A forensic dissection of Starmer’s ceasefire statement
JVL Introduction
Jonathan Cook has dissected the statement issued by the British Prime Minister as the ceasefire deal was announced – although not yet signed. His welcome for a ceasefire, has much to encourage our sympathy for Israelis and the need to remember and mourn Israelis who have been killed (which we should do, of course). However, apparently more than 45,000 Palestinians “lost their lives” (which, as Michael Rosen commented on his Facebook page) is “rather careless” of them! Starmer has continued what happens far too often, which is omitting any reference to Israel’s responsibility for Palestinian deaths, even while most Human Rights organisations refer to this as a genocide. Since the very beginning Israelis are killed by Hamas whereas Palestinians “die”s
AS Cook points out here, Britain is also responsible because of the many things Starmer could have done to prevent more bloodshed and destruction after he became Prime Minister, he did none of them.
LL
This article was originally published by Substack on Thu 16 Jan 2025. Read the original here.
Keir Starmer's support for the Gaza ceasefire is riddled with lies
Estimates are that it will take 80 years to rebuild Gaza. How is a ‘sovereign and viable Palestinian state’, or a ‘better future’, going to emerge out of ruins on that scale?
Loading article text…
Quote: “He could have refused to shelter the Israeli military’s chief of staff, General Herzi Halevi, in London in November by issuing him with special immunity from arrest and prosecution by the ICC.” I don’t understand this sentence. How does ‘refusing to shelter’ work with ‘issuing special immunity’ Is there negative construction needed here. My greatest concern is Starmer’s failure to contextualise the Oct 7 attack in the process of normalisation with Israel to the exclusion of Palestine (Gaza, West Bank), let alone the many decades of Israeli oppression. .
I agree entirely. Well said.
Coruscating. And there are important, underreported points about the Argentinian massacres, and that a large proportion of the Israeli ‘hostages’ being prisoners of war.
excellent
“The “deadliest massacre” for Jews since the Holocaust was, in fact, committed by the Argentinian junta, which disappeared and murdered thousands of Jews in the late 1970s.”
But that government had very good relations with Israel though.
It seems entirely possible that a large fraction – even a majority – of Israeli civilians killed on 7 October 2023 were victims of the IDF, responding to the Hannibal directive, rather than Hamas and other Palestinian militants. Tel Aviv’s absolute refusal to cast any light on the events that day suggests this is the case. What, I wonder, would be the effect on public opinion here or elsewhere to news that the IDF, not Hamas, were the chief culprits on 7 October.
Robert we have to very careful about suggesting that Israeli forces implementing the Hannibal Directive were responsible for a large proportion of the deaths on Oct 7, 2023. Richard Sanders explained in an interview with Peter Oborne what Al Jazeera discovered in their very thorough investigation last spring. There’s no evidence for hundreds, or even many dozens, having died from Israeli fire. You can hear him on YouTube about 26 minutes into this clip. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4vqO-Y70Mk.
It is my great misfortune to have Starmer as my MP. I received this same letter when I wrote urging him and Lammy to oppose the banning of UNRA at all costs. No answer received to that, of course, just this bot-like form letter which is so biased it makes the BBC look good!
According to Starmer Palestinians are losing their lives. Still could be worse, they could even lose their mobile phones!