Labour MP banned from entering Israel attended Muslim Council dinner
One of the two Labour MPs refused entry to Israel attended a Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) dinner weeks before, The Telegraph can reveal.
Abtisam Mohammed and Yuan Yang were turned away at Israel's border on Saturday on the basis that they had travelled to the country to spread 'anti-Israel hatred', Israeli authorities said.
The pair, who became MPs last year, had travelled to Israel as part of a parliamentary delegation organised by Medical Aid for Palestinians and the Council for Arab-British Understanding.
It can now be revealed that Ms Mohamed attended an event organised by a group shunned by the Government because of its allegedly anti-British positions.
The Muslim Council of Britain dinner, which took place on March 17, was a celebration of the organisation's campaign efforts for accurate reporting on Muslims and Islam.
The Sheffield Central MP's decision to attend raised questions, as Labour has continued the Conservative party's policy of non-engagement with the organisation. Husam Zomlot, the Palestinian ambassador to the UK, addressed attendees at the dinner.
While the Government has not given its reasoning for distancing itself from the organisation, Rishi Sunak's administration said positions taken by MCB leaders that it said 'contradict our fundamental values'.
In 2009, Daud Abdullah, MCB's then deputy secretary-general, signed a declaration calling for attacks on the Royal Navy if it tried to stop arms being smuggled into Gaza to supply Hamas. The Labour government of the time said it would not engage with the group unless Mr Abdullah stepped down. He later resigned.
In January this year, Sir Steven Timms, the disability minister, was 'spoken to' for attending a dinner organised by the group.
Ms Mohamed has not faced any similar action from the party because backbench MPs are not held to the same standards as ministers, it is understood. The Government's position on the Muslim Council of Britain has not changed.
Since entering the Commons, Ms Mohamed and Ms Yang have been critical of Israel's actions during the war in Gaza, following the Oct 7 terror attacks by Hamas.
In February, Ms Mohamed organised a cross-party letter signed by 61 MPs and peers that urged the UK to ban goods made in Israeli settlements in the occupied territories.
Ms Yang called for sanctions on Israeli ministers in January, telling MPs: 'We would like more action and we do not think the current action is enough.'
'Control and censorship'
Since the pair were denied entry to Israel, the Labour Party has rallied around them, posing for a group photo in Westminster Hall on Monday that featured Wes Streeting and Hamish Falconer.
On Monday, Ms Mohamed told MPs: 'What happened to myself and the MP for Earley and Woodley [Ms Yang] has been unprecedented. We were denied entry based on our legitimate political opinions, which are firmly aligned with international law.
'There is no direct route into the West Bank. We have to go through Israel. This act was not just a diplomatic affront. This wasn't about security. It was about control and censorship.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
22 minutes ago
- Sky News
Israel-Iran live: Eight killed in Israel as Iran breaches Iron Dome; Tehran preparing to leave key nuclear treaty
Explained: What is Israel's Iron Dome? Israel's Iron Dome defence system was penetrated overnight as Iran launched renewed airstrikes, with at least eight people killed and nearly 300 injured. Iran's Revolutionary Guards claimed to have used a new attack method that caused the multi-layered defence system to target itself. "The initiatives and capabilities used in this operation, despite the comprehensive support of the United States and Western powers and the possession of the most up-to-date and newest defence technology, led to the successful and maximum hitting of the missiles on the targets in the occupied territories," it said. But what is the Iron Dome and how does it work? The Iron Dome is Israel's highly prized air defence system. It uses radar to detect and intercept aerial attacks targeting the country. Mobile launchers and 'battle management centres' It was developed by Israel's state-owned Rafael Advanced Defence Systems with US support. It consists of a series of truck-towed mobile units placed throughout the country. When their radars detect a threat, the information is sent to a "battle management centre" where military personnel analyse it, anticipating its path and impact point, and decide which missile launcher to use to intercept it. Counter missiles are then fired directly at the threat - or near it - so the shrapnel can neutralise it. The dome, known as Kippat Barzel in Hebrew, reacts within a matter of seconds and is manned 24 hours a day. Originally, it was designed to protect cities and strategic sites against missiles with a range of 2.5 to 43 miles, but it is thought to have been expanded. More than 90% effective It has blocked more than 90% of rockets fired towards Israel, with a naval version deployed to protect ships and other assets in 2017. This is at least partly why the number of Israeli deaths in the current fighting with Iran and Hamas has remained relatively low. Soon after it began operating, it became the envy of other militaries. Rafael says it has supplied at least two Iron Dome batteries to the US army, with Ukraine having made a similar request. Saturation point unknown Although extremely effective, it is not perfect. Overnight, a number of cities in Israel were hit by Iranian strikes, leading to several deaths, with more people trapped under the rubble. The dome also has a saturation point at which it would become overwhelmed, but this level is unknown. When fighting between Hamas and Israel broke out on 7 October 2023, 3,000 rockets were fired from Gaza at once. Israel also has medium and long-range defence systems, known as David's Sling, Patriot and Arrow.
