exaggerated Medina Charter from Islam’s seventh-century origins in the Arabian Peninsula. Meanwhile, the scandalous Islamic slavery apologetics of Georgetown University Professor Jonathan Brown flatly contradicts Ahmad’s claim that Islam’s prophet Muhammad “never owned slaves.”
Ahmad’s odes to tolerance under Islamic sharia law climax in the absurd claim that Islam “introduced the concept of formal equality before the law to the world” and the “concept of freedom to the world.” He has written and stated without evidence that the often brutal twelfth-century Muslim commander against the Crusades, Saladin, served as inspiration for England’s 1215 Magna Carta and its principle that the sovereign is subject to law. “The nobility that imposed this concept on King John had just returned from the Crusades where they had witnessed that the ruler of the Muslims, Salahuddin, was subject to the same laws as governed his citizens.”
With similar sophistry, Ahmad argues that in the “peaceful religion” of Islam “warfare is governed by strict rules of what today would be considered ‘just war theory’” and that “jihad ‘in the way of God’ is a struggle for a just cause.” Concerning Palestinian conflict with Israel, he baffles with the statement that the “Palestinian resistance is, in fact, mainly a nonviolent resistance.” Yet the fourteenth-century Muslim historian Ibn Khaldun has written of a much different understanding of Islamic warfare in his Muqaddimah, praised by Ahmad at Libertarianism.org and elsewhere. “In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the (Muslim) mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.”
Ibn Khaldun, a historian once cited by President Ronald Reagan in support of Laffer Curve tax-cutting theories, has often received Ahmad’s praise as a medieval Muslim forerunner of free-market thought. He “was much more consistent than Adam Smith on the economics,” Ahmad has stated, but the Muqaddimah takes a much dimmer view of entrepreneurs. Their characteristics such as “cunning, willingness to enter into disputes, cleverness, constant quarreling, and great persistence…are qualities detrimental to and destructive of virtuousness and manliness.”
Ahmad’s professions of tolerance find little favor in Ibn Khaldun’s Muqaddimah. “All the pre-Islamic sciences concerned with religious groups are to be discarded, and their discussion is forbidden. The religious law has forbidden the study of all revealed scriptures except the Qur’an.” His scientific understanding is equally medieval: the “assumption of physicians that hunger causes death is not correct,” for if the “amount of food one eats is slowly decreased by gradual training, there is no danger of death.”
Cynical responses to the Libertarianism.org tweet noted the Muqaddimah’s racism against black Africans, but Ibn Khaldun’s assessment of Arabs is hardly more positive. His review of Islamic history indicated that Arabs “are a savage nation” and have a “nature to plunder whatever other people possess.” Accordingly, “civilization always collapsed in places the Arabs took over and conquered.”
Any such dark observations are lost on Ahmad, who always sees a positive global role for Islam with groups like the MB’s “social organization.” He has promoted the “peaceful critics” of Saudi Arabia’s ruling monarchy in the London-based Committee for the Defense of Legitimate Rights (CDLR), an Islamist organization that demands an even stricter Saudi application of sharia. Responding to a 2008 article on Iraq’s clearly sectarian Sunni-Shiite Muslim civil war, Ahmad and his MFI coauthor wrote that the article’s “principle premise, that Islam is at the heart of the bloodshed going on in Iraq, is fatally flawed.” Earlier in 2004, Ahmad saw precisely sharia as a solution for Iraq’s sectarianism, arguing that a “rapid exit of American forces…will allow for the development of a legal system sanctioned by Islam, the one common thread among all the significant factions in Iraq.”
Nonetheless, on occasion not even Ahmad can completely ignore sharia’s illiberal elements. Although he appreciates the peaceful nature of democratic power transitions, “democratic means of succession and tenure are not the only ones consistent with Islamic principles.” He also concedes “no doubt that, under Islamic law, certain issues cannot be left to the majority”; the “idea that verses of the Qur’an might be put up to a referendum for repeal or amendment is out of the question.”
