While added financial resources for more guards and extra security has been welcomed by the U.K.’s Jewish community, there remains considerable unease and hostility toward the government
Carlos Jasso - WPA Pool/Getty Images
Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer speaks to members of the Jewish community at the Community Security Trust (CST) where they discussed the Government's response to the attack at the Heaton Park synagogue in Manchester on October 16, 2025 in London, England.
LONDON — Since the terrorist attack on a Manchester, England, synagogue on Yom Kippur that left two congregants dead, British politicians have redoubled their efforts to reassure the country’s Jewish community, which has been increasingly concerned about security issues amid widespread anti-Israel sentiment that has grown in the wake of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terror attacks and ensuing war in Gaza.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer promised to do “everything” in his power to protect the Jewish community, including the recent approval of £10 million ($13 million) in emergency funds to provide greater security.
But while the added financial resources for more guards and extra security has been welcomed by the U.K.’s Jewish community, there remains considerable unease and hostility toward the government, something that became starkly apparent the day after Yom Kippur.
When David Lammy, the country’s deputy prime minister, attended a vigil close to Heaton Park synagogue the day after the attack, he was booed and heckled with cries of “Shame on you” and “Blood on your hands.”
Lammy was foreign secretary when Britain said it intended to recognize a Palestinian state earlier this year. The move was formally announced by Starmer last month, alongside similar action taken by countries including France, Australia and Canada.
In his previous role, Lammy imposed restrictions on British arms sales to Israel and twice summoned Israel’s ambassador to the U.K. to criticize him over Israel’s handling of the Gaza war. Lammy and his parliamentary colleagues have also been criticized by the Jewish community for not doing enough to protect them by allowing hostile anti-Israel marches to proceed week after week in British cities.
“What David Lammy and his government have done has allowed this to happen,” Melanie, who asked only to be identified by her first name, told Jewish Insider. The 42-year-old nurse, who was among those who booed Lammy, attended the vigil with her husband and three children, all of whom attend a Jewish school close to the targeted synagogue.
The angry outburst included cries of “Go to Palestine, leave us alone,” and “You have allowed Jew hatred in Manchester.”
“What right did that man have to be there? That was probably the worst person they [the government] could have sent,” said Melanie. “I don’t know who made that decision but it was the wrong decision.”
As in many Western European countries, incidents of antisemitism in the U.K. have skyrocketed over the last two years. In its latest report, the Community Security Trust (CST), a charity that works towards Britain’s Jewish communal safety and monitors antisemitism, revealed that 1,521 antisemitic incidents were reported in the first half of 2025. This was the second highest level ever recorded for that period, just behind the same timeframe in 2024.
Among the incidents in recent months have been synagogues desecrated with excrement, the vandalism of a rabbi’s home with a swastika and an incident in which visibly Jewish teenagers were shot at with an air rifle.
Meanwhile last week, soccer club Aston Villa announced that it was banning fans of Maccabi Tel Aviv from attending a match at their stadium next month. The decision came after police in Birmingham, Britain’s second-largest city and home to a substantial Muslim population, warned it could not guarantee fans’ safety, leading the Israeli football club to announce on Monday that it would decline any tickets offered to its fans out of concern for their wellbeing and safety. The U.K. government said it was “deeply saddened” by Maccabi Tel Aviv’s decision.
Writing in The Guardian in the wake of the Manchester attack, Dave Rich, director of policy at CST, said, “Antisemitism has been allowed to rise in an unacceptable way for far too long. Last year’s official hate-crime statistics showed that a Jewish person in Britain was 12 times more likely to be the victim of a religious hate crime than someone from any other faith background. Calls for violence against Jews, or Israelis, or Zionists, online and on our streets, have become normalised in parts of our politics.”
The U.K.’s recognition of a Palestinian state was also met with concern over the message the move conveyed about the country’s priorities around the war in Gaza.
A survey of over 4,800 British Jews conducted prior to the Manchester attack by the Institute for Jewish Policy Research, a U.K.-based Jewish research organization, found that Jews’ sense of “ambient antisemitism” in society, including hostile media coverage, online commentary and microaggressions, had increased substantially — 45% of respondents said they experienced it “frequently” or “regularly” in 2025, as opposed to only 8% of British Jews before the Oct. 7 attacks.
In a statement released after the Manchester, attack CST described what happened on Yom Kippur as “the kind of terrorist attack that we have prepared for over many years.”

That is cold comfort for many in the community. “If somebody decided to ram a car along the pavement as the kids were heading into school, they would be hitting lots of kids and lots of parents,” Melanie, the nurse who attended the vigil, said.
