“Trio convicted in UK for terror plot to kill hundreds of Jews” + en artikel om standard reaktionen fra vestlige “ledere”, når muslimer myrder jøder i deres land :(

Rob Potts, of the Manchester police, stated that if the terrorists had been successful, it could have been “one of the deadliest terrorist attacks to ever take place on UK soil.”

Taget herfra

Dec. 23, 2025 / JNS)

Two brothers and a third man were convicted in a court near Manchester, England, in “connection with a foiled terrorist plot intended to target the Jewish community in Greater Manchester,” the local police department said on Tuesday.

The trio aimed to “kill hundreds of innocent people” in an “Islamic State-inspired terrorist attack on Jewish communities in the north-west of England,” according to the Crown Prosecution Service.

The three hoped to smuggle four high-powered, military-grade AK-47 rifles, two pistols and 900 rounds of ammunition into the country and to use them to attack a march against antisemitism in the center of Manchester and “then to move the attack to an area of north Manchester occupied predominantly by the Jewish community,” according to prosecutors.

Sir Stephen Watson, chief constable of the Greater Manchester Police, stated that “it was clear throughout this trial that the scale of the offender’s hatred towards our Jewish community knew no bounds.”

“All too recently in Sydney, and of course here in Manchester in October, the very week before this trial began, we have felt the devastation of terrorism directed toward our Jewish community,” he said.

On Oct. 2, two Jews were killed in a terrorist attack by a jihadist on Yom Kippur at a synagogue in Manchester, England.

“A terrorist attack upon our Jewish friends and neighbors is an attack on us all and is an affront to all decent people in our country,” Watson said. “Today we are again reminded of the harm that such hate seeks to cause.”

According to the police department, Walid Saadaoui (38) and Amar Hussein (52) were convicted of planning terror attacks, and Bilel Saadaoui (36) was convicted of failing to report information about a terror attack.

Saadaoui told an undercover officer, whom he thought was a fellow extremist traveler, in 2023 that he wanted to carry out a “significant terrorist attack targeting Jewish people,” according to Manchester police. According to police, Saadaoui involved Hussein in the plot and later confessed to discussing it with his brother Bilel.

The three are slated to be sentenced on Feb. 13.

Rob Potts, assistant chief constable, stated that if the terrorists had been successful, “then what followed would have been devastating and potentially one of the deadliest terrorist attacks to ever take place on U.K. soil.”

The brothers are reportedly of Tunisian descent. UK prosecutors said that Hussein, “a Syrian who claimed to have fought in the Iraqi army,” was “known to be an Islamic State supporter.”

The group’s plan “included killing law-enforcement officers who might intervene,” police said.

According to prosecutors, Saadaoui told the police informant that he joined ISIS in 2013, before moving to the United Kingdom, and that he joined a Facebook page for Jews in North West England “covertly” to monitor events.

Taget herfra

Så slap Mein Stamer – denne gang – for at hykle sympati for UKs jøder og for at påstå at han og socialisterne i UK “gør noget” mod antisemitismen …

Ligesom Australiens socialistiske Albanese …

Her er en særdeles rammende beskrivelse af vestlige ledere, når jøder myrdes af muslimske terrorister:

“There is a predictable and cowardly ritual that Western leaders perform after every act of jihadist violence. First comes the solemn press conference. Then the vow to “do something.” After that, inevitably, the solution is misidentified with almost comic incompetence. Guns. Knives. Online speech. Anything—anything—except the ideology that produced the murder.”

Taget herfra

There is a predictable and cowardly ritual that Western leaders perform after every act of jihadist violence. First comes the solemn press conference. Then the vow to “do something.” After that, inevitably, the solution is misidentified with almost comic incompetence. Guns. Knives. Online speech. Anything—anything—except the ideology that produced the murder.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has once again shown himself to be a master of this ritual. After a massacre at a Chanukah celebration at Sydney’s iconic Bondi Beach on the first night of the holiday, in which a total of 15 Jews were murdered and three times as many seriously injured, Albanese announced that gun laws would be tightened.

Spare me this verbiage. A father-and-son jihadist duo committed to ISIS went on a killing spree targeting Jews, and Albanese believes that tightening gun laws is what will get to the heart of the matter.

