Muslim Council ‘secretly linked’ to Brotherhood

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/faith/article4644129.ece


Does not come as any surprise they have been found to hold extremist views, support Hamas and suicide bombings. We then wonder why extremism is a problem in this country

Guess I shouldn't be surprised either

But I am disappointed

I'm not...it means we should be ablre to ban them as a proscribed organisation

and it means that ALL those letters...you know, where they condemn bombings etc.....are just "taquiya"

merely confirms what I and many others have suspected for years...

they play "run with the wolves, howl with the hounds"

Very true Vic
Won't happen though

I mean, lets be honest ...THEY were supposed to represent the voice of the supposed " moderate Muslim"

which now begs the question of ...is the "moderate Muslim" merely a convenient fiction to help pull the woool over our heads...Indeed...IS there any such thing....

This is all possibly true; but it won't change anything
Our government officials are just puppets and I'm growing more and more convinced this is all a masterplan

Lord Foul wrote:I mean, lets be honest ...THEY were supposed to represent the voice of the supposed " moderate Muslim"

which now begs the question of ...is the "moderate Muslim" merely a convenient fiction to help pull the woool over our heads...Indeed...IS there any such thing....

"if the "Muslim council was supposed to be the voice of the "moderate Muslim"...what does that say about the "moderate Muslim" huh?

It says that you should believe everything you read about people and there is an agenda going on.

yeah...we KNOW sasy

who's "agenda" though ?

Cameron is up Saudi's arse at the moment, Saudi hate the Muslim Brotherhood, Cameron is trying to blacken them:


Last month, the Guardian revealed that the United Arab Emirates, dominated by the oil-rich emirate of Abu Dhabi, threatened to block billion-pound arms deals with the UK, stop inward investment and cut intelligence cooperation if Britain did not act against the Muslim Brotherhood, which it regards as a terrorist outfit.

Even though:


An 11-page summary makes it clear the government accepts that the “Muslim Brotherhood has not been linked to terrorist-related activity in and against the UK” and has “often condemned terrorist-related activity in the UK associated with al-Qaida”.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/17/uk-will-not-ban-Muslim-brotherhood-david-cameron-says


Money talks

sassy wrote:It says that you should believe everything you read about people and there is an agenda going on.

An extensive report, that has had everything thrown at it by Muslims bodies to prevents its publication.
What dies that tell you?
If some groups has nothing to hide, you would not try ever legal means to denys its publication? In the end they had to just state the key facts untill the report is published, but the report is damning. We have a Muslim body who claims to be against terrorism, but backs terrorism, dependent on who the victim is. It views conflict with western ways, it was Islam to become the dominant force in the UK. Its influencial in universities, schools, Mosques, where the evidence is clear of their link to the Muslim brotherhood.

The findings of the UK government’s review into the Muslim Brotherhood have finally been published.  Commissioned by the Prime Minister in April 2014, the full report will not be released. Although the review finds that the Muslim Brotherhood does not meet the threshold of violence which would see it proscribed in the UK, it described members of the Muslim Brotherhood as possible extremists. As such the government has listed a set of renewed actions, including visa bans, on individuals associated with the group and promises to keep the group’s activities under review in order to consider proscription at a future date.

The key passage from the Prime Minister’s announcement this morning is this:
ADVERTISING


   ‘Muslim Brotherhood–associated and influenced groups in the UK have at times had a significant influence on national organisations which have claimed to represent Muslim communities (and on that basis have had a dialogue with Government), charities and some mosques. But they have also sometimes characterised the UK as fundamentally hostile to Muslim faith and identity; and expressed support for terrorist attacks conducted by Hamas.

   ‘Aspects of the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology and activities therefore run counter to British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, equality and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs. The Muslim Brotherhood is not the only movement that promotes values which appear intolerant of equality and freedom of faith and belief. Nor is it the only movement or group dedicated in theory to revolutionising societies and changing existing ways of life. But I have made clear this government’s determination to reject intolerance, and to counter not just violent Islamist extremism, but also to tackle those who create the conditions for it to flourish. The main findings of the Review support the conclusion that membership of, association with, or influence by the Muslim Brotherhood should be considered as a possible indicator of extremism.’

