In West Yorkshire, after the attack on a synagogue in which a Muslim murdered two Jews, the police held an emergency meeting at which they discussed their worries about assuring the safety of Muslims. A single member of the police security panel wanted to discuss “the elephant in the room” — Islam — and for that, she was sacked. Robert Spencer wrote about this here, and more on this bizarre response to antisemitic violence can be found here: “The FSU is supporting a former hate crime scrutiny panel chair after she was sacked by police for calling the threat from Islamism the ‘elephant in the room,'” by Max Thompson, Free Speech Union, June 5, 2026:
The chair of Bradford’s policing scrutiny panel was sacked by West Yorkshire Police after she complained that officers were ignoring the “elephant in the room” of Islamist extremism in the wake of last October’s antisemitic terror attack on a synagogue in Manchester.
Following the attack, the woman — whom we will call “Elaine” to protect her identity — attended an emergency meeting with officers. She has said that the meeting appeared to focus more on the sensitivities of the Muslim community than on addressing the risk to the Jewish community.
Elaine has accused West Yorkshire Police of seeking to appease Muslims — including Muslim officers and community leaders — rather than focusing on the threat to the Jewish community.
Speaking to Allison Pearson about the meeting, Elaine said: “I could not believe what I was hearing.”
She added: “I was taking part in this emergency Teams meeting hosted by West Yorkshire Police, the day after the horrific attack on the synagogue. It was chaired by a white female inspector. She was very fair, very strict and didn’t take any nonsense, but she was under constant pressure from the Muslim men in the meeting…
“The whole meeting wasn’t about what it should have been about. [It should have been about], ‘How can we protect the Bradford synagogue and the Jewish population?’ ” Elaine insisted that much of what was discussed “[was about], ‘We Muslims need protecting because we are now at risk of anti-Muslim reprisals.’ ”
The retired academic, who is in her 60s, was informed of her sacking via a letter stating it was the result of “divisive and inflammatory” comments that had prompted complaints from Muslim officers who had attended the meeting….
This followed a separate incident in which Elaine, in her capacity as chair of the panel, reviewed a case in which a member of the public had telephoned the police helpline and ranted to Muslim officers about the Prophet Mohammed marrying a nine-year-old child, calling him a “paedophile”. The individual was initially charged with a hate crime….
The caller was simply stating the truth. According to the Hadith, Muhammad consummated his marriage with little Aisha when she was nine and he was fifty-four. You can find this at Sahih al-Bukhari 5134 and in many other hadiths.
At the emergency meeting following the attack on the synagogue, Elaine proposed an open discussion about the threat from Islamist terrorists. She was subsequently informed that she had been removed from her role as member and chair of the scrutiny panel for failing to show impartiality.
After a Muslim murdered two Jews at the Heaton Park synagogue, Elaine wanted to discuss the threat of “Islamist” terrorism. That enraged Muslims on the police force who claimed that showed a lack of “impartiality.” Presumably, she should have asked for equal time be given to discussing Muslim and to Jewish terrorists in the UK, although there are no examples of the latter.
Several complaints from West Yorkshire Police email addresses [from Muslim police] were sent after the meeting. One read: “I don’t know the lady in question… some of the wording used in the meeting today, I noted in my daybook: ‘there is one community that this is coming from’, ‘just say it how it is, we are not stupid’. It appeared she was insinuating that the hate towards the Jewish community was from the Muslim community only and that Muslims — 2 billion or so worldwide — themselves posed a threat.”
Do Muslims pose a threat to non-Muslims, including Jews, or don’t they? How many examples of Muslim attacks on non-Muslims worldwide need be adduced to prove that they do? On what basis should the issue not be discussed? That such discussion might make Muslims feel in danger? Have there been any violent attacks on Muslims in the UK?
Muslim officers are maligning Elaine the truth-teller precisely for telling the truth that “we all know which community is responsible for the attacks in Manchester” — and for noting that “we all know what is the elephant in the room.”
A third complaint said of Elaine: “[She] made a number of comments that I found deeply troubling… I found her remarks highly inappropriate and concerning.”
Yes, how “inappropriate” and “deeply troubling” of Elaine to suggest, just after Muslims murdered two Jews, that Islam itself deserved to be examined.
West Yorkshire Police is no stranger to accusations of imbalance in the way it applies policing across different communities. In 2025, the force temporarily blocked applications from white British candidates in an effort to boost diversity. It is also the same force that a government-commissioned report found had “totally and utterly failed” a religious studies teacher who faced such severe threats after showing pupils a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed that he was forced into hiding.
That teacher, with his entire family, remains in hiding. Shouldn’t the responsibility of the Muslim community in tolerating those of its members who have threatened him be discussed? Shouldn’t its leaders be asked to publicly denounce those who have threatened the teacher?
Those Muslim police officers who wrote to the chief constable to complain of Elaine’s wanting — after the attack that killed two at the Heaton Park Synagogue — to discuss how to protect Jews from attack, rather than on assuring Muslims of their safety, and to demand that she be fired, should themselves be sacked for trying to shut down her exercise of free speech. But they won’t be. Elaine will not be reinstated. And the UK itself will sink further into the mire of appeasement of the Muslims in its midst.
