What is (sic) my thoughts?

My thoughts is that you're speaking a load of crap.

Goto MCCA, the main Islamic bank in Australia and apply for a loan... they're open to anyone. Be careful though, once they get you trapped into a home loan they'll force you to convert to Islam or pay jizya on top!! 

If nonmuslims have to pay jizya and muslims don't, that is discriminatory on the grounds of religion.


Can the nonmuslim world SUE muslims for discrimination ?

jordan484 wrote on Mar 4^th, 2009 at 8:46am:




jordan,

Nice try.

Holding your breathe for that simple reply.

But you are turning blue!!

Breathe, breathe!





Quote:



Even if a muslim said such a loan was not discriminatory against non-muslims, going on past experience,
.....I WOULD NOT BELIEVE A WORD A MUSLIM SAID.

Ok, so I think I'll take that as a no.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 6^th, 2009 at 7:09am:


Why would I assume all muslims in Australia would know each other, and even if I did, what does that have to do with my question? What I did assume was a muslim would know the answer to what is seemingly a basic question about Islamic banking, I highly doubt you do not know the answer. I suspect, however, you do not want to give it as it may show Islam being discriminatory against non muslims.

I guess the question to jordan would be, does the ANZ offer non-interest-bearing accounts that Muslims can use? A simple yes or no response is all that's required.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 6^th, 2009 at 9:59am:

Tell you what, you answer my question first, and I'll consider answering yours when you explain how non Islamic banks discriminate on the basis of religion.

Sprint,

I said interest-free accounts, not fee free accounts.

Jordan,

So you know off hand if the ANZ offers interest free accounts?

Anyway I'm sure you can see now the ridiculous nature of your question, and of your 3-post demand that I answer it, and subsequent dismay when I did not (in a timely fashion).

You're a goose really.

Abu - I thought you meant fee free accounts.

I am sure any bank would agree to pay someone no interest on their deposit if that is what they wanted.
Is that what you meant ?
I'ld be happy to borrow money at 0% interest

Jordan,

Quite simply put, I have no idea whether MCCA discriminate against non-Muslim clients (As I said, ask them), my guess would be no, since they're an Australian company running by Australian laws... Then again, anyone with half a neuron woulda come to that conclusion in the first few milliseconds of the discussion.

Hence my question to you about ANZ, as I was pretty sure you too wouldn't know the answer off the top of your head, and neither would I expect you to go and reasearch for me, yet you seem to think that's my life long ambition.. to answer your petty ridiculous questions.

So no secretiveness, no arrogance, no deflection, simply don't know enough about them to answer... but really come on, the question is ridiculous to begin with.

Sprint,

Quote:


Surprisingly they won't, unless they already have special accounts available like that. I used ANZ in this example, as I happen to know they do offer interest free accounts. See something good (halal) did come across the Tasman after all 

Quote:


Better drop your hatred for everything Islamic then, and get down to your local MCCA branch and sign up.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 6^th, 2009 at 3:05pm:


Then that's all you should have put as your answer when I first asked. No arrogance, no deflection, no secretiveness and no abuse, and no need for the long, protracted thread with the lap dog terrier yapping madly about.

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 6^th, 2009 at 7:09am:


The same way people can choose if they want muslim institutions like schools, mosques, and islamic banks to move in their area. If they say NO that's hardly discrimination as well. Do you agree?

Do muslim banks aprove loans to islamic terrorist organisations or their proxies?

lestat - so the anz and the CBA do not discriminate on belief??

And how does islamic banking financially exist ?
they take a cut of the profit of a successful business loan ?

Abu - sounds fair enough. One of my mates runs a business and does the same thing.

pt2.

It was devised in the mid-20th century by the ideologues who promoted the radical Islamism that threatens us today.

They advocated sharia finance as element of a separate, self-sustained Islamic order with its own Islamic ideology, Islamic politics and Islamic economics that taken together would guarantee an Islamic way of life and ultimately the Islamic state as the first step toward establishing Muslim rule worldwide.

As Britain’s government and banks congratulate themselves on the stunning growth of sharia banking in the UK, do any of them have the slightest

abu_rashid wrote on Mar 9^th, 2009 at 5:39am:


If only it were as fringe as the moon landings were hoaxes.....

http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/testimony/22.pdf

Regrettably the use of sharia banking and zakat for the financing of terror is a reality. Although I know Abu does not wish us to know about that. So any good dhimmis out there, please ignore the report.