The section on the Muslim Brotherhood’s activities in the UK (authored by Charles Farr) are especially noteworthy.  These include the fact that the MB established its first representation in the UK fifty years ago, but that crucially:

   ‘In the 1990s the Muslim Brotherhood and their associates established public facing and apparently national organisations in the UK to promote their views. None were openly identified with the Muslim Brotherhood and membership of the Muslim Brotherhood remained (and still remains) a secret. But for some years the Muslim Brotherhood shaped the new Islamic Society of Britain (ISB), dominated the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) and played an important role in establishing and then running the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB). MAB became politically active, notably in connection with Palestine and Iraq, and promoted candidates in national and local elections. The MCB sought and obtained a dialogue with Government.’



The findings go on to list a set of organisations – including charities – which are associated with the Brotherhood and notes that among these:

   ‘MAB (like the MCB) have consistently opposed programmes by successive Governments to prevent terrorism.’

It concludes that:

   ‘Aspects of Muslim Brotherhood ideology and tactics, in this country and overseas, are contrary to our values and have been contrary to our national interests and our national security.’

The fact that these findings could be published at all constitutes a small victory for government.  And doubtless there will be those who will hope this matter can now be shelved or at least made to go away for a time.  In fact the release of these findings only starts the debate over what to do about the Muslim Brotherhood’s presence in the UK.

For instance, never mind preventing more Brotherhood emissaries travelling to the UK, how can individuals who have come to this country to promote the Brotherhood remain here now they are now known to be working for an entity with some members who have been officially labelled as possibly ‘extremist’ by the UK government?

Furthermore, how can groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood – several named in the report, some of which are closely affiliated with the designated terrorist group (and Brotherhood off-shoot) Hamas – retain charitable status while being designated as possibly ‘extremist’ by the UK government?  What capabilities will be given to the Charity Commission and then the other relevant authorities to investigate and pursue those entities which have clearly been using such a status to further the aims of an entity whose members have now been labelled possibly ‘extreme’?  What about those individuals from the group and its affiliates who teach at universities or work in other public bodies in the UK?  What about those university departments and others who have accepted money from entities that are associated with this organisation?  How can such activity possibly continue after the findings of this report, and what action will be taken retrospectively to pursue those who have engaged in such actions?

The release of these findings is a small triumph.  But now is the time to push the advantage against a group with some members who have now been shown to have been working inside Britain against the interests of Britain. Commissioning and publishing these findings was a demonstration of initiative.  Following up on them will be a test of resolve.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/the-Muslim-brotherhood-review-has-left-many-questions-unanswered/


Now if a group is as seen being dishonest and in fact is extremist in nature, then the Muslim council of Britain is not fit for purpose. The Governement should head up a new Muslim council panelled by Muslims who have the best interest of Britain and Muslims at heart.

Richard The Lionheart wrote:The findings of the UK government’s review into the Muslim Brotherhood have finally been published.  Commissioned by the Prime Minister in April 2014, the full report will not be released. Although the review finds that the Muslim Brotherhood does not meet the threshold of violence which would see it proscribed in the UK, it described members of the Muslim Brotherhood as possible extremists. As such the government has listed a set of renewed actions, including visa bans, on individuals associated with the group and promises to keep the group’s activities under review in order to consider proscription at a future date.

The key passage from the Prime Minister’s announcement this morning is this:
ADVERTISING


   ‘Muslim Brotherhood–associated and influenced groups in the UK have at times had a significant influence on national organisations which have claimed to represent Muslim communities (and on that basis have had a dialogue with Government), charities and some mosques. But they have also sometimes characterised the UK as fundamentally hostile to Muslim faith and identity; and expressed support for terrorist attacks conducted by Hamas.

   ‘Aspects of the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology and activities therefore run counter to British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, equality and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs. The Muslim Brotherhood is not the only movement that promotes values which appear intolerant of equality and freedom of faith and belief. Nor is it the only movement or group dedicated in theory to revolutionising societies and changing existing ways of life. But I have made clear this government’s determination to reject intolerance, and to counter not just violent Islamist extremism, but also to tackle those who create the conditions for it to flourish. The main findings of the Review support the conclusion that membership of, association with, or influence by the Muslim Brotherhood should be considered as a possible indicator of extremism.’

