The Manchester Yom Kippur Attack

Implications for Britain's stability and Keir Starmer's premiership

On 2 October, during a Yom Kippur service, Jihad al-Shamie, a 35-year old Syrian-born British citizen naturalised in 2006, attacked a synagogue in Manchester. Two Jewish worshippers were killed, three others were wounded. Armed police shot the attacker within seven minutes of the attack. However, one of the deceased and one of the injured were also shot by police.

The attacker.

The attack came days after Islamic State called for attacks on Christians and Jews, though there is no evidence that Shamie was responding to that call. Shamie appears to have been known to authorities, given that a man with the same name had threatened a Conservative MP. It is unclear if he acted alone or as part as a cell - three other people have been arrested. He wore a vest during the attack that resembled a suicide vest, most likely to force police to shoot him, rendering him a martyr in his view.

Celebratory riots

Following the attack, pro-Palestinian protesters disrupted train stations in Leeds, Leicester, Leeds, Manchester, Brighton, Birmingham, Sheffield, Liverpool, Cardiff, Glasgow, Edinburgh, and London, among others. Critically, the protests had a celebratory air - with music, flag waving and dancing.

In London in particular, the police seem to have struggled to contain the protests, though generally, the police seemed unprepared and easily overwhelmed. Another major pro-Palestine protest is scheduled for 4 October. The police asked the organisers to cancel the march, but they refused.

State priorities

Counter-terrorism guidance in Britain now describes Extreme Right Wing Terrorism as involving:

• Cultural Nationalism - the belief that one culture is superior to others, and that migrants should integrate into their host societies’ culture. This is civic nationalism, which is championed by both the Conservatives and Reform.

• White Separatism - the belief that Europeans should have mostly ethnically homogenous countries, and,

• White Supremacism, the belief that skin colour marks value, and that whites are of greater worth than others.

It equates all three with Islamic terrorism. This view is pervasive among the intelligentsia, the civil service, the police, and the judiciary. Indeed, it is so pervasive that it prevented security and police services from stopping Salman Abedi, the Manchester Arena suicide bomber, out of fear that they were being racist.

Meanwhile, since 2000, seventy five percent of all terrorist attacks in Britain were Islamic terrorism - Muslims constitute around six percent of Britain’s population. More strikingly, ninety percent of those on the MI5 terrorism watch list are Muslim. Ninety eight out of 109 terrorism fatalities were due to Islamic terrorism.

The stated beliefs of the authorities are simply out of touch with the facts. They reflect the authorities’ fear of the leftist, Islamist mob. The same mob rolled into action immediately after what appeared to be a jihadi terrorist attack. This reflects a dangerous level of boldness and willingness to escalate.

Enemies of the state

Remarkably, just over the weekend, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer had described his main political rival, Reform leader Nigel Farage, MP, as the enemy. This was due to Farage’s belief that there should be at least some deportations in Britain, including of those who entered via the now notorious Boriswave, and his belief that people of all religions should integrate into British culture. This places Farage, according to the definitions above, as a Cultural Nationalist, and therefore part of the Extreme Right Wing Terrorism threat.

Moreover, Starmer was quite obviously rattled by the 13 September Unite the Kingdom rally organised by Tommy Robinson, which was opposed to mass migration and the failure of many migrants to integrate into British culture. The event attracted 140,000 attendees, according to authorities, and close to a million, according to attendees. Robinson claims 3 million attendees. What is evident is this: no one from Reform, Labour, the Conservatives, or any other mainstream group can draw a crowd do this size. The only possible exception is the pro-Palestine movement, which draws on a smaller number of far more zealous supporters. Polling shows that they are a minority, but they are a highly mobilised minority. The popularity lies with the right.

Self-inflicted plight

The problem for the British state - not just the government, but the bureaucracy, the NGO sector, the judiciary, and the police, which have all been purged of genuine conservatives - is that their ideology insists that they equate far left antifa street thugs, the pro-Palestine intersectional far left, Islamic terrorist and protest movements, and a nebulous, ill-defined, far right.