Yet for Ahmad the greatest threat to liberty in the Middle East and beyond is not any Islamic doctrine, but Israel, slandered by him as the “single greatest source of instability in the region.” He participated in a 2001 Beirut conference on Jerusalem attended by numerous terrorism-linked individuals such as Abdurahmen Alamoudi from groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. Ahmad’s address declared that Americans on Israel hear “only what the Zionist-controlled media and politicians have let them know.” Americans therefore “are unaware of Zionism’s…racist foundation, its colonialist nature, and the systematic brutality of its daily dealings with the indigenous people of Palestine.”
Ahmad has flatly declared that “I don’t think you will find a moderate Muslim who will accept the State of Israel” and that “Israel has no more right to claim Jerusalem as its capital than Russia has a right to claim New York City as its capital.” He also demands a “right of return” for millions of descendants of Palestinian refugees from Israel’s 1948 independence war, a demographic suicide for Israel’s Jewish state. Without any factual support, he calls this demand something “guaranteed by International Law, and which no Palestinian government or representative has the right to negotiate away.”
Evoking longstanding anti-Semitic tropes of dual loyalty, Israel’s continuing existence appears to Ahmad as the result of Americans with “foreign objectives.” He thus promotes discredited conspiracy theories that an Israeli airstrike against the U.S.S. Liberty during the 1967 Six-Day War was deliberate and not mistaken; hereby America’s “Zionist lobby has no need to be ashamed of its skill” in a cover-up. Meanwhile, America has undertaken “reckless imperialist adventures conducted at the behest of the neoconservative supporters of Israel.” The associated American support for Israel and Middle East dictatorships merely provides grievances to jihadists like Osama bin Laden, whose agenda supposedly “focuses primarily on political arguments.”
Ahmad sustains his hope for Israel’s destruction precisely from his demonizing of Israel as a parasite upon America:
The question is not if but when and how the Israeli state will fall. Eventually the drain that unconditional support of Israel puts on the economic well-being of the U.S. will become transparent and unendurable, and the American people will demand a change of policy.
Ahmad’s hatred of Israel and radicalism were on full public display during his moderation of the 2014 “Israel Fails US” event at Virginia’s McLean High School outside of Washington, DC. The audience included future Trump Administration national security adviser Sebastian Gorka, his wife Katherine (currently at the Department of Homeland Security), the Institute on Religion and Democracy’s Faith McDonnell, and this author. The event sponsors, Muslim “libertarians” from Muslims4Liberty, were conspicuous through their female members in their rather un-libertarian black, Saudi Arabian-style niqabs that cover a woman’s body except for an eye-slit.
Ahmad’s fellow panelists were Rabbi Yisrael Dovid Weiss from the fringe Jewish ultraorthodox anti-Zionist organization Neturei Karta and the Palestinian-American lawyer Ashraf Nubani, a specialist in defending jihadist terrorists. Weiss’ outrageous remarks blatantly disregarded the Islamic Republic of Iran’s persecution of its once-thriving Jewish community. He noted his past visits to Iran. where he expressed to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad about being “thankful for how he protects his Jewish community.”
Echoing Ahmad, Nubani stated that “I don’t see the existence of Israel beyond the next 20 or 30 years.” He also ludicrously asserted that Hamas jihadist terrorists have merely a “national liberation movement. Everything that they do indicates that this is an issue over politics,” notwithstanding an “Islamic agenda” and “Islamic terminology.” Likewise, an audience member observation that the Hamas charter “is a statement of genocidal intent” against Jews provoked from Ahmad the laughable response that this is a “blatantly fallacious, disprovable, demonstrably false statement.”
In this context the devout Muslim Nubani did not inspire confidence with his future vision for the Holy Land. “For Muslims we believe that it is an eternal public trust that is predicated on Muslim sovereignty with the rights of both Jews and Christians to live in peace and security in the land and to worship at its holy sites.”