The section on the Muslim Brotherhood’s activities in the UK (authored by Charles Farr) are especially noteworthy.  These include the fact that the MB established its first representation in the UK fifty years ago, but that crucially:

   ‘In the 1990s the Muslim Brotherhood and their associates established public facing and apparently national organisations in the UK to promote their views. None were openly identified with the Muslim Brotherhood and membership of the Muslim Brotherhood remained (and still remains) a secret. But for some years the Muslim Brotherhood shaped the new Islamic Society of Britain (ISB), dominated the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) and played an important role in establishing and then running the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB). MAB became politically active, notably in connection with Palestine and Iraq, and promoted candidates in national and local elections. The MCB sought and obtained a dialogue with Government.’



The findings go on to list a set of organisations – including charities – which are associated with the Brotherhood and notes that among these:

   ‘MAB (like the MCB) have consistently opposed programmes by successive Governments to prevent terrorism.’

It concludes that:

   ‘Aspects of Muslim Brotherhood ideology and tactics, in this country and overseas, are contrary to our values and have been contrary to our national interests and our national security.’

The fact that these findings could be published at all constitutes a small victory for government.  And doubtless there will be those who will hope this matter can now be shelved or at least made to go away for a time.  In fact the release of these findings only starts the debate over what to do about the Muslim Brotherhood’s presence in the UK.

For instance, never mind preventing more Brotherhood emissaries travelling to the UK, how can individuals who have come to this country to promote the Brotherhood remain here now they are now known to be working for an entity with some members who have been officially labelled as possibly ‘extremist’ by the UK government?

Furthermore, how can groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood – several named in the report, some of which are closely affiliated with the designated terrorist group (and Brotherhood off-shoot) Hamas – retain charitable status while being designated as possibly ‘extremist’ by the UK government?  What capabilities will be given to the Charity Commission and then the other relevant authorities to investigate and pursue those entities which have clearly been using such a status to further the aims of an entity whose members have now been labelled possibly ‘extreme’?  What about those individuals from the group and its affiliates who teach at universities or work in other public bodies in the UK?  What about those university departments and others who have accepted money from entities that are associated with this organisation?  How can such activity possibly continue after the findings of this report, and what action will be taken retrospectively to pursue those who have engaged in such actions?

The release of these findings is a small triumph.  But now is the time to push the advantage against a group with some members who have now been shown to have been working inside Britain against the interests of Britain. Commissioning and publishing these findings was a demonstration of initiative.  Following up on them will be a test of resolve.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/the-Muslim-brotherhood-review-has-left-many-questions-unanswered/


Now if a group is as seen being dishonest and in fact is extremist in nature, then the Muslim council of Britain is not fit for purpose. The Governement should head up a new Muslim council panelled by Muslims who have the best interest of Britain and Muslims at heart.

A logical impossibility.....the two are fundamnetally incompatible

Tell that to the Muslims in the Army etc and the ones that have been helping people in the floods.  Really Victor, you are getting paranoid.

and...

oh yes a couple of dozen Muslims turn up to help in cumbria...i think I have had something to say about that elsewhere....

yea and some serve in the army...great

given they got a say in matters

without exception ALL would see ridiculous impositions of dress standards on women

certainly there would be no bikinis on our beaches

all would want pubs shut indeed no booze at all

given thay would want islamic rules...you can wave good by to the HRA I dont know of any Muslim nation that implements it..

and say "hello again" to the death penalty.,

even the most "moderate" holds what we hold in contempt

oh and Les and his mates are only safe as long as the Muslims remain an effectively powerless minority....

Lord Foul wrote:

Richard The Lionheart wrote:The findings of the UK government’s review into the Muslim Brotherhood have finally been published.  Commissioned by the Prime Minister in April 2014, the full report will not be released. Although the review finds that the Muslim Brotherhood does not meet the threshold of violence which would see it proscribed in the UK, it described members of the Muslim Brotherhood as possible extremists. As such the government has listed a set of renewed actions, including visa bans, on individuals associated with the group and promises to keep the group’s activities under review in order to consider proscription at a future date.

The key passage from the Prime Minister’s announcement this morning is this:
ADVERTISING


   ‘Muslim Brotherhood–associated and influenced groups in the UK have at times had a significant influence on national organisations which have claimed to represent Muslim communities (and on that basis have had a dialogue with Government), charities and some mosques. But they have also sometimes characterised the UK as fundamentally hostile to Muslim faith and identity; and expressed support for terrorist attacks conducted by Hamas.