In reality, the threat of death comes mainly from Islamic terrorism, and the threat of disruptive, violent rioting comes mainly from the pro-Palestine and far left protesters. For ideological and electoral reasons, the state and parliament cannot act on these realities.

Moreover, the authorities know that Britain is a powder keg. Given their ideology and the strained budget, the ruling classes have neither the moral authority nor the resources to police the different sides equally. They therefore must appease the left and the Muslims, while continuing to crack down on the right (last week there was a series of arrests of right wing online influencers, intended mainly to harass and intimidate).

This imbalance in policing radicalises the right and emboldens the left and the Muslims. This is a self-reinforcing cycle. It will eventually lead to the right adopting violent tactics. Already, in at least one area, native working class Brits have organised their own security to counter the threat from migrants.

The Left

The British left is in a strange position: it dominates the media, the bureaucracy, the NGO-cracy, the police, the judiciary, and even the streets. However, it has lost the narrative war. It is bereft of ideas. Its decline is assured, but its will to power is undaunted. This will lead the left to escalate its violence, protests, and attacks.

Furthermore, polling shows that Sir Keir’s Labour Party is likely to lose decisively the May 2026 local elections. This will discredit Starmer and may turn into a threat to his premiership.

To his right, Starmer is being successfully challenged by Farage, who is leading the polls. And to his left, the Green Party and Jeremy Corbyn’s newly-mined Your Party are threatening to steal away his base. Even the unions are no longer enthusiastic supporters of Labour.

In this environment, cracking down on the Islamists and the far left is electorally suicidal, mainly because it would be seen as implementing Reform’s policies, cementing the idea that Nigel Farage is Britain’s next Prime Minister. Not to mention that it would be resisted by the middle class left wing establishment which runs the mid and lower ranks of the civil service and the NGO complex. Therefore, the state is stuck. It is too ideological to do anything.

Immigration

It is impossible to discuss this atrocity without mentioning immigration. I will not belabour the point. I will merely state that, in addition to the Yom Kippur synagogue atrocity, the children of immigrants and asylum seekers were responsible for:

1. The Southport stabbings of young girls

2. The Manchester Arena bombing

3. The London Bridge attack

4. The Westminster Bridge attack

5. The murder of Sir David Amess, MP

6. The 7/7 bombings in London

7. The murder of Lee Rigby

8. The systemic rape of thousands and thousands of underage girls in Telford, Rochdale, Oxford, Rotherham, and perhaps 50 more other cities.

It also bears repeating that some two thousand Muslims left Britain to join Islamic State in the 2013-2016 period. By comparison, the total number of Muslims in the British armed forces is around five hundred.

There is evidently a threat from the Muslim community. The causes may be debated, but not the reality.

Crucially, much of the Muslim community in Britain does not recognise the legitimacy of the state - witness the state’s need to manage relations through so-called community leaders, such as elders and imams. Should the state attempt to crack down on the threat from Islamic terrorism, the reaction from these communities can be violent, as witnessed during the Southport riots last summer.

Implications:

• It is surprising, frankly, that this is the first lethal attacks on Jews since the Gaza War began. It may be that the perception that the political tide is turning in favour of the Palestinians, and that they are winning the media war, has led to less attacks than we would have otherwise expected.

• The implication is that if Hamas rejects the ceasefire and is eventually defeated, this violence may escalate. Especially if European countries continue to take in Gazans.

• In this environment, more Islamist attacks or disruptive leftist riots are likely to backfire, by instigating similar responses from the right. A continued imbalanced response from the state is likely to accelerate this at some point, given how overstretched the police are and how incapable they are of providing basic security, especially against crime. Just 5.5% of crimes are solved and followed by a charge or a summons.

• Britain is nearing a major bond and/or currency crisis, which the coming budget may trigger. A financial crisis will most certainly worsen communal tensions, given the enormity of the welfare bill, and the fact that migrants, especially from a Muslim background, are far more dependent on state welfare than natives.