Web-exclusive comment - Banks are helping sharia make a back-door entrance, By Tarek Fatah Date Tuesday, January 29 @ 16:54:12 Topic Shariah By TAREK FATAH Special to Globe and Mail Update January 25, 2008 at 12:36 AM EST TORONTO, ONTARIO -- It seems only yesterday that Premier Dalton McGuinty declared: "There will be no sharia law in Ontario." Many of us, who witnessed the medieval nature of manmade sharia laws in our countries of birth, heaved a sigh of relief back in September of 2005. We thought this was the end of the attempt by Islamists to sneak sharia into a Western jurisdiction. We were wrong. The campaign to introduce sharia is back. Last time, the campaign took a populist approach, invoking multiculturalism. This time, the pro-sharia lobby is dangling the carrot of new niche markets and has the backing of Canada's major banks. Such icons of the corporate world as Citibank NA, HSBC Holdings PLC, and Barclays PLC have endorsed sharia banking and have started offering Islamic financing products to a vulnerable Muslim population. In May, 2007, The Globe reported that "Several Canadian financial institutions are preparing sharia-compliant mortgages, insurance, taxi licensing and investment funds to help serve the country's fastest-growing part of the population." Recently, the Toronto Star's business section reported that an unnamed bank may offer sharia loans as early as this summer; Le Journal de Montreal disclosed that Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation(CMHC) was also getting in on the act. Stephanie Rubec, spokesperson for the CMHC, said the Crown corporation had launched a tender worth $100,000 to study Islamic mortgages for Muslim Canadians. Could she be oblivious to the fact that almost all Muslim Canadians currently have home mortgages through banks and don't feel they are living in sin? In fact, CMHC has gone a step further: It has quietly entered into a partnership with a Saudi company, AaYaan Holdings, to develop sharia-compliant mortgage-lending systems. The origin of Islamic banking has its roots in the 1920s, but did not start until the late 1970s and owes much of its foundation to the Islamist doctrine of two people — Abul Ala Maudoodi of the Jamaat-e-Islami in Pakistan and Hassan al-Banna of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. The theory was put into practice by Pakistani dictator General Zia-ul-Haq who established sharia banking law in Pakistan. Proponents of sharia banking rest their case on many verses of the Holy Koran that outlaw usury, not interest. Verses that address the question of loans and debts include: Al Baqarah (2:275): God hath permitted trade and forbidden usury; Al Baqarah (2:276): Allah does not bless usury, and He causes charitable deeds to prosper, and Allah does not love any ungrateful sinner. Every English-language translation of the Koran has translated the Arabic word riba as usury, not interest. Yet, Islamists have deliberately portrayed bank interest as usury and labelled the current banking system as un-Islamic. Instead, these Islamists have created exotic products with names that are foreign to much of the world's Muslim population. This is where they mask interest under the niqab of Mudraba, Musharaka, Murabaha, and Ijara. Two authors, both senior Muslim bankers, have written scathing critiques of sharia banking, one labelling the practice as nothing more than "deception," with the other suggesting the entire exercise was "a convenient pretext for advancing broad Islamic objectives and for lining the pockets of religious officials." Why Canadian banks would contribute to this masquerade is a question for ordinary Canadians to ask. Muhammad Saleem is a former president and CEO of Park Avenue Bank in New York. Prior to that, he was a senior banker with Bankers Trust where, among other responsibilities, he headed the Middle East division and served as adviser to a prominent Islamic bank based in Bahrain. In his book, Islamic Banking — A $300 Billion Deception, Mr. Saleem not only dismisses the founding premise of sharia and Islamic banking, he says, "Islamic banks do not practise what they preach: they all charge interest, but disguised in Islamic garb. Thus they engage in deceptive and dishonest banking practises." Another expert, Timur Kuran, who taught Islamic Thought at the University of Southern California, mocks the very idea. In his book, Islam and Mammon: The Economic Predicaments of Islamism, Prof. Kuran writes that the effort to introduce sharia banking "has promoted the spread of anti-modern currents of thought all across the Islamic world. It has also fostered an environment conducive to Islamist militancy." Dozens of Islamic scholars and imams now serve on sharia boards of the banking industry. Moreover, a new industry of Islamic banking conferences and forums has emerged, permitting hundreds of sharia scholars to mix and mingle with bankers and economists at financial centres around the globe. In the words of Mr. Saleem, who attended many such meetings, they gather "to hear each other praise each other for all the innovations they are making." He gives examples of how sharia scholars only care for the money they get from banks, willing to rubberstamp any deal where interest is masked. No sooner had CMHC announced its plans to study sharia-compliant mortgages, than an imam from Montreal's Noor Al Islam mosque offered his services to Canada's banks, claiming Muslims are averse to conventional mortgages because "it goes against their beliefs," a claim that would not withstand the slightest scrutiny. Other academics who have studied the phenomenon have reached similar conclusions. Two New Zealand business professors, Beng Soon Chong and Ming-Hua Liu of Auckland University, in an October, 2007, study on the growth of Islamic banking in Malaysia, wrote: "Only a negligible portion of Islamic bank financing is strictly 'profit-and-loss sharing' based. … Our study, however, provides new evidence, which shows that, in practice, Islamic deposits are not interest-free." They concluded that the rapid growth in Islamic banking was "largely driven by the Islamic resurgence worldwide." In the name of Islam, deception and dishonesty is being practised while ordinary Muslims are being made to feel that their interaction with mainstream banks is un-Islamic and sinful. As Mr. Saleem asks, "If Islamic banks label their hamburger a Mecca Burger, as long as it still has the same ingredients as a McDonald's burger, is it really any different in substance?" Web-exclusive comment Banks are helping sharia make a back-door entrance TAREK FATAH Special to Globe and Mail Update Latest comment posted at 4:47 AM EST 25/01/08 Banks are helping sharia make a back-door entrance This conversation is semi-moderated . The Middle Finger ..I.. from Canada writes: So what is the problem. Banking is only a mathematical gyration of creative fiscal rules. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:20 AM EST . scamp the from Canada writes: And what is Tarek's problem. There is no one version of Islam and for him to act to be the authentic pope of Islam is just ridiculous. This is a different style of banking. It's not going to finance terrorism. No one is being killed. No one is being abused. No women are being oppressed. and Tarek's problem with it is? oh, it has the name shariah...I understand. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:21 AM EST . The Middle Finger ..I.. from Canada writes: It just struck me..... Journalists with names like ' John Smith ' draw no public reaction but this article is written by ' TAREK FATAH '. Should the public now shake in its boots? * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:38 AM EST . Neil Nawaz from Toronto, Canada writes: Thank you, Mr. Fatah, for expressing so concisely out what I've always felt in my bones -- that 'Islamic banking' is a sham designed to appeal to that subset of Muslims who are both smugly pious and gullible. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:53 AM EST . The Middle Finger ..I.. from Canada writes: To Neil Nawaz from Toronto, Canada who wrote: Thank you, Mr. Fatah, for expressing so concisely out what I've always felt in my bones -- that 'Islamic banking' is a sham designed to appeal to that subset of Muslims who are both smugly pious and gullible. _At least they know their target market. I suppose the ' normal ' banks are more righteous? * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:56 AM EST . Brian Musker from Canada writes: Hey Tarek, it's been a few years. Hope you're doing well. Looks like you are having impact on the writing front, congrats. I have to admit I read this article, and I completely lack the schema to understand it, so I'm probably not the target audience. Still, I'm curious, how can banking and religion have a relationship with one another? And if they do in someone's head, how does this affect someone else's life? Take care, Brian * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:15 AM EST . Jeff S from Canada writes: yeah, the koran says to kill the unbelievers too. i wonder will the banks back that. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:31 AM EST . The Middle Finger ..I.. from Canada writes: To Jeff S from Canada who wrote: yeah, the koran says to kill the unbelievers too. i wonder will the banks back that. _ So does American Justice. Are you a supporter? * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:40 AM EST . Ahmet Seker from Montreal, Canada writes: If Mr. Fatah would like to work with conventional banks, I have no problem with it, even extremists would not chase him for getting interest for his money, but I don't understand why my preference of depositing my money to the Islamic division of Citibank bothers him that much. He says 'The campaign to introduce sharia is back.' Actually 'sharia' is the rules of Islam, what you understand from it depends on how you interpret Islam. So if you say that 'Islam forbids interest' this is a sharia rule, but if you say that 'Islam allows interest' this is also a sharia rule. Since he tries to convince us by quoting verses from Quran that 'Islam allows interest', he also introduces a particular interpretation of sharia. He has freedom to choose a particular interpretation of Islam over another interpretation, or he may even choose not to believe in Islam at all. However when you impose your own understanding of Islam over other Muslims, this is not different from what the extremists do, except that sometimes Western audience like this kind of 'enlightening' pressure over Muslims. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:59 AM EST 10. Sullivan Cromwell from Point Grey, Canada writes: I am looking to start a Scientology bank here in Canada if anyone is interested... do you think the bureaucrats at CMHC would lend me money to study this too? Can no one in government connect dots? * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:02 AM EST 11. Tarek Fatah from Toronto, Canada writes: Dear Ahmet Seker, When big banks like Citi prey on the vulnerability of Muslims and profit from their fear of hellfire, based on lies and deception, it does become a problem for me. Many a slave wanted to remain in slavery, fearing the uncertainty of freedom. Would I have stayed silent? Never. Today, Muslims are being exploited by the new nexus of Imams who are on the payroll of big banks, to issue fatwas asking Muslims to not take interest on their deposits. Hello? Who gains from this stupidity? The banks, my dear! Muslims end up paying higher mortgage costs and get no returns on their deposits. Is it any surprise that they are excited at the chance of profiting from this religiously induced monetary self-flagellation? On a separate issue. I am opposed to Sharia banking because Canada's laws and regulations should never be based on religious texts that can never be debated, changed, amended, or, dare I say, abrogated. Would CIBC and BMO wish to sponsor a debate on sharia? Never! They will rather buy the mullahs, keep them on payroll, and make them pronounce the holiness of the banks' enterprise. Everyone in this exercise knows that the game is based on lies, deception, and not a shred of ethics. A marginalized community is being set up for exploitation. Why would I stay silent Ahmet? * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:11 AM EST 12. j m from Saint John, Canada writes: Is this any different than the 'Ethical Mutual Funds' that were marketed a few years ago? Is it any different from the 'Good Catholics vote Liberal' attitute that existed in Quebec until recently? Is it any different from RBC and CIBC having Chinese language literature and websites? * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:38 AM EST 13. Tarek Fatah from Toronto, Canada writes: JM, You as a good question. Yes there is a marked difference between 'Ethical Mutula Funds' and 'Shariah Banking'. The foremr i based on 'Ethics' and the latter is know for 'Deception' I don't have a problme Banks having signs in Chinese or Swahili or Ojibway. Let them have signs in Punjabi, Bengali or Urdu and Farsi or any other langauge that we Muslims speak. That is marketing outreach. Shariah banking is changing the laws of Canadian banking to suit the requirements laid out by some bearded shiekh in Saudi Arabia and such anti-west Islamists as Maudoodi and Syed Qutb of the Muslim Brotherhood. We wll not sit silent and wathc our Muslim community be exploited by this new nexus of Mullas and Bankers enriching themselevs at the cost of ordinary Muslims. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:46 AM EST 14. Ali Inayatullah from Karachi, Pakistan writes: As a muslim, I am relieved that Tarek is pointing out the exploitation of fellow muslims by powerful lobbies using false religious sentiments. The modern banking system is based on the highly controlled mechanism of Central banks and other fiscal regulations and is a development of the last 3-4 hundred years and interest is a function of inflation, risk and opportunity cost of money. 1400 years ago the Koran forbid usuary that was based on exploitation and which thrived when there was no formalized and regulated banking system. Ironically, Saudi backed 'Shariah complaint' banking is exploitative as it is masking its higher interest charges under the guise of exotic terminologies and falsely stating that it is equity and not debt based. Even a first year economics student will verify that there is no fixed rate of return for equity financing and trying to pass off interest as rent, profit or any other obtuse terminology is not going to fool anyone Tarek is not alone and an increasing number of muslims are fully aware that their shared personal faith is being used as a brand to earn higher profits. They are sad that by adding 'Islamic' to a more costly and less transparent banking system, Saudi-backed lobbies are manupilating muslims to pay more for their financial transactions. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:54 AM EST 15. Marcella x from Overshoe, Canada writes: Wow. Mr. Fatah, I'm impressed. Seriously, when was the last time we saw a musim communicty leader who actually cares about his people, not just advancing an agenda and an ideology. This is the moderate voice we need to hear! Thank you to the Globe and Mail for allowing you a voice. Would that we had more of you, and less of the religious nutjob demagogues in the Muslim community that cynically exploit ignorance and religion for their personal gains. Maybe the future would be a bit brighter for our failing multicultral experiment. I fear you are a lone voice shouting into a howling storm, but thank you, and good luck. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:57 AM EST 16. deliciously uncanadian from Canada writes: Thank you, Tarek. You're right on the money. Be safe and keep ignoring the noise. Painting Muslims as extremists suits Western secularists and Islamic fundamentalists equally: - Secularists love to posit deranged fundamentalists as representatives for religion in general. - Fundamentalists try to cause a Western backlash, driving Muslims into their arms. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:00 AM EST 17. Marcella x from Overshoe, Canada writes: deliciously uncanadian - do you have a problem with secular Canadians? * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:09 AM EST 18. j m from Saint John, Canada writes: Tarek Fatah from Toronto, Canada writes: JM, You as a good question. Yes there is a marked difference between 'Ethical Mutula Funds' and 'Shariah Banking'. The foremr i based on 'Ethics' and the latter is know for 'Deception' ----- My point was that these 'Ethical Funds' are also deceptive; the 'ethics' that they espouse appeal to a group whose leaders manipulate them for financial gain. My comment on language was more to ask if this is a market-driven or supplier-driven. Makng banking choices based on ideology is not new - look at the credit union movement. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:16 AM EST 19. deliciously uncanadian from Canada writes: Marcella x: No. I'm secular myself, just not secularist (i.e. intolerant of religion). Do you have a problem with religion? Or just with a, uh, particular religion? * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:21 AM EST 20. Dude Rancher from Toronto, Canada writes: Weren't usury and charging interest considered the same thing at the time of Mohammed? This article suggests they're different. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:32 AM EST 21. DO GOOD from United States writes: . The Middle Finger ..I.. from Canada writes: So what is the problem. Banking is only a mathematical gyration of creative fiscal rules. --- Sir, I think Tarek is suggesting that if the interest is not honestly stated up-front, it creates an opportunity for loan sharking and usury fraud and gives corrupting power to the church (in this case mosque) in matters of state and civil law that protect our society. Currency, interest rate and oversight matters belong to the State, not a religious group. It makes us secular. . * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:33 AM EST 22. Dude Rancher from Toronto, Canada writes: deliciously uncanadian from Canada: 'Secularist' means 'intolerant of religion'? That's certainly an original definition. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:36 AM EST 23. DO GOOD from United States writes: . deliciously uncanadian from Canada writes: Marcella x: No. I'm secular myself, just not secularist (i.e. intolerant of religion). Do you have a problem with religion? Or just with a, uh, particular religion? --- You're right. From reading all his posts, Marcella x is racist. . * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:39 AM EST 24. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: I think some of you might wish to look up the phrase 'false pretenses' if you fail to understand why this might be a problem. Besides the obvious segregative nature of these banks which I don't personally like or find helpful in generateing unity within our society, there is also this issue of altering standard bank terminology to falsely appear to follow religious doctrine. Doctrine that is being questioned in the firstplace. I will put aside my dislike for the types of individuals running these institutions if for no other reason than to presume their innocence, but ultimately we all lose when misleading or shrouded bank practices are allowed to flourish. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:44 AM EST 25. DO GOOD from United States writes: . scamp the from Canada writes: And what is Tarek's problem. There is no one version of Islam and for him to act to be the authentic pope of Islam is just ridiculous. This is a different style of banking. It's not going to finance terrorism. No one is being killed. No one is being abused. No women are being oppressed. and Tarek's problem with it is? oh, it has the name shariah...I understand. --- No sir. I respect all humanity regardless of their beliefs and like I said earlier, here is my take: I think Tarek is suggesting that if the interest is not honestly stated up-front, it creates an opportunity for loan sharking and usury fraud and gives corrupting power to the church (in this case mosque) in matters of state and civil law that protect our society. Currency, interest rate and oversight matters belong to the State, not a religious group. It makes us secular. . * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:45 AM EST 26. Dan Shortt from Toronto, Canada writes: Ahmet Seker from Montreal, Canada writes: ' .... but I don't understand why my preference of depositing my money to the Islamic division of Citibank bothers him that much.' Indeed, Ahmet. What would you think if Citibank maintained a 'Christian' division, or a 'Jewish' division? Hope you'll forgive my preference to deposit my money in the Christian division of Royal Bank. On another note, while the article raises some important issues, I'm still in the dark. The story was critical of Sharia banking, but didn't explain exactly how Sharia banking and mortgages actually work. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:56 AM EST 27. DO GOOD from United States writes: . Jeff S from Canada writes: yeah, the koran says to kill the unbelievers too. i wonder will the banks back that. --- Indeed, religion is the root cause of much evil. Kind of like this: 'When the LORD your God places these people in your POWER and you defeat them, YOU MUST PUT THEM ALL TO DEATH. DO NOT MAKE AN ALLIANCE WITH THEM OR SHOW THEM ANY MERCY.' (Deuteronomy 7.2) . * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:57 AM EST 28. Juan Valdez from Canada writes: The best way for Canadians to show their disapproval for this charade is to move their money out of the banks that comply to this. Just how much money are we talking about? I notice that the CIBC is mentioned as jumping on the bandwagon too just in case they should miss out on some of the money they can make. If all of the major banks say no to this scheme instead of trying to beat each other to be the first to comply, the idea would go away fast. I will move my money out of CIBC if it panders to the muslims into one which uses the principles of the Catholic or Christian religion. Isn't it time the Bank of Canada or the government stepped in and halted this nonsense with the banks and mortgages before it really takes off? This again supports the notion of curtailing muslim immigration and shows how disingenuous they are about being Canadian as they slowly change our institutions right under our noses. What is worse is that we and the government sit by and let them or engage in helping them. Are we really that nuts? * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:01 AM EST 29. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: deliciously uncanadian from Canada writes: '...Secularists love to posit deranged fundamentalists as representatives for religion in general. Fundamentalists try to cause a Western backlash, driving Muslims into their arms...' The fringe elements always have a vested interest in perpetrating their collective myths. That they are allied in this interest until a boiling point is reached and all out conflict results, should concern all of us. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:05 AM EST 30. Terrence Gainsborough from West Chesterfield, NH, United States writes: What's the big deal? Banks are private institutions, albeit regulated by federal law. If they want to offer their customers a wider range of products, let them. No one would bat an eye if the banks were instead offering 'Torah-compliant loans'. American banks already offer Christians 'ethical' mutual funds and environmentalists 'green' mutual funds, so how are Sharia-compliant loans any different? If these mortgages truly shun traditional rates of interest, why not just feign Islam and refinance your own home at, presumably, a much better deal? Of course, I'm sure there will be a catch; banks are, after all, in the business of making profits. Nonetheless, this benign proposal hasn't stopped all the Internet Chicken Littles from coming here and screaming that our civilization is doomed. Tarek Fatah often has good things to say, but this editorial is ridiculous. Is he off his rocker? For a so-called liberal, why does he feel the need to interfere with commercial relationships between two private parties? Who cares?! This guy is getting more and more bitter as time goes on. