British authorities have declared Thursday’s attack on a synagogue in Manchester as terrorism, but not Islamist terrorism. Deliberation is warranted before judging any criminal’s intent. Yet Britain’s elite is going out of its way to avoid the Islamist causes of rising anti-Semitism.
On Thursday, the first day of Yom Kippur. a man used a car and a knife to attack worshippers outside Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation Synagogue. Two are dead (Adrian Daulby, 53; Melvin Cravitz, 66), of which one seems to have been killed by fire from police. Another three are in hospital, of which one was hit by a police bullet. The victims would have been more numerous if survivors had not locked out the attacker.
The attacker was shot dead by police. Jihad Al-Shamie fits the profile of most Western terrorists: young, male, Muslim, second-generation immigrant (he immigrated as a child, from Syria), with a history of crime, of escalating violence.
Authorities are investigating whether he threatened pro-Israeli politicians, 13 years ago. He was on bail for rape. Somehow, in a country that outlaws polygamy, he had three wives. One described him as a ‘vile’ man who ‘controlled’ her during their relationship. He told another wife that he ‘really loved’ an imam who described Jewish people as ‘treacherous.’ During the attack, he called 999 to pledge allegiance to Islamic State,
Anonymous sources claim that he was never referred to the counter-extremism programme Prevent, although such a denial is often followed by revision.
His father praised Hamas fighters and wished them well on the day they invaded Israel, to murder, rape, and kidnap civilians. The father is now claiming to be shocked at what his son did.
If Jihad Al-Shamie were not dead, I doubt we would know anything about him or his father yet, for fear of ‘inflaming community tensions.’
Western European politicians are in the habit of avoiding the fact that most deadly terrorists are Islamist. We should be able to admit this fact without being accused of denying that most Muslims are not terrorists, most victims of terrorism are Muslims, and non-Muslims too can hate.
But Britain’s government downplays Islamism and exaggerates Islamophobia. Thence, it neglects anti-Semitism and exaggerates white supremacism, which, conveniently, is used to explain both Islamophobia and anti-Semitism.
For years, Britain’s government (going back through Conservative administrations too, in common with Democratic administrations in the US) has invented a myth that most violent extremists are white supremacists.
[Addendum, 6 November 2025: The government just revealed that a record number of referrals were made to Prevent, the government’s anti-terror programme, in the year to March 2024. Cases were up 27 percent on the previous year. Most cases are officially categorized as ‘no identified ideology,’ which is where the government hides Islamism. Officially, Islamism accounts for 10 percent of referrals, even though Islamists make up most of those imprisoned for terrorist offences, and an even greater proportion of deadly terrorism. Right-wingers officially account for 21 percent of referrals. It’s a neat trick for claiming that right-wingers are the greatest threats.]
British popular culture routinely depicts terrorists as white supremacists, and the victims as Muslims, lest any reality is called out by a politician, lobbyist, or journalist as ‘Islamophobic.’
Inevitably, exaggerating Islamophobia has made Britain’s government Islamophilic.
Both biases are discriminatory. They’re bad for social cohesion and for counter-terrorism.
Britain’s government won’t take the counter-Islamist actions that are normative in other Western countries. For instance, it hasn’t banned the Muslim Brotherhood. It still consults the foul and unrepresentative Muslim Council of Britain (which is supported by 2 to 4% of Britain’s Muslims; less outside London). In July, it proscribed Palestine Action, but not because of any terrorism by Palestine Action, rather because it broke with the Labour Party.
Islamism has been allowed to normalize on our streets and in our institutions.
For the last two years, most protests in Britain have been in support of Gaza and thence the terrorist group Hamas, which controls Gaza, and against Israel. These protests started after Hamas’ invasion of Israel (7 October 2023), before Israel invaded Gaza.
Political assembly is fine. But these protests routinely feature chants in favour of Hamas, intifada, Palestinian expansion ‘from the river to the sea,’ and the killing and rape of Jews. Within the first month, Palestine-flagged cars raced through Jewish neighbourhoods with chants of ‘fuck the Jews, fuck all of them, fuck their mothers, rape their daughters and show your support for Palestine’. Within months, 46 per cent of British Muslim respondents said they prefer Hamas over Israel; only 24 per cent expressing negative feelings about Hamas.
Freedom of speech is fine. Except Metropolitan Police ignored anti-Semitic chants, while they arrested a bystander for being ‘openly Jewish.’ The Met later admitted the arrest was wrong…but has continued to privilege one side.
Even the Board of Deputies of British Jews managed to produce a report on the rise of anti-Semitism without using the semantic frames ‘Islam’ or ‘Muslim.’ It was published in July, barely two months before the latest Islamist attack in Manchester.
On Thursday, within hours of the attack, pro-Palestinian protestors went back to the streets of London, Leeds, Manchester, Bristol, Bournemouth, and other cities – not in protest against the attack, but in protest against Israeli detention of Greta Thunberg and fellow activists on a flotilla headed for Gaza.
The Daily Telegraph heard plenty of insensitivity, if not hate. One protestor said: ‘I don’t give a f*** about the Jewish community right now. I thought about it and I’m sorry about what happened, but the whole story and why we’re here is because of [Israel’s arrest of Thunberg].’
