Once Craig Guildford and his team go, they’ll simply be replaced by officials equally paralysed by fear of Islamophobia and blind to Islamist manipulation
January 8, 2026 18:08
To be honest, there’s no point calling for the resignation of Craig Guildford, the craven chief constable of West Midlands police. At least from one point of view. Put it this way: Tim Davie, the former director-general of the BBC, and Deborah Turness, his CEO, both left their jobs in disgrace in November. Has that solved the problem at the Beeb? Has it hell.
Don’t get me wrong, it is only right that Guildford’s head must roll, as must those of his senior team. To be fair to them, they seem more guilty of gullibility rather than malevolence. Saturated in the doctrine of diversity, brainwashed to be so terrified of Islamophobia that they jumped at their own shadows, poorly versed in the cunning ways of the Islamists and not blessed with the sharpest of minds, they were simply trying to obey the norms of multiculturalism.
In this, they are typical of modern public servants, meaning that once they leave their jobs – as they surely must – they will likely be replaced by colleagues who are afflicted by the same mentality, and the same problems will continue unabated. I can say this with some confidence because almost nobody in officialdom, it seems to me, has the resilience and insight necessary to deal with the complex and subversive challenges that we face from having Islamists embedded in our societies.
As readers of my latest book will know, more than ten years have passed since a parliamentary report on the threat posed by the Muslim Brotherhood was published (a portion was made public while the rest remains classified to this day). Produced by Sir John Jenkins, His Majesty’s former ambassador to Riyadh, and the late Sir Charles Farr, former chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee and Director of the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism, it offered a comprehensive overview of the Islamist group’s history, modus operandi and activities in Britain.
Although the Brotherhood was the starter culture for bloodsoaked jihadi gangs like Hamas, Al Qaeda, Islamic State and the Iranian theocratic regime, it has always preferred to hold violence in reserve as a last resort, instead advancing its interests incrementally by influencing and infiltrating local and national politics, the police, the civil service and community groups, exploiting the liberties of an open society to further an incremental agenda of Sharia.
As the French anthropologist Florence Bergeaud-Blackler, who now lives under police protection, put it, “their goal isn’t to adapt Islam to Europe but to adapt Europe to Islam”.
The Jenkins-Farr report reveals that successive governments have been well aware of this threat for more than a decade. “For the most part, the Muslim Brotherhood have preferred non-violent incremental change on the grounds of expediency, often on the basis that political opposition will disappear when the process of Islamisation is complete,” the report said. “But they are prepared to countenance violence – including, from time to time, terrorism – where gradualism is ineffective.” Its doctrine, he added, permits “the use of extreme violence in the pursuit of the perfect Islamic society”.
The Brotherhood is nothing if not duplicitous. According to political scientist Dr Carrie Rosefsky Wickham, on social media the Brotherhood has even mistranslated “Sharia” as “democracy” to trick gullible English speakers. “Brotherhood leaders have grafted ideas of popular sovereignty, pluralism, citizenship rights, and the rule of law into a pre-existing discursive framework that prioritises ideological outreach as a means to prepare society for the eventual establishment of a system based on the full application of Sharia,” she wrote.
Although outlawed across the Arab world, the Brotherhood has thrived in the West, where it has spent decades quietly cultivating the seeds of fanaticism and blocking Muslim integration.
In Britain, the first Brotherhood clubs opened 60 years ago. “None were openly identified with the Muslim Brotherhood and membership of the Muslim Brotherhood remained (and still remains) a secret,” the Jenkins-Farr report said. According to a recent briefing by the Counter-Extremism Project, these groups include mosques, education centres and even sports clubs.
“None will ever willingly reveal any connection to the Brotherhood, while even employees and volunteers may not be aware of the true political nature of the organisations they serve,” it said. “Company directors – likely members of the Muslim Brotherhood themselves – will hold multiple positions in these organisations simultaneously, and often appoint relatives, from siblings to sons and daughters, to similar positions within the ecosystem. They may subtly change the spelling of a name or include middle names to make it harder to connect the dots.”
Meanwhile, Brotherhood fanatics dominate Muslim communities in Britain, controlling many of the mosques and promising heavy penalties for anybody who assimilates into mainstream society. They also appoint themselves as mouthpieces and decry any criticism as “Islamophobia”. Meanwhile, they use their knowledge of the legal system and media regulators to stifle anybody who dares oppose them, using the levers of the very open society that they aim to subvert.
In an episode of The Brink, the podcast I present with former parachute regiment officer Andrew Fox, that is yet to be released, the writer and activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali said: “The irony is that when Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Egypt, Jordan and others proscribed the Muslim Brotherhood and took their leaders down, the Brotherhood decided to headquarter themselves in Europe and in America. Why? Because in America and in Europe, constitutionally, we have the freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom of association. So that’s the paradox… The big conundrum for Western governments is how can we ban them and at the same time retain our freedoms.”
This is a conundrum that the likes of Craig Guildford have not even begun to ask themselves. In fact, so manipulated have they been by the Brotherhood playbook that they are not even aware that there exists a conundrum in the first place.
It is impossible to determine whether the main actors in the Maccabi Tel Aviv debacle are members of the Muslim Brotherhood or not. Reading the Jenkins-Farr report, however, leaves one in no doubt that the whole sorry episode appears to uncannily mirror the Brotherhood playbook.
What is to be done? After years of prevarication, the last Conservative government was poised to ban the Brotherhood before Rishi Sunak did for the process – and for himself – by calling an early election. Today, only Nigel Farage has made a concrete pledge to outlaw the group, which he delivered at the last Reform conference.
The sorry truth is that the Brotherhood is only just getting started. Before the last general election, a group called the Muslim Vote gave detailed instructions on tactical voting, constituency by constituency, along sectarian lines. The five “Gaza independents” were the result. What have those activists been up to in the years since? What will happen at the next election?
Given the way in which our former two-party system is collapsing into multipolarity, making a coalition government likely in 2029, it is all but certain that our next parliament will contain a de facto Muslim Brotherhood bloc.
This grouping may act as the kingmaker in a “progressive” coalition, enabling, for example, the coronation of a hard-left Labour prime minister; Green Party ideologue Zack Polanski as deputy leader; and various “Gaza independents” in ministerial roles. Just imagine: Ayoub Khan MP as secretary of state for defence. It’s enough to make your blood run cold.
How will we deal with that? By that point, legislation regarding “Islamophobia” may have been passed, rendering criticism unlawful, and our robust democratic system contains strong mechanisms to prevent the removal of such MPs. So Craig Guildford? Of course he should resign, but in the longer run, that will make little difference. The Brotherhood has been planning its takeover for decades and it’s only just warming up.
To get more from opinion, click here to sign up for our free Editor's Picks newsletter.
