The importance of understanding this subject must finally be allowed to transcend religious differences and petty party politics. For history shows that we can live with our differences if we feel no threat to ourselves, our beliefs and or our communities. According to the late Professor Hotson, of Waterloo University in Canada, the situation in Bosnia, for example, resulted directly from the high interest rate policies of the Bundesbank in the early 1980’s, which led on to the forced repatriation of 750,000 Yugoslav ‘Guest Workers’ from Germany which eventually and predictably transformed itself from “fear of the future” into “hatred of the stranger.” The failure of the banker Milosovich to solve the problem through interest-free public-spending resulted in a classic BSE solution used by democracies and dictators alike – Blame Someone Else. Any one will do: a foreign neighbour, a political adversary or a religious rival. The evidence shows that it is possible to have peace on earth between Jews, Muslims and Christians (or for that matter any other combination of human beings) provided there is an absence of debt and interest - both the compound and simple variety as both constitute riba. Such was the case for a period of 600 years in Spain, which the Jews call their Golden Age. The Muqadima, of Ibn Khaldun, indicates that there was an absence of usury at that time. And whilst and absence of war does not necessarily indicate the presence of peace, in the case of Spain, under an Islamic umbrella, peace prevailed for six centuries until the Trinitarian usurers, masquerading as followers of Christ peace be upon him, brought the whole idyll to an abrupt, genocidal, end. 

It is very important to avoid throwing the monetary solution, like the baby, out with the bathwater. For that reason, we must be careful not to reject any idea or solution simply because we do not like the people who profess or suggest its application. As Allah points out in the Qur’an: 

“You may dislike a thing in which there is much good for you.” 

Consequently, in our search for the truth – particularly about money – we should always treat it as if it were a search for a lost purse, or wallet, (which indeed it is). A wallet, which we are hoping to find or have returned to us by someone somewhere. In the latter case, we would surely not reject what had been lost on the grounds that we did not approve of the colour, creed or gender of the one returning it, but rather express gratitude and perhaps some other form of appreciation for its safe return. This maxim should extend to all forms of lost property including knowledge. For it is said that knowledge is the lost property of Muslims. 

"The creation of Dirhams and Dinars (money) is one of the blessings of Allah. They are (to be treated as) stones having no intrinsic usufruct (i.e. no natural use or enjoyment) or utility, but all human beings need them, because everybody needs a large number of commodities for his eating, wearing etc. And often he does not have what he needs, and does have what he needs not. Therefore, the transactions of exchange are inevitable. But there must be a measure on the basis on which price can be determined, because the exchanged commodities are neither of the same type, nor of the same measure which can determine how much quantity one commodity is a just price for another."

"Therefore all these commodities need a mediator to judge their exact value. Allah Almighty has created Dirhams and Dinars (money) as judges and mediators between all commodities so that all objects of wealth are measured through them. And their being the measure of the value of all commodities is based upon the fact that they are not an object in themselves. Had they been an object in themselves one could have a specific purpose for keeping them which might have given them more importance according to his intention, while the one who had no such purpose would have not given them such importance, and thus the whole system would have been disturbed. That is why Allah has created them, so that they may be circulated between hands and act as fair judges between different commodities and work as a medium to acquire other things. So the one who owns them is as though he owns every thing, unlike the one who owns a cloth, because he owns only a cloth, therefore, if he needs food, the owner of food may not be interested in exchanging his food for cloth, because he may need an animal for example. Therefore, there was needed a thing which in its appearance is nothing, but in its essence is every thing. The thing which has no particular form may have different forms in relation to other things, like a mirror which has no colour, but it reflects every colour. The same is the case of money. It is not (and should not be) an object in itself, but it is an instrument that leads to All objectives."

“So the one who is using money in a manner contrary to its basic purpose is, in fact, disregarding the blessings of Allah. Consequently, whoever hoards money is doing injustice to it and is defeating their actual purpose. He is like the one who detains a (just) ruler in a prison. And whoever effects the transactions of interest on money is, in fact, discarding the blessings of Allah, and is committing injustice, because money is created for some other things, not for itself. So the one who has started trading in money itself has made it an objective contrary to the wisdom behind its creation, because it is injustice to use money for a purpose other than the one it was created for. If it is allowed for him to trade in money itself, money will become his ultimate goal, and will remain detained with him like hoarded money. And imprisoning a (just) ruler, or restricting a postman from conveying messages is nothing but injustice." [Imam Al-Ghazzali (Died 505A.H.) Found in "Ihya al-Uloom" v.4, P,88-89, Cairo 1939.]

