All this is in line with a single-minded focus on (even the mere appearance of) anti-Semitism from Starmer. To the exclusion of anything else.
The comments reported recently just seem in line with what has been reported by mainstream media (that there was an intelligence failure). Labour's problem is that they couldn't have picked anyone who was supportive of Starmer's line on Israel without that defining the by-election, so presumably they picked someone who would neutralize the issue (in their hopes). But now the news will be entirely defined by their mushiness on Gaza.
This is not correct. It went beyond the stories of an intelligence failure and of Netanyahu having neglected the Gaza front at the expense of the West Bank, to saying that Netanyahu was actively aware that the attack was coming and allowed it to take place.
Ali's statements (including the new ones) have some basis in factual reports, but go beyond what they say and put them together in ways that are conspiratorial.
I can't speak for the UK, but it is a fairly common analysis I've heard in the us. I don't think it is true, but I also don't think it is particularly conspiratorial or anti-semitic. It doesn't really matter, the main thing is that they had to pick someone who supported a ceasefire, but couldn't expand on the reasons why. I think it was an impossible situation that was bound to result in leaks like this.