   ‘Aspects of the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology and activities therefore run counter to British values of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, equality and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs. The Muslim Brotherhood is not the only movement that promotes values which appear intolerant of equality and freedom of faith and belief. Nor is it the only movement or group dedicated in theory to revolutionising societies and changing existing ways of life. But I have made clear this government’s determination to reject intolerance, and to counter not just violent Islamist extremism, but also to tackle those who create the conditions for it to flourish. The main findings of the Review support the conclusion that membership of, association with, or influence by the Muslim Brotherhood should be considered as a possible indicator of extremism.’

The section on the Muslim Brotherhood’s activities in the UK (authored by Charles Farr) are especially noteworthy.  These include the fact that the MB established its first representation in the UK fifty years ago, but that crucially:

   ‘In the 1990s the Muslim Brotherhood and their associates established public facing and apparently national organisations in the UK to promote their views. None were openly identified with the Muslim Brotherhood and membership of the Muslim Brotherhood remained (and still remains) a secret. But for some years the Muslim Brotherhood shaped the new Islamic Society of Britain (ISB), dominated the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) and played an important role in establishing and then running the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB). MAB became politically active, notably in connection with Palestine and Iraq, and promoted candidates in national and local elections. The MCB sought and obtained a dialogue with Government.’



The findings go on to list a set of organisations – including charities – which are associated with the Brotherhood and notes that among these:

   ‘MAB (like the MCB) have consistently opposed programmes by successive Governments to prevent terrorism.’

It concludes that:

   ‘Aspects of Muslim Brotherhood ideology and tactics, in this country and overseas, are contrary to our values and have been contrary to our national interests and our national security.’

The fact that these findings could be published at all constitutes a small victory for government.  And doubtless there will be those who will hope this matter can now be shelved or at least made to go away for a time.  In fact the release of these findings only starts the debate over what to do about the Muslim Brotherhood’s presence in the UK.

For instance, never mind preventing more Brotherhood emissaries travelling to the UK, how can individuals who have come to this country to promote the Brotherhood remain here now they are now known to be working for an entity with some members who have been officially labelled as possibly ‘extremist’ by the UK government?

Furthermore, how can groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood – several named in the report, some of which are closely affiliated with the designated terrorist group (and Brotherhood off-shoot) Hamas – retain charitable status while being designated as possibly ‘extremist’ by the UK government?  What capabilities will be given to the Charity Commission and then the other relevant authorities to investigate and pursue those entities which have clearly been using such a status to further the aims of an entity whose members have now been labelled possibly ‘extreme’?  What about those individuals from the group and its affiliates who teach at universities or work in other public bodies in the UK?  What about those university departments and others who have accepted money from entities that are associated with this organisation?  How can such activity possibly continue after the findings of this report, and what action will be taken retrospectively to pursue those who have engaged in such actions?

The release of these findings is a small triumph.  But now is the time to push the advantage against a group with some members who have now been shown to have been working inside Britain against the interests of Britain. Commissioning and publishing these findings was a demonstration of initiative.  Following up on them will be a test of resolve.



http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/12/the-Muslim-brotherhood-review-has-left-many-questions-unanswered/


Now if a group is as seen being dishonest and in fact is extremist in nature, then the Muslim council of Britain is not fit for purpose. The Governement should head up a new Muslim council panelled by Muslims who have the best interest of Britain and Muslims at heart.

A logical impossibility.....the two are fundamnetally incompatible

Partly agree and more so disagree

From a literal standpoint based on certain belief system in islam it would be impossible, but from the many reformers, it would be very possible. All religions alter and change over time, though with Islam it has been the most stubborn of all to change based on the fact illogical stance of how they deify the supposed and unproven deeds of a man. Placing them on a par to claims of Suras from Allah. Anything can progress and this nation is living proof of that Victor

And many of these we should be standing behind






Muslims fighting against Islamism

Signatories of a full page appeal in the New York Times on January 11, 2015, by Muslims fighting against Islamism:

• Sherkoh Abbas, Chair Kurdistan National Assembly of Syria, Washington, D.C.
  
• Tarek Fatah, Founder, Muslim Canadian Congress, Toronto, Canada
  
• Farid Ghadry, Reform Party of Syria, Washington, D.C.
  