“We don’t have any thoughts that the government is going to protect us because they haven’t done so far,” she said. “It’s terrifying for the kids to know this is the world they’re growing up in.
Is there any place for Jews in this country anymore? If things carry on the way they’re going, I don’t think so because we’re just targeted all the time.”
Lord Katz, a government frontbencher in the House of Lords, told JI that the government has been “acutely aware of the increasing fear and anxiety of the community over the past two years.”
“Whatever your views on the Israeli government, it’s always been clear that that shouldn’t impact on the way that British Jews live their lives and the government’s commitment to working with the CST and other communal bodies to ensure they have enough funding and the right legal measures in place to tackle antisemitism is very very clear and is underlined by lots of recent activity,” he said.
“In the long term, though, it has to be about tackling the cause and not just the symptoms. It has to be done through education and building community cohesion and there’s no easy route to that.”
Katz added: “This isn’t a party political issue — whether it’s attending football matches, wearing Jewish insignia, using the NHS [National Health Service] or feeling safe on our streets and campuses, the Government knows British Jews are fearful and will protect our rights, liberties and way of life.”
Journalist Nicole Lampert, who has been outspoken about antisemitism in the U.K., said that antisemitism began to flourish under the previous Conservative government. The marches have been taking place since the start of the war when Rishi Sunak and his Conservative government was still in power.
She said: “There are many people to blame, but of course, the people that are in control of things are the government,” she said, adding that Labour “came with a history of antisemitism,” referring to the party’s previous leadership under Jeremy Corbyn, who had a long record of anti-Israel and antisemitic rhetoric.
In 2020, an investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) found that under Corbyn the party had a culture “which, at best, did not do enough to prevent antisemitism and, at worst, could be seen to accept it”.
Lampert said, “Many of the people that were in the cabinet, including Keir Starmer, had been in the cabinet with Jeremy Corbyn and had told us to vote for Jeremy Corbyn and had refused to really speak out against antisemitism.”
“Although Keir Starmer said ‘I’m going to clear this party of antisemitism’ [in his leadership campaign], in some ways he used antisemitism as a blunt tool to just get rid of the far left in his party,” she added.
“They didn’t use it as an opportunity for a teachable moment as to what antisemitism actually is and what they’d done wrong,” Lampert said. “That was really frustrating because antisemitism is complex. If you had explained ‘this is why you’re antisemitic’ or ‘this was what was wrong,’ that would’ve been better.”
Alex Hearn, co-director of the campaign group Labour Against Antisemitism, agreed.
“Time after time we’ve seen that it’s easier to remove Jews rather than to challenge racism,” he said. “It’s easier to erase the people who cooperate rather than challenge the vocal and unlawful minority.
“The places we’re allowed to go safely are getting narrower and narrower. Don’t go to central London during marches, don’t walk down the streets looking visibly Jewish, don’t go on social media. And it’s just growing and growing, whether it be comedy clubs or now football matches — our world is getting smaller,” Hearn said. “Then what we’re hearing from our government is that they say the right things when they have to and we find ourselves applauding the sentiments, but wondering where the meaningful action is.”
Hearn added: “Keir Starmer has announced increased security funding to the Jewish community, but other things show why that’s necessary: because the authorities consistently allow racists to run riot on our streets. So we’re building higher and higher fences but we’re not addressing the issue. The most high fences can’t keep everyone out, as we’ve learned from Manchester.”
Dovid Lewis, the rabbi of Bowdon synagogue in south Manchester, said that, like many others, he had been “shaken and shocked” but “not surprised” by the Yom Kippur attack. “Antisemitism is insidious throughout society at the moment,” he said.
“There’s a reason why we have guards outside shul,” he said. “It’s not because we’re paranoid. It’s because there’s a credible threat.”
One of the worshippers at Lewis’ synagogue told him that following the attack she felt most insulted by an interview in which Starmer said that Jews “should feel comfortable in my country.”
The rabbi responded, “We don’t need to feel comfortable in the prime minister’s country — this is our country. I was born here, my parents were born here, my grandparents were born here.”
“You can’t declare [support for] a Palestinian state on Erev Rosh Hashanah and declare at the Labour Party conference, between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, that Israel is committing genocide, then scratch your head and wonder why somebody named Jihad Al-Shamie did what he did several days later,” he said. “There is a cause and an effect.”
One resolution from Republicans highlights immigration issues; a bipartisan resolution links the attack to a growing series of violent antisemitic incidents
Kevin Carter/Getty Images
U.S. Capitol Building on January 18, 2025 in Washington, DC.