The Independent
22 minutes ago
- The Independent
Nuclear agency head warns of radiological and chemical contamination inside Iran's main nuclear site
The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said Monday that there is a possibility of both radiological and chemical contamination within Iran's main nuclear enrichment facility in Natanz following Israeli strikes, although radiation levels outside the complex are presently normal. IAEA director general Rafael Mariano Grossi said that the radiation poses a significant danger if uranium is inhaled or ingested. He added that the risk can be effectively managed with appropriate protective measures, such as using respiratory protection devices while inside the facilities. 'The level of radioactivity outside the Natanz site has remained unchanged and at normal levels, indicating no external radiological impact to the population or the environment from this event,' Grossi said. Grossi was addressing an urgent session of the U.N. nuclear watchdog board in Vienna that was convened at the request of Russia to discuss Israeli attacks against Iranian nuclear facilities. He said there apparently was no additional damage at Natanz and the Isfahan nuclear research site since Saturday. He said that the main concern inside the Natanz facility is the chemical toxicity of a gas called uranium hexafluoride, which is the result of fluorine mixed with the uranium during enrichment. It is extremely volatile, will quickly corrode, can burn the skin and is especially deadly if inhaled, experts say. 'Amid theses challenging and complex circumstances, it is crucial that the IAEA receives timely and regular technical information about the facilities and their respective sites,' Grossi said. Without information, the U.N. nuclear watchdog 'cannot accurately assess the radiological conditions and potential impacts on the population and the environment and cannot provide the necessary assistance.' Grossi said that U.N. inspectors will remain present in Iran and inspect the nuclear facilities 'as soon as safety conditions allow.' He warned that 'military escalation threatens lives, increases the chance of a radiological release with serious consequences for people and the environment and delays indispensable work towards a diplomatic solution for the long-term assurance that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon.' Satellite photos analyzed by The Associated Press show extensive damage at Iran's main nuclear enrichment facility in Natanz. The images captured Saturday by Planet Labs PBC show multiple buildings damaged or destroyed. The structures hit include buildings identified by experts as supplying power to the facility. Grossi told the U.N. Security Council on Friday that the above-ground section of the Natanz facility was destroyed. The main centrifuge facility underground did not appear to be hit, but the loss of power could have damaged infrastructure there, he said. Israel also struck a nuclear research facility in Isfahan. The IAEA said four critical buildings were damaged, including an uranium-conversion facility, but there was no sign of increased radiation at Natanz or Isfahan. Grossi on Monday also told the IAEA board of governors that no damage has been seen at the site of the Fordo enrichment site, which is buried under a mountain and protected by anti-aircraft batteries. Fordo appears designed to withstand airstrikes. Grossi also said that the Bushehr nuclear power plant, Iran's only commercial nuclear power plant, has not been targeted nor affected by the recent attacks and neither has the Tehran Research Reactor. Any country on the 35-member board of the IAEA can call a meeting under its rules. The IAEA board last week found Iran in non-compliance with its nuclear obligations for the first time in 20 year. —- The Associated Press receives support for nuclear security coverage from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and Outrider Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content. —- Additional AP coverage of the nuclear landscape:
Spectator
25 minutes ago
- Spectator
The delusion of western Palestine activists in Egypt
As the news cycle shifts its gaze to Iran and the escalating war to prevent the psychotic Islamic theocracy from going nuclear, spare a thought for the few hundred virtue-signalling westerners who thought it would be clever to traipse through Egypt and attempt to approach the Gaza border, armed not with aid or expertise, but with slogans, smartphones, and a boundless belief in their own moral radiance. They came, allegedly, to show solidarity with Gaza. What they revealed, instead, was the sheer delusion of performative activism gone rogue. Egypt, they quickly discovered, is not Glastonbury These self-styled heroes of humanity had absorbed the wildest claims from Hamas propagandists: tales of genocide, disproportionality, and babies being starved by 'Zionists' for sport. That this information may have come from a terrorist organisation that systematically lies, stages suffering for cameras, and steals aid from its own people did not seem to give them pause. Nor did the macabre irony that Hamas triggered this war by butchering Israeli civilians on 7 October, in an Iranian-backed rampage. For the marchers, it seems context and truth are distractions. Israel is evil, Gaza is pure, and anything that complicates this infantile morality play must be ignored. And so they flew to Cairo, preening like missionaries, oblivious to the region they were entering. Egypt, they quickly discovered, is not Glastonbury. Its security services do not offer vegan meal options or safe spaces. Within days, hundreds were detained, deported, or dumped back in the capital. One might almost feel sorry for them, if it weren't all so laughable. Their misfortune wasn't just predictable, it was the logical outcome of their fantasy-driven politics colliding with a brutal, indifferent reality. One particular scene went viral, mostly because of its tragicomic absurdity. A heavily tattooed man from Wales, claiming to be a nurse and pacifist, stood theatrically in front of Egyptian officers, pleading for passage. His Welsh lilt only sharpened the absurdity: 'You do have a choice. You're humans. We're here for humanity… You are my brother. In Islam, you are my brother!' A woman beside him asked, 'Are you a Muslim?' He ignored her. The performance rolled on. 'Please, I saw them shooting pregnant women, Muslim women.' Behind him, the crowd chanted 'Free, free Palestine,' and our Florence Nightingale of farce continued: 'These people aren't Muslims doing this, they're Zionists. They're not Jewish… I stand for Islam, I stand for the people of Falesteen.' It would have been risible if it weren't so revealing. Far from being political or humanitarian action, this was mere street theatre, but it soon wore thin: even the over-enthusiastic Arabic interpreter who had manically waved his arms and relayed this poor chap's desperate message eventually wandered off, apparently bored. The Welshman carried on alone, invoking starving babies, empty breasts, and the 'white hearts' of the Arab world. This, presumably, was meant to dignify his sobbing saviour complex, but it came across as patronising. The whole thing felt like a pitiful, live-streamed hallucination or a previously unseen moment from Little Britain. But it's not just idiocy on display. There is a deeper, darker pattern at work. Though they're encouraged by the activist news angles which seek to paint the conflict in simplistic, black and white terms, like a Ladybird book version of reality, these activists do not simply fall into their beliefs. They seek them out. They aren't 'radicalised' like someone catches a cold. Instead, they walk themselves into it, one credulous, self-congratulatory step at a time. As philosopher Quassim Cassam argues, extremism isn't just about ideology or tactics, it's a mindset: rigid, conspiratorial, and self-righteous. It thrives on grievance, absolutism and moral vanity. And crucially, it is chosen. People adopt it to interpret the world in a way that flatters their self-image and justifies their hostility. In this sense, the activists' worldview isn't imposed upon them, it is cultivated, reinforced, and rehearsed, with each act of public 'solidarity' functioning as both ritual and performance. They don't appear to ask why Hamas steals aid, embeds rockets in hospitals, or uses civilians as shields. They ignore why Gaza remains under blockade: because demilitarisation and deradicalisation were never accepted. Instead, they fixate on Israel, the Jewish state, as a unique and monstrous evil. This obscene inversion is not empathy. It is hatred, moralised. And the media helps. The BBC and other outlets regurgitate Hamas casualty claims as gospel, air scripted stories by Hamas leaders' children, broadcast false claims of 'flattened' hospitals, and treat every activist as a prophet or a saint. The BBC Arabic service even insisted that Jews spit on Christians as part of a holy festival ritual (we don't). The result is a feedback loop of propaganda and performance. The media amplifies the activists. The activists believe the media. And all of them seem to reinforce each other's prejudices under the performative illusion of humanitarianism. If they cared for Palestinians, they would campaign for Hamas to disarm, for children to be educated in peace, and for aid to be routed through secure, accountable channels. They would support Israel's right to exist and defend itself, and they would call out the Islamic fanatics who hold Gaza hostage and murder and rape Jews. But that would require moral clarity, political knowledge, and a spine. Far easier to film yourself sobbing outside Rafah and post it on Instagram for instant likes and shares. In the modern world, victimhood is currency. And being manhandled by Egyptian police, or weeping theatrically for the cameras, only boosts your activist credentials. They aren't real martyrs, but they certainly play them online. This is a grotesque masquerade. It feeds anti-Semitism, empowers terrorists, and distracts from real solutions. And all for what? So a few westerners can feel righteous for an afternoon. Spare a thought indeed, but not a tear.