Ahmad’s other radical associations include past MFI speakers such as Sami Al-Arian, a Palestinian-American convicted of material support for the terrorist group Palestinian Islamic Jihad and deported to Turkey. Ahmad has decried a “smear campaign” against this man who ran afoul of authorities not because of “some imagined links to terrorism, but because he’s so good at speaking for the Palestinians.” Esam Omeish, a fellow supporter of the “jihad way” against Israel, has also addressed a MFI gala dinner.
Iranian diplomatic representatives funded a table for another MFI gala featuring the notorious anti-Semitic Israel-hater Alison Weir. Close relations are not unusual between Iran and Ahmad, who has worried about an international “double standard” prohibiting Iran’s “peaceful use of nuclear energy.” He has also suggested that “Israeli terrorism” is among the “greater state sponsors of terrorism than Iran.”
A frequent collaborator with Ahmad is the Washington, DC-area Muslim El-Hajj Mauri’ Saalakhan, who has ranted against Israel and praised the Islamic Republic of Iran’s founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Khomeini was a “symbol of faith, love, power and grace” for Salaakhan. He ominously quotes Khomeini as being in a “war of ideology” in order “to desiccate the corrupt roots of zionism [sic], capitalism and communism in the world…It recognizes no borders, no geography.”
One Salaakhan presentation to Ahmad and MFI took a distinctly anti-libertarian stance against the 2005 Danish Muhammad cartoons. Salaakhan judged them as “clearly an act of deliberate provocation” analogous to Holocaust denial, while praising the radical MB cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi. He, “as usual, has provided the Muslims with sound Islamically-based nisaya, or sincere advice” including calls for an international law prohibiting insult to all religions.
Salaakhan shares with Ahmad a conspiratorial mindset involving individuals like the radical leftist lawyer Lynne Stewart. Salaakhan eulogized her on MFI’s website as among “America’s recent political prisoners” for her conviction on charges of aiding terrorism, an example for Ahmad of how “oppressive laws” afflicted Muslim defenders. He has also wondered whether the radical Muslim convicted cop killer Jamil Abdullah Al-Amin (H. Rap Brown) “is just one of many Muslim critics of American policy who have been targeted by neoconservative columnists and commentators.”
Ahmad’s febrile imagination, Islamic doctrinal fantasies, and obsessive hatred for Israel provide a poor example of faith-based freedom. At least in his case, libertarianism and Islam do not fit, as any libertarian who has not baked out his brains with pot should realize. The CATO Institute and any other liberty-loving individuals should best disassociate themselves from this false friend of freedom.
Dave says
Typical dumb brainwashed asshat “libertarian”. Too lazy to read the koran , hadiths ?
gravenimage says
Dave, Ahmad is not a clueless Infidel–he is a lying Mohammedan.
PissLam says
Pact of Umar, even in its abbreviated version should show maggot brained souls what Shariah is all about. Then add Diyya into the mix and Islamic Slave Armies to dig the message in deeper.
mortimer says
ISLAMIC PLURALISM ? Or the notorious PACT OF OMAR ? COMPLETE INTOLERANCE!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxuA548bEVE
RonaldB says
It seems to me that Ahmad should be talking more to Muslims than non-Muslims. Quite obviously, the principles he claims are really Islamic are observed more in the breach in most Muslim countries. Also, Muslims do not recognize the criticism of non-Muslims concerning Islam. Therefore, Ahmad’s most attractive claims for Islam should be turned to Muslims. If Islam were not an expansionist religion focused on domination, the opinion of non-Muslims, particularly in free countries like the US, would not be particularly relevant.
The initial failing of libertarians, and I used to be one, is that they recognize humans as only an economic unit. This leads to two failings:
1) they fail to appreciate the immense power of identity politics in a representative system; thus, they don’t see anything particularly wrong in allowing masses of self-identifying Muslims into the country, out of the delusion the Muslims won’t act as a power bloc to leverage their political and cultural influence;
2) they fail to appreciate the power and value of culture and cultural homogeneity in the life of a person and community. Thus, libertarians are instinctively against a protected market and in favor of economic migration, although such protection might be necessary to preserve vital elements of an indigenous culture. For example, the small farmer or small-town craftsman adds far more to the life of the American than the somewhat lower prices you could get for food if you import loads of unacculturated Somalis and Mexican Indians for cheap food processing and agricultural work.