The House of Representatives is set to vote next week on two resolutions condemning antisemitism and the terrorist attack on a hostage march in Boulder, Colo.
One resolution from Republicans, focused on Boulder, highlights immigration issues and denounces the slogan “Free Palestine,” while the other, which is bipartisan, links Sunday’s Colorado attack to a series of other recent violent antisemitic attacks.
The first of the two resolutions is already attracting criticism from some Democrats. Led by Reps. Gabe Evans (R-CO), Jeff Crank (R-CO) and Lauren Boebert (R-CO), it includes a line that describes “Free Palestine” — a slogan shouted by both Mohamed Sabry Soliman, the Boulder attacker, and Elias Rodriguez, who killed two Israeli Embassy employees at the Capital Jewish Museum, during or shortly after their crimes — as “an antisemitic slogan that calls for the destruction of the state of Israel and the Jewish people.”
Evans’ resolution also notes that Soliman, an Egyptian national, violated U.S. immigration restrictions and states that the case “highlights the need to aggressively vet aliens who apply for visas to determine whether they endorse, espouse, promote, or support antisemitic terrorism or engage in other antisemitic or anti-American activity” and “demonstrates the dangers of not removing from the country aliens who fail to comply with the terms of their visas.”
It criticizes Colorado’s sanctuary state policies, stating that Colorado “hinders immigration enforcement” activities and prohibits law enforcement officials from providing information to federal immigration officials.
It also “affirms that free and open communication between State and local law enforcement and their federal counterparts remains the bedrock of public safety and is necessary in preventing terrorist attacks” and “expresses gratitude” to Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel and other law enforcement.
Given Democratic opposition to many of the Trump administration’s immigration policies, those provisions could prove controversial, and some on the left are also likely to oppose labeling “Free Palestine” as antisemitic.
In statements about the legislation, the sponsors lambast Colorado’s sanctuary state policies, the Biden administration, Democratic Colorado Gov. Jared Polis and state lawmakers for their approach to immigration issues.
The resolution goes on to condemn Soliman and his “antisemitic terrorist attack on peaceful demonstrators supporting the release of the hostages” and prays for the victims of the attack.
The second resolution, led by Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ), has 53 bipartisan cosponsors, and condemns “the rise in ideologically motivated attacks on Jewish individuals in the United States,” including the Boulder attack, and expresses the House’s “commitment to combating antisemitism and politically motivated violence.”
The resolution describes the Colorado attack, as well as the D.C. shooting and the arson targeting Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro’s residence on the first night of Passover, as part of a “disturbing pattern of targeted aggression” and “politically and religiously motivated violence directed at Jewish individuals and institutions.”
It states that the three attacks “share a common pattern of targeting Jewish individuals or symbols of Jewish life and civic engagement” and calls antisemitism “fundamentally incompatible with the values of the United States,” saying it must be “condemned unequivocally.”
The Van Drew resolution calls on law enforcement to thoroughly investigate and prosecute the incident and on leaders to “speak out against antisemitism and politically motivated violence in all forms.”
Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), a co-chair of the House Jewish caucus and a prominent progressive Jewish voice in the chamber, condemned Republicans for calling up the Evans-led resolution and urged colleagues not to support it.
“I am deeply disappointed in the Republican majority’s decision to put a blatantly partisan antisemitism resolution on the floor next week — especially since there is a bipartisan resolution that appropriately speaks to the horrible tragedy in Boulder that is already scheduled to come to the floor,” Nadler said in a statement to Jewish Insider.
“Once again, Republicans are using Jewish safety and the rise of antisemitism in America for their own partisan gain and to perpetuate their bigoted immigration propaganda,” Nadler continued. “As a community full of families who fled to America in search of a better life, American Jews will not fall for this cynical tactic, and I urge my colleagues not to take the bait.”
The two resolutions are the latest in a series of resolutions on antisemitism introduced by House members in the weeks since the Washington attack, some of which point to the increasingly fractured and politicized discourse about the issue.
Following the D.C. attack, 73 House Republicans led by Rep. Addison McDowell (R-NC) introduced a resolution condemning the attack and antisemitism, which noted that “the murderer is a far-left activist and has been affiliated with the Party for Socialism and Liberation.” It also called for “the enforcement of existing laws that punish hate crimes, protect religious freedom, and ensure justice for victims of antisemitic violence and discrimination.”
Following the Boulder attack, another Republican-only resolution led by Reps. Randy Fine (R-FL) and August Pfluger (R-TX), co-sponsored by 23 other House Republicans, also noted that Soliman overstayed his visa, said he “should never have been permitted to remain in the country as long as he was” and called for Congress to “take immediate action to secure the border and deport migrants who overstay their visas.”
