Latest news with #Hassanal-Banna
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Press regulator's decision will have a chilling effect on free speech
Journalism, George Orwell reminded us, is publishing something that someone does not want printed. Everything else is PR. And one thing the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) very definitely does not want to see printed is the fact that I said in Parliament that it is the British affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood. Which is why it is so important that The Telegraph did publish my words. And why it is so reprehensible that they have been asked to issue a correction by the independent press regulator IPSO. When the Telegraph reported on the MAB's affiliation with the Brotherhood it did so quoting my words in the House of Commons last year, as I explained why it was necessary to take steps to deal with extremist organisations opposed to our values. Whether or not you agreed with my proposals (many good people didn't) the Telegraph was reporting in good faith utilising the fact that words spoken in the Commons are protected by parliamentary privilege and may be freely repeated outside. To censure a publication for straightforwardly reporting Commons proceedings can only have a chilling effect on free speech. Which is precisely what the Muslim Association of Britain wants. They don't want scrutiny. Groups suspected of extremism rarely do. They seek to present themselves as a peaceable association of co-religionists who simply want to get along and do good works. But the Muslim Brotherhood is very far from a sort of Islamic Mothers' Union. It was founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna with the explicit aim of re-creating a unified state for all Muslims – the Caliphate – governed by sharia law. Its Palestinian branch – Hamas – is an outright terrorist organisation (BBC please note – militant won't cut it as a description of these guys). In most other nations where the MB exists it isn't involved in or agitating for violence – but it does push for the replacement of existing systems of government and the adoption of Islam as a total way of life governing law and politics. This ideological attachment to sharia for all – Islamism – is not unique to the Muslim Brotherhood. But they're the oldest and perhaps most influential group arguing for it worldwide. That's why David Cameron asked two of our most distinguished public servants to investigate it – Sir John Jenkins, former ambassador to Saudi Arabia and the now sadly deceased Charles Farr of MI5. Their full report is confidential. But a shortened version was published in 2015 by the House of Commons which makes it clear that the MAB was dominated by the Brotherhood and clearly linked to other Brotherhood-associated groups such as the Cordoba Foundation and the Federation of Islamic Organisations in Europe A former director of the MAB, Mohamed Abdul Malek, told the House of Commons in April 2016 that he had joined the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in the UK in 1983 and was a member of the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood (LMB) Shura council and the LMB official spokesperson and European representative. One of its founders was a former Hamas chief. Other jurisdictions – especially in the Arab world – are alive to the subversive nature of Brotherhood activities. Which is why countries from the UAE to Jordan to Bahrain and Egypt are taking action against them and their affiliates. But not here. Islamists in the UK have long exploited libel and other laws to silence critics and evade scrutiny. When, as a Government minister, I argued we must name and expose extremist organisations there were multiple excuses offered to stymie me but the most consistent was always the risk of losing libel actions against these groups, allowing them to secure damages from the taxpayer and thus fund even more extremist activity. I found the idea that we couldn't tell the truth about extremists in our midst because we couldn't trust government lawyers to make a decent case lamentable then and it remains tragic now. But bad as that situation was, I never thought that an organisation named in Parliament as giving rise to concern for their Islamist orientation and views would be able to persuade our press regulator – whose job is to uphold free speech – to demand an apology from a newspaper for accurate reporting. I should have known better. As editor of The Spectator I had to publish an apology because one of our writers called a trans activist a man claiming to be a woman. Thanks to the Supreme Court we are now allowed to assert that fact once more without some lawyer trying to silence us. But while one extremist ideology – trans fundamentalism – has been countered at last, another – Islamism – appears to be benefiting from our failure as a society to uphold the truth and defend free speech. It should not be the job of regulators to police speech in this way. Procedures which were designed to help innocent individuals who may have been inadvertent victims of human error in reporting have been hijacked and turned into tools to intimidate, silence and evade proper scrutiny. This Government has indicated it will take on the lawyers and regulators who impede economic growth. I applaud that. Now they should face down the lawyers and regulators who are standing in the way of something even more important – free speech. Michael Gove is editor of The Spectator Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Press regulator is allowing fundamentalism to flourish