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:06 AM EST 31. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: I for one appreciate Tarek's inside view, which reflects an understanding of some facets of Islamic culture seen through a modern Western lens that we should all be applauding and supporting. We cannot allow anyone to rule people through superstition without at least providing those people another lens through which to gain additional perspective. However only when it comes from one who understands the cultural implications will it be accepted for what it is. Whether you agree or disagree, individuals such as Tarek can provide very topical insights. I believe it can serve a special purpose in illuminating our ability to recognize the difference between simple dogmatism versus the perversion of belief to serve human ends. It would appear that every religion has its share of Pharisees leading people into the ditch. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:09 AM EST 32. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Mr. Fatah is misguided. The Sharia has been creeping in Western Jurisprudence since the last 200 years. The Western Family, Criminal, Civil, Contact, Tort, and Corporate law has been inching towards Koranic injunctions and away from its Grecco-Roman roots. This is because Individual based Islam of Mohammed is the religion of Free Trade Era, just as the Tribal Equity Laws of Moses were the ideal set of rules for the shepherd economy, and the Family Love based way of life was the optimal for agrarian economy. Moses was a shepherd, Jesus was an artisan in the Fertile Crescent. and Mohammed was a small Businessmen in Trading Post of Mecca who defeated much larger forces of Big Business Capitalists, Bankers, and Trade Monopolists. The Mohammedan fight was in fact about freedom to trade. In every free enterprise economy today, the lower the interest rate the higher the growth. The lowest achievable interest rate is zero. Therefore, Sharia interest laws are optimal for the Trade Based Economy. That is the way to the future, whether you like it or not. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:15 AM EST 33. Salma Siddiqui from Ottawa, Canada writes: Terrence, banks are private institutions, but they are governed by federal Canadian laws and regulations. So why should we Canadians accept banks that operate under regulations written by Pakistani, Egyptian or Saudi clerics? And let me understand this: . The depositer does not get any interest on her deposits; the bank keeps all of it; and . The customer pays an average of 1-2% more on her morgage than the conventional mortgage! No wonder the big banks are so happy at employing sheiks and imams who tell their congregations; pay extra now, the balance you will get in paradise. This is a rip-off that all Canadians must protest. The only people making money out of this deal are bankers and mullahs. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:19 AM EST 34. Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: Thanks God there are liberal US chickens to support Islam, without whom it would have been a topic for anthropology. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:23 AM EST 35. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Terrence Gainsborough from West Chesterfield, NH, United States: Neither 'ethical' funds nor 'green' funds are segragative based on race, culture or religion. Both support universal rather than dogmatic ideals. Anyone can subcribe to them if they wish as membership is a matter of choice. You cannot say this for these banks. And incidentally, I think a lot of people would flip out over 'Torah-compliant loans' too. The Jews catch it in the teeth here everyday, so why would you think otherwise? The last thing we need in Canada is to perpetuate anymore of the segregation seen the world over. I agree these particular individuals have every right to start these banks, but that's a far cry from being something we should condone. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:28 AM EST 36. Paul C from Toronto, Canada writes: People are already gullible enough to believe in religion.... why not believe in the idea of interest free loans?? * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:29 AM EST 37. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: More professional information on this financial Islamic TAQYIA here: http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/Ohmyrus/islamic_banking.htm Mr Fatah, being involved with the mortgage origination and loan industry, I can reassure you that the introduction of the so called islamic banking is considered by the industry more or less a fait accomplis. How this scam wll be incorporated vis-a-vis the very strict DISCLOSURE REGULATIONS of FSCO is beyond my comprehension. It will require more pressure from individuals like you and institutions to halt this financial, and purely ideologocally based, deceipt. However, with trillions of petrodollars available it must be pretty easy these days to buy influence and decisions. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:30 AM EST 38. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Salma Siddiqui from Ottawa, Canada writes: '...The depositer does not get any interest on her deposits...the customer pays an average of 1-2% more on her morgage... No wonder the big banks are so happy... employing sheiks and imams who tell their congregations; pay extra now, the balance you will get in paradise...' So in other words this is a directly misleading practise where one uses superstitious belief to rob naive/ignorant people of their money. Shows precisely why these types of articles are neccesary. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:35 AM EST 39. Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: Paul C from Toronto, as long as these 4 handbooks of perversion keep circulating, do not expect much improvement in terms of human intelligence: Old testament New testament Koran Facebook * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:37 AM EST 40. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Mr. Fatah is misguided....... In every free enterprise economy today, the lower the interest rate the higher the growth. The lowest achievable interest rate is zero. Therefore, Sharia interest laws are optimal for the Trade Based Economy. That is the way to the future, whether you like it or not. Mr Abbas, you made my day. The only missing detail: please provide names of prosperous Arab/Islamic countries where the financial system is based ENTIRELY on on 'zero-interest' sharia. As for the 'interest-free' lending, you may wish to enlighten yourself here: http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/Ohmyrus/islamic_banking.htm * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:42 AM EST 41. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: When a the law ceases to embody the principles that give it meaning, then the law has become a tyranny. The principles Canadian law are being subverted under the guise of religious freedom. The spirit of Islamic belief is being perverted, teaching man's law as god's law. I hope their deceit is fully revealed for all to see. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:42 AM EST 42. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Simon Garth: Religions are nothing more than optilam socio-economic strategies to answer the fundamental question of existence - survival, growth, and evolution. The spiritual icing and rituals help to bind people with similar economic outlook closer together. For the positive effect of the Bible on Western life I refer you to Northrop Frye's book 'The Great Code'. Facinating reading. It suggests and demonstrates that the entire output of the Western Civilization until the Enlightenment can be traced to the Bible. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:44 AM EST 43. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: '...as long as these 4 handbooks of perversion keep circulating, do not expect much improvement in terms of human intelligence: Old testament, New testament, Koran, Facebook If it isn't these books, then it will be something else don't you think? It is not the the shape of the physical form that matters but the understanding that all such things fail to be understood from a literal perspective. There has been this battle betweent he literal and the metaphorical going back thousands of years. King Solomon himself noted this and Solomon's key is a reference to the fact that understanding anything requires a metaphorical lens. The facebook thing was though! * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:48 AM EST 44. The Prytanis from Ottawa, Canada writes: So, religious compliant loans... Brand: If the only difference were brand and not paying interest to customers for their deposits, that's the customer's choice to make. Profit: First of all, it's not a dirty word, people. Second of all, as many posters have stated, banks don't do things unless there's profit. Why are banks signing on if there's no interest or high fees, the main source of income on loans? Answer is that of course they're making profit. Ethical Funds: This is a way of 'voting with your dollars', a concept that many out of work students dressed in combat fatiques finds offensive, but is otherwise a good idea. Again, consumer choice. Funding Terrorists: Some muslims will doubtlessly get consulting fees and commissions for this. I submit to you that being a mullah is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition to be a terrorist. Though I suspect the correlation is slightly higher in arabic-muslim societies than elsewhere, I doubt the ones the banks choose to consult will be included. Regulation: Banks are heavily regulated, and that won't cease to be the case with Sharia compliant banking. So This is a problem of perception. As Tarek Fatah properly points out, Muslims may be duped into thinking that they are doing the right thing. Banks, despite many posters' distaste for ATM fees, are not userous. They have low margins relative to other businesses. It is merely the scale of their business that makes them money. From what I'm hearing here, it sounds like the margins on Sharia law are LARGER (more profitable) than those regular Canadians pay. As someone who works as a middle manager in marketing for a bank, I see the merits. Guess what. I'm not going to my Director with this as a business idea because I find it reprehensible, and possibly illegal due to the deception. I have no doubt that we could find a way to make it legal, but I'm taking a pass, and so is my bank.. Cheers. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:52 AM EST 45. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Paul C from Toronto, Canada writes: '...People are already gullible enough to believe in religion.... why not believe in the idea of interest free loans??...' I think the term 'consumer protection' sums up why there's a difference here. If someone wants to believe in the god RA, all the power to them, but when the hierarchy starts calling for the poisoned koolaid then society should step in. This subject falls somewhere in between. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:52 AM EST 46. j m from Saint John, Canada writes: Terrence Gainsborough from West Chesterfield, NH, United States: Neither 'ethical' funds nor 'green' funds are segragative based on race, culture or religion. Both support universal rather than dogmatic ideals. Anyone can subcribe to them if they wish as membership is a matter of choice. You cannot say this for these banks. I would say that all three are ideology based, and not are restrictive. I am sure that if you told your banker that you wanted to get in on the Islam Plan at a 2% markup, he would be happy so sign you up. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:53 AM EST 47. Sue W from Canada writes: CMHC is already in Saudi Arabia, under the guise of promoting affordable housing, probably some intelligence gathering in order to prepare for setting up operations in Canada. Aayan Arabia, CMHC to support AHFC http://www.menafn.com/qnnewsstory_s.asp?StoryId=1093175400 * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:54 AM EST 48. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: '...suggests and demonstrates that the entire output of the Western Civilization until the Enlightenment can be traced to the Bible...' I agree, but not as a result of the bible itself so much as the universal principles it embodies. Principles found wherever they are sought, including other religions and even atheistic philosophy. Even the bible itself warns against confusing appearances with the source. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:57 AM EST 49. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Peter Bojkov: I was expecting your question. It was to come sooner or later. The Islam of today is a far cry from the Islam of Mohammed (and the Koran) just like Stalinist rule was a far cry from Lenin etc. to give you a recent example. Mohammed the Small Businessman in the trading post of Mecca was up against the Trade Monopolists and Bankers. With superior tactics (like a zero interest economy of Medina) he defeated the much larger forces of Mecca. He instituted a System based on Individual Rights (the first one in history to do so, as Moses had emphasized the Tribe and Jesus the Family). Other traits of his revolution were universality, justice, peace, knowledge based economy, reward on merit, and free trade. After his death a minority tendency under Umar took control. The first to go was universality who argued that minority Meccans were superior to majority Medinans. Soon, pro-Arab laws were passed making other races inferior. All rights that the women had gained under Mohammed were over-turned. Judicial system was legalized based on tradition not Koran. The sword of Islam was sent far and wide to conquer Christian lands, the very people who had helped Mohammed in his struggle against the Trade Monoposlists. But worse of all, a 10% import tariff ('Ushr') was imposed on all goods of non-Muslim origin, driving the last nail in Mohammed's System. The rest is history. Islam today is anti-Mohammedan and anti-Koranic. That is why you do not find anywhere what you asked for. But what is instructive is that Mr. Umar Farooq Al Khattab has become the patron saint of Islamic terrorism today. An ideal of Mr. OBL, there are Mullah Omar, Shaikh Umar, Maulvi Umar, Farooq Training Camps, in Chechnya there is Khattab, etc.etc. The reality an theory of Islam are worlds apart. Koran is one thing, and Muslims others. Today's belated attempts at Sharia Banking is nothing more than finding ways to Westernize Islam. * Posted 25/01/08 at 9:58 AM EST 50. k p from Montreal, Canada writes: Mr Fatah, a very interesting article, and a pleasure to have you respond to some of the comments here. What evidence do you have that this causes Muslims to accept a higher rate of interest than they otherwise would, or that they have to accept lower deposit rates than they otherwise would? What banking laws are actually being changed, since the laws of contract pretty much cover the arrangements, and Sharia compliant banks still have to meet prudential requirements. This a a global demand-driven phenomenon, although I will accept the historical perspective you gave, but if that is what people think they want , what's the problem? Better to have them protected by the laws of Canada than say Pakistan. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:01 AM EST 51. deliciously uncanadian from Canada writes: Marcella x: Your concerns are justified. I believe we are witnessing a crisis within Islam. The traditional cultural centres have lost relative power to the religious centre (Saudi Arabia). There are many reasons: Enormous and unmerited oil revenues; unfavourable economic comparisons with the West; demographic pressures etc. We cannot restore the balance from outside, but it behoves us not to play into the Fundamentalists game plan. As cultural Islam is allowed to flourish in the West extremism becomes less attractive. It is worth noting that a large part of cultural programming in the Middle East is generated by expat communities living in West (mostly California and France). Stereotyping them and rebuffing them, thus radicalizing them, would be everybody's loss. Centuries ago, Islam was the last refuge for Greek philosophy and thus saved it for posterity. Now is our time to return the favour. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:04 AM EST 52. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: j m from Saint John, Canada writes: Terrence Gainsborough from West Chesterfield, NH, United States: Neither 'ethical' funds nor 'green' funds are segragative based on race, culture or religion. Both support universal rather than dogmatic ideals. Anyone can subcribe to them if they wish as membership is a matter of choice. You cannot say this for these banks. 'I would say that all three are ideology based, and not are restrictive.' Actually that quote is my response to Terrence, and I think you're missing an implicit point. I'm not saying you can't get a sharia mortgage if you're not Muslim, I'm saying that it's premised on a dogmatic ideal that inherently lends itself to segegative practice. Being ethical or green may be a construct one considers 'special interest' but it is not employ any theistic or supernatural implications that can unduly influence people. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:09 AM EST 53. Lowen Wrainger from Canada writes: No wonder they are so hot to have those virgins waiting in heaven after martyrdom: they're prevented from screwing each other with interest in the here and now! However, where there's a will there's a way... you can bank on it! * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:17 AM EST 54. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Phil King: You are correct. The fundamental principles that the Bible (Old and New Testaments) emphasized are now embedded in the Western Civilization today, even if the Western Hellenism has relegated Christianity to the background. The core value of the Old Testament was Tribal Equity. Today, the Corporation is the closest we have to the Tribe. The core value of the New Testament is Family Love. Thou shall be your brother's keeper. In fact Love is the necessary and sufficient condition for survival and growth of any agrarian society, e.g. India until the 19th century. The core value of the Koran is Individual Rights and Responsi bilities. No one shall carry the burden of others. After Mohammed, the Party that took over went back to Tribalism, that is why whereas the West does reflect Biblical values, the world of Islam does not protray Koranic values. In fact the West today is unwittingly inching towards Koranic values simply because the Mohammedan principles were for a trade based economy, the one we practice today. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:17 AM EST 55. frederick duquette from Edmonton, Canada writes: The article would have been more instructive had it provided further detail on sharia banking, aside from the issue of usury. What is the purpose of this form of banking? Is it for Muslims only, is it gender specific? Once granted, what happens if a holder renounces Islam - is this property repossessed? Lifestyle advertising is common in the banking industry, showing Freedom 55 etc. Banks segregate based on risk; does sharia lend to anyone whom the banks would not normally lend to? My understanding is that Mohammed was a businessman. He therefore would have had to charged a profit to feed his family, else he would have only paid his suppliers by charging at cost. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:29 AM EST 56. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: Mr Abbas, I had a REALLY good laugh reading your Islam apology. I am too well-acquainted with Qu'ran, the hadiths and suras (in their sequence in time, and, therefore, validity) to take you seriously. As a Muslim, you should knowbetter that the earlier hadiths were a convenient TAQIYA, overridden by the later hadiths (read more Bukhari, Mr Abbas). And, BTW, Mohammed, PBUH, was more involved in plundering merchants in the dessert rather than in creatnig a 'zero-interest' financial system. The pearly prosperity of the Khalifate was based on military expansion and conquest, and of adding mote jiziya-paying dhimmis, as a Ponzi scheme. Once such an expansion halters, economically, Islam is as unproductive and barren as the neolithic Age. If you cared to read the article to which I provided a link, you would have understood that 'Islam interest-free banking' already exists in Canada: you buy furniture, electronics, etc interest free. However, the small print indicates hefty 'administration' fees (often as high as credit card interest). The problem is, Islam recognizes profit, but not interest. And how does a financial system make a profit? By charging interest. Is it worth to accommodate this ideologically required deceipt to overcome an ideological mess, at the expense of the Muslim clients? And how will it be regulated? By having the one-country-two-legal-system adsurd, with creeping sharia that overtakes Common Law at the end of the day? Thanks but no thanks. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:29 AM EST 57. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Peter Bojkov: I am glad you had a good laugh. I suggest you read my post again. You will react differently the second time. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:36 AM EST 58. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada Posted 25/01/08 at 10:17 AM EST An interesting thesis. When one uses these historical perspectives to view the present it reveals for us many things. For our own sake it is important to understand the spirit of our cultures to differentiate the forms that have grown up around the ideals they were meant to embody. Our differences, while a source of friction, may serve to liberate us if we can find the wisdom to recognize the implicit unity it reveals by contrast. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:41 AM EST 59. Ted Harrison from Canada writes: Tarak Fatah, earlier in this thread, writes: 'Everyone in this exercise knows that the game is based on lies, deception, and not a shred of ethics. A marginalized community is being set up for exploitation.' These two sentences neatly sum up the problem for me. The banks are interested in profit, pure and simple. Interest is being charged, whatever they actually name it. But by naming it something supported by those advocating Sharia law, they are able, in effect, to charge more interest, while enabling the Sharia law advocates to intimidate Muslims into using these services. This is usary. It's wrong. And it constitutes a good reason for all of us to shift our business to banks which do not engage in this unethical practice. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:43 AM EST 60. Duncan McCockenue from Canada writes: DO GOOD: nice of you to quote the old testament. However; show me in the last 300 years where that quote was actually used to justify an attack on someone or a group of people; based on religion? * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:45 AM EST 61. