That great comic Lenin once observed that the bourgeoisie was so cravenly addicted to the profit motive that its members would happily sell Communist revolutionaries the rope with which they were to be hanged.
I couldn’t help thinking of that when a friend sent me a press release from the Dow Jones News Services yesterday proudly announcing that February marked the “10th anniversary of the launch of the Dow Jones Islamic Market (DJIM) Indexes.”
That’s right folks, mighty Dow Jones, publisher of The Wall Street Journal , also hosts an index “to measure the performance of a global universe of Shari’ah-compliant investable equities.”
“Shari’ah-compliant investable equities”–let’s see, that would be entities that comply with the dictates of Sharia (we infidels can skip the apostrophe), i.e., Islamic law, i.e., the charming code that tells you how and where to go about obtaining multiple wives, what offenses merit flogging, amputation of a hand or foot, or even what another friend of mine refers to as “the full Muslim.”
The greedy pigs on Wall Street did something progressive by accident and the same genocidal racists that defend their ruinous expolitation of the thirld world poor now attack them for affirming a people victimized by merciless genocide by the U.S. and Israel even if it is only to steal their oil. Racists are unwilling to let Muslims live even as oil-pumping slaves.
“Shari’ah-compliant investable equities”?
And those are promoted in equal measure along with Catholic and Protestant compliant equities..
YAH RIGHT.
“weapon production is excluded”!!! Weapon production? They don’t seem to have a problem using them, yet producing them is somehow beneath Islam?
How does that square with Iran and Nukes.
1. apostle of love:
Truly your intellect is dizzying.
I have just received this link which is a short film about spread of a ‘non violent’ Islam; worth watching.
http://blip.tv/play/AdmXMI6nSg
Much ado about nothing, I am afraid.
“Sharia” applies to all field of life. “Sharia”-compliant corporations merely means corporation that do not violate Islamic *BUSINESS* law, e.g., not loaning money with interest, etc. Apart from the name, this has nothing to do with beheading women.
In the Talmud (the main source of Jewish religious law), formulated from ca. 200 BC to 500 AD, some laws deal with slavery, whose legality is (unsurprisingly) taken for granted. Other laws deal with dietary restrictions: what food is kosher. Does this mean that if I buy kosher food I am supporting slavery? Of course not.
Er, Sharia deals with all walks of life. “Sharia-obeying” companies merely means companies that obey Sharia’s business laws, which have nothing to do with its edicts about Jihad.
In the Talmud, some laws deal with slavery, whose legality is taken for granted. Other laws deal with dietary restrictions (which foods are kosher and which are not). Does this mean that US companies producing kosher food is a case of “creeping Jewish theocracy”? Does this mean those who keep kosher support slavery?
Of course not.
#1 apostle of love – I didn’t know Muslim was a race. It’s now racist to be against Islam?
There is nothing to celebrate with Sharia. Nothing.
It’s the umbrella of Islam that follows a person from the time you wake to the time you sleep. Everything.
It smothers.
Actually we are bending forward for them.
Islam is a homicidal death cult. Nothing more. Muslims are violent, primitive, narrow-minded barbarians who should be shunned by the modern world.
“Bend over backwards” for Muslims? I would leave out the “backwards” for a more fitting description.
‘“Sharia”-compliant corporations merely means corporation that do not violate Islamic *BUSINESS* law, e.g., not loaning money with interest, etc. Apart from the name, this has nothing to do with beheading women.’
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck……….
In other words: If they state “Sharia”, they insinuate ALL “Sharia”. You cannot have one without the other else they need to branch off to distinguish they are not now nor do they EVER intend to be associated with bloodletting.
Bad timing on this celebration considering the recent story of Muzzammil Hassan and Bridges TV. Wonder how far one would have to delve into the DJIM before landing at their door step?
>>>>In other words: If they state “Sharia”, they insinuate ALL “Sharia”.
I doubt it. If a package of, say, cookies has a “OU” symbol on it — meaning, “this food is Kosher according to Jewish religious law” — does that insinuate, “we would like to reinstitute slavery”, merely because slavery is (technically) legal in Jewish religious law? Is every bar Mitzvah or Bris — following other parts of Jewish religious law — an “insinuation” that slavery is on the way?
As for the marketing of Catholic and Protestant compliant investments (better known by the name Socially Responsible Investing), they are readily available.
“” We in the West sure do bend over backwards for our Muslim “brothers” … “”
“Backwards?”