Journalism, George Orwell reminded us, is publishing something that someone does not want printed. Everything else is PR. And one thing the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) very definitely does not want to see printed is the fact that I said in Parliament that it is the British affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood. Which is why it is so important that The Telegraph did publish my words. And why it is so reprehensible that it has been asked to issue a correction by the independent press regulator Ipso. When the Telegraph reported on the MAB's affiliation with the Brotherhood, it did so quoting my words in the House of Commons last year as I explained why it was necessary to take steps to deal with extremist organisations opposed to our values. Whether or not you agreed with my proposals (many good people didn't), The Telegraph was reporting in good faith, utilising the fact that words spoken in the Commons are protected by parliamentary privilege and may be freely repeated outside. To censure a publication for straightforwardly reporting Commons proceedings can only have a chilling effect on free speech. Which is precisely what the Muslim Association of Britain wants. It doesn't want scrutiny. Groups suspected of extremism rarely do. They seek to present themselves as a peaceable association of co-religionists who simply want to get along and do good works. But the Muslim Brotherhood is very far from a sort of Islamic Mothers' Union. It was founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna with the explicit aim of re-creating a unified state for all Muslims – the Caliphate – governed by sharia law. Its Palestinian branch, Hamas, is an outright terrorist organisation (BBC please note – militant won't cut it as a description of these guys). In most other nations where the Muslim Brotherhood exists, it isn't involved in or agitating for violence – but it does push for the replacement of existing systems of government and the adoption of Islam as a total way of life governing law and politics. This ideological attachment to sharia for all – Islamism – is not unique to the Muslim Brotherhood. But it is the oldest, and perhaps most influential, group arguing for it worldwide. That's why David Cameron asked two of our most distinguished public servants to investigate it – Sir John Jenkins, a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia, and the now sadly deceased Charles Farr of MI5. Their full report is confidential. But a shortened version was published in 2015 by the House of Commons, which makes it clear that the MAB was dominated by the Brotherhood and clearly linked to other Brotherhood-associated groups such as the Cordoba Foundation and the Federation of Islamic Organisations in Europe Mohamed Abdul Malek, a former director of MAB, told the House of Commons in April 2016 that he had joined the Muslim Brotherhood in the UK in 1983 and was a member of the Libyan Muslim Brotherhood Shura council and the LMB official spokesperson and European representative. One of its founders was a former Hamas chief. Other jurisdictions – especially in the Arab world – are alive to the subversive nature of Brotherhood activities, which is why countries from the UAE to Jordan to Bahrain and Egypt are taking action against them and their affiliates. But not here. Islamists in the UK have long exploited libel and other laws to silence critics and evade scrutiny. When, as a Government minister, I argued we must name and expose extremist organisations, there were multiple excuses offered to stymie me. But the most consistent was always the risk of losing libel actions against these groups, allowing them to secure damages from the taxpayer and thus fund even more extremist activity. I found the idea that we couldn't tell the truth about extremists in our midst because we couldn't trust government lawyers to make a decent case lamentable then, and it remains tragic now. But bad as that situation was, I never thought that an organisation named in Parliament as giving rise to concern for its Islamist orientation and views would be able to persuade our press regulator – whose job is to uphold free speech – to demand an apology from a newspaper for accurate reporting. I should have known better. As editor of The Spectator, I had to publish an apology because one of our writers called a trans activist a man claiming to be a woman. Thanks to the Supreme Court, we are now allowed to assert that fact once more without some lawyer trying to silence us. But while one extremist ideology, trans fundamentalism, has been countered at last, another – Islamism – appears to be benefiting from our failure as a society to uphold the truth and defend free speech. It should not be the job of regulators to police speech in this way. Procedures which were designed to help innocent individuals who may have been inadvertent victims of human error in reporting have been hijacked and turned into tools to intimidate, silence and evade proper scrutiny. This Government has indicated it will take on the lawyers and regulators who impede economic growth. I applaud that. Now they should face down the lawyers and regulators who are standing in the way of something even more important – free speech. Michael Gove is editor of The Spectator