There is one aspect in which I am disappointed in this article. It asserts that the Iranian Jews are persecuted:
The reality is that the Iranian Jewish community is in a totalitarian theocracy, and as such, the people are not free as we imagine freedom. Yet, compared to the average Iranian, the Jews are not badly off and allowed to fully practice a non-Zionist Judaism. The Jews are given religious and educational autonomy, and are allowed a religious exemption for alcohol in Muslim Iran. In fact, this statement was contained in the article linked to by this very article:
For another authority that the Jews of Iran are not treated badly, look at The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran by JihadWatchs Robert Spencer.
https://www.jihadwatch.org/books/the-complete-infidels-guide-to-iran
mortimer says
ISLAMIC PLURALISM? OR the INTOLERANT PACT OF OMAR? You decide…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7VKEE31ZaM
Jaladhi says
A Muslim “libertarian is an oxymoron! A Muslim is a Muslim is a Muslim all the time and nothing else and he can never ever be trusted!
Cato Institute people have no clue of Islam and Muslims and their claim ->“Islamic teachings are consistent w many libertarian principles, such as tolerance, property rights & individualism,”, is pure hogwash!
mortimer says
Agree. Hogwash! Ahmed surely knows that but how does he think he can get away with this rubbish? All the primary Islamic texts show that his contentions are NONSENSE!
JAR says
Minaret of Freedom? Minaret, yes; freedom, no.
Why are you trying to make me submit?
How do I criticize thee? Let me count the ways….
laura ann says
Jaladhi: CATO has been hijacked by change agents, liberal multiculturalists, turning the institute into a leftist think tank. Those that have supported it will be shocked it has turned into pro Muslim agendas.
mortimer says
RESPECT FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY OF NON-MUSLIMS? OR CONFISCATION? You be the judge …
Bukhari 4:52:220
Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah’s Apostle said, “I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the TREASURES of the world were brought to me and put in my hand.” Abu Huraira added: Allah’s Apostle has left the world and now you, people, are BRINGING OUT those treasures (i.e. the Prophet did not benefit by them).
Benedict says
A killer clown with a smiling face recommending “the curse of the law.”
Johnny Cuyana says
This is NOT complicated: throughout ALL of human history, there have been those — warlords, dictators, tyrants, royals, communists, theocrats, and etc … and together with ALL their useful idiot minions — who have denounced and denied individual rights; where, instead, they have promoted some form of SELF-SERVING centralized command and control govt. This person, whichever way you cut it, is fundamentally a useful idiot — I would guess that he has been brainwashed by the evil and detestable death cult of muhammedanism — and, apparently, proud of it.
Freedom-loving individuals, that is, those who advocate for the fair and equal respect of inalienable rights for one and all, are obligated, through Constitutional means, to remove such people from positions of influence. [Blessed are the peacemakers; for they shall become the children of God.]
gravenimage says
He is not a useful idiot–he is Muslim himself.
Voytek Gagalka says
Libertarianism: perversion of liberty.
gravenimage says
I do have my issues with Libertarianism, which does have some logical inconsistencies.
But the main problem here is not Libertarianism, but in believing this lying Mohammedan when he claims that Islam is Libertarian.
Stanton Cordray says
That this argument will never be answered back, while the falsifying polemicists it makes mush out of will be revered, is as certain as the rising of the sun tomorrow morning. That it’s here at all is a reason for hope – but one can despair at it’s relative invisibility.
Wellington says
The only question for me about this man is does he actually believe the nonsense he spews about Islam or does he know he’s lying? Whichever, he is completely untrustworthy.
Jack Diamond says
{He has promoted the “peaceful critics” of Saudi Arabia’s ruling monarchy in the London-based Committee for the Defense of Legitimate Rights (CDLR)}
Let me tell you about the CDLR.