Whoever proposed that gross (double) misrepresentation understands neither our Muslim brothers’ defining habits nor knows his own front from his back!
Brian Richard Allen
Los Angeles CalifISLAMicated” 90028 and the Far Abroad
The (while talking about Muslims, very punny) full-blown Sophist who misrepresents himself hereabouts as a “Skeptic” aught more closely examine the mindlessness of his guiding Moral Relativism than expect an intelligent forum to accept his puny efforts to equate, “Sharia:” — the front line assault-weapon-of-choice employed by morbidly-murderous-ideology-driven psychopathologically-hesperophobic barbarians in their declared fight to the death of Judeo-Christian/Western/Human Civilization; — with the Law that forms the Rock upon which our Civilization stands!
Brian Richard Allen
Los Angeles CalifiSKEPTICated” 90028 and the Far Abroad
Oh, for goddness’ sake. I am a Jew and an Israeli. Believe me, I know a LOT about people motivate by Sharia… having had my home town bombed by them in 2006, for starters. But it does nobody any good to shout “wolf!” every time the S-word (Sharia) is mentioned in any context whatever.
The people who put op the “Sharia-comliant” stock index, or those who consult it to see what stock to buy, do not necessarily, or even likely, have anything to do with Hizbullah. This is easier to see, I suppose, from the other end: Do you think Hizbullah’s fighters read the Wall Street Journal or care about their investment portfolio?
It’s just a list of companies that do not practice certain things Islamic religious law forbids — e.g., charging interest above a certain amount, etc. It is not at all surprising that such a service has been offered for years — ever since Muslims in large number started to invest money in stocks traded in Wall Street. It would be surprising if such a service were NOT offered, in fact.
Again, let me continue the analogy. Suppose that tomorrow the Wall Street Journal offers a list of companies that produce kosher food, or who obey the other business practices in the Talmud – the “Halacha” (Jewish religious law) stock index.
Would that mean a Jewish conspiracy to take over the world had “got up and started walking”? No, it would simply mean that enough people were interested in such a service for the stock market to offer it.
Yep, Skeptic is a Jew AND an Israeli. He says so.
To all:
Without knowing what is required for a business to be a part of this index one cannot form any rational opinions about it. A quick googling of the board of directors of the fund yields no definite data as to their ideologies. Nor could I find a complete list of the criterion used or even the companies currently on the list. One can only speculate as to the true nature of the Index and the intent of its board of directors. I choose not to speculate, but would be eager to hear if anyone can find some actual data.
Skeptic;
A brief comment. If you had the advantage of having studied the nature of the “slavery” allowed by the Talmud you would not have found it a worthwhile example. It bears almost no connection with the meaning of slavery as it is understood by modern society.
Noah –
I know. For the benfit of those who might be ignorant of the subject, perhaps I should have explained that the Talmud — like the Bible — more often than not uses the Hebrew word “eved”, usually translated as “slave”, more in the sense of “indentured servant” or “dependent” than in the sense of actual slavery.
However, saying there is “no connection” between the meaning of “eved” and the modern meaning of “slave” is going too far. Sometimes, at least, “eved” DOES mean an actual slave. There is no doubt that slavery — buying and selling human beings in servitude — did exist, and was legal, in Talmudic and Biblical times.
But my point wasn’t to apologize for Jewish law allowing slavery. There’s no need to: one can hardly blame the Rabbis of the Talmud for being men of their time and not men of our time. It is enough to their credit that even the (real) slave in the Talmud often had more rights than most nominally free peasants or workers had until recent time.
My point is simply to point out an obvious fact: namely, the mere fact that slavery is part of Jewish law hardly means that anybody who obeys Jewish law is ipso facto a supporter of slavery, let alone that, say, American coroporations producing Kosher food are “surrendering to Halacha [Jewish law]” and are making slavery come closer.
Similarly, the mere fact that Sharia says awful things about the infidel hardly means those who wish to invest in companies that obey its business laws are also looking for infidels to kill, or that the Wall Street Journal is about to surrender to having people’s heads chopped off.
P.S.
As for the person who doesn’t think I’m an Israeli Jew… Ma ani yachol le’hagid le’cha? Ani nishba be’elohim she’zoo ha’emet. Im ata lo ma’amin li, al ta’amin li; ma ani yachol la’asot? Biv’racha, rav-samal be’miluim…
“Sharia creep” is exactly what will happen in our court system if Obama gets his way with the terrorist trials.