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: Mr Abbas, why should I read your interpretation of Muhammad's hadiths (and, as a Muslim, you are NOT allowed to interpret them, unless for the purposes of TAQIYA)? Reading from the source (Qu'ran, the hadiths and suras) is preferable. Muhammad's doctrine is there, and was never misinterpreted, as you suggest. There you will find Him inciting in more than 250 verses the killing of infidels; there you will find the supression of women code of behaviour; there you will find the idea of Islamic supremacy and demand on Muslims to conquer and spread Islam; there you will find the 'interest-free' financial lunacy. And, as a Muslim, you are NOT allowed to disagree with any of these pillars of the religion, eh? * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:47 AM EST 62. -- Eiad -- from Ottawa, Canada writes: As usual Mr. Fatah makes his headlines by bashing anything Islamic and claiming that he does it based on Islamic teachings... Mr. Fatah you hate Islam, that's fine with us. Just admit it and stop claiming it's based on 'principles'... If it was then you'd be bashing food makers that label their food 'kosher'!!! The fact is banking is a business and they found a niche market to expand into... I agree they are fooling Muslims into investing with them just like they fool non-Muslims to invest with them in other ways... As for comparing this with the so-called Sharia law proposed by Ontario some years ago, this shows your utter hatred of anything 'Muslim'. These two have NOTHING in common besides the name (which is a marketing scam to get Muslims' money) * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:48 AM EST 63. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: To play the devils advocate for a moment a thought has occured to me. Tarek suggests that most english translations of Islamic texts use 'usury' not 'interest' as some Islamic hierarchy insists is meant. Couldn't this be an ethnocentric translation though? To paraphrase, perhaps someone translating into english would be, by the virtue of their culture, more likely to assume that no one would have a problem with 'interest' and therefore assume that 'usury' is what was intended? Just a thought. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:48 AM EST 64. farzana hassan from Mississauga, Canada writes: Sharia Banking is a farce that needs to be exposed for the exploitative and dishonest tactics it uses to fool ordinary Muslims into believing they will go to hell if they take interest. First of all the Quran forbids usury not interest as Tarek Fatah so aptly points out. The Quran even describes what usury is when it states that it is the doubling and redoubling of the amount loaned. How does modern interest payment fall into that category? Secondly, when the Quran prohibits usury, it only speaks about transactions between individual borrowers and lenders, not about transactions between financial institutions such as banks and their individual clients. There were none at the time of the Quranic revelation. The prohibition of interest by Islamists in modern times is therefore based on flawed analogies that need to be discarded. Introducing such so called Sharia-compliant banking will only plump up the pockets of the mosque establishments while draining resource of ordinary, hard-working Muslims. Please prevent this farce from creeping into Canada. Muslims are getting a rough deal on two counts. Firstly, the banks do not give them interest on their deposits. Second, they charge them an up front fee simliar to stores like Leon's and Brick when they provide 'interest fee' deferred payment loans on purchases. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:51 AM EST 65. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: -- Eiad -- from Ottawa, Canada: While I can understand your anger given your perception of Mr. Fatah as stated, if those who would support Sharia law also perpetuate misleading banking practices, isn't this a troublesome correlation to note, and a good thing to point out? Regardless of our opinions of the author, I think it behooves us all not to fall into the practice of tacitly supporting immoral acts simply because they are not strictly illegal, or because we have more in common with one side of the issue. * Posted 25/01/08 at 10:56 AM EST 66. The Prytanis from Ottawa, Canada writes: I mentioned it above, I'll do it again explicitly. Margins on Sharia banking are HIGHER than on regular banking. It is therefore MORE userous. They are not aware of this because of the strength of Sharia brand-loyalty in their minds. Muslims are being lied to by their own Mullahs. ===== I have to pounce on something that Syed Abbas said. "The lowest achievable interest rate is zero. Therefore, Sharia interest laws are optimal for the Trade Based Economy". Mr. Abbas, this is economic naivete at an near inexcusable level. Interest would be transformed into punishing fees, which are actually LESS fair than interest to people who repay loans early. If not, what incentive would a bank have to be in business? None. While some people succumb to schadenfreude and might think that is a good idea, I am dumbstruck by the idea of eliminating the financial and investment underpinnings of society. A company with no debts on it's books at all is generally a company in trouble. Where would funding come from for innovative companies? How would people afford homes in a society where the only incentive to lend money had been eliminated? No incentive to lend equals no lending. And interest is more fair than any other vehicle that I can think of. I'm sorry, but this is a scam being hefted onto credulous muslims by theocratic selfishness and self-deception. And I haven't even touched the idea that these imams somehow seem to "know" how god wants us to bank. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:00 AM EST 67. Nick Pawliwec from Toronto, Canada writes: I think we need to get rid these archaic believes / customs that are unnatural and harmful to women. We should have more women in charge of banking. Freedoms should be respected as long as it does not degrade or harm others. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:04 AM EST 68. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Peter Bojkov: Infidels were trade monopolists and constantly threatening economical life and well-being of Mohammed's city state of Medina. War is war, and your enemy has to be eliminated. Most of the 80 skirmishes and battles that Mohammed fought were within 10 miles of Medina, in a defensive posture. Should we insult our soldiers who killed over 15,000,000 Germans during WWII? BTW Infidel does refers neither to the followers of Jesus nor of Moses. So dont worry about your behind. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:05 AM EST 69. The Prytanis from Ottawa, Canada writes: Mr Fatah: It has recently come to my attention that you have personally suffered death threats and property damage from fundamentalist members of the Muslim-Canadian community. I had heard that you had left the public forum as a result of these serious infringements of your personal safety. Thank you for coming back to the public sphere. Muslims like you are needed. I commend you on your personal courage for taking these risks. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:05 AM EST 70. Marcella x from Overshoe, Canada writes: Syed Abbas said: BTW Infidel does refers neither to the followers of Jesus nor of Moses. So dont worry about your behind. __ What about secular individuals like myself, Syed. Is my butt on the line because I think god is a scam? * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:10 AM EST 71. Ted Harrison from Canada writes: Syed Abbas, you write that, "Infidel does refers neither to the followers of Jesus nor of Moses." What does "Infidel" refer to? * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:11 AM EST 72. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Marcella x: I can not answer for you. Ask yourself. Are your activities undermining the economic system around you? If so, any society you live in will want you eliminated. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:12 AM EST 73. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: "...Phil King: The Clash of Civilization thesis is flawed, for civilized people do not clash, but cooperate..." Good quote. I'll have to remember that one. Naturally I agree. I think a zero interest economy appeals to the moral sense. I do wonder though about its affects in terms of inflation and other factors, and would need to see a concrete model that justifies it in modern economic terms to fully agree. One thing I note for example is that most business models are driven primarily by the self motivation of greed. It is certainly a reliable motivation as evidenced over the past century, but not one I like particularily as it has caused much harm. I believe it better to build a free society on motivations other than greed, but this requires us to give a substantial voice to universal ideals without requiring a particular ideological framework. We need to recognize the individual within the universal so that they may coexist. The contrast of cultures should allow the wise to recognize what unifies us from what makes us different, and from here devise a basis from which we can all work toward a better society. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:18 AM EST 74. Marcella x from Overshoe, Canada writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Marcella x: I can not answer for you. Ask yourself. Are your activities undermining the economic system around you? __ Huh? I don't understand what you mean... Let's say that I am a peaceful law abiding citizen, but reject the existence of god. Does your interpretation of Islam pose any threat to me? don't speak for Islam in general. How do you, personally, think I should be dealt with Syed? * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:18 AM EST 75. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Ted Harrison: Infidel means a non-Believer. As I have earlier pointed out, a Believer is one who believes in the socio-economic system around him. In the times of Moses, it was Tribal Equity based system. In the times of Jesus, it was Family love based system. In the times of Mohammed, it was Individual Rights and Responsibility based system. The Islams of Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed were socio-economic systems for their respective times. Each system had its own definition of a God, that represents the ideals of perfection in that system. In Mosaic times, it was a caring God, sometimes jealous, sometimes vengeful. In the times of Jesus, the God became uncondional loving. In Mohammed's times the God transformed into an abstract external Compassionate and Merciful. It was and is necessary to believe in these god-like traits to succeed in the economy of the day. So if you are not Compassionate and Merciful in today's economy, you are an infidel, and would not go far in life. Most of the Christians that I know of are loving individuals, and are believers. If you have left the faith, then you must have some positive values. What are they? * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:20 AM EST 76. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Marcella x: You say you do not understand. If you do not follow the logic, there is little I can add. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:22 AM EST 77. Marcella x from Overshoe, Canada writes: Syed, now you are just running away from the question. I am a peaceful, financially successful, law abiding citizen of this land who does not believe god exists. I don't force this belief on anyone, but I don't pretend I believe in god either if asked. What do you think should be done with me? * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:25 AM EST 78. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Ted Harrison from Canada writes: "...What does "Infidel" refer to?..." I should suspect that like all such labels, it refers partially to whatever you would have it refer to in negative terms. That said, it is most likely that at the time the difference was idealistic, not ideological. In other words, it was likely a way of denoting those who would cause you harm for their own sake, ie. "those one are unfriendly to us". Technically all three monotheistic religions call for peace as a general rule where possible, but like all human pursuits those who would do harm always rear their ugly heads. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:25 AM EST 79. Sue W from Canada writes: The muslims who believe in this silliness are they collecting interest on their savings accounts, GICs, bonds and other interest type vehicles? Are they contributing/collecting private and government pensions which invest in mortgages, interest type investments, businesses which buy/sell alcohol or pork? Are these not considered sinful, or are there already discussions underway to provide alternatives to these as well? * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:26 AM EST 80. Sylvester McMonkey McBean from Ottawa, Canada writes: Wow - I'll agree with "civilized people do not clash, but cooperate" with the caveat that "there are no civilized people, only people who presently have enough food and security to pretend for the moment to be civilized". I'll also go on record with the opinion that substituting morality for math in the decision about where to lend money is a recipe for disaster. Interest is an excellent way to determine to whom scarce capital is to be distributed so as to maximize its productivity. It's not perfect, but it does work. You will not build a society of the wise from us, however laudable a goal that is - we're a mess. Better to rely on greed - there's more of that. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:28 AM EST 81. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Phil King: One can only begin to make sense if we study religions in a socio-economic sense. As we as humans gain knowledge and experience, the optimal and viable wealth generation unit has been becoming smaller and smaller. In the times of Moses, it was the Tribe. In the times of Jesus, it reduced to a Family. In Mohammed's times, it had become an Individual. Individuals excel in small businesses, Tribes in Big business. The Corporations today are inefficient - do not create jobs, do not innovate. All new knowledge is created by small business. It is not the size that counts, but outlook. Microsoft is a small business, mostly owned by its employees. It had never had a debt. Its performance has been stellar. The return of Equity of over 35%. This is a company that is unwittingly operating on Koranic zero-interest principle(by not having debt at all). All small businessmen throughout history have believed in Universality, Individual Rights, Emancipation of Women, Justice, Peace, Free Trade, and private investment. Mohammed was no exception. Throughout history, Big Business has stood for Trade Monopoly, Capital (other's money}, subjugation of women, war. The word often used in the Koran is "spend", preferably for good charitable deeds. When people hoard money, it becomes capital, and seeks interest. Capital is hoarded money, not spent for righteous ends. Interest is just another form of greed. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:36 AM EST 82. Ted Harrison from Canada writes: Syed Abbas, I don't believe in God. My sense is that pantheistic conceptions are probably closer to the truth, but that any conception from our human perspective is going to be limited. Socially I believe in freedom and equality, with the tension between those two ideals mediated by a democratic system consisting of rational and reasonable citizens. Would you consider me an infidel? * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:48 AM EST 83. Ulil Abshar Abdalla from Jakarta, Indonesia writes: Thank to Tarek for such wonderful piece. The basic argument he brings up is something that I entirely agree with. I've been through many literatures, Arabic and otherwise, about what is called "Islamic economics" and this is, in nutshel, my impression: those who propose Islamic economics has produced a loose and too abstract jargons and rhetorics that in no way will help us as a Muslim umma to get out from the problem of poverty, injustice, and underdevelopment we are all in now. Islamic banking, again, suffers from the similar problem. Since the discourse of Islamic banking, Islamic finance, etc. has been broacched into a public discussion by its proponent, one thing stands out: there is nothing "Islamic" in this supposedly Islamically sanctioned practice. Islamic banking, to me, seems to play within the existing capitalistc economic arrangement, sprinkling upon it some Arabic word to make it look "Islamic" in the eye of the consumers. It is so sad to see that a mind set lurking still behind our mind is that everything that carry Arabic word or label is "Islamic". Take for example. Islamic banking introduces a new scheme called as "murabahah", or "mudharabah". As a student of Islamic law, I do not see anything "Islamic" in murabahah except that it bears an Arabic label. Murabahah is simply a profit-making undertaking that is normal in any economic activities. I buy a house for $ 200 thousand and sell it again in the market for 225 thousand, that is murabahah. That is how economy, Islamic and otherwise, works out everywhere. The only thing "Islamic" about it is that you are bound to an "ethic" so that you may make murabahah as long as it is fair. But murabahah in itself is by no means an Islamic stuff. It is a universal human activity. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:49 AM EST 84. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Ted Harrison: I would rather not enter into discussion about belief in God. Because first of all we would have to mutually agree on what God is. The concept of God has been undergoing changes over history. I believe Karen King wrote a hefty book on it (that I have not read). The few ideas that I presented is as far as I would go. * Posted 25/01/08 at 11:51 AM EST 85. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Marcella x from Overshoe, Canada writes: "...I am a peaceful, financially successful, law abiding citizen of this land who does not believe god exists. I don't force this belief on anyone, but I don't pretend I believe in god either if asked. What do you think should be done with me?..." There are two very distinct answers to your question depending on who takes the question. If the individual is any form of literalist, they will likely condemn you as you have rightly assumed would be the case. If the individual is the least bit interested in the actual source of authority of the ideals they profess to follow, then they will seek to find common ground and will view you in the light of the values you embody. There is no single interpretation of any religion as it is all man's attempt to concretize the universal. Those who profess otherwise are trying to sell something. In this case zero interest accounts. LOL * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:00 PM EST 86. Michael Quintin from Toronto, Canada writes: The meaning of usury. I do not want Sharia law in Canada but I would like to point out one fact. If you look up "usury" at www.dictionary.com you will find that the following: usary . the lending or practice of lending money at an exorbitant interest. . an exorbitant amount or rate of interest, esp. in excess of the legal rate. . Obsolete. interest paid for the use of money. Considering when the Koran was written I would say that the 3rd meaning may in fact be the correct meaning. That would of course mean any interest paid is against the Koran. Right? Now that would make us bankers something unmentionable to Muslims who prescribe to Sharia Law.... wouldn’t it? So why don't we just charge a fee instead of interest and then we can get around that "law". In effect, that's what Sharia Banking would look like. Half our banking is already Sharia. Have you seen the interest an account pays? It's almost like a rounding error and that's if the account pays interest at all. * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:04 PM EST 87. Jake Jay from Toronto, Canada writes: I agree that Sharia banking is a scam/sham and a money grab. No less a money grab is the expansion into this field of major banks, CMHC et al. They are not in it for philanthropic purposes. The colour of money is green and universally sought after, -- by good means and foul. One thing is clear about Sharia banking - it promotes adherence to the religion of Islam (whatever that is). "Ethical Mutual Funds", "Green Mutual Funds" --- Give me a break. A pox on all the banking houses. * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:05 PM EST 88. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Cameron Reid: I was not talking about "Islam" or "Christianity" but about Koran and the Bible and the fundamental principles of economics they contain. The arguments that I have tried to advance is that Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed were social reformers, and had a profound understanding of the socio-economics of their times. I can not speak of Judhaism and Christianity, but today's Islam is patently anti-Koranic and anti-Mohammedan. For example, the Allah of the Koran is an abstract external powerhouse of 99 noble traits all packed in one. However, today's Muslims believe in a homo-morphic god. That is because most of the Muslims (some 85% of them) interpret the Koran with the help of 6 Books of Sunnah (Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Muslim, etc.). In these books the God is described as having arms and legs, and He even lowers his legs to cool the Hell down. Mohammed is described in most unflattering terms. He is described as an illiterate (an unlikely situation since he was a businessman and a trader) who marries a 6 year old and sleeps when she was 9. So technically, Muslims today, despite clear Koranic descriptions, believe in a homo-morphic god and an illiterate pedophile as their leader. Obviously, such a person could not have come up with the economic system described in the Koran. Corrupted Islam of today is no help to anyone, just as corrupted Christianity can not be counted upon to provide guidance. However, the Bible and the Koran can indeed be applied to pastoral, agrarian, and exchange based economies. * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:06 PM EST 89. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Sylvester McMonkey McBean from Ottawa, Canada Posted 25/01/08 at 11:28 AM EST Don't assume I disagree. I'm suggesting addition, not subtraction. For example, environmental products base much of their value on a moral consideration, but not to the exclusion of financial considerations. I guess a better way of putting it would be to suggest that we need a value-add component of cultivating altruism. * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:06 PM EST 90. Tarek Fatah from Ottawa, Canada writes: This is an interesting discussion. Tariq Amin is indulging in the classic 'paralysis of analysis.' A philosophical discourse bordering sociology and anthropology, merely helps distract us from the subject matter: Big Banks aligning with Islamists to make money by invoking the wrath of God. Frederick Duquette had asked a valid question: What is Sharia banking? Frederick, it is like any other banking, except for the fact that each and every product (a savings account, a mortgage, a bond offering) has to be certified by an a sheik or imam hired by the bank to certify the bank product as 'halal' (as in kosher) or the more yuppie term, 'Sharia-compliant'. Once the bank gets this stamp of approval, the sheik gets his (yes, they are only men; no women allowed) payment or royalty and the product becomes holy. Most Muslims laugh at this nonsense and move on. However a significant minority, that has been led to believe that all-things-Canadian are sinful and would lead to hellfire, choose to take this sanctified product as Islamic and thus not contravening their faith. These are the victims who: 1. Get no interest from the banks on their deposits 2. Pay up front charges (like we do to Leons and Sears, when succumbing to their 'no-interest-for-one-year' marketing ploys) on supposed interest-free mortgages, but in addition, pay the equivalent of the interest under the label 'rent' :-) On top of this, Islamic institutions also deduct the annual 2.5% Islamic wealth tax (Zakat) from the value of the property. Invariably, the customer makes less while the banks make mor and the sheiks get richer: this in a nutshell is sharia banking and this is why groups like CitiBank are so excited. * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:11 PM EST 91. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada Posted 25/01/08 at 12:06 PM EST What you have described here is a common "sin" among Christians as well. We would call it "personifying god" and it directly contradicts the spirit of the commandment forbading idols and superstition, since the characterization place limits on the infinite. "For example, the Allah of the Koran is an abstract external powerhouse of 99 noble traits all packed in one." Which is surprisingly in line with the Cabbalistic understanding of god's "recognizable traits" as discussed through the metaphor of "Jacob's ladder" in which one attempts to recognize and understand the universal principles it demonstrates. * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:17 PM EST 92. Paul Smith from Canada writes: The Banks are doing what they are there for - to make money, who can question that? I don't see anything wrong in that. For the customers I have one question. Who do you think you are kidding? You can call it 'interest' you can call it 'gifts of appreciation' you can call it 'George' for all it's worth. We all know what it is. And this all powerful being that you are trying to comply with? Can he/she not see through this? Religion never fails to amaze me - but probably not in the way that you think. * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:18 PM EST 93. DO GOOD from United States writes: . Syed Abbas, Good day sir. Thank you for your very informative posts that shed a very interesting perspective. In an earlier post you stated the following: "In every free enterprise economy today, the lower the interest rate the higher the growth. The lowest achievable interest rate is zero. Therefore, Sharia interest laws are optimal for the Trade Based Economy. That is the way to the future, whether you like it or not." Questions: ) Interest free or deception: If "Muradaha" is Cost-plus sale, presumably the bank would purchase the home and resell it to a Muslim client at Cost-plus. How then is this different or better than charging a reasonable interest which amounts to the same and which usually can be lowered at any time by paying down the principle amount earlier? ) Economic responsibility: The recent US low interest rate policies resulted in the sub-prime melt down. Can the world afford a repeat of it? ) Winners and losers: Why would a lender loan a sum of money to an individual without interest knowing that that individual will invest it and profit, while the loaner ends up at a loss because of inflation, currency deflation, etc. ) Sense or senseless: How do you logically conclude that 0% interest is the way of the future? ) Why advance loans with nothing to gain and high risks and losses? ) Nations have laws that make loansharking illegal, yet permit a robust and mostly successful industry to spearhead growth and development. This explains the progress of the western civilization over the Muslim world. Why do you mention stories of loan sharks as reason to support "Sheria" when it was long outlawed? ) Currency, interest rate and oversight matters belong to the State, not a religious group. How would 0% "Sheria" be fair in a secular society? . * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:24 PM EST 94. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Paul Smith from Canada: The problem is that they are misleading people into believing that they are getting a good deal and one sanctioned by god. There are consumer protection issues here. Also, this is a matter of religion only on the surface, when really this is an abuse of authority that can happen in any ideological setting where an overt amount of trust is placed in the authority. There is definitely something wrong with intentionally misleading people, and if you don't see that, then I am forced to question your values. * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:25 PM EST 95. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Phil King: I agree. Religions succeed only as far as their god's limits. Muslims are in the pits today because they have personified Allah and reduced Him to one just like themselves. Yahweh told Moses that he shall not see the Him, but only His manifestations. However, 85% of the Muslims believe that they shall see Allah (albeit at the day of the judgment seated at the Throne of Authority). Allah of the Koran is described by his infinite attributes - All Knowing, All Powerful, Omni-present Merciful, Magnificient, Generous, etc. In fact these traits also happen to be the ones that man needs in finite measure in today's economy to be successful. One has to be multi-skilled just to survive today. In shephard economy, one had to be strong and powerful, in agrarian economy, one had to be loving. This external abstract god can not be destroyed. But Muslims today reneged on their Allah and also on their Prophet and created new ones. That is why they are in the pits, and that is where they will remain, playing musical chairs with Sharia Banking notwithstanding. * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:31 PM EST 96. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: DO GOOD: Greetings. I just returned after 3 years in Seattle and San Diego. I have warm memories of the generous hospitality offered to me. What I like about the US is that even when people disagree with you, they do not lose their temper or become hostile. I wish I could answer your questions. "Sharia Banking" to me looks like cutting corners with Islam, that Muslims have done throughout history. Taking the easy way out. It is an attempt to "Westernize" Islam via the back door. I doubt wether it would work. As we move towards a global enonomy without borders, the Koranic principle will become more and more irrestible. The sub-prime lending rate is one such attempt at trying to reach zero interest rate. Mohammedan Islam does not allow dumb investments (hoarded money as capital or loan), but intelligent investment (money with skills). What I mean is Koran encourages people to invest only in businesses in which they can also contribute with their skills as well. Islam stands for small business. If you have some money then it is preferable to invest rather than loan it. Of course, interest free loans, called "Qard e hasna" are also allowed, the like of "love money" that you borrow from your rich uncle for starting your business. I take your point about the advance of Western Civilization over the Muslim one with a bit of caveat. Firstly, the West advanced over the Muslims using the same tactis they had used earlier - colonialism. It failed for the Muslims, and it will also fail for the West. The Muslims were the first to practice Trading Blocks and impose Import Tariffs. It rendered the economy inefficient. The West today is terribly inefficient. In the last 400 years that the West has enjoyed the mastery of the globe it has stopped even replacing itself. It takes a Westerner some 30-50 times as many resources of the world as a Muslim to take a person from cradle to the grave. The West is losing the battle of survival, growth, and evolution. * Posted 25/01/08 at 12:47 PM EST 97. Eric of Windsor from Canada writes: Simon Garth writes "as long as these 4 handbooks of perversion keep circulating, do not expect much improvement in terms of human intelligence: Old testament New testament Koran Facebook Sir upon looking over civilization over the past thousand years or so it it as noticeable as the nose on your face that the Christian society based on the belief in the New and Old Testament are the ones that have advanced mankind to where N.A. and Europe are today. All other religions that dominate other countries were content to never change, remain stagnent . Were it not for the influence of the Christian culture into these societies they would still be living as they did for centuries before. The mid east, Asia, S.A. all are only now in the past 100 years or so modernizing from their old ways of life. Of course if this is how you wish to live feel free to emigrate to these nations. There is nothing inherently wrong with having money, it is the LOVE of money that is the problem because it drives man to do evil things to others to gain it. This is not the way of loving your neighbour as the Bible states we are to do. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:02 PM EST 98. Saleem Samad from Toronto, Canada writes: I am not surprised of the return of Sharia in Canada, apparently a secular nation in North America. Sharia law practiced in those Muslims nations caused critical harm to democracy, freedom of religion, faith and practices, freedom of expression, and specially empowerment of women. Some may not agree that as a secularist we are literally marginalised in the world dominated by religious bigots. Let us express solidarity with the Stop Sharia Banking in Canada campaign in the Facebook, as Tarek Fateh achieved to stop Sharia laws in the garb of Muslim family laws. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:12 PM EST 99. stand up mimi from Canada writes: Tarek Fatah - Thank you for this article. Sharia banking is simply a scam perpetrated on vulnerable people. I don't understand the thought process (if any) of those who feel that it's okay for Muslims to be ripped off, as long as it's other Muslims arranging the deception. Canadians ought to be looking out for each other, regardless of religious differences, to prevent these kinds of abuses from happening. But in practice, we often turn a blind eye to abuse in the name of "other" people's religion. Bountiful, BC is another example of the way we tend to disregard abuse if it is dressed up as a tenet of religious belief, no matter how shaky that interpretation might be. And left unchecked, harmful dogma can enter the public system and erode it. So this does effect all of us. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:16 PM EST 100. Tarek Fatah from Ottawa, Canada writes: Eiad from Ottawa, Canada writes: As usual Mr. Fatah makes his headlines by bashing anything Islamic and claiming that he does it based on Islamic teachings...Mr. Fatah you hate Islam... My dear Eiad, I don't understand why like so many in people in places like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, instead of debating the merits of an argument, you resort to the medieval practise of declaring me an infidel! This is so passe. These sorts of labels, declaring Muslims to be anti-Muslim, used to scare people into subservience, but trust me, they no longer work on me. You agree with my contention that there is nothing Islamic about shariah banking, then why this overt bitterness? The banks and muillahs have joined hands to make money. Why does my comment on this unholy marriage of convenience get labelled as Islam bashing? * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:22 PM EST 101. frederick duquette from Edmonton, Canada writes: Mr Abbas, Does a Muslim living in the West use less resources than a "westerner"? Is the thought of owning a Mercedes appealing? I think the West simply industrialized first, but getting there first is hardly an accomplishment and one they could not imagine the consequences of: wars of immense destruction, totalitarian governments, vast improvements in lifestyle and wealth creation on a level unprecidented in history, human rights, collapsing birthrates, environmental pressures, social upheaval, decline of Christianity, decline of family etc. All of this at a rate of change unknown to our ancestors, as if the clock was being accelerated and the consequences of actions inflated. Im unsure how Islam can avoid these pressures that the "West" is apparently losing the battle for. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:36 PM EST 102. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada: While I have always believed that all religion ultimately speaks to a universal constant of spirit and principle, it is always nice to see examples of this reflected in others. It goes to the point that we need not lose sight of our culture and history to share bonds with those outside it. That we should all strive to do the ultimate good we can envision is a good place to start. Misleading people as these individuals appear to do, doesn't fit this expectation, but we should condemn the sin, not the sinner or his culture/religion. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:39 PM EST 103. L Harder from Canada writes: A very interesting discussion. It seems like the Islamic banking product in not enshrined in Canadian law, but rather a service line. In principle, I don't have a problem with that. Its ironic as The Prytanis pointed out, that this system goes against the spirit of Islamic teaching as it is more exploitive. I enjoy the input of Syed Abbas. He obviously comes from a very different perspective/tradition. Is he a lone ranger or does he represent a school of thought? He is trapped in the idea that value systems originate in religious systems. These values actually predate all the religions in question and merely reflect the means by which we cooperate/compete and live together in an often hostile world. I would suggest for him the study of cooperative, competitive social system from a biological perspective in conjunction with evolution. It will definately break down his definitions (and perhaps take the bad with the good) but would in combination with his background could make for a very rich and sophisticated interpretation of events. He did evade the question whether being a secularist is acceptable. Though perhaps by his definition a Muslim person could be an infidel. My persective is that there is always more than one strategy of life going on at the same time and would reserve the word infidel for those engaged in criminal behaviour clearly damaging to the public interest. I call them criminals. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:40 PM EST 104. Sydney R from Canada writes: So is it legally available to ALL Canadians? just asking. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:41 PM EST 105. Proud Canadian from Canada writes: An excellent article. We need more frank and open dicussions in Canada and I commend TAREK FATAH for taking a stand. Is this not what all religious and ethnic groups should be doing? Debate is very healthy and should be encouraged by all Canadians. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:42 PM EST 106. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Tarek Fatah: I agree with you that the Sharia Banking is an unholy alliance of the Mullahs and the Banks to milk the hapless Muslims of their hard earned money in the guise of Islam. However, your detractors are concerned about your lack of socio-economic depth that requires delving in such a complex issue. From your writings it appears that you understand neither the West, nor Islam. Today's Islam is not what you grew up with. Today's Muslim youth is talking about resurgent, renaissant, vigourous Islam that is based on firm Koranic principles. How else you explain that young Muslim girls are more hijab-observant than their mothers - not only in Muslim countries, but especially in here the West. For them, the Hijab does not represent subjugation of women that it represents for you and your family, but their empowerment. How else you explain that Islam is the fastest growing religion, especially in the West, and particularly among the intellectuals of the Left? That is because they recognize that only following Mohammedan tactics they can defeat the combined forces of the Big Business, Bankers, and Trade Monopolists. He did it in the trading microcosm of Mecca, and the battle lines in our global economies are the same. I suggest you read the New Testament and the Koran not as "Holy Books" but manuals of revolutionaries in agrarian and trade based eras. You will find much wisdom there. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:44 PM EST 107. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Phil King: Condemn the sin, not the sinner. I can not agree more. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:45 PM EST 108. Stan from Canada from from all over Canada, Canada writes: Do these Imams that are lining thier pockets while preaching "ethics" to the great unwashed really think they are fooling God? Just wondering.... * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:47 PM EST 109. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: frederick duquette: Indeed he/she does. I know of families in Toronto sending their children to private schools on family incomes of $24,000 per year without government support. This is because Islamic lifestyle is more "efficient". Islam is spreading not because it is "morally superior", but because it assures better survival and growth in today's dynamic and uncertain economy. Zero interest banking is another such strategy. Try it, you will like it. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:50 PM EST 110. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Stan from Canada: Have you ever encountered a skinny Rabbi, Priest, or a Mullah. Pot-bellies can mean only one thing - over-consumption. Pass the plate and praise the Lord. * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:53 PM EST 111. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: L Harder from Canada writes: "...I enjoy the input of Syed Abbas. He obviously comes from a very different perspective/tradition. Is he a lone ranger or does he represent a school of thought? He is trapped in the idea that value systems originate in religious systems..." I suspect he would disagree with this exact characterization as I do, but I understand why you say this. Despite our different theisms, I suspect we would both argue that recognition of universal principles is best studied from the perspective of the culture one is raised in or is closest to one's heart and mind. If that happens to be philosophical atheism, then I doubt either of us would object as it is not material to the point. The existence of god is characterized by the manifestation of universal law or principle. Personifying such a thing is silly. I commend you on your recognition that all "values" predate religion. It would indeed be silly to claim for example that the "spirit of kindness" belongs to a religion, rather than admit it is the mark of a conscious attempt to embody a universal principle. Also I think "criminals" is an excellent alternate definition of "infidel" as it means to speak to those who ignore the rights of others to exist in peace. All in all you'd make a great Cabbalist! ;) * Posted 25/01/08 at 1:59 PM EST 112. johnny Canuck from Canada writes: What about the 2.5% of profits paid to "Islam". Where will that money go, to the middle east? To help finance more islamic supremacism around the world? And why does 2.5% have to be paid to islam? Seems to over looked but, could end up sending a lot of money to the very people who are trying to undermine our society. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:00 PM EST 113. Stan from Canada from from all over Canada, Canada writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada: You seem to be well versed in this Sharia thing. Please help me with something. In Islam, is it allowed to rent things? (Land, Homes, Vehicles?). If so, how is this any different from the Interest on a loan (which is really just an economic rent for the Capital)? Thanks, Stan * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:04 PM EST 114. deliciously uncanadian from Canada writes: Look, Syed Abbas, anyone can send their kids to a "private" school funded by $100 per barrel oil. It's still government support, just not from the Canadian government. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:09 PM EST 115. Peter Alexander from Toronto, Canada writes: Tarek my old friend, May God, Jahweh, Allah, Gitchi Manitou and the Spirit That Infuses All Living Things shower you with good fortune. We all owe you a mitzvah! None of us non-Muslims should, out of ignorance and naive multicultural deference, condone through inaction or silence the exploitation of (Muslim or other) Canadians under the guise of some dubious divine "decree". I for one find it helpful when you offer some context and history that lets us grapple with an issue, instead of leaving the uninformed to shrug and assume "That's just their way." At these moments I am reminded of an assertion by Joseph Conrad: "All ambitions are lawful except those which climb upwards on the miseries or credulities of mankind." And womankind. Keep up the good work, presenting a reasoned, temperate secular Muslim voice as a counterpoint to febrile brimstone blather from fundamentalist fanatics of ANY and ALL religions. Presumably the Creator also created our capacity for critical thought, skepticism and debunking of self-serving fraud. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:11 PM EST 116. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Stan from Canada from from all over Canada: Hey Stan, I hope Syed chimes in on this one, but from his earlier explanations it would seem that the problem is interest for loans in which the lender provides no value-add. Rent assumes the provision of value, ie. the thing you're renting them. The Imams in this case seem happy to pervert the meaning of "rent". Maybe it seems like a trite difference, but I think perhaps it's a matter of principle? * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:11 PM EST 117. Darmok and Jilad from Tanagra, Canada writes: I am sure the Islamic nations who hold bonds from Western nations are quite happy to RECEIVE the interest... I hope banks are not having to charge non-Muslims higher interest to make up for this foolishness. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:12 PM EST 118. Fred Said from Canada writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: I know of families in Toronto sending their children to private schools on family incomes of $24,000 per year without government support. *********** Of course, because they only need a single book... that really cuts down on costs. I also wonder how many of those families paying for an Islamic education are collecting welfare / other social support dollars. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:16 PM EST 119. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: L Harder: Many thanks for your input. Indeed, the Islam I represent is not mainstream Islam, but I am no lone-ranger There are 40,000,000 Syeds today worldwide, and growing. Mohammed was Allah's messenger, and we the Syeds fancy ourselves as Mohammed's messengers, explaining Islam the way he wanted it to be known. He was our great-great grandfather. No. I do not believe that value system originate in religions, but just the opposite. The fundamental question of existence is survival, growth, and evolution. Only the most efficient and fit survive and grow and evolve, and the optimal strategy always is in harmony with the surrounding Economic environment (i.e. reality around us). Religions are nothing but the sum total of the tried and tested strategies that have stood the test of time. Rituals bond people with similar economic outlook. Mohammed the small businessman summarized these strategies and tactics for the trade based era. Pity that his successors reversed the gains he had made. Within 25 years of his death his Revolution was history. However, the Syeds and their followers (the Shia) have kept the flame burning. Incidentally, while the renegade Muslims have a 1,400 years history of fighting the Christians, there has never been a conflict between the Shia and the Christian. Even during the Crusades, the Shia were the Allies of the Christians, so much so that Saladin saw it fit to reduce them in Egypt before he turned his sword on the Europeans. Islam of Mohammed was for Free Trade. Later day Muslims became Trade Monopolists and made a living off others. First they imposed Tariffs, then they blocked it altogether. But hapless Europeans bypassed the Muslims discovering new trade routes and new worlds. Allah always favors who advance free trade (and zero interest banking). * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:16 PM EST 120. Joanne Johnston from Canada writes: Mixing religion with money, wow. Who would have thought. So I'm not sure how this is supposed to work. Is it something like, "the lord commands you to deposit your money in this bank or else you will burn in hell"? I can't imagine this withstanding the scrutiny of a supreme court challenge, which will surely follow if this passes. I think this is just another case of, "if you can't convince them, confuse them". I'm not so sure this actually benefits muslims. I'm pretty sure our anti-terror legislation says that banking records are fair game when searching for possible terrorists. Wouldn't this just "narrow it down" for the police? Freezing assets etc. I see a lot of problems with this idea; for everyone, not just muslims. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:17 PM EST 121. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Peter Alexander from Toronto, Canada writes: "All ambitions are lawful except those which climb upwards on the miseries or credulities of mankind." An excellent quote. Very succinct indeed. I concur. A "reasoned, temperate secular Muslim voice" is a welcome salve on our society's open wounds, and we should seek to recognize them whenever they appear. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:17 PM EST 122. Sean L. from Toronto, Canada writes: "Eiad from Ottawa, Canada writes: I call for a fatwah on Fatah" Ok so I am paraphrasing, but your intent comes through load & clear. Guess you failed the ethics exam on your citizenship test - that is if we had one. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:26 PM EST 123. bj sutherland from Victoria, Canada writes: Thank you Tarek Fatah for a very informative article. I will question my bank as to whether they are involved in these types of sharia investment schemes for Muslims. You have unleashed some very fascinating discussions, so I hope you will be able to write more in the G&M on these issues. It's not often that we talk about the moral underpinings of how we use money. I got a good chuckle out of Syad Abbas's mention of "love money" which I can regularly call on from my mother and Michael Quentin's mention of just how little interest we really see from our banking institution, thus experiencing our own version of 'sharia' financing. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:26 PM EST 124. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Stan from Canada: I can not speak for Islam. It has come to mean different things to different people. Different sects in Islam believe in different gods and different prophets (of course all named the same). I am no scholar, but from the Koranic point of view I would say not. The reason being Koran does not favor hoarding, but spending. One must be frugal for himself, but generous to others, and spend all the rest in the name of the Lord. So if you are only allowed to keep what you can use, then where would you have an extra home or place to rent out to? One major point that I would like to introduce is that the Koran does not favor taxing income, but only wealth (hoarded income). * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:29 PM EST 125. Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: If the person flying beside me in Air Canada wants a vegetarion, organic, Halal, Kosher meal to eat who am I to deny him the freedom. If my neighbour wants to invest in Ethical funds or Shariah complaint (non usury funds) who am I to deny him the freedom. Islamic finance are simply structured trade products devoid of ususy, similar to ethical products which have filters. There is no injustice being forced on anyone. If a person wants an Islamic finance product and can avail to them in the US and UK why not in Canada. If I was in UK I could walk into any of the 2000 Lloyds TSB branches and have the option of Islamic mortgages and investments. Eight of the 10 largest banks internationally all have Shariah Financing divsions ie HSBC, Citi bank, Credit Suisse, Deushe, etc. This includes two banks in the US: Devon Bank and University Bank. Shariah financing is similar to Halal meat. If we want to ban shariah financing we might as well ban Kosher meat. Its a product that sells to a community, if a community wants it they buy it. As long as there is no injustice denying it would be denying ones freedom. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:30 PM EST 126. Tony Mareschealle from mississauga, Canada writes: The underlying problem is the very concept of allowing ANY form of SHARIA law. If you want to have an "Islamic" bank to cater to muslims, fine, but they must adhere to all existing BOC rules - not special little "fine print" ammendments indicating this adheres to SHARIA law etc. We have banking l was in place, use them, do not invent / create new ones on the absis of religion etc. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:43 PM EST 127. Mahfooz Kanwar from Calgary, Canada writes: Sharia banking is nothing but fraud, a deceit. I know a couple of Mullahs in Calgary who disclosed this fraud to us, the public, and they are now cursing the managers of this fraud. One of them, with a three foot long beard, says he has been ruined financially. Nevertheless, there are a lot of semi-literate Mullahs out there who are justifying this on the basis of 'halal' and 'haram interest'. Please, ignore them. Liberal and progressive Muslims must keep up our struggle against Sharia banking, as we have been resisting in other areas such as Sharia family law, hijab, niqab, and burka among other things. I have written three columns against Sharia in the Calgary Herald, one column against burka in the Calgary Sun, one column against multiculturalism in the Sun Media, and I have produced extensive research in support of gay marriage in my book, JOURNEY TO SUCCESS. In my judgement, anyone who gets involved in Sharia banking, or supports it, needs help in rational education. I am prepared to debate with anyone who allows me. If they insist on it and become stubborn, I will tell them to go where Sharia is practised. This is Canada, where religion and the government are separate. Mahfooz Kanwar, Ph.D. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:44 PM EST 128. j m from Saint John, Canada writes: Omar, you have hit the nail on the head! There is still the issue of consumer protection. My using different words that amount to the same thing, it puts the customer at a disadvantage, simmilar to the use of "fees" instead of "intrest" by payday loan companies. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:46 PM EST 129. The Prytanis from Ottawa, Canada writes: And now, for some humour... A priest, a rabbi, and an imam walk into a bar. The bartender takes one look at them and says: "What is this? Some kind of a joke?" * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:47 PM EST 130. Hasan Mahmud from Toronto, Canada writes: You cannot invent quinine before the advent of malaria. The Quran did not categorically ban a system developed many centuries later and is balanced, transperant and controlled by law. Only personal uncontrolled lending with high interest was banned by islam. The Quran only laid a principle - Islamic finance is another way of playing with Quran. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:50 PM EST 131. Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: Mahfooz Kanwar. Will you tell a sikh to stop carrying a kirban or jew to eat kosher meat? Freedom to practice religion is engrained in the charter of rights and freedom, as long as the practice is not hurting others who are you to deny. People pay extra for Organic products, kosher products if people want to pay more for an Islamic finance product let them decide and give them that freedom. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:50 PM EST 132. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: "...Incidentally, while the renegade Muslims have a 1,400 years history of fighting the Christians, there has never been a conflict between the Shia and the Christian..." If they all share your indepth interpretation of the universal I can see why. I find the correlation between the Syeds and the Gnostic Cabbalists pleasantly surprising. Both originated a very philosophical and deeply considered spirituality that shares remarkable similarities in thought. This definitely lends credence to the idea that both are studying the manifestation of something demonstrably real, ie. recognizing universal principles that exist independent of us. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:52 PM EST 133. stand up mimi from Canada writes: The trouble is, Omar, that one would not pay the higher kosher price for a non-kosher product, but sharia banking means "paying" extra for the same non-sharia items everyone else gets at a better rate, simply because a few people are insisting it's more devout. * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:58 PM EST 134. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada: I agree in principle, but I think you're ignoring the fact that the practice isn't meeting the stated intent. They are being deceitful in their claims of "no interest" as they are in fact charging more for the service than a standard bank using interest. What's more important: Following the letter of the law or the spirit of its intent? * Posted 25/01/08 at 2:58 PM EST 135. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: The Prytanis from Ottawa, Canada: LOL And I thought no one could come up with another Rabbi/Priest/Imam joke I would think was funny. Never say never I guess. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:03 PM EST 136. Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: All Islamic finance products sturctured internationally and in Canada all follow the law of the land. If you have 3 frozen chickens at your grocery store one is kosher, halal and conventional. The end product is the same in all three cases but the cost of kosher and halal is higher. If people of that faith group want to buy blessed meat and pay higher, let them. The same example is of having a child in wedlock or outside the end result is the same but the society view of both is different. My arguement is if you want to ban Islamic financing lets just ban any religious practice from the kirpan to kosher meat and tell anyone who wants to practice ones religion to go back to ones country. This debate is very far and different from Shariah law which is govern by the land of the law. These are products for select groups. As long as they are legal and do not harm anyone why should we deny. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:04 PM EST 137. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Mahfooz Kanwar: While you justifiably berate against semi-literate Mullahs, little I thought I would find semi-literate PhDs. Your diatribes against the Hijab and the Niqab shows your unfamiliarity with the socio-economics of the same, and why it represents women's empowerment not subjugation. The gains Women made under Mohammed in his city state of Medina were: power to choose their own mate, establish her own conditions in marriage contract, full spousal support while married, a 3-stage divorce made at three separate times and none in anger, freedom from housework, option for a temporary marriage. In fact, Mohammed decreed that no man could offer a marriage contract - this privilege only lay with women. While in the West and in Christianity, the marriage is a two way street, in Islam, only the woman proposes, and man accepts or rejects the contract or asks for re-negotiation. In the West, the woman is chosen (man proposes); that is why she is for display. In Mohammedan Islam, woman proposes. So, if the woman is not up for choice, why display herself? She need display herself to only the one she has chosen. Furthermore, in every society, whether Japan, Brazil, or Germany, the women of nobility cover their hair and bosom. Hijab is not for ordinary Muslims, but for the believers, a higher category in Islam. During the 1970's the economic value of housework was a hot topic in progressive circles in Canada. Mohammed solved this 1,400 years ago when he ordained that housework was not the part of matrimonial duties. If she did so, she could demand wages. Muslims rulers after Mohammed took away all of women's rights. The right to choose, the right to 3-stage divorce, the right to contract a short marriage, the right to demand wages for housework. If today's Muslims do not follow Mohammed and the Koran, why blame Islam for it? Why dis-empower women from Hijab. A Hijab is not a woman's obligation. It is her right. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:05 PM EST 138. Alex Yaxmos from Canada writes: Allah doesn't like fees charged on the use of money. So by getting a mortgage or credit card people are living in sin. So the only people getting "hurt" are muslims who are not allow to get charge interest for borrowing money. I'm just trying to understand what this article is about, since an interest free loan is impossible to get, so muslims are tricked into getting loans that are usury free but in fact are charged some kind of fee. How does banking work in the Muslim countries, they get interest free loans? * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:06 PM EST 139. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto: Do you have a link for a reliable site that details the kind of Islamic thought you have discussed? I am always seeking a meaningful way to expand my understanding of the universal, and earlier attempts to read the Koran have resulted in the painful realization that a lack of cultural understanding is a huge barrier. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:06 PM EST 140. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: "...If people of that faith group want to buy blessed meat and pay higher, let them..." Absolutely. As long as that fact is up front and not hidden. "Would a rose by any other name smell as sweet?" Nor more or less so than an interest charge by anyother name, ie. "rent". * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:10 PM EST 141. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Phil King: I suggest you read the Koran as a socio-economic book with a model for the human psyche for the trade based era. While Freud's model was based on the OT, and Jung's on the NT, later day R.D. Laing et al are clearly inspired by the Koran without having read it I suppose. I suggest you read the Bible before delving into the Koran. The latter is a referential book, and not fully comprehensible without the Judeo-Christian background. There are a few Shia sites that discuss progressive Islam. I suggest www.al-islam.org. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:11 PM EST 142. Phil King from Ottawa, Canada writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto: I've read the bible from front to back so many times I can quote much of it from memory, in addition to a number of Judaic texts and translations. I was raised VERY Christian but my natural curiosity nipped that one in bud fairly early. I've identified as atheist, pagan and many other things, but came to find my home in gnosticism and Cabbalism. Your words here have given me an interest in finding the parallels within Islam. I will review the link you've provided. I look forward to future discussions but for now I must go. Regards. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:19 PM EST 143. Economan Bilkington from Red Deer, Canada writes: Sharia mortgage invariably costs MORE than regular mortgages. It is based on administration fees of which a percentage is passed on to the lender for the use of the mortgage money! Not same as interest? U decide. This is just another "Halal" product to benefit the "Brothers" by exclusion in the name of religion. Remember that "Halal" is a derivative of "Kosher", and it is used to corner the meat market by converting it from a health related practice to a religious one. So Muslims buy meat and most groceries only from the "Brothers". All this is merely an economic stunt to keep the wealth in the "Family" of believers, even though that wealth is most often earned by working for, and consorting with, non-believers! Thus, Sharia mortgage is aimed at snagging a transfer of wealth to the "Brothers." "Islamic" countries borrow money on the world market and pay interest. Who will lend them billions unless there is a competitive return from such investment? If Sharia followers want to pay more than competitive rates for the privilege than they are welcome to it. But they shouldn't muddy the waters for the rest of us by inciting higher cost of borrowing with of a parrallel but more costly sysytem based on religious adherence. Only the mullahs and muslim money lenders stand to gain most from a fragmented money market. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:22 PM EST 144. ghostofpatbuchanen buchanen from Victoria, Canada writes: Is anybody - Muslim or otherwise - forced to use a bank? No. So what's the problem? Put your money in a tin can, a sock, under your mattress, in a chartered bank, a sharia-compliant bank, wherever. Live with the consequences, good or bad. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:23 PM EST 145. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Phil King: With such a command of the Bible you are set for studying the Koran. In fact I have met recent Christian converts to Islam who state that they now find reading Bible much more beneficial. They find confirmation of their own beliefs in the Bible. Jesus said that he had come to confirm the Law (of Moses) that the Judahists had laid aside when they adopted the Talmud as the basis of their new religion. Mohammed also said that he had come to confirm the messages of Moses and Jesus. The Good Lord will send guidance to his loving creation in every era. The message remains the same, only the form changes. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:25 PM EST 146. Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: Muslims can buy halal meat from non-Muslim companies or do business with non-Muslims. This is best shown by how the Prophet Muhammad did business with a Jew by gaining food grains from him and using his armour as a security (mortgage) 1400 years ago. Today in Canada Al-Safa Halal which provides halal meat to all the major supermarkets is owned by a Jew and all Imams have accepted the meat. Maple Lodge Farm entire meat operation is Halal. They do have halal and conventional labels but all the conventional products are halal since the entire slaughter process is halal. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:36 PM EST 147. Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: Historically, Muslims were known as traders, he says, travelling the world, dealing with people of all races and faiths, open to progressive ideas. From India and China, they brought back the number system and writing on paper – concepts they developed and passed on to Europe. The trading of money from one city to another originated through the Arabic "saqq," or cheque. "In the 9th century, a Muslim businessman could cash a cheque in China drawn on his bank in Baghdad," states an article, "How Islamic Inventors Changed the World," in The Independent, a British newspaper. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:52 PM EST 148. old Curmudgeon From Ottawa from Canada writes: Banks (and other institutions), take note: I will not make use of any service from any institutions that are participating in the undermining of our civilization and it's institutions. Even more so when the shift is towards a primitive, violent cult. When they stop blowing themselves up and prove to the rest of the world that they can function as reasoning adults, we can talk... Till then, any bank that begins to advertise Sharia-based products will lose my money... * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:39 PM EST 149. Tarek Fatah from Toronto, Canada writes: Dear Omar, I have no problem Muslims bying halal meat or Jews eating kosher food. However, I do have problems with selling pork labelled as halal meat and offering bacon as a kosher delight. Do you see the difference? If Citibank wishes to give me an interest-free loan; I would be delighted. However, when it hides the interest as 'admnistrative fee' or 'rent', this is immoral, unethical and blatantly dishonest. On top of that, when I iam warned by bank paid sheikhs that hell awaits me if I got to an ordinary bank, then I say, go to hell. * Posted 25/01/08 at 3:59 PM EST 150. farzana hassan from Mississauga, Canada writes: Syed Abbas wrote: Today's Islam is not what you grew up with. Today's Muslim youth is talking about resurgent, renaissant, vigourous Islam that is based on firm Koranic principles. It seems to me you are nothing more than a proponent of Tajdid or the renewal of pristine Islam while disingenously affirming your "unique" understanding of the Islamic faith. The two simply do not jive. If you are advocating a reversal to pristine Islam as your posts clearly indicate when you talk about "firm Koranic principles", then you are a salafi through and through. Please don't pretend otherwsie. The Koran certainly elevated the status of Muslim women within the ethos of seventh century Arabia but society has advanced far beyond those initial reforms. Koranic principles do not match modern understandings of what it means to be equal. The hijab represents subjugation as do other Koranic edicts. I am familiar with all the arguments about why these disparities are there and why thery are good for society, but these arguments are nothing more than justifications and rationalizations of continuing inequalities. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:00 PM EST 151. Lowen Wrainger from Canada writes: Don't tell me! This isn't about money, is it? Because if it isn't, then a lot of these posters in this section are un-interesting. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:01 PM EST 152. IEM Canadian from Everywhere, Canada writes: nuke 'em. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:10 PM EST 153. The Prytanis from Ottawa, Canada writes: Tarek Fatah writes: On top of that, when I iam warned by bank paid sheikhs that hell awaits me if I got to an ordinary bank, then I say, go to hell. ==== Aye, there's the rub. So, Sharia-compliant banking has higher margins, pays nothing to depositors, and is therefore MORE userous than regular banking. And, the same people who profit from it's use will tell their "flocks" that if they don't do it they get to burn. Fantastic. Let's hit that Joseph Conrad quote one more time: "All ambitions are lawful except those which climb upwards on the miseries or credulities of mankind." Mr. Fatah, keep on rockin' in the free world. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:12 PM EST 154. Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: Rabbi in Canada state for jews eating non kosher meat is a sin. Those same rabbis certify Kosher products. Is that process of having Rabbis certify products for a fee wrong? Islamic finance products in the end are the same result as is meat. The end cost and features are the same. The disclosure is given that the extra payment is rent and not interest. If a client is willing to pay more for a product, it is his own decision. I refer back to my past posted example: "If you have 3 frozen chickens at your grocery store one is kosher, halal and conventional. The end product is the same in all three cases but the cost of kosher and halal is higher. If people of that faith group want to buy blessed meat and pay higher, let them." Tarek your arguements for Shariah law do not fly with Shariah meat or Shariah finance. These are products for a specific community. As we have kosher, ethical, organic products as you state you have nothing aganist Islamic meat, there is no difference between Islamic Finance. I understand you do not want to open the doors to Shariah in Canada but we already have Shariah food as a product and Shariah finance as a product is no different. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:15 PM EST 155. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: farzana hassan: Many thanks for your input. Obviously you and I move in different circles. My Islam has been undergoing renewal for the last 1,400 years. I believe your Islam stopped that process after Baghdad fell to the Mongols. Tajdid, Salafi, Pristine, etc belong to a vocabulary that is news to me. I look at religions from the socio-economic lenses. