It's official: the police won't arrest IDF Brits for genocide, but they will arrest you for protesting against it
When a mentally ill man with a history of violence stabbed two Jews and a Muslim in one day, Keir Starmer’s first instinct wasn’t to address the systemic failures in mental health care. It was to pretend the Muslim victim doesn’t exist, declare it a terrorist attack against Jewish people and British values, and crack down on pro-Palestine protests. If that doesn’t scream politicisation, what does?
The marches had nothing to do with those stabbings, yet when Starmer appeared on BBC Radio 4, he called for more policing of language and argued some protests should be stopped altogether. He then talked of the cumulative effect on the Jewish community who are, of course, the real victims of Israel’s genocide. Starmer said he would always defend the right to protest, but all he has done since coming to power is strip away that right. Cumulative marches, it seems, are much more problematic that cumulative bombs.
Despite being called out on his bad faith actions, the Prime Minister is doubling down by further attacking the democratic values he is pretending to uphold. Today, he held a summit on antisemitism, summoning leaders from business, education, health, and policing to discuss “eradicating antisemitism”. Only, he seems comfortable with antisemitism towards the only Jewish political leader in the UK: Zack Polanski. What we are seeing here is selective outrage.
Starmer spoke about proscribing the IRGC in the next parliamentary session, but strangely, not the IDF. It seems the goal is to silence critics of the Iran war in the same way the proscription of Palestine Action silenced critics of the Gaza genocide. Expect anyone who supports Iran’s legal right to self-defence to be arrested for “terrorism”.
While newspapers publish racist caricatures of the Green leader and TV pundits talk as though Polanski is not a real Jew, we are expected to walk on eggshells when opposing Israel’s war crimes. One word out of place and an entire movement could be shut down.
Starmer has called the Golders Green stabbings an attack on our traditional values, implying that sections of society have been overcome by hatred of Jews to the point they want innocent blood, instead of pointing out this was the work of a seriously mentally ill individual. It could not be clearer that reality is being distorted to comply with Israel’s censorship demands.
Starmer wants to fast-track new “hate crime” laws and is suggesting prosecutions for use of words like “Globalise the intifada”. He is already limiting repeated demonstrations, he now wants to limit your language. A tiny minority at massive marches—hundreds of thousands strong—might sometimes misbehave, so an entire movement is painted as a threat. If we are to accept this reasoning, all the establishment needs is a few provocateurs (or one lunatic) to shut down any movement.
We’ve all heard the preposterous arguments: “These protests make Jews feel unsafe.” No, they make supporters of Israel’s actions feel uncomfortable. If safety were the real priority, you’d stop arming the military committing what human rights organisations and genocide scholars call a genocide in Gaza. That’s not just a low bar, it’s a legal requirement under British and international law. Comply with that, and maybe the mass protests dry up. But no, you’d rather end free speech for Israel.
Since October 2023, police have made thousands of arrests at pro-Palestine events, yet around 44% of early arrests led to no further action. That means people were arrested for words that couldn’t even meet the low bar of our draconian legislation.
Our courts are facing enormous backlogs that are only likely to get worse. The solution? End trial by jury and ensure that court cases are a foregone conclusion. Peaceful protest is still protected, they say, but only if it can have no meaningful impact. Just know that you can demonstrate as often as you like, as long as the government agrees with you.
Recent violence from Iranian monarchists at a counter-demonstration to the Hands Off Iran protest did not constitute a national emergency. A man was stabbed multiple times, but Starmer is not banning pro-regime change gatherings. Pahlavists are sending death threats to opponents of war, but Starmer is not policing their language. Yet the moment there is violence against two Jews and one Muslim, protests against Israel must stop. It’s like they were waiting for their excuse, isn’t it?
Ominously, Starmer accused everyone who has ever said the words “globalise the intifada” of being responsible for Golders Green. Apparently, it is wrong to raise global awareness of the Palestinian struggle, but it’s fine for politicians to say “Israel has a right to defend itself” when it blows up a school or hospital. It’s fine for the prime minister to say Israel has the right to cut off food, water and electricity to Palestinians. It is the people who are speaking out against genocide who are the problem.
We live in a time when Palestinian doctors are suspended from the NHS for advocating for their people, but British citizens who murdered for the IDF are not investigated by the police.
In April 2025, the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights and the Public Interest Law Centre submitted a 240-page dossier to the Metropolitan Police’s War Crimes Team. It contained evidence of war crimes carried out by British citizens, including the targeted killings of civilians and aid workers, indiscriminate attacks on civilian areas, hospitals and protected sites, and forced displacement.
Over 2,000 Brits have served for the IDF in Gaza, but the dossier carefully named only the ten with the strongest evidence against them. Over 70 legal and human rights experts signed a supporting letter urging investigation, but the Met refused, citing “no realistic prospect of conviction”.
Barrister Michael Mansfield KC (who helped deliver the dossier), called the decision “a complete insult to the rule of law,” arguing it pre-judged the case by demanding conviction-level evidence at the pre-investigation stage. PILC solicitor Paul Heron said: “The very purpose of an investigation is to obtain and test evidence, including evidence not available to victims, lawyers or civil society organisations.”
Given the obvious double standards at play, it is reasonable for people to question Israeli influence in our politics, yet the government refuses to debate a viral petition calling for an investigation into that influence. The petition is titled Call a public inquiry into pro-Israel influence on politics & democracy and the description reads:
“We are concerned about reported Israeli state-linked and pro-Israel lobbying activity in UK politics. We believe it is important to determine the scope and impact of any such influence campaigns.”
The petition surpassed 114,000 signatures, and was rejected, even though a similar petition on Russian influence had triggered a parliamentary debate. The fact they will discuss Russian influence, but not Israeli influence, should tell you where the real influence lies.
The official response was: “The Government does not support a public inquiry on pro-Israeli influence, and does not have plans to hold an inquiry on wider foreign influence and lobbying more generally.” It referenced the Rycroft Review on foreign interference that focused on Iran, Russia, and China, but crucially not Israel. Half of Starmer’s cabinet have received pro-Israel donations and many cabinet members are linked to Labour Friends of Israel. Strangely, there is no Labour Friends of Russia.
In a nation with 50,000 stabbings a year, Starmer treats Golders Green as a civilisation-level test while Palestinian NHS staff get suspended and IDF murderers walk free. We are told to open our eyes to Jewish pain while closing them to Gaza’s dead. Free speech and sovereignty are collateral damage and Starmer’s so-called “British values” seem imported.
Thank you for reading. All of my content will always be freely available, but if you wish to support my work, you can do so at Ko-fi or Patreon. Likes, shares and comments also help massively.



Thank you for articulating so clearly what I've been struggling to put into words myself. The current weaponisation of outrage for political ends is both brazen and appalling.
Spot on, yet again. Beautifully articulated and reasoned. Well said Ricky!