The U.K. government is facing serious questions over its decision to allow the American Islamist cleric Mohamad Baajour to enter Britain for a speaking tour, despite extensive evidence of extremist, antisemitic and pro-terrorist rhetoric in the cleric’s record.
The one who’s a kaffir and died as kaffir, they have the curse of Allah.
In a letter to the Home Secretary, Nick Timothy, MP warned that Baajour’s planned U.K. appearances represent a clear failure of the government’s responsibility to prevent extremist hate preachers from gaining a platform in Britain. The Tory MP for West Suffolk, urged decisive action, drawing parallels with previous cases in which the Home Office eventually barred radical Islamist individuals after public outcry.
In his letter, Nick Timothy called on the Home Office to refuse Baajour entry to the United Kingdom, investigate charities facilitating extremist tours, and clarify the criteria used to assess extremist speech by foreign nationals.
Baajour, a senior figure at the East Plano Islamic Center (EPIC) in Texas, is scheduled to speak in Manchester, London and Leicester. EPIC itself has been mired in controversy and, as of December 2025, has been sued by the Texas attorney general for alleged violations of securities law.
Timothy’s concern is perfectly reasonable. Baajour’s own sermons, widely available online, reveal a consistent pattern of extremist views.
He has explicitly endorsed Sharia law’s violent corporal punishments, insisting that Muslims who object to amputating the hands of thieves are effectively outside the faith. He has spoken approvingly of punishments for adultery that imply stoning to death, and has declared that Muslims should not pray for the welfare of non-believers upon their death.
“The one who’s a kaffir and died as kaffir, they have the curse of Allah, the curse of the angels and the curse of every human being,” he preached in a sermon in Texas in late 2025.
His rhetoric toward Jews is particularly alarming. In multiple talks, Baajour has claimed that “Zionists ruin every country,” alleging a global conspiracy in which Jews interfere in and destroy societies wherever they are present. In separatist sermons, he warns Muslims never to align closely with Jews or Christians, urging believers to “die with your anger, die with your hatred,” language that goes far beyond theological conservatism into open incitement.
A large number of British citizens have been jailed for posting far less extremist social media posts under Keir Starmer’s administration.
Praised Killers of U.K. Nationals
Perhaps most concerning is Baajour’s repeated praise for Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organisation in the U.K. which killed 14 U.K. nationals on October 7.
Following the October 7, 2023 atrocities, Baajour congratulated “the people of Gaza” for “scarring the enemy,” praising what he explicitly called the mujahideen of Gaza. He described those killed in the conflict as ideal martyrs and urged Muslims to “love such a death,” framing mass violence as “religious triumph!”
In other sermons, Baajour equated modern conflicts with Qur’anic battles, invoking Pharaoh and Moses to suggest an inevitable divine victory over today’s “enemies.” He has prayed publicly for victory over “the disbelievers” and called for martyrdom not just in Gaza, but “everywhere.”
The choice of venues intensifies concern. In Manchester, Baajour is due to speak at Didsbury Mosque, previously attended by the Manchester Arena bomber Salman Abedi and in London, he is scheduled at the East London Mosque, an institution long criticised for hosting divisive speakers. The tour—as stated in Nick Timothy’s letter to the U.K. Home Secretary—is supported by Muslim Aid, a registered U.K. charity, raising further questions about oversight of charities facilitating extremist speakers.
Nick Timothy’s letter highlights a striking parallel with the case of Shadee Elmasry, another extremist preacher who was eventually barred from the UK. Timothy argues that Baajour’s record is at least as severe, if not worse, and questions why the Home Office appears unwilling to act proactively this time.
No serious critic disputes the importance of free speech. But as Timothy rightly notes, “free speech does not oblige the state to import hate preachers”—particularly if they express support for a U.K. government-proscribed group.
Allowing Baajour to tour U.K. cities sends a dangerous message: that individuals who praise terrorist violence, promote antisemitic conspiracy theories, and advocate religious coercion can still expect access to British platforms—provided their extremism is framed in religious language.
The sharp contrast and inconsistency with Britain’s current position is stark when viewed against past actions. In 2009, the U.K. government, under Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, refused entry to Dutch MP Geert Wilders on the grounds that his presence “would pose a genuine, present and significantly serious threat” to community cohesion and public safety.
U.K. citizens have a right to consistency. When ministers insist that extremism will not be tolerated, that promise must apply equally—not selectively and without fear or favor.
Whether the U.K. government acts will be a test of its credibility. Failure to do so risks reinforcing the perception that Britain has become permissive territory for extremist ideologues—even as ordinary citizens face increasing scrutiny for far less inflammatory speech.
Interestingly, the United Arab Emirates, a Muslim country, has announced it is restricting its nationals from enrolling at British universities over fears that U.K. campuses are being radicalized by radical Islamist groups.
The evidence in Baajour’s own words is extensive, public, and deeply troubling. It confirms the fear that Britain is a hotbed for radicalisation. Ignoring it would not be showing tolerance. It would be pandering to extremists.