Forty people were arrested for trying to march on Downing Street, or for attacking police officers, none was arrested for hate speech or supporting a proscribed organization.
Talking of supporting proscribed organizations, the government-funded BBC used a Hamas official’s son to speak for Gaza, without admitting Hamas’ involvement. And the BBC asked the government whether its more robust stand on immigration had radicalized Jihad Al-Shamie!
By contrast, many Jews link rising anti-Semitism to Thursday’s attack.
The UK’s Chief Rabbi tweeted. ‘This is the day we hoped we would never see, but which deep down, we knew would come. For so long we have witnessed an unrelenting wave of Jew hatred on our streets, on campuses, on social media and elsewhere – this is the tragic result.’
The Board of Deputies of British Jews and Jewish Leadership Council, in a joint statement, also blamed ‘rising anti-Semitism.’
The Spectator’s Jonathan Sacerdoti wrote: ‘Let no one feign surprise. The signs have been visible. The hate has been loud. And the consequences are now bleeding into the streets.’
The next day, Policy Exchange’s expert on security categorized the attack as ‘not a surprise. Britain has been heading in this direction for many years.’
The historian Simon Sebag Montefiore says the ‘intifada has come to Britain…fueled by years of incitement and indifference.’
Robert Jenrick (a husband and father to Jews), writing as Shadow Justice Secretary, described the attack as ‘the product of years of rampant anti-Semitism,’ and warned that we must stop ‘tolerating’ it.
Keir Starmer’s administration does not suggest that Britain’s government will stop tolerating anti-Semitism.
Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu blamed Starmer personally for the ‘barbaric’ attack, by failing to curb ‘a toxic wave of anti-Semitism.’ ‘Weakness in the face of terrorism only brings more terrorism. Only strength and unity can defeat it.’
Starmer is offering unity, but not strength.
One of Starmer’s arguments when campaigning for leadership of the Labour Party was in opposition to its anti-Semitism, under Jeremy Corbyn. For credibility, he lent on the fact that he, like Jenrick, is husband and father to Jews.
But he tolerates MPs elected on their self-identification as Muslim and their promises to put Muslims first and to focus British resources on their authoritarian home countries. For instance, a Labour councilman appeared in front of a Pakistani flag telling his fellow ‘Pakistanis’ to take over councils. A Labour MP organized a campaign for Britain to build an airport in Kashmir.
Starmer oversees a government intent on outlawing Islamophobia, on tolerating Sharia law, cousin marriages, self-segregation, and self-policing, on avoiding the whole truth about Muslim rape gangs, and on putting the rights of mostly-Muslim illegal immigrants ahead of mostly non-Muslim residents.
And last month he recognized Palestine as a state, without any expectations for how it should behave, be governed, or draw its borders.
Even the BBC recognizes that Starmer’s policies are driven by his Party’s Muslim base.
Thursday’s attack has not changed him.
On the day of attack, Starmer rushed back from a European summit in Denmark, to Downing Street, for briefings, but his broadcast from there was lame. He said the attack is ‘horrific’; the attacker is ‘vile.’
He admitted ‘rising’ ‘hatred’ of Jews in Britain, but failed to specify the haters or why hatred is rising.
Apart from saying ‘Britain must defeat it,’ he offered no solutions, other than a ‘promise’ that ‘I will do everything in my power to guarantee you the security that you deserve, starting with a more visible police presence.’ The Mayor of London too has promised more policing.
Policing is sensible, but what is Starmer offering longer term?
Starmer promised ‘that over the coming days, you will see the other Britain, the Britain of compassion, of decency, of love.’ That’s true. That’s nice. But that’s not a solution.
On Friday, Starmer visited the synagogue, where he said he would ensure the Jewish community is ‘safe and secure.’ He visited Greater Manchester Police to thank first responders. But again he specified no causes or solutions.
The Home Secretary, Shaban Mahmood, was with Starmer, but equally evasive. She said she is ‘horrified by the anti-Semitic terrorist attack,’ and that ‘those who seek to divide us, they will fail.’ On Friday she called the anti-Israel protesters ‘unBritish.’
But Mahmood is the same person who characterized most British flag-wavers as ‘white,’ ‘male,’ and ‘bad,’ once called for direct action against British companies doing business in Israel, characterized Reform UK’s immigration reforms (despite adopting some of them) as ‘worse than racism,’ led the push to outlaw ‘Islamophobia,’ and repeatedly pretends that ‘Islamophobia’ is normative and rising – without citing anything other than subjective experience, before she ever acknowledges anti-Semitism.
Notably, Starmer and Mahmood avoided the vigil outside the synagogue on Friday afternoon.
Starmer sent David Lammy, the hater of Israel, Donald Trump, whites, and Western history (even though he’s a terrible historian: he just accused Nigel Farage of flirting with the Hitler Youth as a child).
Somehow, Starmer thought Lammy was the man to be his first Foreign Secretary, his second Deputy, and his primary ambassador to grieving Jews. Some in the crowd chanted ‘shame on you,’ as soon as he was introduced, and again as he promised unity.
Starmer’s government isn’t credible.
This is what the government should have done.