F.G.Hawtrey, a former Assistant Secretary to the British Treasury, confirms Imam Ghazzali’s view that when money is prevented from performing its proper roll - as a medium of exchange - it becomes an object in itself: “and thus the whole system” becomes “disturbed.” No further doubt can remain that the fault lies in the way money is treated and in banking system itself. He stated: 

"Banks create money and trade depression arises from faults in the banking system in the discharge of that vital function. "    

Today’s Muslims, of all denominations, need to recover or return to the forgotten knowledge of our great Prophet, his family and faithful followers peace and blessings be upon them all. For our greatest enemies are still ignorance and pride. Imam Ali said: 

“We withstood the weight of the iron, the stone and the lash, but found the hardest thing to endure was the weight of debt”. 

This gave him every justification to declare that: 

“If poverty were a man, I would kill him…” 

He was truly a man of his word. For he was genuinely “tough on poverty and tough on the causes of poverty.” For poverty, we are told, leads to disbelief. Leaving one to conclude that a lack, rather than the love of money, - is the root of all evil. So who ever controls the money controls the world. As the great Jewish banker Meyer Anselm Rothschild pointed out over two hundred years ago: 

“Permit me to issue a nation’s currency and it matter not who makes its laws.” 

A point confirmed by many others before and after him: The key functions to bear in mind at all times is the power that the  creation and issuing of money bestows on the one who controls these functions. Thomas Macaulay wrote about similar things and William Cobbett pointed out that the establishing of the private Bank of England had produced what the world never saw before: 

“Starvation in the midst of abundance.”

Lord Stamp a former director of the Bank of England said as much when he admitted that the banking systems of today’s “modern nation” are unjust and oppressive: “Banking,” he said, 

“was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the earth, take it away from them, but leave them with the power to create money, and with a flick of a pen they will create enough to buy it all back again…(therefore) if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and continue to pay for the cost of your own slavery then allow bankers to continue to create money and control credit.” 

In the United States, Stuart Chase, identified similar causes for the problems facing equally “modern” 1930’s America. Conditions, which are exactly the same as the problems, we are facing in 1999. He stated, in The New York Nation, in August 1933:

“The creation of money, (and) the allotment of purchasing power, is a social function of the first importance, and should be restored to the Federal Government, in whose hands the Constitution placed it. It is forever impossible for the private Banker, working for private ends, adequately to finance the consumer…The consumer therefore, cannot adequately consume until the private Banker, as the chief executive of the nation’s credit, is lifted gently but firmly out of the picture.” 

INTEREST AND ITS ROLE IN CREATING & PERPETUATING POVERTY

The Roman Law of Justinian effectively describes ‘inter-est’ as ‘that which is ‘‘in-between” the creditor’s actual position and what it would have been if the contract had been fulfilled. It was arguably, therefore, thought reasonable to demand a penalty if a loan was not paid on time. This then became formalised as the ‘poena conventionalis’ or the suitable compensation for the late payment of a loan. Its damaging effects are clearly documented in more than 2000 books in European languages the majority in English. Sir Josiah Child, the banker, having this to say on the subject: 

‘All countries are at this day richer or poorer in an exact proportion to what they pay, and have usually paid, for the interest on money…The abatement of interest is the cause of the prosperity and riches of any nation.’ 

This was quoted by Sir Harry Page in his book IN RESTRAINT OF USURY. Astonishingly, Sir Harry was the former City Treasure of Manchester and perhaps more astonishing is the fact that this book condemning usury was published by CIPFA – The Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy in 1985. The things associated with inter-est and “other dishonest profits” include: Avarice, bloodsucking, unfeeling attitudes; burglary, buccaneering, cruelty, commandeering, depredation, preying on, pillage, plunder, piracy, ravaging, rapacity, grossness, murder, etc. The sole, legitimate purpose for inter-est/usury is explained by St Ambrose, in his comments on Deuteronomy 23:19, in Old Testament. 

“From him demand usury, whom you rightly desire to harm, against whom weapons are lawfully carried. From him exact usury whom it would not be a crime to kill. He fights without a (visible) weapon who demands usury; he who revenges himself upon an enemy, who is an inter-est collector from his foe, fights without a sword. Therefore, where there is a right of war, there also is a right of usury.” [St. Ambrose (c.340-397AD)] 

The Jews understand this problem well; which is why they do not allow interest to circulate freely amongst themselves for they know that their fragile cohesion will self destruct if they do. For they know that inter-est is the most subtle weapon of war. It is also forbidden to Christians, but they consistently forget the penalty and pay the price. VIX PERVENIT was the last meaningful encyclical by the Vatican against what it referred to as: 

“Usury and other dishonest profit.” 