The problem is not lax gun laws. It is that Australia has ISIS adherents walking around its cities, a reality the authorities refuse to confront.

This is not a policy disagreement. It is a category error.

Put plainly, with just the right amount of political incorrectness: Australia has no issue with Jewish-on-Jewish violence or with Jewish violence against other groups. Australian synagogues do not erupt into spontaneous bloodshed, despite Jews having the same access to firearms as everyone else.

What Australia does have is a small but extraordinarily dangerous population of Islamists who believe—sincerely, religiously and proudly—that Jews are legitimate targets. They are the problem, not the guns.

By talking about firearms laws instead of jihadism, the Australian government has refused to name the threat, even though that threat is an unmistakable ogre casting a long shadow across the country.

Australia has tightened gun laws before, which is why it already has some of the world’s toughest firearms regulations.

Thirty years ago, former Prime Minister John Howard strengthened gun laws after the massacre of 35 people at Port Arthur in Tasmania, and it did reduce certain forms of violence. But those were different times, with different pathologies. Policies that worked then will not stop today’s problem of jihadist lunacy.

Politicians find gun laws attractive because they allow leaders to sound decisive without naming Islamism, jihadism or the global ideological ecosystem that produces men who pledge allegiance to ISIS and then hunt down Jews in Western cities. It is the politics of evasion; talking as though ISIS recruitment videos are being filmed in gun shops, with antisemitic pamphlets tucked into rifle cabinets.

The implication is that if only the terrorists had different tools, the jihadists’ antisemitic intent would somehow not exist. That is deeply insulting, as though antisemitism were an unfortunate accident rather than a deliberate, coherent and global ideological project. This habitual Western confusion—mistaking symptoms for causes—is a reason the West is losing to Islamist movements and will likely continue to do so.

ISIS is not a mood, a grievance, a byproduct of social exclusion or the result of inadequate gun buybacks. It is a genocidal movement rooted in a theology that celebrates Jewish death and sanctifies violence against unbelievers. It has doctrine, recruitment pipelines, financing networks and digital propaganda arms that operate seamlessly across borders.

Yet Australian and other Western leaders still speak as if these fanatics are not the problem, only the weapons to which they have access.

Albanese’s response sends a chilling message to Australia’s Jews: We will protect you symbolically, but we will not confront those who want you dead. We will light candles, hold vigils and issue statements, but when it comes to naming the ideology that made the massacre possible, we will avert our eyes and purse our lips.

This pattern is not new. Jews have seen it across Europe, North America, Britain, Canada and Australia. When jihadists attack Jews, the authorities’ response is always curiously oblique. Leaders speak of “hate,” “extremism” or “violence,” as though these were free-floating abstractions. The word antisemitism is often whispered. Islamism almost never is.

This is because acknowledging Islamist antisemitism shatters too many illusions and upsets too many powerful constituencies. It would force governments to confront the limits of multiculturalism, to debate immigration honestly and to acknowledge the uncomfortable truth that some belief systems are not merely “different,” but actively hostile to liberal democracy and minority safety.

It also complicates the preferred narrative—a superb piece of inverted fiction in which Jews are cast as powerful oppressors rather than perpetual targets. In progressive moral hierarchies, Jews are rarely granted the status of innocent victims. Naming Islamism as the enemy would force a reckoning that many Western elites are desperate to avoid.

So instead, governments regulate objects.

Every time a leader responds this way, extremists learn that their ideology will not be challenged, that their networks will not be named and that their religious justifications will be handled delicately, if at all. The state will busy itself rearranging furniture while jihadists plan their next attack.

Here is what I want Australia’s leaders to say: Australia has a problem with Islamist extremism, and Jews are being targeted because they are Jews. There. That wasn’t so hard, was it? I didn’t even need to issue a press release or hold a media event.

Solving the Islamism problem will require acknowledging its scale and severity; deploying extensive intelligence resources against radical networks; and embracing deportations, surveillance and prosecutions where necessary.

Above all, it will require the courage to say that these ideas and beliefs do not belong—and cannot belong—in a liberal democracy.

Taget herfra