Quote:

U.S. Tracks Saudi Bank Favored by Extremists
Officials Debated What To Do About Al Rajhi, Intelligence Files Show

By GLENN R. SIMPSON

JIDDA, Saudi Arabia -- In the 1940s, two Bedouin farm boys from the desert began changing money for the trickle of traders and religious pilgrims in this then-remote and barren kingdom. It was a business built on faith and trust, Sulaiman Al Rajhi once told an interviewer, and for many years he would hand gold bars to strangers boarding flights in Jidda and ask them to give the gold to his brother on their arrival in Riyadh.

Today, Mr. Al Rajhi is a reclusive octogenarian whose fortune is estimated at $12 billion. And Al Rajhi Bank grew into the kingdom's largest Islamic bank, with 500 branches in Saudi Arabia and more spread across the Muslim world.

Following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the bank also set off an intense debate within the U.S. government over whether to take strong action against its alleged role in extremist finance. Confidential reports by the Central Intelligence Agency and other U.S. agencies, reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, detail for the first time how much the U.S. learned about the use of Al Rajhi Bank by alleged extremists, and how U.S. officials agonized over what to do about it.

After 9/11, the Saudi monarchy pledged its full support in the fight against global terrorism. And following violent attacks inside the kingdom in the next two years, the Saudis did launch major strikes against militants operating on their soil. But the Saudi government has been far been less willing to tackle the financial infrastructure essential to terrorism. U.S. intelligence reports state that Islamic banks, while mostly doing ordinary commerce, also are institutions that extremism relies upon in its global spread.

As a result, the Bush administration repeatedly debated proposals for taking strong action itself against Al Rajhi Bank, in particular, according to former U.S. officials and previously undisclosed government documents. Ultimately, the U.S. always chose instead to lobby Saudi officialdom quietly about its concerns.

The U.S. intelligence reports, heretofore secret, describe how Al Rajhi Bank has maintained accounts and accepted donations for Saudi charities that the U.S. and other nations have formally designated as fronts for al Qaeda or other terrorist groups.

In addition, Mr. Al Rajhi and family members have been major donors to Islamic charities that are suspected by Western intelligence agencies of funding terrorism, according to CIA reports and federal-court filings by the Justice Department.

A 2003 CIA report claims that a year after Sept. 11, with a spotlight on Islamic charities, Mr. Al Rajhi ordered Al Rajhi Bank's board "to explore financial instruments that would allow the bank's charitable contributions to avoid official Saudi scrutiny."

A few weeks earlier, the report says, Mr. Al Rajhi "transferred $1.1 billion to offshore accounts -- using commodity swaps and two Lebanese banks -- citing a concern that U.S. and Saudi authorities might freeze his assets." The report was titled "Al Rajhi Bank: Conduit for Extremist Finance."

Al Rajhi Bank and the Al Rajhi family deny any role in financing extremists. They have denounced terrorist acts as un-Islamic. The bank declined to address specific allegations made in American intelligence and law-enforcement records, citing client confidentiality.

In 2002, the bank sued The Wall Street Journal Europe after an article said Saudi authorities were monitoring some Al Rajhi Bank accounts at U.S. request, in a bid to prevent them from being used, wittingly or unwittingly, for funneling money to terrorist groups. The bank dropped the suit in 2005 and the Journal published a statement saying its article hadn't reported any allegation that the bank supported or financed terrorism.

Also in 2005, a U.S. judge dismissed Al Rajhi Bank from a lawsuit filed by relatives of Sept. 11 victims. The ruling said banks couldn't be held liable for providing routine services to people who turned out to be terrorists. In a statement in response to questions about suspected terrorists among its clients, the bank noted that "Al Rajhi Bank has a very large branch network, and a very large retail customer base."

U.S. law-enforcement and intelligence agencies acknowledge it is possible that extremists use the bank's far-flung branches and money-transfer services without bank officials' knowledge. The U.S. has never obtained proof that the bank or its owners knowingly facilitate terrorism, according to documents and former officials, despite what they describe as extensive circumstantial evidence that some executives are aware the bank is used by extremists. The 2003 CIA report concluded: "Senior Al Rajhi family members have long supported Islamic extremists and probably know that terrorists use their bank."

Most major banks around the world are bound by a patchwork of treaties and agreements that, in effect, require them to know their customers and report any suspicious activities to regulators. The rules are designed to fight terrorism, money laundering and narcotics trafficking.