Separately, six members of Colorado’s House delegation — all but Evans and Boebert — introduced a bipartisan resolution condemning the attack and expressing support for the survivors, as well as calling for additional federal resources to counter antisemitism and hate crimes and protect targeted communities.
Screenshot/X
A man is arrested after throwing a Molotov cocktail at pro-Israel demonstrators in Boulder, CO on June 1, 2025.
Good Wednesday morning.
In today’s Daily Kickoff, we report on the aftermath of the terrorist attack last weekend at a hostage march in Boulder, Colo., and cover a resurgent push for the U.S. to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization following reports that the Boulder attacker had expressed support for the group. We also talk to students and faculty at Harvard to check in on the school’s recent approach to antisemitism and its clashes with the Trump administration, and report on President Donald Trump‘s recommendation not to increase the funding level of the Nonprofit Security Grant Program. Also in today’s Daily Kickoff: Rep. Randy Fine, Santa Ono and Jake Sullivan.
What We’re Watching
- The White House is holding a briefing for Jewish community leaders this afternoon.
- The House Education and the Workforce Committee is holding a hearing today with Education Secretary Linda McMahon on the department’s policies and priorities.
- Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID) is speaking at the Hudson Institute this afternoon about the future of American foreign policy in the Middle East.
- The Congressional Israel Allies Foundation is hosting a belated Jerusalem Day celebration today on Capitol Hill. MK Gila Gamliel, Israel’s minister of innovation, science and technology, will address the gathering.
- In New York City, WNBC, Politico and Telemundo are hosting a mayoral primary debate at 7 p.m. tonight for nine of the candidates vying for the Democratic nomination later this month.
- Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar is traveling to Germany today, where he’ll meet with his German counterpart, Johann Wadephul, and other senior officials, as well as Jewish communal leaders, in Berlin.
What You Should Know
A QUICK WORD WITH JI’s mELISSA WEISS
The holiday of Shavuot is one of prayer and celebration, marked by all-night learning, indulging in cheesecake and communal events.
But across the U.S., this Shavuot was marked with a fear and unease that has become abnormally normal in recent months, following the Passover arson at the home of Gov. Josh Shapiro and the murders of two Israeli Embassy employees outside the Capital Jewish Museum last month, and deepened further by the horrific attack in Boulder, Colo., on Sunday in which an Egyptian national threw homemade Molotov cocktails at marchers calling for the release of the remaining 58 hostages being held in Gaza. Twelve people, including a Holocaust survivor, were injured.
The reverberations from the attack are already being felt in Washington, where legislators are reviving a bill to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. More below.
Two days before the attack, we reported on the Trump administration’s full FY 2026 budget request for Congress — which did not recommend an increase in funding to the Nonprofit Security Grant Program, instead holding it at its current level of $274.5 million. Fewer than half of the requests — which are submitted by organizations at elevated risk of being targeted in a terrorist attack — were fulfilled in 2024.
The attack in Boulder is likely to garner additional calls from the Jewish community for increased funding for the program. In the wake of last month’s deadly attack at the Capital Jewish Museum, a coalition of leading Jewish groups called for the federal government to increase NSGP spending to $1 billion. “The rising level of anti-Jewish incitement, which inevitably leads to violent acts … requires governmental action commensurate with the level of danger,” the organizations said.
In the wake of Sunday’s attack, many legislators condemned the attacks, most denouncing the antisemitic nature of the firebombing. But three Squad members — Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Summer Lee (D-PA) — condemned the attacks without mentioning Israel or antisemitism. President Donald Trump, in his response, did not mention Israel or antisemitism either, choosing instead to rail against former President Joe “Biden’s ridiculous Open Border Policy, which has hurt our Country so badly.”
The identities of the victims of the attack and the perpetrators’ declared motivations are political inconveniences to legislators and activists on both sides of the political spectrum — and their decision to erase both perhaps reverberates the loudest.
Other lawmakers focused their comments on the shooter’s immigration status. Mohamed Sabry Soliman had come to the U.S. in 2022 and received a work visa, which expired earlier this year. That the attack was perpetrated by an individual who had been approved for a visa by the Biden administration and remained illegally under the Trump administration is expected to produce more calls for stricter immigration policies. Last night, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said that Soliman’s wife and five children had been apprehended by immigration officials and faced potential deportation.
But while politicians debate the best approaches — from designating terror groups to calling for immigration crackdowns — Jewish communities remain on edge, feeling unsafe and unheard.
Perhaps nothing underscores Jewish communal concerns at this moment better than an op-ed published in The New York Times on Tuesday by National Council for Jewish Women CEO Sheila Katz.