KK says
Let me see if I got this right. The muhammadists attack the synagogue yet the police defend the muhammadists instead of the jews. Insane!
Siddhi Nasranni says
I agree with you, this is the Red/Green alignment.
Read this book.
United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror
by Jamie Glazov (Author)
United in Hate analyzes the Left’s contemporary romance with militant Islam as a continuation of the Left’s love affair with communist totalitarianism in the twentieth century. Just as the Left was drawn to the communist killing machines of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot and Castro, so too it is now attracted to radical Islam. Both the radical Left and radical Islam possess a profound hatred for Western culture, for a capitalist economic structure that recognizes individual achievement and for the Judeo-Christian heritage of the United States. Both seek to establish a new world order: leftists in the form of a classless communist society and Islamists in the form of a caliphate ruled by Sharia law. To achieve these goals, both are willing to wipe the slate clean by means of limitless carnage, with the ultimate goal of erecting their utopia upon the ruins of the system they have destroyed.
tgusa says
The left has not thought things through. If the two groups were able to wipe out everyone else the left would find themselves up against the muslims. The left are loud confrontational and safe space driven, the muslims are loud confrontational and homicidal. The left wouldn’t stand a chance against the muslims. There are three groups, the left and the muslims are two and the third one is far right. The left has labeled everyone but themselves and the muslims far right. You dont actually have to be far right to be far right.
James Lincoln says
tgusa,
To your point:
An individual who was a political “centrist” just 20 years ago would now be labeled “far right”.
Even JFK, a Democrat, would be labeled “far right” in 2026.
tgusa says
Yes James. Non-leftist Westerners. The left calls themselves diverse but they are only diverse in outward appearances. Other than that the left are monolithic. They all think and believe the same things. We of the far right have true diversity. We are a collection of differing thoughts and beliefs but bot so different that we couldn’t get along. We are Reagan’s 70/30 rule. We can agree on 70 percent of stuff and may disagree on 30. We are the people of the West, they are the Borg.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Was the Third Reich much worse? They too defended those who attacked Jews. Only difference here (so far) is that the Nazi law enforcement attacked Jews as well, whereas the Brits have yet to go that far
WPM says
Give them time as more Moslems enter the force(with native whites being excluded from entering according to the article) they will be the majority of law enforcement officers . .Like in the American south around 1920 the Klan had a strong following in political leaders ,law enforcement and other position of power. The sharia creep into English law will advance quickly with Moslems elected both passing changes in law and Moslem in law enforcement enforcing sharia law. This women even speaking out at a public meeting saying the truth that English citizens that are Jewish should get protection from jihad terrorist attacks give leaders in law enforcement the vapors because of Moslem cops on the force might be offended.
CryHavoc says
Since no one over there has any rights, this sort of garbage is the end result. The USA revolted against such a scenario in 1776 I still am mystified why any Jews still live in Europe.
Siddhi Nasranni says
As a Jew, can I not live anywhere in the world, like anyone else ??
tgusa says
You can, but you have to consider the danger level. Myself, I can live anywhere in the world but as a white guy Johannesburg (to name one) would be a bad choice. It is not just a Jewish thing so dont get upset just because you cant live anywhere you want.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Most people actually can’t. As a Hindu, I’d have to be a lunatic to live in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Qatar, Yemen, Somalia and UK. Most other countries might be fine to varying degrees
tgusa says
Yep.
Beans🫘 says
Hindus are abused severely in the gulf, and even in other Muslim regions like Lebanon etc.
But it is covered up, and covered up even by Hindus themselves.
With India gaining power and clout it is time to man the hell up and show your people cannot be abused, the Indian state has to take these cases much more seriously. I cannot imagine being an India woman working in a Saudi home.
But when these same abuser cultures come to India, you guys treat them like royalty.
Wellington says
Long way away from the times of Emily Bronte and her magnificent sisters (Charlotte and Anne) respecting the Yorkshire moors and when Yorkshire and all of England were still OK.
Isn’t the case any longer, not by a long shot, and this is a damn shame, actually a monumentally catastrophic shame, and why I will visit England never again.
tgusa says
“A single member of the police security panel wanted to discuss “the elephant in the room” — Islam — and for that, she was sacked.”
She failed to understand that trying to discuss “the elephant in the room” while she is surrounded by a room full of elephants is a losing proposition. Yes, islam is an elephant in the room but so are the coppers. Lots of elephants in the room and she is all alone among them.
roger says
Muslims should NEVER be allowed to join the police force.
England Invaded says
Muslims top of the list for hell caused in the UK. However, the problem is with third world filth of just about any kind.
A video based on just one sequence of events recently in the UK. Yet, sums up the over all situation with police, politicians and much of the media across the UK generally. Here-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6guDahpAx0c
Sir Peter says
After the native Britons reclaim their country there will have to a massive purge of the police