Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Libloather

Besides the NYT trying to disingenuously promote Shariah through association with non-usary activities, in fact usary, per the article, is not being avoided at all. Instead, the bank merely creates a fiction whereby the entire cost of a house, plus 30 years of interest rates, is added up and then divided across the time payments of the loan. So where is the denial of usary here? Why not just call all of the interest each month chocolate drops, and make the loan agreement include chocolate drop payments? The whole article is a fraud, designed to shove Shariah in everyone’s faces as some sort of reasonable but profound power that even banks must obey. You should read the article, though - the NYT makes more favorable quotes towards faith in God than they have in the entirety of their last fifty years of articles about Christianity. What brazen hypocrites they are.


4 posted on 03/07/2009 8:47:53 PM PST by Talisker (When you find a turtle on top of a fence post, you can be damn sure it didn't get there on it's own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Talisker

They can also sell a property without interest and instead charge a “service fee” or some such rot. It’s all smoke and mirrors. And Allah knows best.


12 posted on 03/08/2009 6:00:04 AM PDT by Sender (It's never too late to be who you could have been.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson