Amazon is funding an extremist UK charity

[Deleted]

Source

Amazon has approved funding for an Islamic extremist British charity called The Muslim Research and Development Foundation, through its Amazon Smile programme, The Times reports.

The charity (MRDF) which according to the government’s counter-extremism commissioner Sara Khan, is the “main Salafist organisation in the UK”.

It was founded and formerly chaired by Haitham al-Haddad, a 52 year old Saudi Islamic scholar. Khan also stated, “Haitham al-Haddad’s views are misogynistic, racist and homophobic.

They promote a supremacist ‘us versus them’ world view that wrongly makes Muslims feel that they can’t be fully British.” In addition he has also been described as “one of the most dangerous men in Britain” by the head of the Muslim run counter extremist organisation, The Quilliam Foundation.

Mr Haddad PhD. Who says he represents orthodox Islam, affirms child marriage, “the younger the better”, though “you have to be careful of the legal issues”, female genital mutilation, done the Islamically approved way, “is better for the husband” and “a virtue or honour for women”.

As well as, stoning people to death for adultery, that husbands have a right to beat their wives, that homosexuality is an evil crime and that western women should submit to Allah and wear the niqab among other things.

He has also made the wild claims that paedophilia will be legalised in the west and that some western countries are planning to sell aborted foetuses “as meat to be eaten, to be used as a barbecue” by people in east Asia.

In 2012 he said, “I have received so many requests from western women who committed adultery. They were begging me to help them to find a way to a Muslim country to be stoned to death.”

He believes that Muslims are engaged in an “eternal and global” struggle against “the enemies of Allah” that will one day lead Islam to conquer the world.

The Amazon Smile programme allows customers of the online retail giant, to choose a charity they want a portion of their purchases (0.5 percent) to go to and as such, will make payments to the charity when it is selected by its supporters. Standards for eligibility on the programme include charities that do not “engage in, promote or support hatred, intolerance or discrimination based on sex, religion or sexual orientation”.

Amazon have declined to say when MRDF joined Amazon Smile, nor what sum of money it has already paid to the group, instead passing the buck of responsibility to the charities regulator to “determine which organisations are eligible to participate. Due to the serious nature of these concerns, we have referred these allegations to the commission and will be conducting a full review to ensure they do not violate our policies.”

Emma Webb, of the Henry Jackson Society’s centre on radicalisation and terrorism, said that Amazon was “channelling ordinary shoppers’ money to the hands of intolerant extremists. That’s wildly irresponsible. It’s giving charities like MRDF a veneer of respectability they don’t deserve.”

It's great to see such honorable organization founded by this distinguished individual receive money. /s

[cubby]

It's great to see such honorable organization founded by this distinguished individual receive money. /s

Does this seem like normal behavior for Amazon? Maybe dig a little deeper instead of being the normal child-like reactionary?

I mean, did it ever occur to you that Amazon didn't know about it? Just wasn't aware because of some oversight or missed queue? Or do you really think Amazon supports such charities.

I really wish more people would think before they post such drivel. Or at least highlight the important parts of the article. But your emotional extremism is much appreciated by the Ridiculous Right.

[PosPosPos]

Does this seem like normal behavior for Amazon? Maybe dig a little deeper instead of being the normal child-like reactionary?

I mean, did it ever occur to you that Amazon didn't know about it? Just wasn't aware because of some oversight or missed queue? Or do you really think Amazon supports such charities.

I really wish more people would think before they post such drivel. Or at least highlight the important parts of the article. But your emotional extremism is much appreciated by the Ridiculous Right.

Eh, I just checked, and since it isn't there when I searched for it, it's yet another alarmist alt-right hoax as usual.

https://imgur.com/a/lrLIpXa

Plus, Amazon themselves state there are 1 million + charities you can choose from, so I doubt they have the time or resources to vet them all. Alt-righters really need to stop manufacturing outrage when Amazon Smile charities require the user to manually opt-in in order to donate money to them.

