With a tone of moral vindication, the BBC reported on the Starmer government's condemnation and sanction of Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, both far-right cabinet members in the Netanyahu government. Connected to the Settler movement, they have been charged with inciting violence against Palestinians in the West Bank, and the abuse of human rights. Further they have openly advocated policies of ethnic cleansing, though the official statements dance around this a bit as there are legal implications once such 'red lines' are crossed.
Joining the UK are Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Norway. The move represents a split in not just the West's support of Israel, but a divide between the Five Eyes Alliance with Norway representing a dissenting voice within Europe. This must also be viewed in connection with a broader and thus less specific condemnation of Israeli conduct in Gaza issued by the UK, Canada, and France back in May.
From the standpoint of the Israeli Right, such moves by the UK are necessarily Anti-Semitic and connected to historic British attempts to restrict Jewish migration during the time of the Mandate (1920-1948).
The Starmer government supports Israel but views the policies of the Netanyahu government in a negative light. Unwilling to go after Netanyahu himself (and thus invite bi-partisan wrath from the United States), they have chosen a selective if indirect condemnation.
The irony here is pretty thick considering the fact that Starmer more or less rose to prominence on the wave of a bogus Anti-Semitism scandal within the Labour Party. It was used to oust Jeremy Corbyn who was condemned for being either Anti-Semitic himself or too passive. He was accused of allowing Anti-Semitic elements to operate within the confines of Labour. Those that condemned the Starmer-led campaign argued that there was no Anti-Semitism at all and that the charges were bogus and politically motivated. These supposed Labour Anti-Semites were being critical of the policies of the Israeli state and in particular Likud and its leader Benjamin Netanyahu. Starmer (as the current leader of Blairite New Labour) and others on the Right insisted that any such Anti-Israel rhetoric was necessarily Anti-Semitic.
Well, apparently not. Starmer now (and without a hint of shame) is attempting to thread that needle - to condemn Israel without being Anti-Semitic. One would think the BBC might call this question to attention and challenge Labour leaders or even the prime minister himself, but I'm not holding my breath.
And while the proclamation sought to isolate the extremists within the Netanyahu cabinet from the mainstream policies and positions of Likud - a hair that frankly cannot be split, this was of course unacceptable to the American Right. And they have a representative on hand in the person of US Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee. He also was interviewed by the BBC - an exchange that made world headlines even if it was barely noticed in the United States.
Huckabee demonstrated once again that he's a lying mouthpiece for Zionism and he did not shy away from proclaiming his heretical Dispensational Theology when he claimed that Israel has a 'Biblical' right to the land - a blood-soaked theological assertion rejected by the New Testament.
In addition to being a Dispensationalist, Huckabee is in reality little more that a Christo-American (and now Christo-Trumpite) - a person with a religion wholly separate from New Testament Christianity but one that borrows its lexicon and some of its concepts and weds them to a host of extra- and anti-Biblical concepts and commitments. To use his own term in the BBC interview, he is a 'reprehensible' party to murder and it is a disgrace that Christians are not calling him out and denouncing his endorsement of heresy and genocide. His support for the Netanyahu, the Butcher of Gaza is unwavering. If Mike Huckabee is a Christian, then the term no longer has any meaning. He's as much of an apostate as the worst Marxist Lesbian priestess within the Episcopal Church. Both represent false forms of Christianity. Both must be categorically rejected.
There's plenty of spin to go around. At the same time as this was taking place, I was listening to coverage of Trump sending in the military to Los Angeles to quell the riots. As one California official put it, the initial conflicts weren't any worse than the kind of hooliganism one sees after a championship sports match. It was under control. But Trump clearly wants to escalate the situation. He's itching for opportunities and precedent to put American troops on the streets. The Right loathes Left-wing protesters and there is a kind of bloodlust - a desire to see these people smashed and injured. This became very clear after the protests in recent years in places like St. Louis, and Minneapolis as well as Portland. In each case the Right spun these stories and misled audiences with video loops conveying a sense of utter chaos and destruction. Outlets like FOX became agents of anger and fear. 'News' has nothing to do with what they're about.
The military resisted Trump during his first term but now with a CREC Defense Secretary who invites his pastor to lead worship services at the Pentagon - things have changed. Pete Hegseth, a psychopathic fascist has openly promoted the idea of using the military to go after protesters. Characterizing all resistance to Trump as Marxism, these people are viewed as subversive enemies worthy of death.
The spirit of the moment was on full display when one of the law enforcement 'heroes' was caught on camera blatantly shooting an Australian reporter with a rubber bullet. He wasn't provoked. It wasn't an accident. It was pure sadism - something all too common in military and law enforcement. I immediately thought of some of the local churches that have held 'Blue' worship services in recent years in an attempt to honour law enforcement. Not only is this the result of tortured reasoning and ethics, it is rank idolatry and represents an impoverished and compromised understanding of worship and the role of the Church.