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:17 PM EST 156. Gary Thomson from Surrey, BC, Canada writes: IEM(4:10),et al, aside, this has been a very interesting, informative, and CIVIL discussion. I have enjoyed the postings on this comment very much. My thanks to the contributors. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:26 PM EST 157. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: farzana hassan: A hijab is not a Muslim woman's obligation, but a believing woman's right. It is only meant for those select women who would rather choose than be chosen. There is nowhere in the Koran that asks ordinary Muslimas to don the Hijab. If you do not feel up to the mark than lay the hijab aside. But why belittle those strong women who would choose rather than be chosen? Go and display yourself and wait to be chosen. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:31 PM EST 158. Banofee Pie from Toronto, Canada writes: Syed, that's your opinion. If it's a woman's choice, than let it be her choice. Why do you have insert your male opinion about whether or not it's "strong"? Maybe it's not strong. Maybe it's forced upon her. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:44 PM EST 159. jalal zuberi from Atlanta, United States writes: Thank you Tarek Fateh for drawing the distinguishing between what should be mainstream Muslims' view of modern banking (halal) versus what the religious establishment would like us all unsuspecting Muslims to believe in favor of "Islamic Banking" for the benefit of few and deteriment of the common Muslims. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:44 PM EST 160. scamp the from Canada writes: Tarek Fatah writes "On top of that, when I iam warned by bank paid sheikhs that hell awaits me if I got to an ordinary bank, then I say, go to hell." You're more than free to do so as well as write lengthy articles about this. People are free to move their money to another bank if they so wish. But what you cannot do is push for laws banning it. Freedom is fundamental in western society. The last thing we need is more infringement on our freedoms. Something Tarek Fatah could use a lesson in, since his response to anything he disagrees with is to ban it. He's just as bad as any other Islamic fundamentalist...just on the left side of the equation. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:51 PM EST 161. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Banofee Pie: If Hijab is forced upon the women, then it ceases to be a symbol of her empowerment as the Koran or Mohammed meant it to be. This practice of forcing the women is practiced in Tribal Islam of the likes of Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan. However, these very people also believe in a different god and different Prophet to what is described in the Koran. The god of these Muslims is a homo-morphic being they call Allahg, and their prophet is an illiterate pedophile they call Mohammed. What else do you expect from these people. If they have devalued their god and their prophet then why worry about their devaluing their women? * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:52 PM EST 162. go west from Canada writes: Very good article, I'd like to read more on this. * Posted 25/01/08 at 4:54 PM EST 163. sriya wicks from Canada writes: Tarek Fatah - I must thank you for your courageous voice - a voice of reason and logic - when few voices are raised or heard on behalf of moderate muslims. I too heard that you have received many threats and had to pull back but I appreciated reading your commentary now as well as before on the MCC website. Syed you seem to be displaying a lot of hostility and veiled threats to the females who contradict or question you in this discussion - perhaps a demonstration of how empowered women are in your world? You stated several "facts" such as "young Muslim girls are more hijab-observant than their mothers - not only in Muslim countries, but especially in here the West. For them, the Hijab does not represent subjugation of women that it represents for you and your family, but their empowerment." Where are you getting these facts from? How do you know that young muslimahs are thinking? That wearing hijab is out of a sense of empowerment or because they have been tricked, cajoled or fearful of being murdered like Aqsa Parvez? Perhaps they are taught and have bought into attitudes like you have clearly stated - if you don't wear hijab it's because you are a lesser woman than those who do, a believing woman would do it, and really the best one "Go and display yourself" the attitude that if you don't wear it you must be one who likes to "display" herself. Phail at understanding the word misogyny much Syed? Another of the facts you share with us is "Islam is the fastest growing religion, especially in the West, and particularly among the intellectuals of the Left?" again the only places I have seen this "fact" is on islamist websites - where are these facts coming from and where's the research group? * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:00 PM EST 164. scamp the from Canada writes: BTW...i just read up on these islamic mortgages. Probably the biggest difference occurs is in risk taking. In a normal mortage, if you can't keep up the payments, the bank can reposses your house and you're left with nothing. In an Islamic mortgage there is shared risk. The islamic bank buys the house. You pay rent on the house plus an amount that goes towards owning the house. Every month, you own more and more of the house. So if you cannot keep up your payments, the islamic bank sells the house and you both get your share. So you see, their is shared risk, which prevents scrupulous loans...aka...sub prime loans would not have happened. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:07 PM EST 165. emran warsi from Toronto, Canada writes: Im agree100% with Omar Kalair ...well said "Islamic finance products in the end are the same result as is meat......... This is just a different style of banking thats all what it is. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:09 PM EST 166. John Robinson from Canada writes: Syed Abbas, Socrates has never been proven to have existed. It is theorized that he was probably a character created by Plato to illustrate through allegory. Plato has much less influence on Western Society than Aristotle. Further, to state that the West is Hellenistic is a bit misleading, you skip over the entire British Period that was built largely with a Roman influence. Granted, Romans were influenced by the Greeks but added much more than you seem to be allowing for. British Common Law isn't as Greek as you seem to make it out to be. You make some good points though. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:10 PM EST 167. Amna Bakhtiar from Canada writes: Alot of people are missing the point of this article. Tarek is not upset because people are using one form of 'banking' over another - that's not the case. The point is that a form of banking is being cloaked as "holy" and "pure" when it is NOT. Canadian muslims don't need to be saved by pseudo-religious banks. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:13 PM EST 168. Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: Today we have Islamic meat being cloaked as holy and pure as is kosher meat, where there is no scientic difference between the two. If practicing Muslims or Jews want to eat meat blessed according to ones faith and pay more for it and the rabbis and imams are already telling them if they don't they will sin what difference is it with Islamic finance products? Tarek Fatah accepts Islamic meat there should be no reason not to accept Islamic finance. In the end its a product, it is drastically different from the Shariah law in Ontario issue. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:23 PM EST 169. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: sriya wicks: I wish you had not made your remarks personal, but I shall answer anyway. Today in Toronto, young Muslim girls are much more hijab observant than when I landed here in 1968. All you need is a short trip to any school. The same is even more true in the US, especially black muslims girls. I have noticed that even those who were not observant 40 years ago have become so today, perhaps people become more conservative with age, but that does not explain the youth phenomenon. Hijab was never an issue in the West, but it has become one today. I wish I could quote statistics, but for that I need time. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world. Google it and find out the arguments and facts. Not because it is morally superior, but because it is based on Free Trade. It makes sense for our era. Christianity is losing faithful because it is agrarian based, and unrbanization is the law today. The Left in Europe is all enamoured with Islam. Roger Garaudy, the Second in Command of the French Communist Party was the first one to jump ship. I suggest you read his work. I could find many more examples. The principle reason is that in Mecca Mohammed was up against the Capitalist Umayyads, the Banker Abbasides, and the Trade Monopolists, and the Left sees itself against the same forces today. That is why the appeal to the Islam of Mohammed. I did not think these facts were up for dispute. John Robinson: I was using Arnold Toynbee's 1930s categories that their are 5 living civilizationg today: Hellenized West, Christian Russia, Islam, Indics, and the Sinics. Socrates must have existed because a reformer like him makes sense in the trade based economy of Athens, and Plato would have been a poor one. Mohammed succeeded in Mecca what Socrates failed to do in Athens. He was done in by Democracy. So much for free speech. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:24 PM EST 170. Steve Gibbons from Calgary, Canada writes: This is BS. We live in a secular culture. Screw it then, I want an interest free mortgage because Christ denounced the money lenders. Banking whores trying to work around laws to make another dollar. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:33 PM EST 171. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: John Robinson: Even today Europe is Hellenized, and America is Roman. The British Empire never sought inspiration from the Romans. The Greeks were civilized, and the Romans were inventive. British Common Law was inspired by anti-Mohammedan Medieval Muslims, and has all its negatives as well. The rule of the law is not justice. The Western Courts are that of Law, not Justice. The former is based on Laws made by men, the latter by restoring inalienable rights. Western Jurisprudence is moving away from the Common Law towards a system based on Rights, a corenerstone of Mohammed's Koranic jurisprudence. Mohammed was the first one in history to speak of "Haqq", or the Right. Before him we spoke of the Law - of Moses, Roman, Greek, etc. Later day Muslims reverted to the Law and Tradition - in effect our Common Law. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:34 PM EST 172. Ahmet Seker from Montreal, Canada writes: Thank you Mr. Fatah for answering my comment. However you talk about Muslims as vulnerable and ignorant people who are ready to be exploited and who need to be protected and enlightened. You mean that you try to "enlighten" Muslims about some evil plans of Mullahs and commercial banks. However as I mentioned in my first comment we do not need to be enlightened by anybody. It is true that some extremists try to enlighten us about Islam itself and they want to show us the true path. However there are some others like yourself who also would like to enlighten us about Islam and would like to show us the true path. At least philosophically where you stand is not different than where the extremists stand. Muslim Community is one of the most educated communities in Canada. Average education level of Muslims in Canada is much higher than the Canadian average. Why do you think that we are vulnerable or need to be enlightened by anybody. Why do you try to create a homogenous Muslim community who denounce Islamic banking or sharia courts in Ottowa. Why don't you just be happy about the fact that we have plurality among us. Of course you have right to express your own views and you may even hate from the "views" of some people but I think you should be respectful to the right of these people to have those views and their right of existence. However many "enlightened" Muslims in Canada do not respect the right of existence of other Muslims just like the extremists. For example they try to ban hijab just because they think it is not Islamic or just because they think that Muslim women are oppressed. I think this is not different from forcing Muslim women to wear hijab since some people think that it is required by Islam or to protect them from other men. No Muslim women are as mature as the women of any other community. They can decide themselves whether hijab is Islamic and whether they want to wear it. The same is true about Islamic banking or sharia courts. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:38 PM EST 173. DO GOOD from United States writes: . Syed Abbas, You say "I look at religions from the socio-economic lenses." You have also persisted that "Sharia interest laws are optimal for the Trade Based Economy. That is the way to the future, whether you like it or not." My post of was intended to solicit the intellectual foundations of your claims. Reference My Post: Posted 25/01/08 at 12:24 PM EST Instead, I got this response from you: "I wish I could answer your questions. "Sharia Banking" to me looks like cutting corners with Islam, that Muslims have done throughout history. Taking the easy way out. It is an attempt to "Westernize" Islam via the back door. I doubt wether it would work." Reference Your Post: Posted 25/01/08 at 12:47 PM EST Sir, not meaning to be offensive, I must still ask how you can make unsupported and what appear to be poorly thought out statements and say the opposite when questioned? How could I or anyone then consider you credible? You say "This external abstract god can not be destroyed." All ancient gods were destroyed. Roots of Allah stems from Egyptian gods Ra, Re, Ptah, Khnum and in particular Aten and Amun. The temple gods were not mobile. Moses was loosing power and control. Intangible, portable WAHWEY became the solution. Thus Moses led people to slaughter humanity and usurp fertile lands (Jws claim it's theirs by god). J*sus challenged the Jws. A Roman emperor was loosing power and control. Thus, the Bible was conceived. Power and control was restored with decisive persecution of opponents. And then there is Mohammad who also gained power. If you "look at religion from a socio-economic lens" do you not see how destructive it is. The gullible believe and are duped, but others challenge and discover the truth. Sir, have you ever challenged Allah to know if he is true or a delusion for power? . * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:42 PM EST 174. Lavrenty Beria from Canada writes: A very useful and informative article. of course, the very notion of a free lunch from the banks is a contradiction in terms. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:43 PM EST 175. Sydney R from Canada writes: One problem I have with this is whether I'm being charged the same in the long run for bank services as clients using the sharia route. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:49 PM EST 176. VA - Logic from Toronto, Canada writes: Its been a very long and interesting discussion but sadly its not helping to reach any consensus....while lot of people like Syed Abbas, Phil King...etc have presented their views (no doubt they were thought provoking) but nobody is really addressing the issue ... so here it is in very simple words: ISSUE: Does sharia banking needed in a secular society? My answer: No its not. Secular answer : Probably NO Action required to make sure something like Sharia banking is not introduced in our society: Talk to your bank ...share with them your concern...make sure they know how you feel abt this... If any bank still goes ahead with this whole sharia banking idea: My personal reaction: I will withdraw my money from that bank and invest it in some other bank which reflects secular values. Your Reaction : You decide Bottom line: Religion doesn't belong in public sphere whether its education, banking, politics or science. No religion gets special treatment. To the Critics: If you think its just a marketing thing or this will boost free trade then you just need to read a marketing or an economics book. Current banking system (though has its own flaws) is the best so far we have come across in many centuries. The most important characteristic of current banking system is that it is secular.. and i would seriously like to keep it that way. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:50 PM EST 177. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Peter Bojkov: Infidels were trade monopolists and constantly threatening economical life and well-being of Mohammed's city state of Medina. War is war, and your enemy has to be eliminated. Most of the 80 skirmishes and battles that Mohammed fought were within 10 miles of Medina, in a defensive posture. Should we insult our soldiers who killed over 15,000,000 Germans during WWII? BTW Infidel does refers neither to the followers of Jesus nor of Moses. So dont worry about your behind. Mr Abbas, who were these mysterious "infidel monopolists" threatening Muhammad's well-being and prosperity? Obviously, Muhammad had a family "economics" feud with the Quraish tribe to which he himself belonged, eh? Trying to take over the Ka'aba business in Mecca before his "economic" defeat and the subsequent Medina retreat? As for my behind, no, I cannot take it easy despite your generous reassurances. I AM worried for it, since in a Muslim-dominated society I would be a lowest of the low dhimmi, with all the socio-economic consequenses so dear to your heart. Mr Abbas, * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:53 PM EST 178. sriya wicks from Canada writes: Syed Abbas: "I wish you had not made your remarks personal, but I shall answer anyway." Why do you wish this? Is it because you thought you should be the only one able to make personal remarks e.g. to farzana hassan with "Go and display yourself"? Interesting. So after reading your answer if I understand correctly you have no backing for your facts other than personal observance. A fact without any basis in reality other than your own personal interpretation is actually just that - your personal opinion. Nothing wrong with that just when you counter other people's opinions with your "facts" a thinking person would have expected a little injection of reality other than, it's my opinion so it must be true and "I did not think these facts were up for dispute." * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:56 PM EST 179. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: DO GOOD: Koranic Economics is one thing, Sharia Banking is another. Koranic states clearly that interest is not lawful. Empirical evidence suggests that in trade based economy, the lower the interest rate, the higher the growth and society's welfare. The lowest interest rate in zero. Mohammed was a small businessman in the trade based era. Therefore, Koranic Economics makes perfect sense. Furthermore, taxing income limits production, spending encourages production. Taxing wealth discourages dead money. Koran asks people to make money active. "Sharia Banking" is a modern term, and Mr. Fatah states, an unholy alliance of Mullahs and Bankers. It has nothing to do with the Koran. All previous gods were destroyed because they were not abstract. They were either on Mt. Olympus, or like an absentee father in Heaven. Mohammed's Allah is omnipresent hence indestructible. Abstract entitities are by definition indestructible. The God of Moses was also abstract. But that of the Judahists is the Old Testament God that wrestles with Jacob all night and is defeated by him. The God of Jesus was also abstract, but that of Christians has a split personality. The God of Mohammed was abstract external, but that of Muslims is a homo-morphic destructible. This all has to do with weakening of their respective faiths. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:56 PM EST 180. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: sriya wicks: Your comments are much appreciated. * Posted 25/01/08 at 5:58 PM EST 181. W W from Canada writes: Can a Sharia financial product be sold by a non-Muslim person? If not then the financial institutions selling these products are potentially looking into a possible law suits against them for obstructing the free market. As the financial sector is heavily regulated (more than food and education), I can see lawyers lining up to go after these financial institutions. I wonder if the cost of the lawsuits has already been built into the cost of the product. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:02 PM EST 182. Intizar Zaidi from Montreal, Canada writes: It amazes me to see how Islamists come out of the wookworks to 'defend the indefensible'. When they cannot argue the merits of the case, they resort to the time-tested tool of fanatics--throw the charge of blasphemy to scare fellow Muslims. Tarek Fatah must be congratulated for making it possible for us liberal-minded, ordinary Muslims to speak out against the mullahs and imams of the Musim Brotherhood who stifle our voices and blackmail most of us into silence. Why would Omair or Ahmet pay heed to Syed Qutb or Hasan al-Banna who develped this ponzy scheme to make money in the name of God? Syed Qutb and Hassan al-Banna were Islamic extermists from Egypt and we don;t need their ideology in Canada. Those who wish to follow the world-wide jihad of the the Muslim Brotherhood are not welcome in Canada. I saw their bullying tactics in Brossard when they threatened MNA Fatima Houda-Pepin with defeat when she moved a motion in the Quebec Assembly banning Sharia law. She perservered and won twice, despiet threats from the local Islamist goons. Tarek Fatah faces the same threats and yet he contiues. Good for him. Thei so-called Islamic Banking is a fraud that has become a major racket. Western Banks have taken to Islamic banking not out of love for Islam or Muslims. Why? Because it is more profitable than standard banking. Its the same exploitation but with a new twist that allows them to charge more. In Saudi Arabia, banks have commitees of mullahs who look into various financial instruments to see whether they are "sharia compliant" or not. They charge a hefty fee for their advice. The hypocrites have been telling us not to have any dealings with banks because their earnings are "haram" (sinful) . They also advise people not to rent property to the banks or not to seek employment in banks. Yet the greedy charlatans don't bat an eye lid when the same money finds its way to their pockets. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:03 PM EST 183. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Peter Bojkov: The care of the Kaaba was already under the clan of Mohammed. It was hardly a business but a financial drain. Mohammed's uncle, Abu Talib, died in heavy debt because of his Kaaba responsibilities. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:04 PM EST 184. Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: Islamic Banking is in the UK and the US and no clients have pulled out funds from institutions such as HSBC NY, Lloyds TSB, Citibank, Credit Suisse, etc. You see ethnic marketing in all Canadian banks. Islamic Finance is simply another structured product for a specific community. If we want to boycott banks if they introduce Islamic products then might as well boycott your local grocery store that shelves Kosher and Islamic meat. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:06 PM EST 185. VA - Logic from Toronto, Canada writes: Syed Abbas: "Empirical evidence suggests that in trade based economy, the lower the interest rate, the higher the growth and society's welfare." Syed Abbas:"Furthermore, taxing income limits production, spending encourages production." Syed Abbas:"The lowest interest rate in zero." You are absolutely correct on all 3 statements but unfortunately there is difference between theories and real data....in theory we will achieve more growth at 0% interest but real world has lot more variables and when we adjust our theories to these variables ..what we get is interest rate that is healthy for everybody ..which is generally in ve ....0% is not a middle ground its the one the xtreme corners ... % is real wold can have unwanted consequences.. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:13 PM EST 186. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: Rabbi in Canada state for jews eating non kosher meat is a sin. Those same rabbis certify Kosher products. Is that process of having Rabbis certify products for a fee wrong? Islamic finance products in the end are the same result as is meat. The end cost and features are the same. The disclosure is given that the extra payment is rent and not interest. If a client is willing to pay more for a product, it is his own decision. I refer back to my past posted example: "If you have 3 frozen chickens at your grocery store one is kosher, halal and conventional. The end product is the same in all three cases but the cost of kosher and halal is higher. If people of that faith group want to buy blessed meat and pay higher, let them." Tarek your arguements for Shariah law do not fly with Shariah meat or Shariah finance. .." Mr Kalair, either you do not understand as a Muslim Islam, or you are attempting a TAQIYA. Islam, as Mr Abbas will gladly testify, is nor merely a religion: it's a socio-economic system that defines all socio-economic activities, moral, and behaviours of a Muslim, 24/7. Combined with an in-built assumption of a Muslim supremacy, which Mr Abbas has generously demonstarted in a number of posts, Islam requires that ALL its aspects be implemented, Sharia being just one of them, and nor solely in the dar al-Islam. So we're not talking here some exotic banking system, but an aspect of Islam implemeneted in a country governed by Common Law as a small, incremental step of an islamization process. Yes, Jews may have their Kosher products, but they do not have a religion which obliges them morally to spread their socio-economic (thanks, Mr Abbas) model and values over infidels, or eliminate (thanks, Mr Abbas) the dissenting infidels. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:16 PM EST 187. Tarek Fatah from Toronto, Canada writes: Many people have raised queries about sharia banking and this exchange does not provide enough room to respond. If you are interested in reading detailed analysis of this ponzi scheme and how it is related to the world-wide jihadi movement, please visit my blog on the subject. On the left hand column, there are two downloadable articles from Prof Omar Farooq of Oklahoma University and links to two other books that I quoted in my piece. Here is the link: http://nosharia.blogspot.com/ If you need to get in touch with me, please do not hesitate to e-mail me at: tarekfatah@rogers.com Cheers and good night! * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:18 PM EST 188. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: VA - Logic : In Macroeconomics, one deals with macro variables. The details are left to the micro-economics. The major policy decisions are Macro based. When the Feds see that production needs to be stimulated, they lower the interest rate. Zero interest rate does not sit well with those who have accumulated wealth, because they can not use the hoarded wealth to their greater advantage. The problem is not with production side, but with distribution side. Unless the Koranic distribution side is also implemented, a zero intereest policy may have unforeseen and possibly negative consequencies in a Capitalist economy. However, Koranic economics is for a free-enterprise, non-capitalist, free-trading, knowledge- based economy, not a Capitalist, Trading Block, Patent-based economy that pervades the West today. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:21 PM EST 189. emran warsi from Toronto, Canada writes: Its a product that sells to a community, if a community wants it they buy it. what a big deal......................... * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:21 PM EST 190. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: "Peter Bojkov: The care of the Kaaba was already under the clan of Mohammed. It was hardly a business but a financial drain. " Exactly, it was already under the Quraish tribe/clan. The other assertion of yours is an inaccuracy at best: the business was quite profitable, but Muhammad was not part of it. Did Gabriel's visitation have anything to do with that? * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:22 PM EST 191. Shahzad Siddiqui from Toronto, Canada writes: The Muslim World's Greatest Contribution to Modernity (Part 1) Tarek Fatah's headline is inflammatory and does not reflect the content of his article. To quote from another Tarek (El Diwany): "A few years ago, one occasionally heard scholars mentioning Michael Rowbotham on the subject of money creation by the commercial banking system. Although he does not believe that interest should be prohibited, the prominence of Michael’s work was a hopeful sign because his thesis on the monetary system is essentially correct. Like me he believes that the business model of commercial banking involves the creation of money out of nothing (fraud) and its subsequent lending at interest (riba). For Muslims to focus on narrow issues of contractual structure when the monetary framework has been corrupted in this manner, is to guarantee the failure of the Islamic finance experiment." The "Islamic finance experiment" probably represents the greatest contribution the Muslim world has made to modernity (and there have not been many). Mr. Fatah's words may apply to Citibank and HSBC. The raison d'etre of Islamic finance is to eliminate interest. Why would one trust the motives of those whose main reason for existence is to eat up interest? These suspect motives do not apply to young, dynamic firms emerging in the field. Like Ittihad Capital Inc. and Unicorn Investment Bank - the real future of Islamic finance. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:26 PM EST 192. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Peter Bojkov: The Care of the Kaaba was under the Bani Hashim. The leader of the Bani Hashim was Mohammed's uncle Abu Talib, Mohammed's keeper and protector. The Bani Hashim were also Qureish, the larger tribe. The "business" of keeping Kaaba was a financial drain that no other Qureish would want to undertake. I am afraid you are not making much sense anymore. Your knowledge of Islamic and Meccan history leaves much to be desired. With incorrect facts you will not draw correct inferences. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:28 PM EST 193. Shahzad Siddiqui from Toronto, Canada writes: The Muslim World's Greatest Contribution to Modernity (Part 2) "Dozens of Islamic scholars and imams now serve on sharia boards of the banking industry." One of these scholars referred to is Taqi Usmani. He was on the Sharia Appellate Board in the "Islamic" Republic of Pakistan. He wrote a judgment that within 1 year of his judgment all banks in Pakistan had to be interest-free. The inside word is that the World Bank called Pakistan and said "What the hell are you doing?" Taqi Usmani subsequently got sacked and now flies around the world advising various banks and finance houses. He's gone on record (see his book Introduction to Islamic Finance, available online) to say that all these products of compromise out there are necessary in a transitionary phase, but that is all they should be: transitionary. Islamic finance, after all, is a minnow in a sea of interest. With companies like Ittihad and Unicorn, however, there is hope. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:35 PM EST 194. DO GOOD from United States writes: . Syed Abbas, Your words "I look at religions from the socio-economic lenses." You have also persisted that "Sharia interest laws are optimal for the Trade Based Economy. That is the way to the future, whether you like it or not." My post of was intended to solicit the intellectual foundations of your claims. Reference My Post: Posted 25/01/08 at 12:24 PM EST Your response: "I wish I could answer your questions. "Sharia Banking" to me looks like cutting corners with Islam, that Muslims have done throughout history. Taking the easy way out. It is an attempt to "Westernize" Islam via the back door. I doubt wether it would work." Reference Your Post: Posted 25/01/08 at 12:47 PM EST YOU HAVE NO CREDIBLE EXPLANATION FOR YOUR DOUBLE TALK, BUT MORE DOUBLE TALK. You say "This external abstract god can not be destroyed." The gullible fear, believe and are duped. Like the propaganda of our governments, mass delusion is the source of religious power. THUS THEY KILL HUMANITY FOR THE GLORY OF THEIR GOD AUTHORITY. TO CREATE THIS GOD IS TO CREATE A DELUSION. DESTROY THE DELUSION AND YOU DESTROY THE GOD. QUESTION: Others challenge and discover the truth. Sir, have you ever challenged Allah to know if he is true or a delusion for power? No response. The gullible fear, believe and are trapped within a delusion. Simple minded people do believe in demons. SIR, YOU WILL NEVER KNOW TRUTH. YOU CANNOT BE FOUND CREDIBLE. . * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:35 PM EST 195. Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: To understand further about Islamic finance how it is simply a product as is Islamic meat one can review: Harvard Islamic Finance Project http://ifptest.law.harvard.edu/ifphtml/ HSBC Islamic Finance International Division http://www.hsbcamanah.com/1/2/hsbc-amanah/ LlyodsTSB Retail Islamic Financing in 2000 UK branches http://www.lloydstsb.com/currentaccounts/islamicaccount.asp http://www.lloydstsb.com/mortgages/islamichomefinance.asp Chicago Jewish Bank offering Islamic finance products www.devonbank.com Detroit based bank offering Islamic finance products www.universitybank.com As with Islamic meat clients, Islamic finance clients are simply looking for products that meet ones religious requirements. As society has no problem with Jewish meat or Islamic meat, Islamic Finance is the same. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:37 PM EST 196. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: DO GOOD: Many thanks for repeating your earlier post. May I refer to my earlier response at 5:56 PM. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:38 PM EST 197. Nargis Tapal from Toronto, Canada writes: I have been reading some of the posts by Muslim men comparing home mortagages to meat and groceries, and I shake my head in despair. Is it any wonder that so many non-Muslim Canadians find our demands on the rest of society, not only bizarre, but laden with arrogance with an attitude of entitlement. As a Muslim mother of two, having seen how, in my native Pakistan, Islamic banking failed its customers, but enriched its directors, I am wondering why people like emran, omair and ahmet would turn a blind eye to this fraud and defend the exploitation of their own community. Have they not seen that counties with Islamic banks, despite floating on oceans of oil, have failed societies, while other nations like India, with no natural resources and the traditional banking system, have achieved so much more for their people. What have these so-called Islamic banks contributed to their communities? Nothing. Unimaginable profits for their owners, and deprivation and backwardness for their communities. This Muslim woman will have nothing to do with Islamic Banking and will oppose every effort to bring this con job to Canada. I came to Canada to escape this nonsense, not to have it follow me here. All Canadians must and should oppose any banking that relies on Saudi and Pakistani laws * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:40 PM EST 198. Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: Intizar, I loved your posting. If we are immigrating to Canada, we should be busy with our own personal projects rather than teaching the merits of Islam to Canadians. And banks in Canada should be busy with standard banking while they are operating in Canada, not with some Islamic banking bullshit to rob customers. (Islamic banking is an illegal term for a bank to define its operations in Turkey. You are not allowed to sell a structured product named "Islamic" under the roof of a legitimate bank. You can open up some lesser institutions which are not regarded as reliable. One of them has recently converted itself into a bank and had to give an end to its interest-free ads. It did not ever even dare mention being Islamic. Remember that, the central government is very Islamic in here nowadays.) I go to Canada to be within a more secular society, not in a lesser one. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:49 PM EST 199. DO GOOD from United States writes: . Syed Abbas, Sir, I did not repeat my earlier post. You are now being disingenuous. Read the capitalized print repasted here but out of context. ) YOU HAVE NO CREDIBLE EXPLANATION FOR YOUR DOUBLE TALK, BUT MORE DOUBLE TALK. ) You say "This external abstract god can not be destroyed." The gullible fear, believe and are duped. Like the propaganda of our governments, mass delusion is the source of religious power. THUS THEY KILL HUMANITY FOR THE GLORY OF THEIR GOD AUTHORITY. TO CREATE THIS GOD IS TO CREATE A DELUSION. DESTROY THE DELUSION AND YOU DESTROY THE GOD. ) Sir, have you ever challenged Allah to know if he is true or a delusion for power? No response. The gullible fear, believe and are trapped within a delusion. Simple minded people do believe in demons. SIR, YOU WILL NEVER KNOW TRUTH. YOU CANNOT BE FOUND CREDIBLE. Sorry, I know the truth can hurt. . * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:50 PM EST 200. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Nargis Tapal: You decry that Islamic banking failed its customers, but enriched its directors. Is that anything new? Can you recall anytime in Islamic history after Mohammed that anything Islamic not fail its adherents and enrich its rulers, the Caliphs. Immediately after Mohammed died, the Caliphs sent the sword of Islam to terrorize the very people who had helped him in his struggles in Mecca - the Christians. The Ethiopean kindgom was the first to be decimated. In Spain, after 700 years of rule what Muslims left behind was the most perverted form of Christianity, the most ruthless and cruel, and the most exploitative. In 700 years of rule over India what remains is the Taj Mahal, where 22,000 skilled workers laboured 22 years for a useless monument to a dead queen. Only one king who ruled for a mere 4 years interested himself with what we called public works. In Baghdad, the Caliphs kept harems with hundreds of nubile women. In Istambul, the Caliphs did the same. Exploiting the hapless adherents made the nation the sick man of Europe. Fortunately, Kemal Pasha finished the Caliphate for good. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:53 PM EST 201. VA - Logic from Toronto, Canada writes: Syed Abbas: "In Macroeconomics, one deals with macro variables. The details are left to the micro-economics. Macro variables are decided so that it doesnt adversely affect micro variables e;g given below The major policy decisions are Macro based. When the Feds see that production needs to be stimulated, they lower the interest rate." The point i am trying to convey is that a positive interest rate helps in maintaining the balance in economy...you dont want everybody to go out and spend or invest everything in the economy .Individuals need to save also for future (which is by the way unpredictable by a high degree)....the hoarding that you are talking about is not only the result of greed but also to very high extent result of risk that is created by unpredictable future. Moreover 0% interest rate doesnt take into account inflation. e.g.: $100 in bank today at 0% interest rate will be worth less then $100 at inflation = 2% (current rate) in 1 year .. Net Change = Loss of value Production in the economy can only boosted to certain extent as we have limited resources....if we change our interest rate to 0% ...it will create tremendous pressure on the economy which will result in shortage of resources ( i.e supply) ...result = high inflation ....which will further erode the value of money. Final point: To keep our economy out of chaos we need an interest rate which is in ve and also which we can manipulate to achieve desired results ..what ever they may be .. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:53 PM EST 202. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: "Peter Bojkov: The Care of the Kaaba was under the Bani Hashim. The leader of the Bani Hashim was Mohammed's uncle Abu Talib, Mohammed's keeper and protector. The Bani Hashim were also Qureish, the larger tribe. The "business" of keeping Kaaba was a financial drain that no other Qureish would want to undertake. I am afraid you are not making much sense anymore. Your knowledge of Islamic and Meccan history leaves much to be desired. With incorrect facts you will not draw correct inferences. " Mr Abbas, you'd better substantiate your assertions. I could have provided numerous links to back my post, but deliberately chose The Sacramento Muslim association's website: Rejection (of Muhammad) As the ranks of Muhammad's followers swelled, he became a threat to the local tribes and the rulers of Mecca. Their wealth, after all, rested on the Kaaba, the focal point of Meccan religious life. If they threw out their idols, as Muhammad preached, there would be no more pilgrims, no more trade, and no more wealth. Muhammad’s denunciation of the Meccan traditional religion was especially offensive to his own tribe, the Quraysh, as they were the guardians of the Ka'aba. Muhammad and his followers were persecuted. Some of them fled to the Ethiopian Kingdom of Aksum and founded a small colony there under the protection of the Christian Ethiopian king (called Al-Negashi, or "The King"). I noticed numerous pretentious, totaly unsubstantiated generalizations in your posts. Pls provide CREDIBLE links to your dubious assertions. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:54 PM EST 203. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: DO GOOD: For a detailed discussion of God I refer you to a treatise by Karen King published in 1995. It will answer your questions better. Logic dictates that abstract entities are indesctructible. The Abrahamic gods are based on the Ultimate Reality, and are not illusions. You can not destroy the reality around you. * Posted 25/01/08 at 6:59 PM EST 204. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: VA - Logic: Today's economy can not function without interest, just as it can not function without taxation. Capital Asset Pricing Model will tell you what debt/equity ratio will maximize the value of the firm, and this value is not 0. But the point I am trying to make is that above zero interest rate is sub-optimal and inefficient. A lot has to change before zero interest would make sense. It requires a virtual revolution, and the likes of that I do not see on the horizon unless we have a super crash like the 1930s. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:03 PM EST 205. Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: Syed, you are one of the few safe-to-approach-looking Muslims, therefore can I dare ask you if I correctly understand you? Do you say that Islam has been consistently failing for 15 centuries but there are marvellous times ahead? By the way, I personally thank you for your pro-Ataturk post. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:07 PM EST 206. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Peter Bojkov: You still do not make any sense. The Meccans still ended up throwing out the idols, but the pilgrims keep on coming. Today, more than 3,000,000 visit per year during hajj alone. After the fall of Mecca, it stopped being the trading post that it once was. The trade patterns changed. After the fall of Meccan, the Capitalists left the locale and set shop in Syria and installed themselves as rulers. So much for your theory. Your statement that as Mohammed's adherents grew, he became a threat to his enemies. Would you expected the opposite? Sorry mate: Better luck with some other poster. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:10 PM EST 207. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: Said Abbas: But the point I am trying to make is that above zero interest rate is sub-optimal and inefficient. A lot has to change before zero interest would make sense. It requires a virtual revolution, and the likes of that I do not see on the horizon unless we have a super crash like the 1930s. Interesting, the Japanese should have kept the zero-interest miracle they adopted in their desperation in dealing with deflation. Obviously, they do not inhabit your utopia, Mr Abbas. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:11 PM EST 208. DO GOOD from United States writes: . Syed Abbas, There is much I too can refer you to. I do not find your elusive double talk credible. The zealous will never know truth. Thank you for your response. . * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:12 PM EST 209. DO GOOD from United States writes: . Syed Abbas, One more thing: You say "Logic dictates that abstract entities are indesctructible." A DELUSION IS NOT AN ENTITY. There goes your logic. . * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:15 PM EST 210. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: Syed, you claimed the Ka'aba business was a financial drain on the Quraish clan. I claimed it was profitable, but Muhammad was not part of it, as confirmed by your fellow Muslims in Sacramento. Revisit your history before indulging in ad hominem. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:18 PM EST 211. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Simon Garth: You read me right. Prophets are only that. They show the way to the future. Moses brought a new system for the Pastoral era. He failed, but his ways triumphed many centuries later under David and Solomon. Jesus brought a new system 2,000 years ago for the agrarian economy. He was a failure in his life, but his system did flower 1,000 years later in the European Middle ages. Later it was overtaken by the Western Hellenism after the 17th century. Mohammed brought a new system 1,400 years ago for the trade based era. He partially succeeded in his life in Medina. But after his death the usual happened. The revolution was overturned. But the principles remain. As we enter the trade base era globally, Mohammed's values are taking root. For the last 200 years the West is adopting Koranic values lock stock and barrel. The recent concept of Rights is a Mohammedan invention. So is free trade. Watch for the coming times. If Mohammed would not go to the mountain, the mountain is coming to Mohammed. The Muslims have failed over the past 14 centuries. But Islam never failed. Islam of Moses triumphed under David and Solomon. Islam of Jesus triumphed in Europe in Medieval times. Islam of Mohammed is triumphing today. Better days are still to come. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:19 PM EST 212. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Peter Bojkov: I thank you for your latest comment. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:23 PM EST 213. Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: DO GOOD from United States writes: Syed Abbas, One more thing: You say "Logic dictates that abstract entities are indesctructible." A DELUSION IS NOT AN ENTITY. There goes your logic. DO GOOD, the awful truth is that, you are correct and Syed is telling the reality: Please destruct God if you can. I promise I will worship you, as I had enough of God or Allah around. You cannot destruct something that does not exist. