Islamic law prohibits the payment and collection of interest, which is seen as a form of gambling, so highly complex instruments such as derivatives and other creative accounting practices are banned.A fine system, although one diametrically opposed to what the banksters have in mind -- global slavery based on usury. That's why they hanker to drop bunker busters on the Arabs and Muslims of Iran, that and the reprehensible racism of the neocons. It's embarrassing to some of the bankers, the over-the-top hatred the neocons harbor, the American neocons who are mostly wedded to the Likudniks in Israel. It is not too embarrassing, however, so long as it gets the job done. Plus there is the cross-over effect: many of the banksters are Israel lovers as well, or more specifically lovers and followers of the reactionary branch of Zionism, the branch screaming for more mass murder, as if the murder of over a million Iraqis, mostly Muslim, is not enough.
Transactions must be backed by real assets -- not shady repackaged subprime mortgages -- and because risk is shared between the bank and the depositor there is an incentive for the institutions to ensure the deal is sound.
Investors have a right to know how their funds are being used, and the sector is overseen by dedicated supervisory boards as well as the usual national regulatory authorities.
Reading the above about the Islamic banking system, I am reminded of Ezra Pound. Not only Pound, but Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, all adamantly opposed to usury. Pound was opposed to the post-Calvin usurious society of the last 500 years and believed it was at the root of war and all organized mass murder campaigns.
Posts
