We now know beyond doubt the UK is illegally arming Israel during genocide
This is a war crime so why aren't police acting?
Many of us have been exasperated that British police will investigate those who protest against genocide, but not politicians who participate in genocide. Their excuse until now was presumably that the UK suspended 20% of arms licences to Israel and is therefore complying with international law.
The government’s rather laughable claim was that the other 80% of arms licences relate to weapons that won’t be used against Palestinians. Unsurprisingly, even that pathetic excuse has turned out to be bullshit.
We now know the British government has misled parliament and continued to arm Israel in violation of its own export rules. It’s worth reiterating that arms licences were suspended on the basis that not doing so would mean we were contributing to Israel’s violations of international law. It would mean that Starmer, Lammy and other ministers could be held accountable for their role in genocide.
Don’t take my word from it, look at this excerpt from a statement from the United Nations:
The excellent
has reported for Drop Site News that the Labour government has sent 8,630 separate munitions to Israel since arms licences were suspended in September 2024. He based his article on a report by Palestinian Youth Movement, Progressive International, and Workers for a Free Palestine. They obtained their evidence from the Israel Tax Authority.In an attempt to avoid incriminating itself, the British government is refusing to say what the deliveries to Israel contained. They are hiding behind the national security excuse which they quite literally see as their get out of jail free card.
While the UK government pretends all shipments are not for military operations in Gaza, Israel categorises the deliveries as:
Bombs, Grenades, Torpedoes, Mines, Missiles And Similar Munitions Of War And Parts Thereof
Parts and accessories of revolvers or pistols
Parts and accessories of shotguns and rifles
Rocket launchers; flame-throwers; grenade launchers; torpedo tubes and similar projectors
Tanks and other armoured fighting vehicles, motorised whether or not fitted with weapons, and parts of such vehicles
The report points out David Lammy claimed “much of what we send is defensive in nature. It is not what we describe routinely as arms”. The British foreign secretary suggested we are only sending items such as “helmets and googles” when, in fact, we have sent Israel 150,000 bullets.
Are we expected to believe that Israel is not using those 150,000 bullets in Gaza? And even if it wasn’t, would it be acceptable if it used them in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen or Iran? A war crime is a war crime, regardless of where it takes place. Those arms export restrictions are in place because Israel can’t be trusted to respect human rights anywhere, not just in Gaza.
When Tory politicians, and even the Financial Times, are disowning Israel for ethnic cleansing and mass starvation, the British prime minister is still covering for Israel. He was challenged by independent MP Shockat Adam in parliament and denied ethnic cleansing was underway, saying “Mr Speaker, most of what he said is simply not right.”
The thing is every word Shockat said was 100% accurate. See for yourself:
“This week the Israeli government approved a plan to officially conquer Gaza, and just yesterday minister Smotrich vowed that Gaza will be entirely destroyed, that the Palestinians will have to leave in great numbers to third countries. This comes at the end of the extermination of over 50,000 Palestinian men, women and children, and the expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank that I witnessed with my own eyes last week.
“So now, will the prime minister finally acknowledge that ethnic cleansing is underway and end all UK military cooperation with Israel, especially the illegal provision of F-35 fighter jet parts, or will he risk making Britain complicit in war crimes and be the prime minister to see Britain answer in the Hague for its role in this atrocity?
I would like to know which part of that statement the prime minister thinks is wrong. This matters because there is the expectation that the parliamentary record is accurate. Any inaccuracies are supposed to be corrected. It’s not acceptable for the prime minister to dismiss serious concerns without actually addressing them. We need to know the following:
Does the prime minister claim it was inaccurate to say Israel has officially approved a plan to conquer Gaza? Because it has.
Does he claim it was inaccurate to claim that Bezalel Smotrich said Gaza will be completely destroyed? Because he did.
Does he claim it was inaccurate to say over 50,000 Palestinians have been killed? Because no credible organisation is claiming the death toll is lower and most are saying it’s likely to be much higher.
Does he claim it was inaccurate to say Israel is expanding illegal settlements? If so, someone needs to watch the Louis Theroux documentary!
Does the prime minister deny he is illegally supplying F-35 parts to Israel? Well, of course he does, because if he said otherwise he would be admitting to a war crime.
Starmer gave a mealy-mouthed response to Shockat in which he said the situation in Gaza was “intolerable” and he was “increasingly concerned” about the lack of aid getting in. I would like to know what word he would use to describe a country blocking all food entering another country for over two months? Would he call it genocide if it was happening to us? If British children were withering and dying in their parents’ arms?
If Starmer denies ethnic cleansing is taking place, he needs to be listening to Netanyahu who is saying he will drive the population of Gaza into the south (where there doesn’t seem to be a building left standing) and permanently occupy it.
“We will see to the general security in the Gaza Strip and will allow the realisation of the Trump plan for voluntary migration. This is the plan. We are not hiding this and are ready to discuss it at any time.”
Starmer is saying Netanyahu is not doing ethnic cleansing and Netanyahu is quite clearly saying: “Yes, I am!” It would be laughable if it wasn’t so serious.
Israel has outlined its plans to force Palestinians into a “humanitarian area” and flatten any buildings that remain standing outside of it. The strategy is to make life so unbearable that it forces Palestinians to accept the so-called “voluntary migration”. Bezalel Smotrich came right out and said it:
“Gaza will be entirely destroyed, civilians will be sent to ... the south to a humanitarian zone without Hamas or terrorism, and from there they will start to leave in great numbers to third countries.”
Why would Palestinians leave in great numbers unless Israel made life unbearable for them? Does Sir Keir Starmer not understand that making the conditions of life impossible is in itself an act of genocide? Of course he does, he is a human rights lawyer, and even if he didn’t, ignorance would be no defence because he is the fucking prime minister!
By supplying weapons and ammunition to Israel and denying war crimes that Israel is openly admitting to, the prime minister is committing war crimes himself. Why then are the police not investigating him?
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.
Place Starmer in the Tower of London in a musty smelly dungeon with just one glass of water and a piece of bread.
Had enough of this SHIT
The police and the law protect the powerful. It's always been that way. Businesses as usual.