The 2003 CIA report tells of efforts by two Al Rajhi brothers to keep some giving secret. It says that Sulaiman and Saleh transferred $4 million to parties in Germany and Pakistan in December 1998 using "a unique computer code to send funds at regular intervals to unspecified recipients, suggesting they were trying to conceal the transactions and that the money may have been intended for illegitimate ends."

The report says extremists "ordered operatives in Afghanistan, Indonesia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Yemen" to use Al Rajhi Bank. Mamduh Mahmud Salim, convicted mastermind of the 1998 embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, was carrying records of an Al Rajhi account (number 001424/4) when arrested in Germany in 1998, German police found.

In 2000, the CIA report says, Al Rajhi Bank couriers "delivered money to the Indonesian insurgent group Kompak to fund weapons purchases and bomb-making activities."

A U.S. intelligence memo dated Nov. 16, 2001, says a money courier for Osama bin Laden's second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahri, traveled on a visa that the bank had obtained for him. The memo adds, however: "Reporting does not indicate whether bank management was witting" of the courier's terrorist connections.

Al Rajhi Bank maintained at least 24 accounts and handled unusual transactions for Al-Haramain foundation -- a charity that Treasury officials say has acted as a front for al Qaeda in 13 countries -- until the Saudi government ordered the charity shut down in late 2004, according to intelligence and law-enforcement reports. The United Nations has designated top officials of Al-Haramain foundation as terrorists, and most of its offices now are closed.

According to a federal indictment in Oregon, a top Al-Haramain official in 2000 carried $130,000 in $1,000 traveler's checks from Portland to Riyadh and deposited them with Al Rajhi -- funds the indictment says were for the ultimate benefit of al Qaeda fighters in Chechnya. The indicted official, Soliman Al-Buthe, now works for the city of Riyadh. In an interview, he confirmed carrying the checks and depositing them with Al Rajhi Bank but said that they weren't for al Qaeda and that he did nothing wrong.
[Adnan Khalil Basha]

A Jidda-based charity called the International Islamic Relief Organization, or IIRO, arranges for donors to send their donations directly to the Al Rajhi Bank. The IIRO's chairman, Adnan Khalil Basha, says the charity is "absolutely apolitical" and has elaborate spending controls to prevent illicit diversions. The charity says it works with Al Rajhi Bank simply because its fees are low and its service is best.

However, the U.N. has labeled two of the IIRO's branches and some of its officials as al Qaeda supporters. In 2004, the IIRO solicited donations through Al Rajhi Bank for the Iraqi city of Fallujah, then largely under the control of insurgents and the base of the late Abu Musab al Zarqawi, who led al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. The IIRO's workers oversaw construction of a trauma clinic in an insurgent-controlled area of Fallujah. The U.S. saw the clinic as a haven for insurgent fighters, and Marines destroyed it in November 2004. That was "a big tragedy for us," says the IIRO's chairman, Mr. Basha.

He denies the charity had any involvement with the Iraqi insurgency. Charity officials complain that the U.S. has produced no evidence of their alleged ties to terrorism.

Two years earlier, federal agents raided the Virginia offices of a network of charities funded by Sulaiman Al Rajhi that worked closely with the IIRO and that -- according to Justice Department court filings -- provided funds to Palestinian terrorists. No charges have been filed.

A year after the 9/11 attacks, U.S. authorities began to lament the lack of Saudi action in taking down terrorists' financial infrastructure. A November 2002 CIA report said the Saudi government "has made little independent effort to uncover terrorist financiers, investigate individual donors, and tighten the regulation of Islamic charities," largely because of "domestic political considerations."

The report advised against a noisy confrontation: "A key factor for continued successful counterterrorism initiatives with the Saudis, whose society is by tradition private, closed, and conservative, will be to ensure that their cooperation with the United States is handled discreetly and kept as much as possible out of the public eye."

The U.S. began to rethink that approach after an al Qaeda attack in Riyadh in May 2003 that killed 26 people, including nine Americans. Deputies from the National Security Council, CIA, Treasury and State departments debated a proposal for legal and political action against Al Rajhi Bank, including the possibility of covert operations such as interfering with the bank's internal operations, according to Bush administration documents and former U.S. officials.

One idea kicked around was "listing or threatening to list" Al Rajhi Bank as a supporter of terrorism. Such a listing can be done if recommended by a committee representing the Treasury, State and Defense departments and the CIA and NSC, and signed by the president. The designation bars U.S. companies from doing business with the named entity. A U.S. designation also normally is forwarded to the U.N., and if that body puts the name on its own terrorist-supporter list, all member states are obliged to freeze the entity's assets.