OP is arguably editorialising with post title, as it doesn’t match the headline - Billions in Israel defence contracts put Australia at risk. Yes, that sentence does appear in the article proper, but we all know just how many people don’t actually click through - and just go off vibes.
Yet even then, the article has questionable content at best - and this is coming from someone who generally supports Michael West and journalistic transparency.
It’s referring to $2.5b spent since 2004 (ie. since Howard FFS), so the first question any honest journalist would ask is - how much of that occurred, or was contracted to occur before October 7, 2023?
Secondly, this money hasn’t been ‘funnelled’ to Israel for them to commit genocide on the Palestinian people, it was payment for the procurement of military vehicles, services and technology. Again, most of which was contracted to occur before Israel began committing genocide on the people of Gaza.
Under the Arms Trade Treaty, to which Australia is a signatory, governments are required to block weapons transfers if there is an overriding risk they would be used to commit serious violations of the Geneva Conventions.
Thirdly this entire argument is a bit of a red herring, as this isn’t referring to transferring weapons TO Israel - but rather buying from. Now again, there is a whole seperate matter of any money paid in the past, now being put towards genocide - but that quoted paragraph is trying to conflate these two.
Don’t get me wrong, this is not an attempt to apologise for Israel - fuck Netanyahu, Gvir and their ilk for the war crimes they’ve committed, let them burn in the pariah state that they have created… and fuck each and every member of the IDF willingly going along with it.
But honestly, I am somewhat embarrassed to share political ideology with such a disingenuous reporter. Do better, Stephanie.