• Iftikhar A. Hai, President, United Muslims of America, San Francisco, CA
  
• Tawfik Hamid, International Center for Countering Radicalism, Oakton, CA
  
• Husain Haqqani, Former Ambassador of Pakistan to U.S., Washington, D.C.
  
• Jamal Hassan, Council for Democracy and Tolerance, Baltimore, MD
  
• Sheikh (Dr.) Usama Hassan, Quilliam Foundation, London, UK
  
• Farzana Hassan, Director, Muslim Canadian Congress, Toronto, Canada
  
• Arif Humayun, President, Circle of Peace, Portland, OR
  
• Farahnaz Ispahani, Director, Americans for Pakistan, Washington, D.C.
  
• M. Zuhdi Jasser, American Islamic Forum for Democracy, Phoenix, AZ
  
• Naser Khader, Former Member of Danish Parliament, Copenhagen, Denmark
  
• Zainab Zain Khan, United Nations Association, Chicago, IL
  
• Courtney Lonergan, Arizona Interfaith Movement, Phoenix, AZ
  
• Hasan Mahmud, General Secretary, Muslims Facing Tomorrow, Toronto, Canada
  
• Salim Mansur, PhD., Professor, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada
  
• Maajid Nawaz, Co-Founder and Chairman, Quilliam Foundation, London, UK
  
• Raheel Raza, President, Council of Muslims Facing Tomorrow, Toronto, Canada
  
• Munir Pervaiz, President, Muslim Canadian Congress, Mississauga, Canada
  
• Oubai Shahbandar, Principle, Dragoman Partners, Washington, D.C.
  
• Jalal Zuberi, MD, Associate Professor, Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
  
• Ahmad Vanya, Fellow, American Islamic Forum for Democracy, San Jose, CA
  

Note 2 – references on the Muslim reform movement
Online articles:

• “As a Muslim, I Think Canada Should Ban the Niqab and Burka in Public”, September 25, 2015, Raheel Raza
  
• “We Need to Talk About Islam’s Jihadism Problem”, September 15, 2015, Maajid Nawaz and Sam Harris
  
• “The need to reform Islam”, June 1, 2015, Moha Ennaji
  
• “The Prospects for Reform in Islam”, March 30th, 2015, Raza Rumi
  
• “Charlie Hebdo attacks: time for Islam to reform”, January 9, 2015, Usama Hasan
  
• “An open letter to all Canadians – Canada is under attack!”, October 22, 2014, Raheel Raza
  
• “Islam in the Rear-View Mirror”, September 29, 2014, Salim Mansur
  
• “Does moderate Islam exist?”, September 14, 2014, Tawfik Hamid
  
• “Discriminating Islam from bigotry”, September 14, 2014, Sinem Tezyapar
  
• “The false belief that Muslims are at war with non-Muslims”, May 13, 2014, Sinem Tezyapar
  
• “Farzana Hassan: Islamic Reform — Daunting But Needed”, April 29, 2014, Ryan Mauro
  
• “Islam and Islamism”, July 23, 2013, Salim Mansur
  
• “Bassam Tibi: Islamism Is Incompatible With Democracy”, June 6, 2013, Ryan Mauro
  
• “Ideas About Modernizing Islam “, January 30, 2013, Farzana Hassan
  
• “Dr Amina Wadud: For a Progressive Islam”, November 19 2009, Trisha Sertori
  
• “Reform is Islam’s best kept secret”, August 30, 2005, Ziauddin Sardar
  
• “Rethinking Islam”, May 2002, Ziauddin Sardar
  

Books:

• “Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue”, October 6, 2015, Maajid Nawaz and Sam Harris
  
• “Inside Jihad: How Radical Islam Works; Why It Should Terrify Us; How to Defeat It”, September 10, 2015, Tawfik Hamid
  
• “Their Jihad NOT My Jihad: Or How Can You Possibly be an Anti-Terrorist Muslim?”, Nov 2, 2014, Raheel Raza
  
• “Political Islam, World Politics and Europe: From Jihadist to Institutional Islamism”, July 11, 2014, Bassam Tibi
  
• “Radical: My Journey Out Of Islamist Extremism”, October 15, 2013, Maajid Nawaz
  
