By PAN PYLAS and BRIAN MELLEY, Associated Press

LONDON (AP) — Two people were killed and three others were seriously wounded Thursday in a synagogue attack in northern England on the holiest day of the Jewish year, police said.

The suspect is also believed to be dead after being shot by officers, but that couldn’t be immediately confirmed because of concerns he had an explosive on him, Greater Manchester Police said. A bomb disposal team was at the scene.

The incident took place as people gathered at the synagogue on Yom Kippur, the day of atonement and most solemn day in the Jewish calendar.

In a series of posts on X, Greater Manchester Police said they were called to the Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation Synagogue in Crumpsall shortly after 9:30 a.m. by a member of the public, who said he had witnessed a car being driven toward members of the public and that one man had been stabbed.

Shots were fired by firearms officers minutes later, police said.

“One man has been shot, believed to be the offender,” it added.

Police initially said four other people were being treated for injuries caused by both the vehicle and stab wounds. They later updated the number of victims to five.

Police had “declared Plato,” the national code-word used by police and emergency services when responding to a “marauding terror attack.” That does not mean it has been declared a terrorist incident.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he was appalled by the attack and additional police officers would be deployed at synagogues across the U.K.

Related Articles

Gaza death toll mounts as Hamas is still considering its response to Trump’s peace proposal

Today in History: October 2, Vin Scully wishes all ‘a pleasant afternoon’ for the last time

Swiss glaciers shrank 3% this year, the fourth-biggest retreat on record, experts say

Cuban foreign minister says Rubio’s ‘personal’ agenda in Latin America risks Trump’s peace prospects

South Korea’s president calls for more self-reliant military as questions arise about US commitment

He was flying home early from a summit of European leaders in Copenhagen, Denmark, to chair a meeting of the government’s emergency committee.

“The fact that this has taken place on Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, makes it all the more horrific,” Starmer said on the X platform.

Dave Rich of the Community Security Trust, a charity that monitors antisemitism in the U.K., said Yom Kippur is the holiest day of the Jewish year.

“It’s a very solemn day and synagogues across the country will be full throughout the day,” he said.

He said there is “always a significant security operation in place” between police and the trust across the Jewish community on all major Jewish festivals.

Manchester was the site of Britain’s deadliest attack in recent years, the 2017 suicide bombing at an Ariana Grande concert that killed 22 people.

Vikings vs. Browns (+3½)
The Vikings play their second straight week in Europe. Many Americans who stayed over the pond for both games spent the past few days visiting Northern Ireland, where they toured the countryside and stopped at Rory McIlroy’s home to curse him.
Pick: Vikings by 7

Rory McIlroy of Team Europe celebrates with fans after Team Europe’s 15-13 win over Team United States during the Sunday singles matches of the 2025 Ryder Cup at Black Course at Bethpage State Park Golf Course on Sept. 28, 2025 in Farmingdale, New York. (Photo by Richard Heathcote/Getty Images)

Texans at Ravens (-3½)
Baltimore is 1-3 and ravaged by injuries to QB Lamar Jackson and several top defenders. In an effort to boost morale, coach John Harbaugh is considering renaming the Ravens’ defense the Department of War.
Pick: Ravens by 7

Head coach John Harbaugh of the Baltimore Ravens looks on after losing to the Kansas City Chiefs 37-20 at Arrowhead Stadium on Sept. 28, 2025 in Kansas City, Missouri. (Photo by David Eulitt/Getty Images)

Cowboys at Jets (+2½)
Bad Bunny will headline the halftime show at Super Bowl LX in February in Santa Clara, Calif. That’s a huge victory for fans of the Puerto Rican megastar who wagered online that he would make it to a Super Bowl before Jerry Jones’ team did.
Pick: Jets by 3

NEW YORK, NEW YORK – MAY 06: Bad Bunny attends The 2024 Met Gala Celebrating “Sleeping Beauties: Reawakening Fashion” at The Metropolitan Museum of Art on May 06, 2024 in New York City. (Photo by Dia Dipasupil/Getty Images)

Chiefs at Jaguars (+3½)
Jacksonville coach Liam Coen got into a postgame tussle with 49ers assistant Robert Saleh in which he warned the coach to “keep my name out of your (expletive) mouth!” The quote proved costly to Coen as he has been ordered to pay royalties because that line has been trademarked by Will Smith.
Pick: Chiefs by 7

Jacksonville Jaguars head coach Liam Coen reacts toward an official near the sideline during the first half of an NFL football game against the San Francisco 49ers in Santa Clara, Calif., Sunday, Sept. 28, 2025. (AP Photo/Kelley L. Cox)

Dolphins at Panthers (-1½)
Tyreek Hill’s season ended with a dislocated knee in Monday night’s victory over the Jets. The injury was especially tragic for the Dolphins, who were planning to trade Hill in a couple of weeks when they begin tanking for Arch Manning.
Pick: Panthers by 7

Miami Dolphins wide receiver Tyreek Hill (10) talks with a staff member as he is carted off the field after suffering an unknown lower leg injury in the second half of an NFL football game against the New York Jets, Monday, Sept. 29, 2025, in Miami Gardens, Fla. (AP Photo/Rebecca Blackwell)

Patriots at Bills (-7½)
Stefon Diggs, coming off his best game as a Patriot, says he’s “excited” about young New England quarterback Drake Maye. It’s a big change for the former Viking, as lately he has only shown enthusiasm for Cardi B and baggies of pink powder.
Pick: Bills by 11

Stefon Diggs #8 of the New England Patriots runs against the Carolina Panthers during the third quarter in the game at Gillette Stadium on Sept. 28, 2025 in Foxborough, Massachusetts. (Photo by Evan Bernstein/Getty Images)

Raiders at Colts (-6½)
Indy rookie Adonai Mitchell likely cost the Colts their first loss by dropping the football an instant before crossing the goal line for what would have been a crucial touchdown. It was surprising because Jonathan Taylor is usually in charge of the Colts’ season-killing ball drops at the goal line.
Pick: Colts by 4

Adonai Mitchell #10 of the Indianapolis Colts fumbles the ball at the goal line during the third quarter against the Los Angeles Rams at SoFi Stadium on Sept. 28, 2025 in Inglewood, California. (Photo by Ronald Martinez/Getty Images)

Commanders at Chargers (-2½)
Los Angeles was stunned by the lowly New York Giants for its first loss of the season. Chargers coach Jim Harbaugh is not taking the loss lying down and has been poring over scouting reports in the hopes of finding a new sign stealer.
Pick: Chargers by 7

Los Angeles Chargers head coach Jim Harbaugh watches the scoreboard during an NFL football game against the New York Giants on Sunday, Sep. 28, 2025, in East Rutherford, N.J. (AP Photo/Rusty Jones)

Titans at Cardinals (-7½)
The Titans are winless, starless and hopeless. But on the bright side they’re still ranked fourth in the state behind the Tennessee Volunteers, Memphis Tigers and Vanderbilt Commodores.
Pick: Cardinals by 11

Cam Ward #1 of the Tennessee Titans is tackled by Tyquan Lewis #94 and Zaire Franklin #44 of the Indianapolis Colts during the first quarter at Nissan Stadium on Sept. 21, 2025 in Nashville, Tennessee. (Photo by Dylan Buell/Getty Images)

Giants at Saints (-1½)
Giants rookie quarterback Jaxson Dart won his starting debut against the Chargers last Sunday. New York sports fans haven’t been this delighted since the Mets’ season mercifully ended.
Pick: Giants by 3

Jaxson Dart #6 of the New York Giants celebrates a win against the Los Angeles Chargers after the game at MetLife Stadium on Sept. 28, 2025 in East Rutherford, New Jersey. (Photo by Ishika Samant/Getty Images)

Other games

Lions at Bengals (+10½)
Pick: Lions by 27

Buccaneers at Seahawks (-3½)
Pick: Seahawks by 3

Broncos at Eagles (-4½)
Pick: Eagles by 7

Amon-Ra St. Brown #14 of the Detroit Lions scores a touchdown during the fourth quarter against the Cleveland Browns at Ford Field on Sept. 28, 2025 in Detroit, Michigan. (Photo by Mike Mulholland/Getty Images)

Bye week

Falcons, Bears, Packers, Steelers

Record

Last week
6-9-1 straight up
*** 2-14 vs. spread
Season
40-23-1 straight up (.635)
32-32 vs. spread (.500)
All-time (2003-25)
3859-2124-15 straight up (.645)
2942-2911-145 vs spread (.503)

*** Sadly, not a typo. To paraphrase the great Walter White: “MY PICKS ARE THE DANGER!!”

This image released by AMC shows Bryan Cranston, left, and Aaron Paul in a scene from “Breaking Bad.” Paul is nominated for best supporting actor in a drama series for his role as Jesse Pinkman. The Academy of Television Arts & Sciences’ Emmy ceremony will be hosted by Neil Patrick Harris. It will air Sept. 22 on CBS. (AP Photo/AMC, Frank Ockenfels )

You can hear Kevin Cusick on Thursdays on Bob Sansevere’s “BS Show” podcast on iTunes. You can follow Kevin on X — @theloopnow. He can be reached at kcusick@pioneerpress.com.

Related Articles

The Loop Fantasy Football Report Week 5: As top receivers drop, no-names can catch on

The Loop Fantasy Football Update Week 4: Last-minute moves

The Loop NFL Picks: Week 4

The Loop Fantasy Football Update Week 3: Last-minute moves

The Loop NFL Picks: Week 3

Seven years ago, when I was a nonpartisan advocate for girls and women, I faced a startling question from a supportive Senate staffer: “Have you considered helping boys? They really need our help now.”

I resisted the urge to cringe. Instead of dismissing her point, I dived into the research and discovered a real, mostly ignored crisis facing boys and men. There was another surprise in the data: Liberal parents are uniquely positioned to make progress.

Women have fought hard for progress and personal freedom, breaking down barriers for women and girls, and that’s worth celebrating. But boys and men are facing crises that have been ignored for too long, and it’s time we extend our empathy to them and support efforts today for more compassion and resources being directed their way. We should champion efforts like Gov. Gavin Newsom’s recent executive order aimed at addressing the growing crisis of suicide and social disconnection among boys and young men. Because if we root for only one sex to win, both sexes will lose.

A Brookings report highlights that both conservative and liberal parents — both mothers and fathers — express greater concern about the futures of their sons than those of their daughters.

Curiously, when asked about children in general — not their own — conservatives were more concerned about boys than about girls, and liberals expressed greater concern for girls.

Related Articles

Commentary: Why academic debates about AI mislead lawmakers — and the public

W.J. Hennigan: Hundreds of officers, 2 long hours of political theater

Trump’s peace plan: Perhaps impossible, but never more necessary

Maureen Dowd: AI will turn on us, inadvertently or nonchalantly

David French: Make no mistake about where we are

This disparity underscores a blind spot: Liberal parents must recognize that the struggles of boys are not just isolated issues affecting their individual families; the experiences reflect a systemic bias that demands our attention.

Today, we face a significant gender gap in education. In colleges across the United States, nearly 60% of students are women. The gender gap in higher education is now wider than it was when Title IX was enacted in 1972, but flipped in the opposite direction. Yet, where is the national campaign to address this imbalance?

Why aren’t we working to bring this back to center? Why have we abandoned “equality”?

Women now earn the majority of associate’s, bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees, yet efforts to boost female achievement still often overshadow the need to support men.

Instead of questioning what’s “wrong” with boys, we should be examining the systems that are failing them. Our education system may not be designed to align with the general nature of boys, many of whom thrive in environments that encourage active engagement, hands-on learning and flexibility.

The crisis extends beyond boys’ education to adult men’s mental health, loneliness and well-being. Men are four times more likely to die by suicide than women and make up 71% of drug overdoses, yet our cultural narrative often blames their reluctance to “open up” or points to “toxic masculinity” as the root cause.

Men’s health, in general, is another area where disparities are stark. The United States has eight federal offices dedicated to women’s health — and none for men. The data would seem to point policy makers in the other direction: Men have worse health outcomes than women, experiencing more illness and dying younger.

This imbalance speaks volumes. If we truly value the health and well-being of the boys and men in our lives, we must advocate for federal and state initiatives that address men’s health.

The challenges facing boys and men today are interconnected, spanning education, mental health, physical well-being, the family court system and societal narratives. They are the results of a confluence of events, including cultural and technological changes that have disproportionately hit men and boys.

To address these disparities, we need leaders — women and men, Republicans and Democrats — who will champion equitable resources and systemic reforms.

The starting point has to be to think big. We must build an education system that nurtures the potential of all students, a mental health system that provides compassionate and effective care, and a healthcare system that recognizes the unique needs of boys and men.

And at the cultural level, we should rethink narratives that blame and shame our boys. It’s time to find compassion for boys and men.

A shift in public perspective is overdue, and progress can accelerate if women — particularly those with liberal values — champion this cause, because the future isn’t female: The future is everyone.

Lisa Britton of Los Angeles is a writer for Evie magazine and an advocate for boys, men and fathers. She wrote this column for the Los Angeles Times.

Picture this: A congressional hearing on “AI policy” makes the evening news. A senator gravely asks whether artificial intelligence might one day “wake up” and take over the world. Cameras flash. Headlines declare: “Lawmakers Confront the Coming Robot Threat.”

