Seattle Proposes Sharia Compliant Financing For Muslims - Always Wondered How This Works...

[Selene]

These folks are active in:

We currently offer Shariah-compliant home financing in the following states:

California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Washington

Yo! You clowns with the "if you see something say something" slogan of semantic stupidity...

LOOK I see something...Follow the fucking money...

Murabaha financing is also known as an “installment sale” contract. In this case, UIF will act as an agent for University Bank and purchase the property you identify. University Bank will then sell the property back to you at an agreed-upon, marked-up price. Down payments for our Murabaha contracts may be as low as 5% in certain states. Read more about Murabaha Home Financing or visit our Murabaha FAQ page.
Ijara Home Financing

Ijara financing is a redeemable lease contract based on the Islamic principle of Ijara wa Iqtina, (lease to own). The process is simple: You identify a property and an independent Trust acquires it on your behalf and leases it back to you. You make monthly payments to the Trust that comprise of a Rent portion and an Acquisition payment. At the end of the contract term, the Trust transfers the house ownership to your name. You now own the property free and clear. The minimum down payment for our Ijara contracts is 30%. Read more about Ijara Home Financing, or visit our Ijara FAQ page.

UIF Home Finance Main Office: 30500 Northwestern Hwy. Suite 315 Farmington Hills, MI 48334

http://www.myuif.com/financing/shariah-compliant-home-financing/

http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/blog/2015/07/seattle-mayor-offers-plan-to-help-followers-of.html

It's unclear how many Muslims in Seattle would benefit from Murray's plan. The Washington state chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) estimates more than 30,000 Muslims live in the greater Seattle area, and Chapter Executive Director Arsalan Bukhari on Tuesday said it's "fairly common" for some not to seek loans.

Maybe homeland security and the FBI should be looking here instead of Amish country. I understand that they both wear beards, however I have yet to see an Amish terrorist gallop into a recruiting center front door.

[RobinReborn]

I don't see the issue. This is a private bank offering a specific type of financing.

[Selene]

I don't see the issue. This is a private bank offering a specific type of financing.

I am sorry did i say something negative about the bank?

If I did, would you point it out.

[Selene]

Here is an example of a useless poll...with lots of spin on it...

Pew: Huge spike in Americans 'very concerned' about domestic Islamic extremism

So apparently PEW just decided to poll for this and found what we all feel, "very concerned."

Can't get anything past PEW. Have not found the questions that were asked yet.

The charts are basically useless.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pew-huge-spike-in-americans-very-concerned-about-domestic-islamic-extremism/article/2568471

[william.scherk]

Here is an example of a useless poll...with lots of spin on it...

[ http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pew-huge-spike-in-americans-very-concerned-about-domestic-islamic-extremism/article/2568471 / Washington Examiner ]Pew: Huge spike in Americans 'very concerned' about domestic Islamic extremism

I have cited from this rolling series of PEW surveys in the past (eg, here, and see their page covering research on global attitudes and trends). I think you would agree that we need to drill down into the methodology and limitations of the research to extract reliable and meaningful kernels of knowledge.

So apparently PEW just decided to poll for this and found what we all feel, "very concerned." Can't get anything past PEW. Have not found the questions that were asked yet.

The PEW wonks and wonkettes did not "just decide to poll for this." This release of data brings a longer-term international collection of opinions up to date, adding the latest samplings. [ "Extremism Concerns Growing in West and Predominantly Muslim Countries: Worries Especially Widespread in Western Europe and U.S." ]

-- as I suggested, this set of results tracks trends in global opinion, allowing us to see opinion change over time. The Washington Examiner seemed most interested in the subset of soundings from the USA. I am quite interested in the subset from Canada. The money quotes at the Examiner come in the first two paragraphs:

Even before the killing of four Marines in Chattanooga, Tenn., in an "act of terrorism," Americans revealed a deep concern about Islamic extremism and a very high worry about ISIS, according to the latest poll from Pew Research.

Some 53 percent, more than the average in the non-Islamic world, said they are "very concerned" about Islamic extremism in the United States, said Pew.

There isn't too much spin there, to my eyes, maybe just a tight focus on a few contrasts. From the PEW site, though, a couple of outliers:

People in Israel (37% very concerned) and Russia (23%) are less concerned about extremism than those in many of the other countries surveyed. But this has not always been the case in Russia, where great concern about extremism is down 12 percentage points since 2011 and 29 points since 2005, when the survey was fielded just months after 334 hostages died in a school in Beslan that was taken over by Chechen rebels.

I am going to cross-check the Canadian figures, to see if there has been any lurches like in Russia, but have a look at this chart from the online report:

For the particular questions put to the national cohorts, see page 11 (eleven) of their Topline report.

The charts are basically useless.