[cubby]

Eh, I just checked, and since it isn't there when I searched for it, it's yet another alarmist alt-right hoax as usual.

https://imgur.com/a/lrLIpXa

Plus, Amazon themselves state there are 1 million + charities you can choose from, so I doubt they have the time or resources to vet them all. Alt-righters really need to stop manufacturing outrage when Amazon Smile charities require the user to manually opt-in in order to donate money to them.

Lol, thanks for walking down that road a bit and posting the results. What a shock that the alt-right lied again.

[PosPosPos]

Lol, thanks for walking down that road a bit and posting the results. What a shock that the alt-right lied again.

I buy stuff from Amazon, and buy via their Amazon Smile thing.

Amazon Smile forces you to manually choose which charity you want to donate to, and obviously if you gave so much as a fuck about not donating to "evil muslim extremists" like our darling @MS-20, you would at least check online beforehand to research whichever charity you are planning to lock into(you can change your choice afterwards too).

[cubby]

I buy stuff from Amazon, and buy via their Amazon Smile thing.

Amazon Smile forces you to manually choose which charity you want to donate to, and obviously if you gave so much as a fuck about not donating to "evil muslim extremists" like our darling @MS-20, you would at least check online beforehand to research whichever charity you are planning to lock into(you can change your choice afterwards too).

And that's a good point. Moreover, with more than 1 million charities, vetting them probably isn't a priority - just getting them into the system was probably monumental. People lose track of what a million actually means.

And of course, as you pointed out, people can be responsible for choosing their own charity - so even if the Bring Back Bin Laden Foundation was listed, it's unlikely that people will actually be sending them money.

[Kujako]

Is this real, or is this fake?

Who knows.

It's really fake, we know.

[sircaw]

Honestly this is utter bullshit, what gives it away is



The part about female gential mutilation being a muslim thing is just a lie, it's an old regional practice in parts of Africa it has nothing to do with religion.

Reporting this.

UNICEF estimated in 2016 that 200 million women living today in 30 countries—27 African countries, Indonesia, Iraqi Kurdistan and Yemen—have undergone the procedures.[3]

[cubby]

UNICEF estimated in 2016 that 200 million women living today in 30 countries—27 African countries, Indonesia, Iraqi Kurdistan and Yemen—have undergone the procedures.[3]

But the point was that it isn't a Muslim specific thing. It might be done by Muslims, but it's not a tenant of their religion.

I'm speaking of their religion, like Catholics use the bible, rather than discussing the religion.

[Kallisto]

Unverified report from a far right nutjob source. Easy enough to disregard.

[Edge-]

https://www.businessinsider.com/amaz...emists-2018-10

So from an actual news site on this topic.

It seems that...

Amazon facilitated the donations, they didn't make donations themselves. This is part of an existing charity program they have.

It lets shoppers donate 0.5% of a purchase to a charity, so it's pretty negligible.

The two charities had ties to al-Haddad but were not run by him.

Amazon "takes cues" from the UK's charity regulator in determining eligible charities, and these two charities maintained that status which is why Amazon left them eligible.

So the long and short is a likely negligible amount of money went towards these charities which were not flagged by the UK government despite their connections to al-Haddad, and Amazon's program is largely just allowing folks to donate to any registered, government approved/confirmed charity which includes these.

Amazon has been made aware of the issues and is taking action.

Ok.

[josykay]

Now that sounds like an absolutely reasonable source.

[Draco-Onis]

It's great to see such honorable organization founded by this distinguished individual receive money. /s

What else are the voices telling?

[Orbitus]

It's great to see such honorable organization founded by this distinguished individual receive money. /s

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/voice-of-europe/

Bias: Extreme Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Anti-Islam

Why am I not surprised that @MS-20 would fall for a conspiracy like this?

[Deleted]

Does this seem like normal behavior for Amazon? Maybe dig a little deeper instead of being the normal child-like reactionary?

I mean, did it ever occur to you that Amazon didn't know about it? Just wasn't aware because of some oversight or missed queue? Or do you really think Amazon supports such charities.

