Controversy Surrounds Muslim Brotherhood-Linked Convention in Toronto

Photo: NorthTension, Flag of the Muslim Brotherhood, Wikimedia Commons | Jihad Watch

During the May long weekend, the Muslim Association of Canada (MAC) held its national convention at Toronto’s taxpayer-funded Enercare Centre, drawing controversy over allegations of extremist rhetoric, antisemitic messaging, and ideological links to the Muslim Brotherhood.

MAC is considered one of the largest and most influential Muslim organizations in Canada, operating mosques, Islamic schools, and charitable institutions across several provinces. Critics and investigators have long pointed to the organization’s ideological roots in the Muslim Brotherhood, also known as the Ikhwan. Archived statements previously published by MAC acknowledged that its “modern roots can be traced to the Islamic revival of the early twentieth century, culminating in the movement of the Muslim Brotherhood,” while also identifying the group’s founder, Hasan al-Banna, as a major influence on its teachings and direction.

Concerns regarding these ties were also highlighted in a Canada Revenue Agency audit, which reportedly documented communications with Muslim Brotherhood-linked figures, support for Brotherhood-associated causes, and activities appearing to align with the movement’s broader objectives.

One of the most controversial moments during the convention reportedly occurred at a youth workshop titled “Visionaries of the Ummah: Youth Activism Lab.” Participants were asked to describe the type of community they wished to build, with responses displayed in a live word cloud projected onto a large screen. Among the phrases visible to attendees was the term “Jew free,” which appeared prominently during the session.

According to reports, no facilitator or adult organizer intervened to remove the phrase or publicly object to its appearance. The workshop itself was reportedly facilitated by individuals connected to the Canadian Muslim Public Affairs Council (CMPAC), further intensifying criticism over the lack of response to openly antisemitic language.

The controversy has emerged amid growing concerns about rising antisemitism in Canada and increasing public debates surrounding extremist activism presented under the banner of political “resistance.”

Attention has also shifted toward another upcoming event scheduled for November in Toronto. The conference, titled “Three Years of Al-Aqsa Flood Conference: Resistance & Return From the Belly of the Beast,” is being organized by the Masar Badil Movement, also known as the Palestinian Alternative Revolutionary Path Movement.

The organization has been closely linked to the Samidoun Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network, which Canada designated as a terrorist entity because of its alleged ties to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a recognized terrorist organization.

Promotional material for the conference openly praises the October 7 attacks, referring to them as “one of the most courageous acts of resistance in our lifetimes.” Organizers described the event as an effort to strengthen “regional forces” while reaffirming what they call “Palestinian resistance.”

Statements published by Masar Badil have also openly praised Hezbollah and armed resistance movements across the Middle East. In a recent statement commemorating Lebanon’s “Resistance and Liberation Day,” the movement celebrated Hezbollah’s role in forcing Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000 and declared that liberation can only be achieved “through the weapons, the political vision, and the principles of Resistance.”

The organization further praised resistance movements in Lebanon, Palestine, Yemen, and Iran, while glorifying “martyrs” and calling for continued struggle against Israel and Western influence in the region.

These developments have intensified debate across Canada regarding the limits of free expression, the promotion of extremist ideologies, and the normalization of antisemitic rhetoric at public events held in taxpayer-funded venues.

Critics argue that conferences glorifying violent movements or allowing openly hateful slogans to circulate unchecked contribute to growing social divisions and embolden radical narratives. Questions are increasingly being raised about how such events continue to receive public space and visibility despite ongoing concerns over incitement, extremist affiliations, and the spread of antisemitic sentiment.

(This Article was originally published by Jihad Watch)