The charts merely give a graphic representation to salient data. If you wanted to go and find reasonably reliable indicators of concern about Islamic extremism outside the USA and inside the USA, I think PEW global survey is the place you would go. It doesn't stand in for gut feelings or other non-rigorous assessments of opinion. Perhaps everyone has a rough idea of 'level of concern' in our circles large and small. Checking our intuitions and rough reckonings against more rigorous sampling is good cognitive housekeeping, I think. The Examiner published only these two charts from the PEW release -- it's a kind of time-lapse of rising disquiet:

Adam, I think you would probably agree that what matters about polls is what policy they may lead to, or which attitudes seem harbingers of future action. In this instance, I wager that international cohesion in combating murderous death-cult ISIS and all its psychotic appendages and hothouses is going to ramp up. The increasing alarm suggests to me that a common enemy in ISIS-style jihadism and destruction will hasten or deepen an international inclination to 'do what it takes'.

Back to 'spin,' I assume you meant spin applied by PEW itself and the Examiner writer and editor. That's a judgment call, I guess.

My opinion is pretty narrow: "What explains the difference between Canadian fears and American fears?" I am still trying to figure that out. My conclusions are nowhere near fixed.

(I reckon, roughly, that we simply do not have as many 'prestige' targets for the ISIS-deluded death-cult converts. I mean, the at-home Canucki Muslim revulsion after our two military guys were murdered was so strong, we used that revulsion to add another layer of surveillance to the project of identifying and nullifying internal death cultist threats. That, and we sadly have none of the majesty of US bases to be shot at. We are but a middling country with a teeny military footprint compared to you guys, with no significant enemies besides ISIS ...

I always, always feel terrible in the aftermath of these mass murders in America. We get a small share of the deranged too, but the blows are so much heavier and persistent down there. I know what revulsion and anger and contempt you might feel toward murderous Muslims attacking Marines. It may be cognitively tempting to go truffling for granular examples of Muslim perfidy in America, in banking or whatever. No one has yet articulated any argument for or against sharia-compliant financial instruments. Is a unifying theme Creeping Sharia in America, Beware? Does Creeping Sharia potentiate or eventuate massacres? What are the obvious connections? What are the policies that must be undertaken by the USA to prevent similar massacres? What and who is the enemy? How to identify the enemy within? How to leverage international fears to underwrite 'The War On Terror"?)

Edited July 17, 2015 by william.scherk

[Selene]

Here is an example of a useless poll...with lots of spin on it...

[ http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pew-huge-spike-in-americans-very-concerned-about-domestic-islamic-extremism/article/2568471 / Washington Examiner ]Pew: Huge spike in Americans 'very concerned' about domestic Islamic extremism

I have cited from this rolling series of PEW surveys in the past (eg, here, and see their page covering research on global attitudes and trends). I think you would agree that we need to drill down into the methodology and limitations of the research to extract reliable and meaningful kernels of knowledge.

-- as I suggested, this set of results tracks trends in global opinion, allowing us to see opinion change over time. The Washington Examiner seemed most interested in the subset of soundings from the USA. I am quite interested in the subset from Canada. The money quotes at the Examiner come in the first two paragraphs:

Even before the killing of four Marines in Chattanooga, Tenn., in an "act of terrorism," Americans revealed a deep concern about Islamic extremism and a very high worry about ISIS, according to the latest poll from Pew Research.

Some 53 percent, more than the average in the non-Islamic world, said they are "very concerned" about Islamic extremism in the United States, said Pew.

There isn't too much spin there, to my eyes, maybe just a tight focus on a few contrasts. From the PEW site, though, a couple of outliers:

Again William, I can't even get past this early statement.

There is more spin on this than a Felix Hernandez slider...see Seattle's Cy Young award pitcher.

First of all, who was surveyed?

Second, who cares about where Americans stand in relation to other countries in the non-Muslim world!

Framing this issue in meaningless numbers is an established pattern on how marxists hide the truth in full view.

A...

[Selene]

Informed by the founders’ interest in research, practical knowledge and a robust democracy, our portfolio has grown over time to include public opinion research; arts and culture; and environmental, health, state and consumer policy initiatives. Our mission is to:

Improve public policy by conducting rigorous analysis, linking diverse interests to pursue common cause and insisting on tangible results;

Inform the public by providing useful data that illuminate the issues and trends shaping our world;

Invigorate civic life by encouraging democratic participation and strong communities. In our hometown of Philadelphia, we support arts and culture organizations as well as institutions that enhance the well-being of the region’s neediest citizens.

Nope, no spin, no agenda...

Global Ocean Legacy’s goal is to establish 15 marine parks by 2022. Six reserves have been designated so far, protecting more than 2.8 million square kilometers (around 1.1 million square miles), an area nearly the size of India. Global Ocean Legacy partners meet regularly to chart the project’s progress.