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:24 PM EST 214. VA - Logic from Toronto, Canada writes: Syed Abbas: "above zero interest rate is sub-optimal and inefficient" well in theory yes it is ....but on the contrary we never had 0% interest in the history of mankind... the consequences of 0% interest rate are unknown...so to assume that 0% will be more efficient in real world is just plain wrong. There is no real life situation where 0%interest results in high gains to the economy as a whole. Syed Abbas: "A lot has to change before zero interest would make sense. It requires a virtual revolution" You mean the revolution which we have witnessed in last century doesn't address our financial needs well enough and that we need to borrow financial ideas from medieval people who by the way never achieved complexity that our current financial system reflects. We are in 21st century ..and we need 21st century solutions to financial needs..and the way i see it the virtual revolution that you are talking abt is something that ignores one major variable i.e : risk Syed Abbas: "that I do not see on the horizon unless we have a super crash like the 1930s." hahhaha this statement means nothing..... revolution can occur anytime ..revolution depends on the need and not ...recession or crash in the economy... * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:28 PM EST 215. Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: Syed, tell me if I shall ever witness the beauty of Islam. You know we mortals die. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:29 PM EST 216. sriya wicks from Canada writes: Hmmmm why do you all bother to repeatedly question a person who states extravagant claims and opinions as fact without any basis and does not respond with much logic? Without hope our world would not be a good place... but this person has not demonstrated himself able to carry a logical argument, deflects argument onto something else when challenged and contradicts himself when questioned. So fellow G&Mers - maybe hope of carrying a logical conversation with him is not warranted. It's much like ignoring the troll... * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:29 PM EST 217. Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: And tell me Syed why anyone should risk his/her money for 0% return. For sentimental reasons? That is a Nat King Cole song. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:33 PM EST 218. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: VA - Logic: You said the key word - risk. Any interest rate above zero introdues a positive risk. I know a number of colleagues who took loan risks and lost their businesses because the banks called the loans. Had the banks invested instead, they would still be in business. Mohammedan economics is about reducing risk in an uncertain times. All elements of his system - universality, justice, peace, Rights, knowledge, and free trade are inter-related, and meant to reduce risk. You remove one element and risk increases. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:35 PM EST 219. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: Syed Abbas: "The Muslims have failed over the past 14 centuries. But Islam never failed." Yep, first it was Poitier, then Vienna, and tomorrow the demise of the internal combustion engine. Miraculously, the petrodollars, the high birth rates and a few hundred hate/supremacy verses/hadiths keep the rocking boat afloat. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:38 PM EST 220. Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: Sriya wicks from Canada, I as a radical atheist, support Syed's presence in here. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:38 PM EST 221. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Simon Garth: As I stated earlier, the least risky investment is one where you complement it with your own skills. Intelligent investment is favored by Koran. Dumb investment, where you provide loan or equity in someone else's business, is risky and not favored by Islam. A modern example is Microsoft. Never been in debt, mostly owned by employees. Great return in Equity. Bill Gates does not tire in telling outside people not to invest in Microsoft because it is over-valued. Now that is class. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:39 PM EST 222. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Peter Bojkov: Many thanks for your latest in-depth comment. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:43 PM EST 223. VA - Logic from Toronto, Canada writes: Syed Abbas: "Any interest rate above zero introdues a positive risk" A positive risk also demands higher return .....what will zero risk demand? Syed Abbas: "I know a number of colleagues who took loan risks and lost their businesses because the banks called the loans. Had the banks invested instead, they would still be in business".. Did you ever considered that your colleagues lacked the skills to run a successful business...if i can put in other words you mean that 0% interest will ensure that every business will be a success...success depends on lot of variables, and not just interest rate ... Syed Abbas; "Mohammedan economics is about reducing risk in an uncertain times." Another statement with no meaning ..there is no precedent in our history that says 0% interest will reduce risk in uncertain times ..where as the truth is that we manipulate current positive value to achieve desired results ..whatever they may be ..getting out of an recession..boosting the production...encourage spending..encourage saving... All elements of his system - universality, justice, peace, Rights, knowledge, and free trade are inter-related, and meant to reduce risk. You remove one element and risk increases" Syed Abbas:Mohammedan economics is about mixing philosophy and religion with finance and economics. universality, justice, peace, Rights, knowledge, and free trade are inter-related, and meant to reduce risk. You remove one element and risk increases"....all these exist in current financial system ....your point was? * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:51 PM EST 224. Tarek Fatah from Toronto, Canada writes: Dear Omair, Notwithstanding the bizarre comparison you make between meat and banks, I was struck by your definition of Devon Bank as a "Chicago Jewish Bank." How did you come to the conclusion that Devon is a "Jewish Bank"? If Devon is described by you as Jewish, would CitiBank be labelled Christian and ICCIC as a Hindu Bank? Here is how Devon Bank describes itself: "Devon Bank opened originally as the Devon North Town State Bank on June 9, 1945, just before the end of World War II. Our founders were local merchants who believed that the community known then as North Town, on Chicago’s north side, would benefit from a community bank. Today, 61 years later, Devon Bank has remained an independent community bank with deep roots in our communities and with the dedicated customer commitment envisioned by our founders. Owned and operated by the Loundy family since 1953, Devon Bank has grown gracefully, along with our customers and our communities. Today we have 16 locations including four full service offices and twelve senior residence facilities." What part of the above description made the bank Jewish? Or do they offer Jewish baking products? Brother, what world are you guys stuck in? Which century of the past has entrapped your mind? Will you now ask for a Sharia Automibile or an Islamic Airplane or Halal fiction? * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:52 PM EST 225. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Simon Garth; will you ever witness the beauty of Islam? Simon, that depends upon whether you are a Believer - in the Law of Moses, or the Love of Jesus, or the Justice of Mohammed. The Koran does not even guarantee the bliss to the Muslims. But it confirms unconditionally that the Believers shall achieve salvation. And by your own admission, you are not a believer. Just as the Islam of Moses was a Tribe based religion, and the Islam of Jesus emphasized the Family, the Islam of Mohammed is an individual based religion. It is possible to live a Koranic life anywhere on earth, in any political system. The socio-economic decisions regarding no interest loans can be practiced by anyone who believes in the Divine Truths as brought by Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed. One must not look at the perverted Jews, Christians, and Muslims for what the religion is like. It is your individual decision. There is no compulsion. * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:56 PM EST 226. DO GOOD from United States writes: . Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: DO GOOD from United States writes: Syed Abbas, One more thing: You say "Logic dictates that abstract entities are indesctructible." A DELUSION IS NOT AN ENTITY. There goes your logic. DO GOOD, the awful truth is that, you are correct and Syed is telling the reality: Please destruct God if you can. I promise I will worship you, as I had enough of God or Allah around. You cannot destruct something that does not exist. --- Simon Garth, Not sure if you read my previous posts. You may have taken my statement with minimal thought. ) IF you believe in a god, you are DELUDED. There is no reality to god or gods, for it/they are a fabrication(s) of (wo)man or (wo)men. ) Destroying the delusion refers to no longer living in it. A delusion is not an thing that you physically destroy. Thus, destroy the delusion and you destroy the God, for God is a delusion. I destroyed my god authority. Only you can destroy yours, IF it infests your mind. If Syed Abbas ever challenged Allah, he would discover the delusion, the corruption and the evil. He would terminate his delusion. OH PLEASE DON'T WORSHIP ME SIMON. Like the propaganda of our governments, mass delusion is the source of religious power. THUS THEY KILL HUMANITY FOR THE GLORY OF THE POWER. POWER CORRUPTS AND GIVES RISE TO EVIL. Example: "When the LORD your God places these people in your POWER and you defeat them, YOU MUST PUT THEM ALL TO DEATH. DO NOT MAKE AN ALLIANCE WITH THEM OR SHOW THEM ANY MERCY." (Deuteronomy 7.2) AND THE ISRAELITES SLAUGHTERED EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD, and took their land and all possessions. . * Posted 25/01/08 at 7:59 PM EST 227. DO GOOD from United States writes: . Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Simon Garth; will you ever witness the beauty of Islam? --- Syed Abbas, Will you ever witness the beauty of truth? . * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:04 PM EST 228. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: VA - Logic: The discussion is about risk, not return. Seeking higher return is greed. Correct. They may have lacked business sense. But the beauty of a robust system is to protect you from the possible mistakes you can make. "Mohammedan economics is about mixing philosophy and religion with finance and economics" You make a valid observation. Any Muslim will confim that there is no separation between the profane and the spiritual in Islam. .... universality, justice, peace, Rights, knowledge, and free trade are inter-related, and meant to reduce risk. You remove one element and risk increases".... all these exist in current financial system. No. These do not exist in current system. There is no universality, except for people within a national boundary, and even there, it is breaking down. You forget about the debate over medical costs in Canada. Justice - The Western Courts are Courts of Law. One retired Chief Justice of Ontario confided to me in private that most Judges and Lawyers in canada can not differentiate between Law and Justice. The situation is a bit better down south. Peace - well, why are we in Afghanistan? Free Trade - so what is the NAFTA, EEC, etc. Just try importing a day's groceries from the US and see a 15% duty slapped over at the customs. Try importing a car from the US. Sir, you are not grounded in reality. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:06 PM EST 229. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: DO GOOD: Witnessing the beauty of truth in a Democracy? The last time someone who tried it was forced to drink Hemlock. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:08 PM EST 230. Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: DO GOOD from United States, perhaps what I wrote to you was too ironically worded that you were puzzled. I reverbalise: I have no God to destroy since my birth, I think God is for peasants or crooks, and worshipping you was a joke. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:09 PM EST 231. sriya wicks from Canada writes: Re: Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: Sriya wicks from Canada, I as a radical atheist, support Syed's presence in here. How is your radical atheism relevant to what I said? Anyway I am out of this - goodnight and peace. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:13 PM EST 232. VA - Logic from Toronto, Canada writes: Syed Abbas, You are too inclined towards religion and less towards financial and economic concepts. You are using terms like " Mohammedan Economics" which do not even exist .. economics is something that is universal .. there is no Mohammedan economics or as a matter of fact Christian economics. "Mohammedan Economics" is just lot of religion mixed with little economics.....while this might not have serious financial consequences but it definitely provides one more weapon to the religious fanatics. while you might be supporting this idea with all good intentions but the people who will use it or will implement it will not and this is where the trouble begins....Not everybody is "Syed Abbas"...people with wrong intentions will totally build on this whole sharia idea and will try to exploit every opportunity they get ... So my suggestion to you ..for the sake of secular society we all have to stress less on our religious views and more on fundamentals of secular society...and this sharia idea doesn't click with secular society.... * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:17 PM EST 233. DO GOOD from United States writes: . Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: DO GOOD: Witnessing the beauty of truth in a Democracy? The last time someone who tried it was forced to drink Hemlock. --- Syed Abbas, You misunderstand and extrapolate for disingenuous argument. I did not say "Will you ever witness the beauty of truth IN A DEMOCRACY?" I said "Will you ever witness the beauty of truth?" THE TRUTH ABOUT THE FABRICATION AND EVILS OF THE RELIGIONS AND THE ALLAHS THAT YOU ARE DISCUSSING. Only then will you know TRUE honesty, TRUE humanity and TRUE peace that comes forth, when you are not defending those demons. . * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:21 PM EST 234. Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: Syed, I know Koran guarantees nothing even if you do everything it orders. I enjoy it at nights when I feel like being inspired for my crime fiction stories. So why not take the risk and ignore the unguaranteed manual of heaven? After all, there will be lots of ingredients for the barbecue parties of hell, we will not be the only dishes. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:21 PM EST 235. Omar Kalair from Toronto, Canada writes: Dear Tariq. I did a quick search on Devon Bank (who offer Islamic finance products and proundly state they are Jewish) and came up with these media articles: Chicago Sun article September 2, 2003 BY TAMMY CHASE quotes: "Devon Bank in Chicago, a Jewish family-owned bank, launched Muslim real estate and business-loan products in January 2003 in one of the country's most diverse neighborhoods. It joined a handful of traditional financial institutions, including HSBC in New York and University Bank in Michigan, in exploring the Muslim market." USAToday quotes: "At a time where Muslim and Jewish relations are deeply strained around the world, the Rogers Park bank, owned by the Loundy family, a Jewish family prominent on the North Side, has found a way to help the orthodox Islamic population buy homes. " http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/general/2005-02-24-islamic-finance-usat_x.htm Muslim clients are happy to do business with Jews or any other non-Muslims as our Prophet Muhammad himself did business with others. If any community asks for a product for its member may it be ethical, organic, religious, kosher, Canada gives the freedom as long as we are obeying the laws of the land and not harming others. Islamic meat is acceptable to you which has scholars who certify it and are paid a fee and it is a higher price. I see no reason why Islamic financial products would be any different then Islamic meat. All major supermarkets sell Islamic meat as they sell Jewish meat. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:23 PM EST 236. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Simon Garth: To each his own. There is no compulsion in religion. I read the Koran not only for its poetic symbolism, but also for its socio-economic relevance. I read the Bibles too for the same purpose. The Koranic model of the psyche, is post-modern. Its psychology is prescriptive, rather than the Western descriptive. I find most facinating that the Oedipus myth is just opposite of the Abraham sacrificing his son. Now there is a valid reason for clash of two systems. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:29 PM EST 237. Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: Okay Syed, it was a pleasure to chat with you, good night. See you on some other discussion. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:33 PM EST 238. DO GOOD from United States writes: . Simon Garth from istanbul, Turkey writes: DO GOOD from United States, perhaps what I wrote to you was too ironically worded that you were puzzled. I reverbalise: I have no God to destroy since my birth, I think God is for peasants or crooks, and worshipping you was a joke. --- Yes, I am aware of what you said. I can read. That is why my post used the word "IF" going to the extent of capitalizing IF, since you are not the only one who would read that post. This is a public discussion board and my posts are public messages. Further, it was you who stated: "You cannot destruct something that does not exist." That called for an explanation as you took me too literally. . * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:37 PM EST 239. Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: Simon Garth: Many thanks, and good night. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:39 PM EST 240. Sarfaraz Haq from Canada writes: What's the big deal Tarek? Businesses are private institutions and have every right to cater to the needs of its clients, what ever they may be, as long as they meet Canadian banking regulatory requiremetns. Tarek, as you are excercising your right to free expression thousands of us who want to see alternate financial modes have the right to debate and demand our rights. Your farce knowledge of the religion and finance does not give you the right to become a spokes person for the majority of Muslims. If you expand your narrow minded knowledge you will find that American banks already offer Christians 'ethical' mutual funds and environmentalists 'green' mutual funds, so how are Sharia-compliant loans any different? Tarek we live in a society that is plural and catering to diverse needs, you may have a position on this issue but it's not the only one. Open up your thought process and get off the band wagon of Islamophobia. For a proponent of liberalism and the one who wants to be known as such, your interference with commercial transactions between two consenting private parties is unwarranted and unethical. * Posted 28/01/08 at 2:09 PM EST 241. Peter Bojkov from Vaughan ON, writes: Syed Abbas from Toronto, Canada writes: "To each his own. There is no compulsion in religion." But there is too much compulsion voiced by Muhammad, PBUH, to convert to a certain religion. Or Mohammad maybe is not part of THAT religion? * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:43 PM EST 242. L Harder from Canada writes: After reading the discussion, the concept of infidel even in the broadest most generous spirit started to bother me. Far too easy to label a dissident, crush an opponent, or persecute someone out of ignorance of the complex system to which one belongs. The term infidel probably belongs on an intellectual trash heap. Potentially very destructive. It was interesting that hibabs and sharia banking topics came together for a while. Perhaps there is a common theme of identity and separation between the two. In my Christian upbringing, separation from the world was a part of my life too. Having overcome it in my secular life, I feel saddened that people are would hold on to a narrow world view rather than explore the larger world out there. How many bright kids are held back by this. Thanks for the comment Phil King: I don't fit in very well with any organization, and I'm afraid I would either get kicked out, or leave out of frustration. I'm probably a bit more cynical than you, seeing the bad as well as the good and have a bit of understanding why both happen. Both are interesting topics. Just a note or wisdom or stupidity depending on ones' perspective. Intellectual concepts are useful descriptions of what is going on around us. However, they inevitably fail because the world is bigger, more subtle, more complicated and tricky than any of us can imagine. * Posted 28/01/08 at 8:54 PM EST 243. VA - Logic from Toronto, Canada writes: "The discussion is about risk, not return. Seeking higher return is greed. Correct". Not Correct ! .....risk and return are intertwined ...there is no return if there is no risk involved. They way you are defining higher return as greed is very narrow thinking ...higher return doesnt necessarily result from greed ...higher return is an incentive for people to work hard...and do their best ...its about material world demanding more materialistic objects (nothing wrong with it until you look it thru lens of religion).....and i can see that you have a conflict with this view... ...u see thats why secular society wants separation of religion from other fields coz religion sees material world as sickness whereas truth is material world is reality ..people demand more..its human nature ...to suppress higher return will be too suppress humans and their growth. May be the whole problem is that you are looking through the lens of Islam ...for a second be just human ...not a musLim ..just yourself..and as yourself ...THINK ...does Mohammedan economics really makes sense in a secular society?... I must say u have lot of personal opinions and very few logical statements. You are telling me personal stories ..i can tell you 100 stories that i know... i can give 100 examples of peace..free trade..love ...etc ...but stories doesn't prove anything ...but facts do .. Sir ...i might not be grounded in religious reality but i have got very strong roots in real secular world. and this is what motivates me to reason. * Posted 25/01/08 at 8:46 PM EST 244. Vic Hotte from Kettleby, Canada writes: Here in Canada, it seems the politicians have busily been carving up the population by culture, costumes, recipes, songs, complexion, religion, even education ... it was just a matter of time until the banks got into the act because the banks really go in for golden idols and graven images. There seems to be a problem here with the religious model though -- everyone who believes in God, say "aye!" Now, look around and watch how they split themselves up into various factions, even though we are only talking about the main religions that basically "share" different versions of the same Good Book: Muslims, Christians and Jews. Lots of strife and fighting among the followers who can't agree on anything, except God loves them. Now, all those who don't believe in God, raise your hands. * Posted 29/01/08 at 2:23 PM EST As Albert Einstein said, "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." It is up to the reader to decide if Mr. Fatah is a "Great spirit" or a "mediocre mind". This article comes from IslamBank.Community :: Easing the Burden on Humanity :: Home of Gen M - The Interest-Free Generation http://tyo.ca/islambank.community/ The URL for this story is: http://tyo.ca/islambank.community/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=4002