Extreme Islamism - like all political movements - requires cash. Those who pay extreme Islamists are at best helping to further bigoted, Flintstone ideas and, at worst, they are directly funding Islamist terrorism. Since Islamists often show two faces to get what they want (in an uneducated misinterpretation, they justify this as taqiyya) a good lesson is to never pay an Islamist, whether you think he or she is an extremist or not. Not a penny.

Remember that in Britain extreme Islamists are in charge of numerous charities and "places of religious worship". Even if they stick a charity registration number under your nose or some cause that in some way pulls at your heart strings you are better off donating to some globally represented NGO like Oxfam or the Red Cross.

A growing number of people are rightly disgusted at the state of the Charity Commission and how, in spite of some recent improvements under new management, it continues to fail the British people - handing out charity numbers to proven extremists without checking.

A short walk from Victoria station - at 23, Crawford Street - a charity called BEST operates (Charity Number 1014888). BEST stands for British Educational Support Trust - as valid a use of the word "British" as the similarly racist and extremist British National Party. Charity Number 1014888 used to be called RIHS (Revival of Islamic Heritage Society, headquartered in Kuwait). Go inside 23 Crawford Street and - sitting amongst a collection of Islamic books - you'll find piles of free RIHS leaflets dotted around, mostly written in Arabic.

Recent BEST charity accounts have carelessly been written on RIHS letterheads in spite of the charity's attempts to pretend it is nothing to do with RIHS anymore. The Charity Commission's point of contact with BEST is a bigot by the name of Sirag Elnour, who is a well-known Islamist. So why the name change for 1014888?

RIHS is a banned organisation across many UN member states. The US Treasury and Bank of England froze its accounts post-911, it has been behind dozens of bombings in Bangladesh (which maimed and slaughtered scores of innocent civilians) and was a crucial funder and organiser of mujahideen in the Yugoslav wars in the 1990's. Its Pakistan office was run by Abd al-Muhsin al-Libi - a man better known as an Al Qaeda facilitator. Al-Libi provided Osama bin Laden and his associates with facilities in Peshawar, and personally carried money and messages on behalf of Osama bin Laden.

BEST still operates in the UK because the Charity Commission investigative unit in Liverpool is under-funded and lacks the expertise to comprehend the scale of abuse by Islamist (and other) extremist organisations of charity status going on in Britain. BEST - amongst other activities - runs camps for young British Muslims. There is still a serious lack of linkage between the Charity Commission and over-stretched national security agencies.

What the Charity Commission really needs to do is start all over again - make all charities re-apply for charity status and stop giving the benefit of any doubt. This would be a huge and disruptive process but one - as with the recent, mostly successful reclassification of student visa-valid colleges - that would be of great benefit to the British people and the prevention of Islamist and other extremism. To weed out the existing charities run by radicals would be an extremely difficult undertaking.

Instead we are left with sections of the Charity Commission set up to help Muslim charities run by Muslims who are proven Islamists themselves. Just as proven Islamists have been involved in crucial State posts in departments as sensitive as Immigration; once again we are left with abusers handing out the candy.

Whilst people can boycott charities, most charities will feel no effect from a boycott. A BEST or White Pigeon (one of several LTTE UK charity fronts) are funded by those from within extremist enclaves where funding these charities is obligatory or enviable. Such charities make use of their charity tax status to make the most of their funds, to garner apparent respectability to hide their sinister aims. Unfortunately the average Briton will make no difference by boycotting them, as these charities do not bother with street collections, stick to their own Diaspora and try to keep under the radar as much as possible.

But what if a British High Street bank is directly funding an extremist organisation? Or what if a British High Street bank is letting its accounts be used by an extremist organisation? People could surely boycott these banks? At least cause them enough deserved distress to change their mind and re-allocate their funding?

In the case of the Tamil Tigers' White Pigeon charity, National Westminster Bank happened to run its bank accounts. But at least NatWest do not advertise on LTTE forums or legitimise Tamil Tiger calls for murder and a return to terrorism across LTTE publications and sites.

