Israel Just Proved Birmingham Right – But Starmer’s Not Apologising

Right, so few governments could manage to imply that their own police and Birmingham’s Safety Advisory Group are antisemitic for following safety protocol and barring an Israeli football club’s fans from attending an upcoming match and then be proven wrong by scenes from Israel itself — but Keir Starmer’s just did. What began as a straightforward policing decision in Birmingham, restricting Maccabi Tel Aviv fans from Villa Park on public-order grounds, has turned into a political farce the equivalent of an antisemitism custard pie meeting Starmer’s brylcreemed mush. Because just days after Zionist performative outrage hit the British mainstream headlines, Israeli police themselves have cancelled Maccabi’s own derby match in Tel Aviv after violent riots, using a phrase that makes the safety decision making in Birmingham entirely justified: Israel’s own police considered the situation in Tel Aviv a “risk to life.” The logic of both police forces is identical, the outcome the same — only the spin is different. In Israel, it was called public safety; in Britain, its been called racist and wrong by our own PM, who seemingly values Zionism more than public safety. Therefore this isn’t a story about football anymore. It’s about how moral posturing backfires when the facts of the matter don’t tally up — and how a Prime Minister desperate to look righteous has yet again ended up looking like a ridiculous sellout to foreign interests instead.
Right, so ahead of Aston Villa’s Europa Conference League match against Maccabi Tel Aviv next month, West Midlands Police and the local Safety Advisory Group ruled that Israeli fans would not be permitted to attend the fixture. The reasoning was plain: recent intelligence and prior incidents showed a high risk of disorder, their recent track record in Amsterdam and Paris and Greece, providing ample evidence for them to have come to this conclusion. Officials described the restriction as a standard public-safety precaution, nothing more, it’s nothing we haven’t seen happen to a lot of clubs, not least British ones because of fan conduct.
There was no hint of discrimination in the language used by police or the advisory group. They cited logistics, intelligence, and prior crowd-management failures with regards to this particular club. Birmingham MP Ayoub Khan backed the call, saying the authorities had a duty to protect residents and visitors. Within twenty-four hours, however, what should have been a technical safety measure dealt with at local governance level of course exploded into a national controversy, because its Israel and they must apparently always be treated as the exception.
Keir Starmer, a man persistently on the wrong side of public opinion to the extent he’ll end up in the Guinness Book of Records for it before long and of course a self-proclaimed Zionist without qualification, publicly condemned the decision, saying he thought the decision was wrong. Others went further determining the action to be antisemitic. Together, those remarks converted a local risk assessment, based on evidence into a moral trial. A local crowd management issue for some reason warranting national government comment, undermining the authorities involved. Ministers, pundits, and MPs rushed to echo him, whilst prostrating themselves for the Zionist apartheid state. Overnight, Birmingham’s police and council were painted as bigots for acting on their own intelligence.
Khan and others who had also spoken up in support of the ban given Maccabi’s high profile hooliganism faced online abuse, harassment, and denunciation from Israel’s supporters at every level too. They were accused of bigotry for agreeing with the professionals tasked with keeping the public safe. What had begun as a normal policing matter was turned into a loyalty test to Israel and woe betide those who failed it. The message was unmistakable: that where it comes to Israel, security assessments were now political statements, and dissent from the government’s preferred narrative carried a stigma. Starmer and Co have been publicly berated, out of touch with the opinion of most of the public that Israel are shameless genocidaires with an obsession with hanging onto a victim status they long ago ceased to warrant, especially give the last two years in Gaza. For even football to become a massive political farce just went to show how far some will go to defend the blue and white state come what may in this country. But Karma’ can be a b*tch sometimes can’t it?
The trouble for all of Israel’s defenders came only days later, as events in Tel Aviv itself have now vindicated Birmingham completely. You see just yesterday, Israeli police cancelled the Premier League derby match between Maccabi Tel Aviv and Hapoel Tel Aviv after violent clashes erupted outside the Bloomfield Stadium.