This was issued in 1745 by Pope Benedict IV. 

There are numerous authentic Islamic traditions that stress the necessity for realizing a balance in the society through an emphasis on the prohibition of israf (squandering) and also the necessity of renouncing poverty and providing subsistence for every individual (in other words a basic income). But what happens when there is no more actual hard cash money in the treasury to distribute or provide the things that will make “him (or her) needless” or at least be able to provide a minimum subsistence; when, at the same time, there is an abundance of wealth available elsewhere waiting to be consumed (or utilised), but which, for various reasons, cannot be commandeered because it belongs to others in the society who may, or may not be Muslims, and who, under Islamic Law, must be paid or compensated for their goods and/or services?  

Several eminently workable solutions are known to exist but, for a number of equally well-known reasons, they are not allowed to be discussed, let alone implemented. Unfortunately for Islam, and Muslims, most of the information about money, ‘double-entry book keeping’ and “modern-western ‘fractional reserve’ banking” has been completely lost, ignored, overlooked or connived with by most, if not all Scholars and Jurisprudents right across the secular and religious divide. One of the main reasons being, I believe, is because to be seen taking a particular interest in money appears to be for the one group ‘unworthy’ or ‘irreligious’ – and to the other to be an inevitable, immoveable, fact of life. The non-secular preferring to believe that they should leave the matter of ‘how much, or little, they have’ for fate to determine, and in so doing place themselves, their lives, and their properties at the mercy of non-believers who, see nothing wrong or inequitable in a system which monetizes the creditworthiness of a creditworthy individual (or society) and hands it back to them as a debt plus interest, instead of providing them with genuine credit at zero interest. A view held by a wide variety of Western economists including David Riccardo and John Maynard Keynes.  

This debt creating act constitutes legalised fraud, which is then compounded by the additional crime of extortion through interest. Which leads on inexorably to create the weight of unbearable debt described so graphically by Imam Ali. Usually, at this point in any discussion, conventional economists – including many Muslims – voice their pet arguments against interest free loans. Believing, like J.C. Hubbard, a 19^th century MP., that: 

“a loan made without interest to be a monster” 

and a loan made below the current level of interest to be “a monster in its degree”. The claim being that unless there are incentives, such as interest, people will neither save nor lend their money to others. And, as such, there will be no money to run the economy. But the problems arise because people feel compelled to save money and in so doing deny the economy its life blood which Keynes called “effective demand” in other words purchasing power. Which is why it should be clearly understood by everyone that the High Street banks do not need depositor’s money in order to lend out money to others. This they never do. Only Merchant Banks actually lend out what is deposited with them. Over and above this, they have to borrow, when ever they stumble across a credit worthy victim. This is part of an ancient deception which is part of a elaborate confidence trick to maintain the illusion that banks actually need the deposits of their customers in order to lend when, in actual fact, they are only needed by the system to make sure they go along with the concept of taxation and borrowing as the only possible options open to them and government. 

This fraudulent process, which is termed Fractional Reserve Banking, was born out of the experience gained over a long period of time by the London Goldsmiths that only about 10% of the actual gold deposited with them was ever called for at any one time. So they fraudulently issued more receipts than the gold they had in reserve and issued these receipts as interest bearing instruments. And the people thought, and still do, that they are putting their money in a safe place. Thus the rule or convention was established which eventually led to the foundation of the so-called modern banking system. Under this fractional reserve scheme, banks are permits to lend out ten, twenty, or thirty times more than the actual amount of cash in their depositor’s accounts. The result of which is that our lives and livelihoods are governed by a completely fraudulent and unstable system. Which, in the words of Professor Bernard Lietier, the designer of the EURO: “could melt down in as little as two hours.”  Much like the situation surrounding the recent tax on fuel campaign, when everything in the country came virtually to a stop within a few days. With money it would be only a matter of hours. 

Since time immemorial both the lending and borrowing at interest has always brought famine, war and pestilence to those who allow its practice, which represents the inevitable fulfilment of the ongoing promise made by Allah, in the Towrat, Injil and in His Final Word to mankind on the subject: 

“O, you who believe! Fear Allah and give up what remains of your demand for usury, if you are indeed believers…If you do not, then take notice of war from Allah and His Messenger…” He also warns us in the same surah that: “Satan threatens you with poverty and bids you to conduct unseemly. (Whilst) Allah promises you His Forgiveness and bounties and Allah careth for all and He knows all things…” (The Qur’an Surah 2, Al Baqara, verses 267 & 268).   

Other authentic verses emphasize mutual responsibility and co-operation and, further, consider all kinds of negligence with respect to this principle as: a general rejection of din [faith and religion]. Allah, The Exalted says: 

"Have you seen the person who rejects the religion? He is the one who treats the orphan with harshness, and does not urge (others) to feed the poor." (Qu’ran 107:1-3). 

The IMF and the World Bank are two of the worst offenders in this regard. In the Sudan, IMF stands for “Intimidation, Murder & Fraud”. In Indonesia it stands for IM’Fired. Without doubt The IMF, The World Bank and NATO “threaten” all countries “with poverty” if they do not obey their harsh, anti-human orders. As a result of which almost every government body forces its people into committing “harsh improper acts” and “conduct unseemly” becoming indirect agents of The New World Order or perhaps more accurately The New World Odour, whose effects are felt equally by the children of Iraq and the poverty stricken people of America as well. Which is why it should be clearly understood that because money is man-made, it can only ever be in short supply if men decide to make it scarce. It is clear that the Muslims have ignored the warning from Allah that if we do not work together as our enemies work that corruption and oppression will occur on earth. 

MORE ON HARSHNESS  

Abraham Lincoln clearly understood in 1864 that: 

“Money is a creature of Law.” 

So it can be ordered into or out of existence It is the great crime and folly of all governments – with, perhaps, the exception of Guernsey and Jersey - to remain in ignorance of this fact and continue to believe that the only ways to fund the public sector is through taxation and borrowing. This only ever works in the interests of a miniscule number of individuals, a fraction of a fraction of 1% of the entire mass of humanity. The evidence of history shows that it has never ever worked in the interest of either national or local government, industry or society as a whole. To better understand the mercurial process by which money comes into existence let us turn to the 1921 Nobel Prize Winning Chemist, Professor Frederick Soddy, MA., F.R.S. Author of, amongst other works, “Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt” and “Money Versus Man”, who came to the following conclusions: “The most sinister and anti-social feature about bank-deposit money is that it has no (physical) existence. The banks owe the public for a total amount of money, which does not exist. In buying and selling, implemented by cheque transactions, there is a mere change in the party to whom the money is owed by the banks. As the depositor’s account is debited, the other is credited and the banks can go on owing  for it all the time. 

“The whole profit from the issuance of money has provided the capital of the great banking business as it exists today. Starting with nothing whatsoever of their own, they have got the whole world into their debt irredeemably, by a trick. 

“This money comes into existence every time the banks ‘lend’ and disappears every time the debt is repaid to them. So that if industry tries to repay, the money of the nation disappears. This is what makes prosperity so ‘dangerous’ as it destroys money just when it is most needed and precipitates a slump. 

“There is nothing left now for us but to get ever deeper and deeper into debt to the banking system in order to provide the increasing amounts of money the nation requires for its expansion and growth. An honest money system is the only alternative…” He also stated elsewhere“…But debts neither get out of date nor wear out; they grow”  

Which explains why Lord Acton (a Cambridge Professor of History) pointed out that: 

“The issue which has swept down the centuries, and must be fought sooner or later, is the people versus the banks.” 

He is more famous for stating that: 

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupt absolutely.” 

And no where is corruption more prevalent than in the banking systems of the world. 

As previously mentioned, the Qur’an tells us unequivocally to:

“expect war from Allah and His Messenger.” 

It is a promise binding on Allah: The seeds of all future wars were sown at Versailles in 1919, and ratified in perpetuity at Bretton Woods in 1944. These future wars, like all their predecessors, will be caused by the congenital fault in our hideous monetary system - based as it is on inter-est and compound inter-est. To solve these recurring wars caused by: “recurring deficiencies of effective demand” The obvious solution to the problem is for the Treasury to provide all the money required to satisfy the spending requirements of all our people by extending the aggregate known as M0, at zero inter-est. The Treasury knows well how to solve this particular problem, if it only chose to exercise its power

“Government can, and does finance itself to a small extent by the issue of non-inter-est bearing money: this is the aggregate known as M0, the stock of which is currently some 19.1/2 billion. The size of the stock of M0 is limited by the demand for this form of money…The money that banks CREATE is either inter-est-bearing or renders some sort of service that costs banks money to provide.” 

Thus wrote Anthony Nelson, M.P, whilst acting as a spokesman for HM Treasury, on the 22^nd February 1993. He failed to point out that he, like Norman Lamont, were both from N.M.Rothschild, perhaps the greatest purveyors of government debt-finance the world has ever known.