I really wish more people would think before they post such drivel. Or at least highlight the important parts of the article. But your emotional extremism is much appreciated by the Ridiculous Right.

This is really funny coming from the left. You should also stop being an apologist for the Amazon, it is their duty to thoroughly check "charity" organizations.

Eh, I just checked, and since it isn't there when I searched for it, it's yet another alarmist alt-right hoax as usual.

https://imgur.com/a/lrLIpXa

Plus, Amazon themselves state there are 1 million + charities you can choose from, so I doubt they have the time or resources to vet them all. Alt-righters really need to stop manufacturing outrage when Amazon Smile charities require the user to manually opt-in in order to donate money to them.

It's not there because Amazon took it down for further investigation.

I buy stuff from Amazon, and buy via their Amazon Smile thing.

Amazon Smile forces you to manually choose which charity you want to donate to, and obviously if you gave so much as a fuck about not donating to "evil muslim extremists" like our darling @MS-20, you would at least check online beforehand to research whichever charity you are planning to lock into(you can change your choice afterwards too).

I'm not sure what is your point here? I know how system works.

https://www.businessinsider.com/amaz...emists-2018-10

So from an actual news site on this topic.

It seems that...

Amazon facilitated the donations, they didn't make donations themselves. This is part of an existing charity program they have.

It lets shoppers donate 0.5% of a purchase to a charity, so it's pretty negligible.

The two charities had ties to al-Haddad but were not run by him.

Amazon "takes cues" from the UK's charity regulator in determining eligible charities, and these two charities maintained that status which is why Amazon left them eligible.

So the long and short is a likely negligible amount of money went towards these charities which were not flagged by the UK government despite their connections to al-Haddad, and Amazon's program is largely just allowing folks to donate to any registered, government approved/confirmed charity which includes these.

Amazon has been made aware of the issues and is taking action.

Ok.

I was wondering if someone will link this. Good job!

Is this real, or is this fake?

Who knows.

It's really fake, we know.

Unverified report from a far right nutjob source. Easy enough to disregard.

More alt right fear propaganda based completely on ignorance like their own philosophy is.

I’ll renew my Prime subscription just for you qtpie.

Now that sounds like an absolutely reasonable source.

What else are the voices telling?

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/voice-of-europe/

Bias: Extreme Right, Propaganda, Conspiracy, Anti-Islam

Why am I not surprised that @MS-20 would fall for a conspiracy like this?

Voice of Europe is mostly an aggregator site and they do include links to original articles which are usually not in english. If you bothered to click on the link or read properly you could've seen this is a legit UK Times article, so the jokes on you.

All articles I post are legit.

[Dendrek]

Can someone tell me how outraged I should be?

[AeneasBK]

There are so many better reasons to hate Amazon than them engaging in a little mild domestic terrorism.

[Orbitus]

This is really funny coming from the left. You should also stop being an apologist for the Amazon, it is their duty to thoroughly check "charity" organizations.



It's not there because Amazon took it down for further investigation.



I'm not sure what is your point here? I know how system works.



I was wondering if someone will link this. Good job!















Voice of Europe is mostly an aggregator site and they do include links to original articles which are usually not in english. If you bothered to click on the link or read properly you could've seen this is a legit UK Times article, so the jokes on you.

All articles I post are legit.

You got your article destroyed, now you are trying to defend it? We already know you are a liar, so why not defend a conspiracy website.

[Deleted]

You got your article destroyed, now you are trying to defend it? We already know you are a liar, so why not defend a conspiracy website.

How exactly is my article destroyed?

They are quoting and linking this UK Times article and there is Business insider article talking about the same thing.

Article is legit and you are just hysterical. As I said all articles I post are legit and can be verified from different sources.

[Orbitus]

How exactly is my article destroyed?

They are quoting and linking this UK Times article and there is Business insider article talking about the same thing.

Article is legit and you are just hysterical. As I said all articles I post are legit and can be verified from different sources.

@Edge-'s post. He explained EVERYTHING and why you are wrong, but you ignored it.