HSBC, however, has had a regular advertising spot on the extremist Islamist online forum Ummah.com for a while now, where the likes of RIHS (not bothering to disguise itself with its new name BEST) advertise events and fundraisers. HSBC helps keep Ummah.com afloat by paying for a banner on the Ummah forum, alongside other household names like The Children's Mutual (advertising its Sharia baby bond).

HSBC - Britain's biggest bank with over 1500 branches throughout England & Wales - donates cash to a collection of excellent charities including Help for Heroes, Oxfam and the Red Cross. HSBC customers in the UK include many servicemen and women who are serving / who have recently served in Afghanistan (and Iraq).  

Ummah.com (not set up as a charity yet) has run a section dedicated to "Crusader Deaths" where dead servicemen and their families are poked fun at and the Taliban congratulated for their killing of non-believers (referred to as "dirty kuffar").

The site (open to all of whatever age) houses extremist lectures by the likes of Sheikh Anwar Al-Awlaki, an American-born Yemeni scholar who was banned from addressing a meeting in London by video link in August because he is accused of supporting attacks on British troops and backing terrorist organizations. Al-Awlaki is said to be the inspirer of the Muslim US Major Nidal Malik Hasan who recently massacred thirteen US soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas.

On Ummah.com there are videos calling for jihad. Several areas call for the death of homosexuals and lesbians - same sex relationships described as "horrifying behaviour" while Muslims who engage in homosexual acts are described as individuals "past out of Islam" who "deserve to burn to death".

Ummah.com has archives full of extremist comments and sources which make Ayman al Zawahiri appear like a feasible Outreach candidate. It's a viper's nest where Britain's extremist Islamists - both male and crone - congregate and replenish on venom. For many years now there have been calls for the site to be taken off the web, whilst others have argued the site should be continued so extremists can be monitored there and terrorism can thus be prevented. All critics have recognised the extremist content on the site and no-one has suggested any of Britain's financial institutions sponsor such material.

Some dim, fringe, radical left-wing commentators - who know next to nothing about the subject matter - have said the site should be left alone because "it's not so bad" (fortunately such chicken-brained quislings are so marginal they are as good as irrelevant in modern day Britain. No-one responds to their misrepresentations and public figures have now grasped how a wall of silence exposes these little weaklings further in their helplessness and wholly-merited marginality).

So, what the hell is HSBC doing offering paid advertising for HSBC Amanah (its Sharia banking services arm) on this vile website? Has this prestigious banking organisation decided that - in spite of its commitment to British service men and women overseas - Ummah.com's user numbers are too good an opportunity to pass by? (This seems highly unlikely from a bank which prides itself on its ethical approach).

Is this merely a case of someone very busy at HSBC Canary Wharf's marketing department signing off on funds given to HSBC's appointed marketing agency - focusing on the figures rather than the advertising location?

HSBC could argue that its advertisement is one of many banners splashed across many sites by online marketers and that it is the online marketers' error for not pointing out to them the difference between a website serving Britain's peaceful Muslim community (the vast majority of British Muslims) and a website serving a fringe group of bloodthirsty, bigoted, crazed, Islamist extremist savages. 

The thing is that we checked with Ummah.com. HSBC knows jolly well that it is advertising on Ummah.com with its alleged 50,000+ unique users.

We questioned Ummah.com's Sajid Pandore on September 16th this year, who declares his role at Ummah.com as a "moderator". Here follow some of his answers (excuse the quality of his English as English is not his first language).

We asked Mr Pandore which companies funded the site and he clarified it was "HSBC etc who pay for advertising space and it goes towards the cost of the expensive rental costs per month". Mr Pandore should know as he admitted, "No I dont get paid a penny for what i do over at Ummah forum its just voluntary basis in return i get to use it as an advertising tool for marketing stuff i do (mailshots, banner advertising that sorta stuff) 50,000+ members you cant go wrong with that sorta marketing eh?!" Translation: Pandore is the one who sets up the advertising links on the Ummah.com site and he gets the likes of HSBC to advertise there.