Al Arabiya
29-04-2025
- Politics
- Al Arabiya
Jordan's ban on the Muslim Brotherhood: Extremist ideas can die too
The Jordanian government had long shown patience and tolerance toward the Muslim Brotherhood, giving it ample time. Since October 7, 2023, there has been a continuous campaign of incitement, questioning its legitimacy, attacking its symbols, and stirring unrest to push society toward turning against the state. So, it's no surprise that extremist groups have intensely targeted Jordan for years – both Sunni and Shia Islamist groups – trying to turn it into another chaotic arena for weapons smuggling, clandestine cells, and logistical support. For all the latest headlines follow our Google News channel online or via the app. Jordan is closing an important chapter in its history. But the question remains: Will the idea of the Muslim Brotherhood die after the ban? The Muslim Brotherhood is not just a political organization – it's also an ideological and doctrinal one. Defenders of extremist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood argue that such ideas don't die and instead are passed down from generation to generation. And they're not entirely wrong. The Muslim Brotherhood is a concept that began nearly 100 years ago when Hassan al-Banna founded it in 1928, and it has persisted until today. Why? For several reasons. First, some governments have used the Muslim Brotherhood to gain legitimacy, out of fear of confronting them or provoking their wrath. Others used the group to mobilize against rivals or opposing ideologies, or to draw it into the political arena in an attempt to neutralize its power. These reasons all helped prolong its existence – but also led to major failures. Allowing the Muslim Brotherhood and its ideology, members, and activities to flourish unchecked for a long time essentially poisons a society from within, planting landmines of extremism. It's a dangerous game. Being lenient with extremist groups, compromising with them, or trying to contain them is like keeping a venomous snake company. History tells us the Muslim Brotherhood has often turned on its sponsors at critical, pivotal moments, weaponizing its followers and aligning with adversaries to eliminate them. Second, failed development breathed life into the Muslim Brotherhood. The group capitalized on economic decline or development failures in many Arab countries. Its legitimacy is fed by the absence of successful economic projects. Whenever poverty, corruption, poor governance, and injustice rise, the Brotherhood presents itself as the viable alternative. Third, the cultural and intellectual failure. The Brotherhood was given full freedom to dominate schools and universities, turning the education system into a tool for indoctrination. It also took over religious institutions entirely and was given the green light to influence society through events, lectures, and forums. Its media platforms operated without restriction. Its rhetoric dominated minds for decades, spreading a culture of hate at an unprecedented scale. And then we wonder why its ideas endure. Things reached a dangerous point, with Muslim Brotherhood leaders openly threatening to bring down the state, banking on the popularity they amassed over decades, rallying many in society and exploiting every tool they could – from relations with the West and the US to the Palestinian cause – to undermine their opponents' legitimacy. All of these reasons – and more – allowed the Muslim Brotherhood's ideology to endure for decades. Not because it was inherently robust or legitimate, but simply because it was given the space to survive and grow. The Muslim Brotherhood's ideology, like other extreme ideologies such as Nazism and fascism, can die – if it's defeated on security, cultural, and economic fronts. Only defeating it militarily while letting it thrive intellectually and culturally will guarantee its return. With corruption and poverty, the Brotherhood will find an opening to revive its narrative. If we take the German experience as an example, we see that the victors didn't just crush the Nazis militarily – they banned them and offered a successful economic and cultural alternative that relegated Nazism to the dustbin of history. This is exactly what must happen with the Muslim Brotherhood's ideology, which has lasted far longer than it should have.
New York Times
23-04-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
Jordan Announced a Sweeping Ban on the Muslim Brotherhood. Here's What to Know.