The positioning of the military in Los Angeles was also a political move meant to discredit California governor Gavin Newsom who is a potential threat to the GOP in the theatre of national politics. By claiming that he 'liberated' Los Angeles, Trump is able to claim Newsom was derelict and incompetent. Regardless of what one thinks of Newsom, this is a false and deceitful claim. I immediately thought of figures like John MacArthur and Phil Johnson. Will they perpetuate the Trump narrative? Will their contempt for Newsom justify such deceptive narratives? Given what we've seen in the past, we have every reason to think so.
The narrative becomes stunning when one listens to Right-wing rhetoric about lawless behaviour, vandalism, and threats to government officials and the mandate to act, given the fact that the Right continues to support the January 6 insurrectionists and their pardoning by Trump. This is pure politics. The ethical casting of these questions is completely disingenuous. For Christians to fall into this kind of political manipulation is reprehensible.
Likewise, this reminded me of other recent events such as the collapse of Air Traffic Control at Newark Airport. The Right attempted to spin this by blaming the situation on Biden's Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. He had nothing to do with it but he's also a rising star in the DNC with recent surveys suggesting he may be a front-runner in 2028. I would say the Democrats are foolish in putting forward someone like Buttigieg but by the time Trump is finished, the national-political reaction may prove extreme. The Bush years resulted in the country electing a Black man named Barack Obama - something almost inconceivable just a few years before. Trump 2.0 may result in the election of an open sodomite. I'm dubious but it's only June, 2025. Regardless, the Right is already going after these people and seeking to capitalize every opportunity. It all may blow up in their face.
They will work with their Right-wing allies in the UK to also condemn Starmer, building the case against him in preparation for elections due to take place no later than 2029.
At this point in time there is so much spin in the media that it's hard to identify and track. Some outlets are particularly problematic when it comes to foreign policy - some especially so when it comes to Israel. The BBC can at times cover American politics better than domestic US-based media and yet this can even get tricky - a recent BBC story on the growth of Russian Orthodoxy in the United States completely missed the mark, casting the question in terms of Trump and Covid rather than a broader context of what's happening in American culture and in American Christianity. I've followed up with some of the commentary on this - and this too has been mixed as some completely discount the Trump-Covid angles. That too would be a mistake.
The world and the coverage of events has become so complicated and this at a time when the average person is (apparently) relying on Facebook memes and Twitter-feed for their news. The situation is pretty grim and for many the fact that mainstream outlets are setting up 'fact-checking' websites and launching similarly themed shows is a sign of encouragement. I'm not encouraged. In fact it's just adding to the mud already in the water. Many of these tools and programmes are fraught with bias and problems of their own.
The Western (and certainly the American) Social Consensus is truly broken. It's shattered and thus people are struggling to even interact as they inhabit different universes. It's dystopian and will continue to move society in that direction. On the one hand there is something to lament in this. On the other as I think of conformist Christianity in say the 1950's, I find the breakdown refreshing. However, I must admit I am not at all encouraged by what I'm seeing emerge as a replacement in Christian circles. In fact, it's probably worse than ever as 'conservative' Christianity has wed itself to partisan politics and opened itself up to corporate and financial interests. The agents of the enemy have an open field, standing on the platforms at conferences, entering pulpits, hosting podcasts, and dominating the sectors of Christian radio that are not merely pumping out pop fluff.
Given the shocks I have experienced over the past thirty years in witnessing the downgrade, I'm usually trying to think a few steps ahead and I have to be frank the only words that come to mind are collapse and apostasy. This is not to say we are without hope or should despair but we need to re-think some vital questions about the Church, its place in the world and how to react and interact with large segments of the Church that are openly worshipping idols - Bible in hand and with Christ on their lips. This is nothing new as similar examples exist throughout the Old Testament but sadly most people are not able to discern this or if they encounter it all (assuming they actually read the Scriptures) these episodes are spun by politically motivated corrupt and deceived pastors. The idolaters in the Old Testament are by their telling not deceived and syncretist Jehovah worshippers but (in today's terms) Leftists and outside infiltrators - and thus the badly needed message and its contemporary warnings and application are not only missed - but eliminated from consideration.
For many at the present, it's a time of a 'peace, peace' message. Trump is turning things around. God is affirming the Evangelical Church in its various idolatries, mammonism, heresy, syncretism, and ethical collapse. Like the naysayers who challenged their progenitors Old Testament, such people cannot even understand where the criticism is coming from. They are optimistic and flourishing. They cannot grasp and are unable to see the storm clouds that are blocking out the sun and spell an impending doom. Truly, there is nothing new under the sun.