Fireworks, smoke grenades, and stones were hurled at officers and rival fans. Several police officers and civilians were injured. Thirteen arrests were made. In their official statement, Israeli police described the disturbance as “serious violent riots that endangered life.” West Midlands Police had likewise cited serious public-safety concerns in their Villa Park assessment.
The Israeli decision was not symbolic and I dare Starmer to infer that Israeli police are racist now; it was an operational decision, just as is the case in Birmingham and Tel Aviv’s own fans, prepared to tear up their own city, let alone anyone else’s, proved exactly why that is the case. Commanders ordered the cancellation to prevent further harm.
When Israel’s own police called off the derby, they confirmed what Birmingham had predicted. The threat was not theoretical. It was measurable, immediate, and well-documented.
At that point, the British pro Israel narrative went to pieces, baseless as it always was. The same people who had accused Birmingham of antisemitism now watched Israeli police do precisely the same thing—and could offer no explanation, certainly couldn’t make the same racist accusations.
If a local ban based on risk assessment was racist, then the Israeli police, by Starmer’s logic, had committed the same offence. The contradiction was so obvious that those accused have had a field day, particularly at Starmer’s expense.
One post on Twitter that I noted summed the whole situation up brilliantly by saying:
‘Be in no doubt who controls the narratives, the publishers and editorials, the news outlets and broadcasters. The mask has gone and we can see via the Maccabi Tel Aviv story who is bought and paid for by Israel.’
Starmer’s words, once delivered with all of his fake moral certainty, now looked every inch the political pygmy and bought and paid for Israel shill so many of us see him to be. He’s wetter than a dolphins chin when it comes to Israel. The “antisemitism” accusation had collapsed under the weight of evidence, the use of that word and the false accusations that too often come with it having cheapened the entire thing. The government’s posture—swift, moralistic, and incurious—crumbled in real time.
The data spoke for itself and had been summed up in a tweet by Stan Collymore - Maccabi Tel Aviv had endured two match postponements in the last 266 days due to public disorder. Aston Villa had not had a single game postponed for violence in more than 50,000 days, stretching all the way back to 1888. No reasonable observer could possibly equate the two. Clearly we have too many unreasonable ones.
Within hours of the Tel Aviv rioting and the police cancellation of derby match attendance, the footage and police reports turned Westminster’s immoral crusade into a proper crisis of credibility. The accusation against Birmingham did not merely fade—it backfired. Every fact that emerged showed that the city had been right and the Prime Minister wrong, but not just wrong, because as ever with Starmer, there’s hypocrisy at play too.
Ten years earlier, Keir Starmer had appeared at a Palestine Solidarity Campaign event titled Kick Israeli Racism Out of FIFA. At the time, he had presented himself as a human-rights lawyer committed to confronting racism wherever it appeared. That event addressed exactly the kind of abuse and violent fan culture that has since plagued Israeli football.
A decade later, the same man condemned others for acknowledging the same problem he himself had previously spoken about. He’s turned from critic of Israeli racism to defender of those accused of it. Again we’re reminded that every principle he ever notionally had, has been replaced by political convenience and he’s reaping what he deserves from that.
Between those two moments lies the story of a politician who chose alignment over integrity.
Little Tommy Ten Names, on a visit to Israel as he currently is, invited especially because they love him over there, announced that he plans to hold a rally in Birmingham in support of Maccabi Tel Aviv. Robinson’s involvement has also reframed the issue: that this was no longer about sport or faith—it was about weaponising Israel’s image to inflame Britain’s own culture wars.
Robinson’s record of anti-Muslim agitation is extensive. His sudden enthusiasm for Maccabi Tel Aviv has little to do with football and everything to do with politics. For him, waving the Israeli flag is a shorthand for attacking Muslims and Palestinians. That overlap between state symbolism and far-right street politics has been visible for years. In 2025, the British government’s rhetoric effectively invited it.
By condemning Birmingham’s restriction as antisemitic, the government had handed a propaganda victory to the far right. Robinson and his followers could now claim they were defending Israel from British prejudice, so Starmer has stuffed up twice over. A government professing to fight hate had ended up on the same side as a man convicted of it.