• “Unveiled: A Canadian Muslim Woman’s Struggle Against Misogyny, Sharia and Jihad”, October 27, 2012, Farzana Hassan
  
• “Islamism and Islam”, May 22, 2012, Bassam Tibi
  
• “Arab Spring Dreams: The Next Generation Speaks Out for Freedom and Justice from North Africa to Iran”, May 8, 2012, Nasser Weddady and Sohrab Ahmari
  
• “Allah, Liberty and Love: The Courage to Reconcile Faith and Freedom”, February 7, 2012, Irshad Manji
  
• “The Jew is Not My Enemy: Unveiling the Myths that Fuel Muslim Anti-Semitism”, December 6, 2011, Tarek Fatah
  
• “Chasing a Mirage: The Tragic lllusion of an Islamic State”, April 14, 2008, Tarek Fatah
  
• “The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim’s Call for Reform in Her Faith”, February 10, 2005, Irshad Manji\
  
• “Muslim Reform Movement”, December 5, 2015, M. Zuhdi Jasser and Raheel Raza
  

Note 3 – Other Muslim peace activists
The following are Muslims who, although not known to be involved in Muslim reform (and therefore not mentioned in notes 1 and 2), are publicly involved in denouncing Islamism and supporting peace with Israel:

• Abdel Bioud, graduate student at McGill University (Canada) and active member of the “Students for Israel” association.
  
• Abdul Hadi Palazzi, secretary general of the Italian Muslim Assembly and the Khalifa for Europe’s Qadiri Sufi Order.
  
• Abdullah Saad Al-Hadlaq, Kuwaiti journalist and writer.
  
• Abdurrahman Wahid, Former president of Indonesia (now deceased).
  
• Aboud Dandachi, Syrian refugee, writer, and blogger.
  
• Adnan Oktar, Turkish author.
  
• Ahmad al-Adwan, Jordanian Sheikh.
  
• Ahmed Meligy, Egyptian peace activist.
  
• Ali Salem, Egyptian writer and playwright (now deceased).
  
• Anet Haskia, Israeli Arab politician and mother of three IDF soldiers.
  
• Bassem Eid, Palestinian human rights activist.
  
• Dalia Ziada, noted Egyptian human rights activist.
  
• Ed Husain, Adjunct senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations in the United Kingdom.
  
• Hasan Alsawaf, American immigrant from Syria, dentist, and Republican politician.
  
• Hasan Afzal, director of British Muslims for Israel.
  
• Kasim Hafeez, pro-Israel activist who was honored with the Speakers of Truth award.
  
• Khaled Abu Toameh, veteran award-winning journalist, and a Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute.
  
• Khaleel Mohammed, Muslim scholar and professor of religion at San Diego State University.
  
• Lucy Aharish, Israeli-Arab news anchor.
  
• Mahdi Majid Abdallah, Kurdish writer and journalist.
  
• Maikel Nabil Sanad, Egyptian activist who leads the No Compulsory Military Service Movement.
  
• Maulana Jamil Ilyasi, Secretary-general of Indian organization representing 200 million Muslims.
  
• Mithal al-Alusi, Iraqi Member of Parliament.
  
• Mohammed Mostafa Kamal, freelance journalist based in the United Kingdom.
  
• Mohammed Zoabi, Israeli Arab student and outspoken supporter of Israel.
  
• Mudar Zahran, Jordanian-Palestinian politician and writer who resides in the United Kingdom as a political refugee.
  
• Muhammad Al-Hussaini, British Imam.
  
• Muhammad Ali Al-Husseini, Shiite cleric in Lebanon.
  
• Qanta Ahmed, Associate Professor of Medicine, State University of New York, and Honorary Professor Glasgow Caledonian University, School of Public Health.
  
• Robert Werdine, American self-employed and history enthusiast.
  
• Salma Siddiqui, founder and president of Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations (CPCMO).
  
• Sara Zoabi, Israeli Arab chef.
  
• Siavosh Derakhti, recipient of an award for his efforts to promote tolerance and educate about the Holocaust.
  
• Sohail Raza, director of Coalition of Progressive Canadian Muslim Organizations (CPCMO).
  
• Tahir Gora, CEO of Canadian Thinkers’ Forum.
  
• Tarek Shahin, Egyptian cartoonist, creator of RISE, a graphic novel about the Egyptian Revolution.