Jordan accused the Muslim Brotherhood of planning attacks in the country and introduced a blanket ban against the group on Wednesday, in a move that could shutter the nation's largest opposition party, the Islamic Action Front, the group's political arm in Jordan. The Islamic Action Front won a foothold in Parliament last year after campaigning against the Israeli invasion of Gaza. Here's more about the Muslim Brotherhood and its reach across the Middle East. What is the Muslim Brotherhood? The Muslim Brotherhood is a Sunni Islamist movement founded in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, a schoolteacher in Egypt, who argued that a religious renewal would help the Muslim world fend off colonialism and Western influence. He was sometimes contradictory about the group's focus and avoided defining what an Islamic government would look like. Mr. al-Banna was assassinated in 1949 at the age of 43. The group's doctrine, nonetheless, spread across the region, where many political movements, which operate loosely and independently, trace their roots to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. Some related groups use the Muslim Brotherhood in their names, but others do not. Similarly, some groups are explicitly linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, while others are offshoots or descendants. The Muslim Brotherhood has denounced violence, but some people who become frustrated with the group's stance have left for more militant organizations, like Al Qaeda. What happened in Jordan? The announcement on Wednesday came a week after Jordanian security services said that they had arrested 16 people accused of threatening national security by involving weapons and explosives, and planning to make drones. The Jordanian interior minister, Mazin Al Farrayeh, suggested in a news conference that the plot was connected to the group, saying that 'elements of the Muslim Brotherhood' had 'worked in darkness to carry out activities that undermine stability and tamper with security and national unity.' The Muslim Brotherhood did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Jordan's ban. This is not the first time that Jordan has moved against the group. In 2016, Jordan closed the Muslim Brotherhood's headquarters in Amman, the capital, and in 2020, a court took steps toward disbanding the group. But the Islamic Action Front was allowed to continue operations. Experts say that Jordan's sweeping ban on Wednesday may be related to global pushback against Hamas, which was founded by a man active in the Muslim Brotherhood during the first Palestinian uprising against Israeli control of the West Bank and Gaza. 'My guess is that the Jordanian government feels pressured by the Trump administration's keenness to push people from the Gaza Strip to other countries,' said Jon B. Alterman, the director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. But he said the reasoning was ultimately unclear. 'There is a way in which Gaza is in play now, which creates domestic concerns for the Jordanian government, which may make them less tolerant of political opposition and make them more fearful of domestic unrest,' he added. A large portion of Jordan's population is Palestinian, and Jordan has experienced local discontent over the war in Gaza, especially after the Jordanian government supported Israel in downing Iranian missiles last spring. An internal rift in Jordan's Muslim Brotherhood has been growing in recent years. Moderate members want to calm tensions between the government and the group, while more aggressive factions favor of challenging the country's rulers on rights and reforms. How is the group viewed around the world? During President Trump's first term, his administration considered labeling the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, which would have imposed broad travel and economic restrictions on people who interact with the far-flung and loosely knit group. The proposal roiled the Middle East and was met with criticism from officials and experts, who said the move could have unintended consequences. Some Muslim Brotherhood movements in Arab countries have championed democratic elections, causing friction in places led by authoritarian governments. The group's support has dwindled in places where it was once popular, such as Egypt and Tunisia, in part because governments have cracked down on the group. In Egypt, for example, the military deposed the country's first democratically elected president, Mohamed Morsi, a former Brotherhood leader who was elected amid the Arab Spring. The country's leaders in 2013 banned the group and imprisoned many of its members. What's next for the Islamic Action Front? It is not immediately clear how the ban will affect the Islamic Action Front's operations. The police surrounded the group's headquarters in Amman on Wednesday, and in a news conference, the party's secretary general, Wael Saqqa, said members were surprised by the searches the authorities conducted but had voluntarily complied. The Islamic Action Front did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
India Today
23-04-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Jordan outlaws Muslim Brotherhood, confiscates assets
Jordan has outlawed the largest opposition group in the country, the Muslim Brotherhood. The group is an ally of the Palestinian militant group, group is an ally of the Palestinian militant group, as the Society of the Muslim Brothers in Egypt by Hassan al-Banna in 1928, it is a transnational Sunni Islamist organisation. After members of the group were found to be linked to a sabotage plot, its assets were confiscated, said Jordan's Interior Minister Mazen Fraya, as reported by Reuters. He stated, "It has been decided to ban all activities of the so-called Muslim Brotherhood and to consider any [of its] activity a violation of the provisions of the law'.advertisementHe added that any promoter of the group's ideology will be held accountable by security forces arrested 16 people linked to the Muslim Brotherhood last week who were trained and financed in Lebanon. They are alleged to have plotted attacks on targets inside the kingdom involving rockets and ban extends to everything that may be published by the Muslim group has released no official comment on the actions by Jordanian WAS ONE OF THE FEW WHERE GROUP OPERATED LEGALLYThe Muslim Brotherhood has operated legally from Jordan for decades and has a wide supporter base spread across major urban centres and scores of offices across the country. It follows the Sunni Islamist ideology and consolidates with the goal of establishing a caliphate under sharia September, the Islamic Action Front (IAF), the political arm of the Brotherhood in Jordan, made significant gains in parliamentary elections. It secured 31 out of 138 seats by tapping into anger over Israel's war against group has been outlawed in many Arab countries, who consider it a dangerous 'terrorist group' that must be crushed, as mentioned by where it originated, has listed it as a terrorist though the Brotherhood claims that it publicly renounced violence decades ago and pursues an Islamist vision using peaceful means, the Arabic countries opposing it want it to be Watch