When Israeli police cancelled the Tel Aviv derby, Birmingham’s position was vindicated beyond dispute. West Midlands Police had used the same criteria, reached the same conclusion, and acted to prevent the same outcome. Their decision was sound. Ayoub Khan’s insistence that “public safety comes first” proved correct. It’s a matter that should never have been in question.
The people who smeared him owe an apology, though none has been forthcoming. Their silence since the Tel Aviv riot is its own admission. The institutions they accused of bigotry have been proven competent and correct.
It is a test case for how evidence is treated when it intersects with politically sensitive subjects. If local authorities can be called racist for following intelligence assessments, the chilling effect on policing will be severe. Officers will hesitate to act on credible threats if they fear political retaliation. That hesitation endangers the public.
The sequence of events demonstrates how evidence can be crushed by political optics. Birmingham’s officials acted on documented risk. Westminster reacted on instinct. The government labelled a safety decision antisemitic without examining a single police report.
The chain of cause and effect is clear. Birmingham applied its safety assessment. Starmer and others condemned it. Days later, Israeli police implemented the same measure for identical reasons. The outcome exposes a political reflex: when the subject involves Israel, facts become secondary to allegiance.
This reflex has consequences. It deters honest analysis. It trains institutions to prioritise how a decision looks over whether it is right. It tells police officers, elected officials, and civil servants that truth is conditional on foreign policy.
The most lasting damage is linguistic. “Antisemitism” once meant hatred of Jews. It now risks meaning more and more “criticism of Israel,” a shift that harms everyone, especially Jewish people around the world whether they support Israel or not.
The Maccabi Tel Aviv controversy shows how that weaponisation corrodes real anti-racist work. If every act of accountability is reframed as prejudice, genuine antisemitism becomes harder to isolate and confront. The public stops listening. The term loses its precision.
For a government that claims to champion equality, this drift is fatal. By diluting the meaning of antisemitism, officials weaken their own credibility in combating it. They also alienate the communities that rely on clarity and truth in the fight against hate. For Starmer’s Labour it reminds us all that the hierarchy of racism endemic in his party remains very much the case.
The riot in Tel Aviv also reveals something deeper about Israel itself. Reports described Maccabi Tel Aviv ultras clashing with police before the match. Such behaviour is not random. Israeli football culture has long reflected the militarisation of national life. Group identity, aggression, and defiance of authority are celebrated in the stands.
Academic studies have documented links between fan groups and nationalist movements. The boundary between sporting rivalry and political ideology is thin. The violence outside Bloomfield Stadium was therefore not just a policing failure; it was a social indicator. It showed how a culture accustomed to impunity behaves when its own internal order breaks down.
For British authorities, that pattern matters. It explains why the threat assessment in Birmingham was justified. A club that cannot guarantee safety in its own capital city cannot expect other nations to take unnecessary risks.
Britain’s mainstream media played a central role in amplifying the false narrative. Before the Tel Aviv riot, major outlets repeated government talking points almost verbatim. The debate was framed around prejudice, not public safety. When the facts changed, the coverage largely didn’t.
After Israeli police confirmed the violence, few outlets revisited their earlier claims, though some did report what Israeli police have done, leaving their hypocrisy hanging in the air. Corrections were minimal. Those who have been vilified are being left without public vindication, even though the fact very much do so.
This pattern is now routine from the mainstream media though of course. Accusations linked to Israel receive instant amplification. Exonerating facts receive silence. The result is a one-way information economy in which allegation equals truth, but retraction never follows. That environment breeds cynicism and mistrust. It encourages officials to avoid controversy rather than confront it. So we need to hit them with it instead.
The logical contradiction at the heart of this case remains unresolved. If protecting the public from violent fans is antisemitic in Birmingham but responsible in Tel Aviv, then the moral compass of British politics has been utterly obliterated.
That double standard undermines every claim the government makes about evidence-based policy. It exposes the fragility of Britain’s moral discourse: principles apply selectively, depending on whom they might offend.
