Shariah-compliant banking, sometimes called Islamic banking, is growing in popularity in the Western and Islamic worlds. But critics say American interest in the system at a time of economic crisis is opening the door to increased Islamic influence in the American banking system. Worse yet, some fear the banks may be helping to finance international terrorism.
Allowing Shariah-compliant finance in the U.S. is green-lighting a seditious system that supports jihad, said Frank Gaffney, founder and president of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C.
“If you understand what Shariah is, you understand that it is a pretty awful system. Not something that you’d want insinuated in your society and becoming a major feature of your economic system,” Gaffney said. More>>
- Frank Gaffney discusses the Wall Street failure and Shariah Compliant Finance
- U.S. Interest in Shariah Finance Opens Dangerous Doors, Critics Say
- Dick Morris on Sharia Financing – for those out there who still don’t understand how horrible this is
- Documents link Saudi royalty to terrorists
A Win for the Good Guys and a setback for sharia-compliant finance in America.
By Frank J. Gaffney Jr. and David Yerushalmi
AIG sponsors, pays for, and aggressively markets sharia-compliant insurance products. The practice of sharia finance has created lucrative advisory positions for often radical imams, who get paid to guarantee the religious “purity” of sharia-compliant products. Such vehicles typically follow the Muslim principle of zakat and donate a slice of their profits to charity. Unfortunately, many of the charities receiving these funds have links to terrorism. Mr. Murray objects to his funds’ being used to legitimate and promote sharia law, when that is the same law that calls for jihad. For that matter, sharia allows Saudis, Iranians, Sudanese, Somalis, Afghans, Taliban members, and other adherents to justify the following: the execution of apostates who decide to abandon the faith; the criminalizing of “Islamophobic blasphemy”; the punishment of petty crimes with amputations, floggings and stonings; and the repression of “non-believers” from practicing their respective religions freely and openly.
AIG — read the federal government — now is in the business of selecting which sharia-adherent “authorities” shall be enlisted to determine whether or not a given product is sharia-compliant. In early maneuvering on Murray v. Geitner et al., the government moved to dismiss the case on two grounds. First, its lawyers argued that Mr. Murray did not have standing to bring this lawsuit. Second, they contended that, even if he did have standing, the government acted in buying AIG without any intent to promote or become involved in religious questions. More>>