“We believe Global Ocean Legacy’s work to establish marine protected areas in the sea is akin to the United States’ great national parks on land and is improving the health of oceans worldwide,” says Anisa Kamadoli Costa, chairman and president of The Tiffany & Co. Foundation. “We are particularly impressed by the program’s emphasis on collaboration. Before pursuing the establishment of a reserve, Global Ocean Legacy consults with local communities, nonprofits, political leaders, and conservation specialists, lending site-specific perspectives and credibility throughout the process.”

I am certain that this will not increase tourism and traffic into the nearest land sectors right?

http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/about/mission-and-values

[william.scherk]

There isn't too much spin there, to my eyes, maybe just a tight focus on a few contrasts. From the PEW site, though, a couple of outliers:

Again William, I can't even get past this early statement.

There is more spin on this than a Felix Hernandez slider...see Seattle's Cy Young award pitcher.

First of all, who was surveyed?

Second, who cares about where Americans stand in relation to other countries in the non-Muslim world!

Framing this issue in meaningless numbers is an established pattern on how marxists hide the truth in full view.

I did not know you had such a bitch with PEW, but now gather that you put up the link and excerpts to illustrate communist corruption. I disagree with you about the information revealed and its value.

Meaningless numbers (for you), sure. I get it. Who was surveyed? Well, I gave you the links to the detailed methodology and the particulars of the question at hand across the various nations.

(about the 'who cares' question, I gave a couple of examples where I cared and where policy-makers might care in the post above, and won't repeat them. I did expand on why Canadians are not as worried as Americans, though I am not at all certain I understand.)

-- the trends 'revealed' or 'spun' out of sheer marxism, well, I think you set off on one foot "The numbers are freaking obvious for America, duh," and set down the other foot here, "it is all a plot to lie and distort and hide truth and is otherwise meaningless, who gives a shit."

I guess the only thing I would ask you to reconsider was my notion that tighter anti-ISIS war plans will advance. Public opinion in the theatre of war right now is peaking. No better time to collar more allies in the protracted struggle against islamic extremism. That's just my opinion, and I am happy enough if you dispute it.

Maybe PEW is ever more corrupt and sinister than the next guy, or the political pollsters. It's a judgment call. You seem to be saying that there is zero value and much disvalue in any PEW findings on this question and maybe others under its purview. Fair enough. I disagree. And so the world turns.

At the risk of corrupting OL readers further with Hernandez-level spin, here's another report just published on a set of data from the suspect crew:

Climate Change Seen as Top Global Threat

Americans, Europeans, Middle Easterners Focus on ISIS as Greatest Danger

BY JILL CARLE

In advance of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris this December, many publics around the world name global climate change as a top threat, according to a new Pew Research Center survey measuring perceptions of international challenges. This is particularly true in Latin America and Africa, where majorities in most countries say they are very concerned about this issue. But as the Islamic militant group ISIS maintains its hold in Iraq and Syria and intensifies its grisly public executions, Europeans and Middle Easterners most frequently cite ISIS as their main concern among international issues.

Global economic instability also figures prominently as the top concern in a number of countries, and it is the second biggest concern in half of the countries surveyed. In contrast, concerns about Iran’s nuclear program as well as cyberattacks on governments, banks or corporations are limited to a few nations. Israelis and Americans are among the most concerned about Iran’s nuclear program, while South Koreans and Americans have the greatest concern about cyberattacks relative to other publics. And apprehension about tensions between Russia and its neighbors, or territorial disputes between China and surrounding countries, largely remain regional concerns.

These are among the findings of a new Pew Research Center survey, conducted in 40 countries among 45,435 respondents from March 25 to May 27, 2015. The report focuses on those who say they are “very concerned” about each issue.

And a pretty but spun-shit graphical depiction:

[william.scherk]

[from The Pew Charitable Trusts Mission & Values page]

Informed by the founders’ interest in research, practical knowledge and a robust democracy, our portfolio has grown over time to include public opinion research; arts and culture; and environmental, health, state and consumer policy initiatives. Our mission is to:

Improve public policy by conducting rigorous analysis, linking diverse interests to pursue common cause and insisting on tangible results;

Inform the public by providing useful data that illuminate the issues and trends shaping our world;

Invigorate civic life by encouraging democratic participation and strong communities. In our hometown of Philadelphia, we support arts and culture organizations as well as institutions that enhance the well-being of the region’s neediest citizens.

Nope, no spin, no agenda...

I thought you were going to demonstrate the spin in the particular global trends survey that you found faulty. But I can see that you mean more nothing is to be trusted from this crew, least of all its devotion to: research, practical knowledge and a robust democracy. These are terms just gaping open for spin and 'nuance' of the worst kind.

