I am fully aware of what the conversation is about.

Let me break it down for you.

Caricatures are drawn of a politician.

Somebody claims that because said politician is Jewish and has a big nose in the caricatures that they are antisemitic.

Likens the caricatures to pro-Palestine marches when they are, and should be, independent of one another.

I would suggest that Keir Starmers connections to Israel, and influence by the Jewish people close to him, may lay closer to the reason that his government have cracked down so hard on the Pro-Palestine movements.

They are a total contradiction in themselves, which has been proven time and time again. Which is something I get is being attempted with this/these examples.

But they are not like for like. Nowhere in the cartoons is the politician calling for death to Palestinians or even pro-Israel (so cannot be accused of being antisemitic) under Starmers laws.

But equally if the politician was calling for that, he likely wouldn't be accused of it either under Starmers Britain.

Starmers Britain is one where the "only" antisemitic people can be those that will use satire, humour or criticism of the Jewish people, but not necessarily Semite people. That includes calling out Genocide or just publicly supporting aid for the people being slaughtered.

One example is in this video - A Jewish community crowd around a news crew, telling a Semite journalist that he should "go home" and that he is not welcome on their streets, calling him a Donkey and a Dog. Nothing happened to any of them.

The law is very lob sided on this 'law' under Starmer. His version of antisemitism that he "will not tolerate in any form" is only really in favour of some Semite people, but definitely not all, and not only does he tolerate it, he often ignores it, in many of its forms.

It seems Jewish people cannot be antisemitic, but other Semite people can be.