The Manchester Synagogue Murders

At 09:31 on Wednesday, 2nd October 2025, police received a call reporting that a vehicle had struck pedestrians outside the Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation Synagogue in Manchester. According to Greater Manchester Police, the suspect drove into worshippers gathered for Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, then exited his vehicle and began stabbing synagogue attendees, including a security guard who was left seriously wounded.

Officers arrived on the scene within seven minutes of the first call, fatally shooting the attacker at 09:38. Because the assailant was believed to be wearing an explosive vest, a bomb disposal unit carried out a controlled explosion before confirming the device was not actually viable. Despite a rapid response from police, the attack left two dead and four seriously injured. The efforts of the security guard and attendees prevented the attacker from entering the synagogue itself. All those inside the premises were kept inside until police confirmed it was safe to leave.

The authorities declared Operation PLATO, the national counterterrorism protocol for marauding attacks. Police patrols have been stepped up nationwide, particularly around synagogues and community centres in London and other major cities. Chief Constable Stephen Watson of Greater Manchester Police urged vigilance but reassured the public that there is “no ongoing wider threat”.

Two individuals have since been arrested in connection with the incident, and investigations are ongoing to determine whether the attacker had accomplices. The police have named the man responsible as Jihad al-Shamie, a 35-year-old of Syrian origin. There has been much speculation about whether the man was motivated by Islamism, with details of the attack strongly supporting that assumption.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who cut short a visit to Copenhagen to chair an emergency COBRA meeting, condemned the assault as “vile” and confirmed it was motivated by antisemitism. “This man attacked Jews because they are Jews” he said, pledging increased security for Jewish communities across the country. The King and Queen expressed their condolences, while Israel’s embassy in London called the violence “abhorrent and deeply distressing”.

As mourners gather at the site of the attack, floral tributes have begun to appear outside the synagogue in Crumpsall, where a police cordon remains in place.

Why Did this Attack Happen?

Despite the attacker’s motive not being formally confirmed, there has been much discussion about Islam and Islamist terror attacks. Given that he is a Syrian man named Jihad, a word that means “struggle” or in common usage “holy war” against the enemies of Islam, it seems a reasonable assumption. The attack comes only a couple of weeks after a spokesman for the Islamic State, Abu Hudhaifa al-Ansari, encouraged his supporters to “Shoot, stab and ram” both Christians and Jews alike throughout America, Europe, and the rest of the world. It instructed that explosive devices, firearms, bladed weapons, and vehicles should be used as weapons against such people. His release also urged followers to:

“Break into their homes, kill them, and punish them by any means you can…Keep in mind that you are the hand of the Islamic State today, striking at the heart of the infidels, and avenging Muslims in Palestine, Iraq, Syria, and all Muslim lands.”

Against the backdrop of the Israel–Palestine conflict, tensions between Muslim and Jewish communities seem to have reached a historic peak worldwide. An attack like this one was entirely predictable. This is particularly evident in the Manchester neighbourhoods surrounding the site of the attack. Broughton Park, where the synagogue is located, is majority Jewish (56.7%), and it directly borders Crumpsall South, a majority Muslim area (69%), according to the 2021 census. The area has become a microcosm of the wider Israel–Palestine conflict.

Such ethnic ghettoisation only exacerbates community tensions, and, in the age of mass migration, the importation of foreign grievances has become an all-too-common problem. Authorities seem unwilling to prevent or remove dangerous foreign extremists from the country. This is epitomised by the recent case of a Taliban commander’s nephew who was granted refugee status in Britain, along with the right to bring seven of his relatives.

There has also been a considerable and deliberate political campaign in Britain to downplay the threat of Islamic terror. This is even in the face of a growing Islamic population. Nevertheless, there has been an increasing emphasis on Prevent, the governmental strategy to identify potentially dangerous extremists, to focus on the “far-right” rather than that of Islamic terror.

Colonel Richard Kemp, a terror expert who has chaired the government’s COBRA Intelligence group, has been critical of these attempts. Stating:

“I know that the authorities are trying to emphasise far-right extremism rather than Islamic extremism… I can tell you that the threat between the two is not comparable. Of course there is a marginal threat from the left and right, but not comparable.”

 “In the interests of trying to appear even-handed and appease people that criticised the Prevent programme for focusing on Islamic extremists, I know they are looking at far-right extremism more to counter those accusations… The authorities have tried to inflate that threat to try and appease critics of those policies.”

This shift in focus from Islam to the “far-right” has led to the absurd situation where the terror threat from old-age-pensioners allegedly went up by 90% between 2016 and 2019, presumably for the extremity of their right-wing beliefs. Of course, a terror attack by a “far-right pensioner” has yet to materialise, but there have been several notable Islamic attacks since. This also relates to the increasing Islamic influence within the Home Office. Currently, there is a network of more than 700 Muslim staff members lobbying to recruit more Muslim staff members, increase Muslim migration, and discourage Prevent from monitoring Islamic terror.

In a time where the government takes the threat of terror less seriously, is importing dangerous individuals from abroad, and in a climate of mounting tension, an attack like this was inevitable. Unless there is a radical shift in approach, another attack is not a question of if but when.