We also asked Mr Pandore for the names of the people who run the site. His answer (written verbatim below) was: "Waha Media LTD - I'm sure you can pick that info up from the net or through public records or whatever, they not radicals either, mainstream Muslims - I don't associate myself with radicals or people like that nor do we let ummah as well too much to lose plus we have a lot of reputable mainstream companies both muslim and non muslim that advertise stuff with us being associated with radicals have a lot to lose and these companies that advertise with us if they thought we were radical would not even be associated with us."

We checked up on Waha Media Limited (UK Company Number 042469) and it has a registered office located at 17 Holden Avenue, Kingsbury, London, NW9 8HP. Its administrative contact is listed as Nawaf Ibrahim. Another company called Pointreward Limited is run from the same (residential) address. Something else came up about Waha - not for printing here.

Sajid Pandore has openly admitted that his role at the website has been to police the content and to ensure the smooth running of the site. Pandore (his words) is "Moderator - meaning someone who tries to police the forum i.e. dealing with members, outsiders and removing any objectional / illegal material on the board that sorta stuff and looking after technical side of things".

Then perhaps Pandore can now explain why - three months after we pointed out that Ummah.com was housing extremist content - there are lectures available on the Ummah Forum from the radical preacher Abdullah el Faisal dating back to May 2006, extremist Al Muhajiroun videos dating back to November 2006 and one section entitled "Declaration of War" from April 2007 where a recording of Osama Bin Laden himself is downloadable where Bin Laden is described as "the honourable Sheikh Usama bin Laden (may Allah preserve him)" by the contributor. These extremist, often illegal resources are just some of many housed on the website.  They are available on only 56 pages of resources listed since Ummah.com started - why hasn't he removed this objectionable, illegal material from the website? How long does it take to go through 56 pages of resources and remove this material? Why the hell hasn't he done this?  

Mr Pandore is off to Dubai "to run an Arabic music MTV style channel". He has stated "if the police ask for help I'll help" which should come as great news to extremists who have made Ummah.com their home, as Pandore logs their IP addresses. This fact has been confirmed by his blogging friends in several of their little-read blogs and notes. One wonders how soon Mr Pandore will be leaving Britain.

What for HSBC?

News of the bank's support for a website that mocks the British victims of Afghanistan and Iraq (and their grieving families) is currently doing the rounds of Army, Navy and RAF forums. A dossier on Ummah.com with verified screenshots of its worst offences has been sent to the top British Equality charities and organisations, as well as the relevant Government departments. Letters have been sent to HSBC's Marketing Department which can be written to at: HSBC Bank PLC, Marketing Department, Level 33, 8 Canada Square, London, E14 5HQ. (We urge you to pick up your pen and write a quick letter to them now).

Our hope is that HSBC drops its advertising campaign at Ummah.com immediately and recognises that advertising on a site which houses extremist material and attracts the very worst extremist Islamists in our society is hugely irresponsible. If HSBC's error was a technical oversight, so be it. Actions speak far louder than words.

If you bank at HSBC then you too should do a search of Ummah.com - which is easily achievable online without signing up to the website as a member. If HSBC and others refuse to drop their advertisements you know what to do - there are plenty of other banks out there who would not be seen dead on a site inhabited by Britain-hating, Britain-abusing, extreme Islamist refuse.

Watch this space.

If Ummah.com is going to continue to exist it will continue to exist without mainstream money - costing Islamists any money they have to keep the site going. Ummah.com's future is one where it will have the authorities all over its back until it changes its contents, moderation and rules to meet the only laws that matter in this country - which happen to be those made by Britons for those who are in Britain; whatever colour, background or creed.

As soon as the mainstream advertising on Ummah.com goes, I urge all of you and all your friends and family to join up to Ummah.com and overload the website with stories of British heroism in Afghanistan and Iraq. Then we will see once again the comfort afforded by these vile virtual havens turn overnight into merited discomfort and pain.

Dominic Wightman is Editor of the Westminster Journal.

---

Bookmark with: