East London candidate suspended over antisemitic posts, Tower Hamlets 2026

Key points

• Tower Hamlets Council’s ruling Aspire Party has suspended candidate Abul Monsur in the Lansbury ward, Poplar, over antisemitic Facebook posts.
• Monsur’s posts, published repeatedly through 2025, included Holocaust denial and an apparent approval of Adolf Hitler.
• On 30 May 2025 he shared an image replacing “Holocaust” with “Holohoax” and repeated conspiracy claims about Jews controlling the media.
• Monsur also wrote: “ADOLF HITLER OUTLAWED USURY (INTEREST – MAKING MONEY WITH MONEY)” followed by “bullseye” emojis, and added: “ADOLF Hitler must have agreed with Islam that Usury is bad?”.
• He circulated a video of former British National Party (BNP) leader Nick Griffin and claimed the far‑right group was “destroyed” for refusing to take money from “Zionist lobbies”.
• Monsur reposted a graphic alleging that the Talmud permits Jews to kill non‑Jews and to rape three‑year‑old children.
• The Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) alerted both Monsur and Aspire after an independent candidate, Andrew Wood, flagged the profile.
• Monsur told the LDRS he was “deeply sorry” and “ashamed”, apologising to Jewish people and pledging education and training.
• Aspire stated it had no prior knowledge of the posts, which were public and prolific, and suspended Monsur pending an internal investigation and disciplinary process.
• The party acknowledged that Monsur did not disclose the accounts during candidate vetting and said it would review its social‑media‑checking procedures.
• Ballot papers for the Tower Hamlets local elections on Thursday, 7 May 2026, have already been printed, so Monsur will still appear on the Lansbury‑ward ballot as an Aspire nominee.

Tower Hamlets (Extra London News) May 2, 2026 – The ruling Aspire Party at Tower Hamlets Council has suspended one of its local‑election candidates, Abul Monsur, after the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) uncovered a series of antisemitic Facebook posts spanning 2025. The revelations, which included Holocaust denial and apparent approval of Adolf Hitler, have prompted the party to review its candidate‑vetting procedures while leaving Monsur’s name on the ballot because the withdrawal deadline has passed.

What are the nature of the antisemitic posts?

As reported by the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS), Abul Monsur’s Facebook page featured a “string” of antisemitic material published throughout 2025.

On 30 May 2025, Monsur posted an image entitled “Zionist victim card”, in which the word “Holocaust” was crossed out and replaced with “Holohoax”. Immediately below it he wrote:

“There is NO mention of a ‘Holocaust’ in papers written after WW2 by Churchill, Eisenhower, and De Gaulle”,

a claim that echoes established Holocaust‑denial narratives.

Monsur also repeated a conspiracy trope asserting that “Jews gaining control of the media” allows them to shape public memory of the Holocaust. In the same post, he contended that contemporary Jewish campaigning on antisemitism is “mainly a PR tool” and that Jews “have a lot of money and power”.

Did Monsur express approval of Adolf Hitler?

According to the LDRS, Monsur appeared to show approval of Adolf Hitler in a September 2025 post that tied Hitler to antisemitic conspiracy claims about Jews, greed, and finance. He wrote:

“ADOLF HITLER OUTLAWED USURY (INTEREST – MAKING MONEY WITH MONEY)”

followed by three “bullseye” emojis, and then added: “ADOLF Hitler must have agreed with Islam that Usury is bad?”. Analysts cited by the LDRS emphasised that this couples economic antisemitism with admiration for a genocidal dictator.

Monsur also shared a video of former British National Party (BNP) leader Nick Griffin, whom he praised as “one of the bravest men in the UK”. In accompanying text he claimed the neo‑Nazi‑linked BNP was “destroyed” because it refused to take money from “Zionist lobbies” to focus on

“(1) Islam (thus all Muslims) and (2) Not talk about the banking system (owned or controlled by them Zionists)”.

What other anti‑Jewish content did he circulate?

The LDRS further documented that Monsur reposted a graphic alleging that the Talmud instructs Jews to kill non‑Jews and permits them to rape three‑year‑old children. Such imagery draws on centuries‑old blood‑libel and “Talmudic conspiracy” myths frequently used to dehumanise Jewish communities.

The LDRS noted that the graphic was shared alongside captions that castigate Jewish “lies” and “propaganda” while praising those who allegedly “expose” such material.

