Starmer and Burnham are two sides of the same coin

Keir Starmer has finally accepted defeat as he gave a speech stepping down as Labour leader.

During his teary speech at the podium outside No.10, Starmer praised how he got rid of the antisemitism which had apparently plagued the party before he took the reins. He said his administration defied the odds, claiming:

That we were consigned to history, that a majority at the general election, let alone a landslide majority, was impossible. But we proved those people wrong because we changed our party.

Ripping out the poison of antisemitism, restoring trust on the economy, defence, and national security.

However, the reality, as we have all increasingly learned, is that he chose Israel and Zionism — which then saw him shield the genocidal state from any accountability.

Starmer lied his way to the top, took every freebie he could get, targeted the sick and disabled, demonised & scapegoated refugees, gave a top govt job to a billionaire paedophiles best pal, enabled & armed a genocide.

Beth Rigby tells us it was a very dignified speech. pic.twitter.com/qQWIjzXd03

— Saul Staniforth (@SaulStaniforth) June 22, 2026

Starmer slid down a slippery slope to the bottom of the barrel

Starmer began his resignation speech by acknowledging people’s doubts about whether he was the leader to take Labour forward, but that members of his party had been calling for his resignation for quite a while.

Starmer’s challenger Andy Burnham has a record of political u-turns and links with Labour Friends of Israel. But, there’s not much difference between the two men as Starmer followed a similar script.

His lucrative relationships with pro-Israel donors raise serious questions about whose interests are really being heard in Westminster, especially given the controversy surrounding his early comments on Gaza when he legitimised the Zionist siege on Gaza.

This intervention from Starmer underscored the reality that keeping murderous interests happy always mattered more to the prime minister than human lives, including British citizens. The terrorism charges recently levelled against direct action activists from Palestine Action have significantly curtailed the right to protest and freedom of speech in the UK.

And, it’s an intervention that has come to define his time as prime minister.

Starmer deserves every bit of the humiliation the coming days will heap upon him, he gave Israel the green light to commit genocide in Gaza: pic.twitter.com/UcwUzxmTx8

— Bill Cruickshank (@BjCruickshank) June 21, 2026

@BethRigby refers to the claim Starmer is emotionless.

She said,

"It's not true…he just hides his feelings well"

That'll be why he never flinches at the sight of 1,000's of dead civilians in Gaza. Little toddlers in their baby grows blasted to pieces.

Yeh! that'll be it.🤗 pic.twitter.com/Rt5hANo0Hn

— sandra (@mrsDugskullery) June 22, 2026

Choosing Israel should see Starmer in the Hague

Declassified UK, whose investigations have been crucial in scrutinising our government’s ongoing complicity in Israel’s genocide, pointed out how Starmer only sees fit to shed a tear when it impacts his career.

In contrast, he has shown little emotion when faced with the mass murder of Palestinians.

Keir Starmer shed tears on resigning but never noticeably did so over the tens of thousands of Palestinians murdered by Israel with his complicity. pic.twitter.com/VdnWVP07rK

— Declassified UK (@declassifiedUK) June 22, 2026

Subsequently, Declassified UK posted about whether Starmer’s approval for a huge number of spy flights which aided Israel’s genocide should see him face justice in the Hague.

🚨BREAKING — Keir Starmer resigns as Prime Minister

In our documentary, we ask whether Starmer's decision to send hundreds of spy flights over Gaza amid the genocide should put him in the Hague👇https://t.co/qL3jN8D1qV

— Declassified UK (@declassifiedUK) June 22, 2026

Scrutiny is crucial

Starmer’s cabinet is pretty much a lineup of political stooges bought and paid for by Israel’s government. Whether that be David Lammy and his eagerness to afford the majority of public funds for pro-Israel propaganda reports, or Yvette Cooper and her iron fist brought down on anti-Zionist activists and protesters, the interests of the genocidal state have become indistinguishable from British government policy decisions.

Therefore, whilst the government and billionaire-bought media will seek to portray Burnham and other candidates as indicative of ‘change’, it should not be so easily believed.

Scrutiny will be absolutely critical in understanding who Burnham works for — himself, Israel or the British public.

Featured image via the Canary