For a leader who brands himself the champion of “law and order,” Starmer’s decision to attack his own police forces was stupid to begin with, but its now become absolutely catastrophic for him as its all blown up in his face. It showed that even core institutions can be sacrificed to protect the narrative he desires. Polce arresting Palestine Action protesters is fine, but the police barring Israeli football fans – a shambles. When evidence threatens politics, politics wins.
But the effect of such governance is corrosive. Officials learn that obedience to the story matters more than truth. That is how institutions lose both competence and legitimacy.
Amid the noise, the people who acted correctly remain understated. Ayoub Khan, West Midlands Police, and local officials upheld the rule of evidence when the national government abandoned it. They maintained composure under public attack. They treated policing as a duty, not a political performance.
Their integrity deserves recognition. They demonstrated that local governance can still function when national politics fails. Their restraint was the opposite of the hysteria that engulfed Westminster. They followed procedure, proved correct, and asked for nothing in return.
The contrast is moral as much as professional. Where national leaders sought headlines, local officers sought safety. Where ministers spoke first and checked later, the police checked first and acted only when necessary.
This was never just a football dispute. It was a test of whether evidence could survive contact with ideology. The answer was no.
The Maccabi Tel Aviv affair exposes how quickly Britain’s political culture abandons its own standards when the subject touches Israel. Accusation replaces fact. Loyalty replaces reasoning. The effect is to hollow out democratic accountability.
It also shows the widening gulf between local governance and central authority. Birmingham acted to protect its citizens. Westminster acted to protect its pro Israel standing at the expense of British citizens. When national leaders prioritise foreign optics over domestic safety, they delegitimise the very institutions that make democracy functional.
For the Labour government, the implications are severe. A party that once prided itself on defending evidence and equality now stands accused of distorting both and justifiably so. By branding a legitimate policing decision as potentially racist, it discredited the concept of equality itself.
That contradiction cannot be hidden by silence. The facts are public and indisputable. Birmingham’s actions were justified. Israeli police have confirmed as much. Every attempt to spin the story otherwise will readily fall apart.
Labour’s credibility on issues of racism, law enforcement, and moral consistency was already damaged, now it has been trashed beyond any possible point of recovery. The government’s instinct to moralise before it investigates has left it exposed once again to the point people will legitimately question in who’s interests this country is being run by them. What began as a show of virtue has ended as a demonstration of arrogance and biased incompetence.
Israeli police had cancelled a match because Maccabi Tel Aviv supporters posed a danger to life. British police had predicted that risk in their assessment and acted accordingly. The Prime Minister had said their action was wrong. He was in fact wrong, but you won’t get an apology out of him over it, he never ever says sorry. In fact Ayoub Khan has public asked for an apology from those who have attacked him, A few people might well demand such of Starmer too and turn the thumbscrews a bit.
Maccabi Tel Aviv cannot play safely in Tel Aviv because of their own supporters. Yet Birmingham authorities get branded racist for preventing the same threat on its own streets.
Keir Starmer once stood at a podium demanding that Israeli racism be confronted in football. Ten years later, he condemned those who actually did so. The transformation is complete: from principle to posture, from evidence to expedience. Was he a liar then, or just a liar now?
The Maccabi Tel Aviv saga will eventually fall from the headlines, but its warning will remain. It shows how fragile truth becomes when leaders turn moral language into political currency. It shows that courage at the local level still matters more than slogans at the top and those authorities have been vindicated in standing their ground. And it leaves one question hanging over Westminster: now that the evidence has destroyed the spin, will those who created it admit the lie—or double down on it and still pursue attempts to overturn the Birmingham rulings, because who would put it past them?
For more on the Maccabi farce, why it is justified and the attacks on those who today are exonerated, do check out this video recommendation here as your suggested next watch.
Please do also hit like, share and subscribe if you haven’t done so already so as to ensure you don’t miss out on all new daily content as well as spreading the word and helping to support the channel at the same time which is very much appreciated, holding power to account for ordinary working class people and I will hopefully catch you on the next vid. Cheers folks.