An independent candidate in another ward, Andrew Wood, brought Monsur’s Facebook profile to the LDRS’s attention, prompting the service to contact both Monsur and Aspire Party.

Wood later told the LDRS that he had long been concerned about the tone of online discourse around local politics but felt compelled to act when the material reached Holocaust‑denying and Hitler‑endorsing levels.

How did Abul Monsur respond to the allegations?

In a statement to the LDRS, Abul Monsur said he was “deeply sorry for these social media posts and ashamed of them”. He continued:

“I apologise from the bottom of my heart to Jewish people in our community and in wider society. These social media posts were unacceptable and I have a lot of learning to do and I will undertake training and education.”

Monsur added:

“I was not thinking straight and did not understand a lot of what I posted.”

He also confirmed that he had been suspended by the Aspire Party “pending an investigation and disciplinary process”, and said he agreed with the party’s decision.

What did the Aspire Party say about the suspension?

A spokesperson for the Aspire Party told the LDRS that the party had “no idea” about the posts, which were public and numerous, and that it took “immediate action” once informed. The spokesperson stated:

“The party had no idea about these appalling and unacceptable posts and once informed, took immediate action.”

The spokesperson also noted that Monsur had not disclosed the Facebook accounts during candidate vetting, for which he had apologised to the party. The statement continued:

“We apologise and are extremely regretful that this was not found in due diligence checks. We are reviewing how we can improve social media checks to make them as thorough as possible to ensure this mistake can never happen again.”

The Aspire Party has governed Tower Hamlets since 2018 and will face voters in the upcoming local elections on Thursday, 7 May 2026, with results expected on Saturday, 9 May.

Why does Monsur still appear on the ballot?

Despite the suspension, ballot papers for the Lansbury ward have already been printed, and the statutory deadline for candidate withdrawals has passed. As a result, under current electoral rules, the borough’s returning officer cannot remove Monsur’s name at this stage.

If elected, the party expects its internal disciplinary process to determine whether he would be allowed to take a seat; observers point out that this would likely trigger a by‑election should he be barred.

The LDRS’s coverage, which has been reproduced or summarised by outlets such as AOL and The London Standard, has framed the case as part of a wider pattern of political parties grappling with antisemitic and other hate‑linked content in candidates’ online histories.

How have others reacted to the suspension?

The Community Security Trust (CST), a UK‑based antisemitism‑monitoring organisation, has declined to comment specifically on Monsur’s case but has repeatedly warned that Holocaust‑denial and “Hitler‑apology” posts on social media distort public understanding of the Holocaust and can fuel hostility toward Jewish communities. In broader statements, CST representatives have urged all major parties to strengthen background checks and to act swiftly when candidates are linked to antisemitic material.

The LDRS’s reporting has also been cited by local‑media outlets and social‑media channels that highlight the story through headlines such as

“Aspire councillor candidate suspended over antisemitic posts – Abul Monsur”,

underscoring the local‑political impact of the scandal.

What broader implications does this case raise for political parties?

As reported by the BBC in a separate piece on candidate vetting, several parties – including the Conservatives, Labour, the Greens and Reform UK – have recently launched investigations into candidates’ social‑media histories following allegations of Islamophobic, antisemitic or otherwise discriminatory posts. The broadcaster noted that such cases have put pressure on parties to implement more rigorous online‑screening processes, especially as local‑election campaigns draw closer.

The Aspire Party’s response to the Monsur affair has been presented by the LDRS as an example of a governing local party trying to balance damage control with institutional reform. By publicly acknowledging the failure in vetting and committing to “improve social media checks”, the party aims to reassure constituents while signalling that antisemitic content will not be tolerated.

In Tower Hamlets, whose demographics include significant Jewish, Muslim and migrant communities, local‑political actors tell the LDRS that the episode has heightened scrutiny of how candidates’ online behaviour aligns with community‑relations pledges. Residents interviewed in the borough said they expect both established and new parties to treat antisemitism, Islamophobia and other forms of hate speech with equal seriousness.

The case of Abul Monsur remains live as the 7 May 2026 local elections approach, with his suspended candidacy casting a spotlight on how political parties monitor, investigate and respond to antisemitic social‑media material produced by those who seek to represent their constituents.