The founder of the CDLR, Mohammad al-Masari, and the CDLR, is listed as a plaintiff in the 9/11 plaintiffs lawsuit. Massari is part of al Qaeda. His website (created by his son who was deported from the USA in a notorious case) was a well-known watering hole for al Qaeda.
The CDLR is closely related to the ARC (Advice and Reformation Committee). Both were Saudi groups with close ties to bin Laden. The ARC in the USA was set up by Mohammad al-Massari’s wife, Lulain al-Iman, in Denver. The founder of ARC, Khalid al-Fawwaz, was linked to to the al Qaeda embassy bombings in East Africa. In 1994 Fawwaz and bin Laden set up a media office in London to publicize al Qaeda statements and provide cover for their operations.
Fawwaz employed a student in Columbia, Missouri, Ziyad Khaleel, as a procurement agent for bin Laden. He was tasked with purchasing a satellite phone. This phone played a prominent role in coordinating the embassy bombings of 1998 and other al Qaeda operations.
Fawwaz helped with bin Laden’s 1996 “Declaration of War Against the West” document and to disseminate it through the CDLR. Fawwaz ran the ARC, but its US branch was located at a P.O. Box registered to al-Massari’s wife. Al-Massari himself set up an 800 number for ARC to communicate between Saudi Arabia and the UK without being caught by the Saudis. CDLR’s US branch was registered to a known al Qaeda operative, Tariq Hamdi.
It was Hamdi who arranged for the delivery of the battery for the satellite phone Khaleel had purchased for bin Laden, and who arranged an interview with bin Laden for ABC News in 1998 that provided cover for the delivery for that battery. Hamdi also worked for the International Institute for Islamic Thought in Herdon, VA part of the SAAR network, that shell game of al Qaeda front groups.
Ahmed knows he is lying. Oh yes.
Wellington says
Thanks for that information, Jack Diamond.
underbed cat says
Economic drain was classic Osama bin Ladin, he wanted to destroy our economy. He also wanted Allah’s religion to conquer the minds of many in America. He had the perfect doctrine to do both…by using deception techniques found and used in the Quran, but he spoke openly about wanting to bring Islam and while striking and destroying the U.S..and ridding the world of people who would not convert to Islam. Such was the purpose of 9/11, and many terror events prior.There were many organizations present in the U.S. that that had previously be set up that could and were used for the deception after 9/11 that could present themselves as peaceful and tolerant..they had the money of rich oil countries, the American education to gain positions of power, were already established in many universities, cities, worked in the field of civil rights partnered with the left, found a muslim candidate with all the accouterments of a skilled con man as a polished politician to talk about Islam as peaceful, tolerance, beautiful with an abhorrence to violence to distance themselves from 9/11 and confuse many. Entering persona’s into media, educational systems, medical facilities, stock markets, banks and all the needed and support of Saudi Arabia and many countries to do so. Marketing genius of the MB, and all the assisting organizations all to bring silencing of the truth of the doctrine that uses terrorism to submit to Osama’s goal..to live under sharia that many could explain as an evil that is also occurring by the brutal islamic groups around the world such as isis, boko harem, daesh and the defense of some politicians for votes in these strange times.
underbed cat says
I would agree with Pamela Geller to say” let the laughter begin”, in my opinion she is aware well some quran schooled representatives can twist words as well as a magician to the uninformed. Now you see it, now you don’t ….as some representatives can be very,very clever and they are given a Quran “sharia law deception pass” to do so.
gfmucci says
Pardon my baffooneresk righteous indignation, but that man is a lying a-hole on behalf of Muhammad and all the other Muslim queers.
gravenimage says
The CATO Institute’s Libertarian for Sharia
“Islamic teachings are consistent w many libertarian principles, such as tolerance, property rights & individualism,” the CATO Institute’s Libertarianism.org website tweeted recently.
……………………………..