“When antisemitism emerges within progressive spaces, cloaked in the language of justice, too often it is met with silence and discomfort, creating echo chambers where dangerous ideas are amplified rather than confronted,” Katz wrote. In response to sounding the alarm about antisemitism in left-wing circles, she said, “we have been gaslit, ignored and told that our fear is overblown, our outrage unjustified. Among many groups that have fought to secure and reclaim civil rights, voting rights and reproductive rights, we have seen antisemitism dismissed as not bad enough to matter, our grief met with cynicism, our safety treated as optional.”
Some Americans waking up to their morning news on Tuesday saw “Jews Are Afraid Right Now” as the Times headline accompanying Katz’s piece. But for the first several hours it was posted, the op-ed had a different headline: “American Jews Are Paying for the War in Gaza” — an approach to both the Israel-Hamas war and antisemitism in America that plays into the dual-loyalty tropes that American Jews have fought long before the Oct. 7 attacks.
The Times quietly changed the op-ed’s headline to the milquetoast “Jews Are Afraid Right Now” — which, while correct, missed Katz’s core point: “At rallies and on campuses, in coalition rooms and online spaces, slogans sometimes directly drawn from Hamas’s terrorist manifesto have been chanted and painted on placards, and shouted from stages and in the streets. ‘Globalize the intifada.’ ‘By any means necessary.’ ‘From the river to the sea.’ ‘Zionists out.’ These are not simply words; they can be interpreted as calls for violence.”
The Boulder attacker told investigators he wanted “to kill all Zionist people” — not dissimilar from comments made by the Capital Jewish Museum shooter, who declared, “I did it for Palestine, I did it for Gaza,” after gunning down Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim. The arsonist who set the Pennsylvania governor’s mansion on fire said he committed the crime because of what Shapiro, one of the most prominent Jewish politicians in the country, “wants to do to the Palestinian people.”
From academia to activism to journalism, there is a reticence in left-wing circles to acknowledge that inciting language around the Israel-Hamas war can have a dangerous impact.
A year and a half ago, Ivy League administrators were pressed on whether “From the river to the sea” was a genocidal chant. The response, given by the since-ousted presidents of Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania, was that “it depends on the context.”
In this case, the context is the firebombing of elderly Jews calling for the release of hostages in Gaza. Last month, the context was the gunning down of a young couple outside a Jewish organization’s event focused on humanitarian aid in Gaza. In April, the context was the arson of the residence of a Jewish governor on the first night of Passover.
The recent attacks in Harrisburg, Washington and now Boulder are not surprising. They are what happens when ideology-driven activism trumps ethical journalism, when antisemitism becomes a political football and when the boundaries between free speech and calls for violence blur — creating a dangerous and deadly reality for American Jews.
temperature check
Jews at Harvard are still worried about antisemitism — and about Trump’s response to it

As Israeli students departed from Harvard University last month to begin summer break, the usual sense of relief and excitement at having completed another academic year was replaced by fear and uncertainty for many. Amid the Trump administration’s battle with Harvard — which recently escalated to stripping the university of its ability to enroll foreign students entirely — among international students exchanging goodbyes, “See you in the fall” was replaced with “I hope to see you in the fall.” Jewish students and faculty who conduct biomedical research at Harvard also face grim prospects, after Trump revoked billions of dollars in federal funds to the university. At the same time, many Jewish students on campus expressed relief that the antisemitism and anti-Israel activism that was all too common in the aftermath of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks had declined significantly in the previous school year, Jewish Insider’s Haley Cohen and Gabby Deutch report.
Trump effect: Changes on campus were implemented at the beginning of the 2024-2025 school year, when Joe Biden was still president, said Harvard Law professor Jesse Fried, noting that Harvard’s progress in addressing antisemitism and students’ anti-Israel bias was not only a result of pressure from President Donald Trump. But once Trump came into office and began threatening Harvard — and then implementing policies that directly targeted the Ivy League university — change happened more quickly, Fried observed. “Harvard is moving very quickly and aggressively to eliminate certain sources of anti-Israel bias on campus,” Fried said. “If the Trump administration were not breathing down their neck, I believe progress would have been much slower.”
Elsewhere: A federal judge dismissed a discrimination lawsuit filed against the University of Pennsylvania by two Jewish students, saying that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the university had taken action that “could be interpreted as antisemitic with the intention of causing harm to the plaintiffs.”









































