Global Ocean Legacy’s goal is to establish 15 marine parks by 2022. Six reserves have been designated so far, protecting more than 2.8 million square kilometers (around 1.1 million square miles), an area nearly the size of India. Global Ocean Legacy partners meet regularly to chart the project’s progress.

“We believe Global Ocean Legacy’s work to establish marine protected areas in the sea is akin to the United States’ great national parks on land and is improving the health of oceans worldwide,” says Anisa Kamadoli Costa, chairman and president of The Tiffany & Co. Foundation. “We are particularly impressed by the program’s emphasis on collaboration. Before pursuing the establishment of a reserve, Global Ocean Legacy consults with local communities, nonprofits, political leaders, and conservation specialists, lending site-specific perspectives and credibility throughout the process.”

I am certain that this will not increase tourism and traffic into the nearest land sectors right?

http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/about/mission-and-values

You are certain and sarcastic. But yeah, who but those with a sinister collaborative agenda would work towards establishing marine nature reserves and parks in oceanic settings, right? I mean, look at this language (from the Global Ocean Legacy website):

Global Ocean Legacy, a project of Pew and its partners, is working with local communities, governments and scientists around the world to protect and conserve some of our most important and unspoiled ocean environments.

Together we are establishing the world’s first generation of great marine parks by securing the designation of large, fully protected reserves. To date, our efforts have helped to double the amount of safeguarded ocean habitat worldwide.

Disgusting, right? Private trusts working towards a creepy future where marine areas are 'preserved' or 'protected' (meaning, free from economic activity like harvesting or mining)? Great marine parks? What the fuck.

Moreover, Adam, you may be quite right that marine reserves and protected areas in themselves work against economic activity even with tourism -- not just the hellish no-go zones promoted by PEW and its henchmen. How can we estimate the potential lost to exploitation, when areas are put under a blanket of socialist protection?

I guess the first place to check my assumptions is to look at Canadian and then American and then Australian reserves and protected areas to see if there is still any kind of economic harvest after 'protection,' even if only from the drones of eco-tourism, divers, snorklers, etc.

I'll have a look at some of this Pew collective's 'saved' territories, and see just how bad a hit the local economies can expect from 'saving nature.'

[Selene]

There isn't too much spin there, to my eyes, maybe just a tight focus on a few contrasts. From the PEW site, though, a couple of outliers:

Again William, I can't even get past this early statement.

There is more spin on this than a Felix Hernandez slider...see Seattle's Cy Young award pitcher.

First of all, who was surveyed?

Second, who cares about where Americans stand in relation to other countries in the non-Muslim world!

Framing this issue in meaningless numbers is an established pattern on how marxists hide the truth in full view.

I did not know you had such a bitch with PEW, but now gather that you put up the link and excerpts to illustrate communist corruption. I disagree with you about the information revealed and its value.

See William, we are not doing this your way anymore.

I do not have a "such a bitch with PEW."

I put their website up for folks to understand that they have an agenda.

Second, I do not believe that I used the word communist, however, I am sure that if I did, you will point it out.

So since you chose to make inferences, once again, as to why I posted the information on PEW, I have to stop you right there.

A...

[william.scherk]

See William, we are not doing this your way anymore.

I do not have a "such a bitch with PEW."

I put their website up for folks to understand that they have an agenda.

Second, I do not believe that I used the word communist, however, I am sure that if I did, you will point it out.

So since you chose to make inferences, once again, as to why I posted the information on PEW, I have to stop you right there.

So, yeah, we disagree here and there, and point out different aspects of reality. As I say, the world turns. We each do cognitive housekeeping. Sometimes we get in a flap over our feather-dusting strategies and our portraits of reality. In the end, knowledge advances. We have a tough rink and a tough audience. "Framing this issue in meaningless numbers is an established pattern on how marxists hide the truth in full view."

-- as an aside, fantastic amount of tourism in Pew's favoured Pacific island targets. As the French say, haute de gamme, top of the line, and on down from luxury to wilderness boating /trekking/surfing/yadda-ing ... yearnings for unspoiled paradise attract big spenders. The tide is out on that aspect, from my point of view.

I'm glad you haven't yet fully put me on your Ignore list. I'll head back to Wikitravel. Who knew?

Edited July 17, 2015 by william.scherk

[Selene]

William:

Thanks for the soft shoe routine.

However, do you understand what I meant by hiding the truth in a camouflage of numbers is common today. Corporations have employed this, governments also and a panoply of "tax deductible non-profits."

The statutes, regulations and rules covering all non-profits shall bee repealed is a critical starting point to defund this Juggernaut.

Unlike some, I have never ignored anyone on OL.

A...