My God, what a lie. There is nothing *less* Islamic than tolerance, property rights, and individualism. There are all things Islam violently rejects.
But many foolish Infidels are all too willing to swallow this tripe.
Georg says
So, Islam is a peaceful, feminist, libertarian ideology.
Beginning to understand.
Warren Raymond says
How many of these maggots are embedded in American institutions?
Guy Macher says
This Muslim is a lying bastard, in other words, he’s is a devout and knowledgeable Muslim!
RICHARD CANARY says
Amen to that.
Mark says
Not now Cato:. https://youtu.be/IA8QrOAghZ0
Kenneth says
What an absolute and pathetic joke.
Pnina says
“Islamic teachings are consistent w many libertarian principles, such as tolerance, property rights & individualism,” the CATO Institute’s Libertarianism.org website tweeted recently.
He just got the wording confused. Surely what he meant to say is that Islam teaches principles that are antithetic to anything libertarian, such as intolerance, property rights of men over women and the complete submission of the individual to the dictates of a totalitarian ideology and a totalitarian theocratic caliphate.
Smarty says
There has always been a tinge or at least accusations of anti semitism with libertarian Ron Paul and other Prominent voices in the libertarian movement. So, this doesn’t surprise me at all with CATO.
Joy D. Brower says
Once upon a time (when I was a “card-carrying” Libertarian, attended a national convention and voted for the Libertarian candidate whenever one appeared on the ballot), the Cato Institute was a RESPECTED ad actual Libertarian organization – but, apparently, no longer!! Well, “Sic transit gloria and veritas!!” Now, it seems, the Cato Institute is a hybrid of a nothing burger and Islamic supremacy!!
gravenimage says
Yes–I am sorry to see this suicidal idiocy from the Cato Institute.
RICHARD CANARY says
In my opinion, considering the difficulties of determining the sincerety of any person who claims the faith of Islam and its sharia law, the only sensible, rational approach to dealing with Muslims is to ban all of them from any nation that wishes to thrive according to and within its own ideals and truly peaceful religions, without a constant deadly threat from one religious sector of it its population.
I fully understand that this approach can be criticised as violating our “freedom of speech and religion” but the history of Islam in the world shows that Islam is deadly to all humans who are not Muslims. Therefor, it is incumbent on truly peaceful people to protect themselves and assure that all Muslims must be confined to their own nations.
We try to wipe out deadly diseases, and only dreamers and fools try to allow them to co-exist with all other forms of life.
This may seem to be impossible to implement, but think again. What person in their right mind would build a religious movement on the foundations of dealing death and slavery upon all that do not embrace it? That would seem to be impossible. Only a madman would undertake such a task.
But a madman was available and did just that.
Hatred of Jews and Christians made Mohammed a madman, along with his epilepsy or acromegaly. His followers should count themselves to be lucky if they were confined to their own nations with no interactions with others but their own kind.
All this migration caused by the Arab Spring that was intentionally caused by Obama and his Muslim comrades-in-arms is doing the opposite of what the world needs to find peace. All of Europe is bleeding and dying under the knives, bombs, and vehicles of jihadi Muslims. America is next, unless we protect ourselves, and the rest of world from this malevolent ideology.
Mark A says
The CATO Institute has taken several highly questionable positions lately.
It was once a credible organization. With this and other positions it has recently taken, the Cato Institute has lost much of its former credibility.
John Forbes says
MORE DECEPTION & LIES PUT OUT BY THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD ! BUT MUST NEVER BE UNDERESTIMATED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES !
HOPEFULLY TRUMP CAN DRAIN AT LEAST SOME OF THE OBAMA/HILLARY CESS POOLS !
EDUCATING THE PUBLIC MAY BE ONE OF THE HARDEST CHORES !
Cretius says
THE ONLY PHOBIA IS THE ONE MUSLIMS HAVE AGAINST ALL OTHER BELIEF SYSTEMS INCLUDING SECULA R DEMOCRACY AND THE TRADITION OF WETERN FREE SPEECH AND DEEATE OF IDEAS!