Meanwhile, outside the Beltway on main streets across the country, everyday Americans worry about whether AI tools will replace them on factory floors, in call centers, or even in classrooms. Those bread-and-butter concerns — job displacement, worker retraining, and community instability — deserve placement at the top of the agenda for policymakers. Yet legislatures too often get distracted, following academic debates that may intrigue scholars but fail to address the challenges that most directly affect people’s lives.

That misalignment is no coincidence. Academic discourse does not merely fill journals; it actively shapes the policy agenda and popular conceptions of AI. Too many scholars dwell on speculative, even trivial, hypotheticals. They debate whether large language models should be treated as co-authors on scientific papers or whether AI could ever develop consciousness.

These conversations filter into the media, morph into lawmaker talking points, and eventually dominate legislative hearings. The result is a political environment where sci-fi scenarios crowd out the issues most relevant to ordinary people — like how to safeguard workers, encourage innovation, and ensure fairness in critical industries. When lawmakers turn to scholars for guidance, they often encounter lofty speculation rather than clear-eyed analysis of how AI is already reshaping specific sectors.

The consequences are predictable. Legislatures either do nothing — paralyzed by the enormousness of “AI” as a category — or they pass laws so broad as to be meaningless. A favorite move at the state level has been to declare, in effect, that “using AI to commit an illegal act is illegal.” Laws penalizing the use of AI to do already illegal things give the appearance of legislative activity but do little to further the public interest. That approach may win headlines and votes, but it hardly addresses the real disruption workers and businesses face.

Part of the problem is definitional. “AI” is treated as if it were a single, coherent entity, when in reality it encompasses a spectrum — from narrow, task-specific tools to general-purpose models used across industries. Lumping all of this under one heading creates confusion.

Should the same rules apply to a start-up using machine learning to improve crop yields and to a tech giant rolling out a massive generative model? Should we regulate a medical imaging tool the same way we regulate a chatbot? The broader the category, the harder it becomes to write rules that are both effective and proportionate.

This definitional sprawl plays into the hands of entrenched players. Large, well-capitalized companies can afford to comply with sweeping “AI regulations” and even lobby to shape them in their favor. Smaller upstarts — which might otherwise deliver disruptive innovations — are less able to bear compliance costs. Overly broad laws risk cementing incumbents’ dominance while stifling competition and experimentation.

Academia’s misdirected focus amplifies these legislative errors. By devoting disproportionate attention to speculative harms, scholars leave a vacuum on the issues that lawmakers urgently need guidance on: workforce transitions, liability in high-risk contexts, and the uneven distribution of benefits across communities. In turn, legislators craft rules based on vibes and headlines rather than hard evidence. The cycle perpetuates popular misunderstandings about AI as a mystical, autonomous force rather than what it really is: advanced computation deployed in diverse and practical ways.

Breaking this cycle requires a shift in academic priorities. Law schools and policy institutes should be producing rigorous, sector-specific research that maps how AI is actually used in hiring, logistics, healthcare, and education. They should be equipping students — not just with critical theory about technology but with practical tools to analyze which harms are novel, which are familiar, and which are overstated. And they should reward faculty who bring that analysis into legislative conversations, even if it means fewer citations in traditional journals and more engagement with policymakers.

For legislators, the lesson is equally clear: resist the temptation to legislate against “AI” in the abstract. Instead, focus on use cases, industries, and contexts. Ask whether existing laws on consumer protection, labor, and competition already cover the concern. And when crafting new rules, ensure they are narrow enough to avoid sweeping in both the start-up and the superpower indiscriminately.

If academics can resist the pull of speculative debates, and if legislators can resist the urge to regulate AI as a monolith, we might finally bring policy into alignment with reality. The public deserves a debate focused less on worst-case scenarios and more on the practical realities of how today’s tools are already shaping daily life. That is where the real challenges — and the real opportunities — lie.

Kevin Frazier is an AI Innovation and Law Fellow at Texas Law and author of the Appleseed AI substack. He wrote this column for The Fulcrum, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news platform covering efforts to fix our governing systems.

Related Articles

Trump’s peace plan: Perhaps impossible, but never more necessary

Maureen Dowd: AI will turn on us, inadvertently or nonchalantly

David French: Make no mistake about where we are

Cory Franklin: The dark reality behind the Chinese president’s hot-mic moment about transplanted organs

Other voices: Congress has no good excuse to keep trading stocks