Member's statement: Israel: 7 October 2023 Attacks

Member's statement by Mr David Brooks on 10 March 2026.

MLA

Mr David Brooks

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

10 March 2026

Type

Member's statement

Business

Members' Statements

Heading

Israel: 7 October 2023 Attacks

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5436078

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Yesterday, this place marked European Remembrance Day for Victims of Terrorism, which takes place tomorrow. I was unable to attend the event, but I take this opportunity to say that I stand in solidarity with the innocent victims represented yesterday and, in particular, with those who still await justice. Speaking of innocent victims of terrorism, also yesterday, I, along with a number of other representatives, had the opportunity — one that, I have to say, I was conflicted about taking — to see some unedited footage of the Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) attacks on Israel on October 7. I saw the horrors of terrorism that can be wrought upon innocent people living their everyday lives. I am glad that I took the opportunity to confront that, even if some of it will stay with those of us who watched it for a long time and even if I had to avert my eyes on a number of occasions from the sheer barbarity of what was carried out. Children, parents and grandparents — ordinary people living ordinary lives — were murdered in their beds and kitchens, burned in cars and, of course, murdered at a music festival by what I can only describe as animals, who, with demonic zeal, chanted "Allahu Akbar", declared themselves heroes and called their families to boast of killing their first Jew or about how many they had killed. One repeatedly told his parents on the phone, "I've killed 10, I've killed 10: your son is a hero". A father panicked, guiding his young sons, all in their underwear, to a small safe room in the garden, where a big, brave Hamas terrorist — the people, perhaps, whom Gerry Carroll referred to as "the Palestinian Resistance" — seconds later, threw in a hand grenade to murder and maim. Heads were removed by shovels to gleeful chants and cheers; they were played with, and orders were given to take photos. I could not watch that scene, but, even as I turned my eyes away, it was clear what was about to happen. Women with their clothes torn from them were lifted like a prize to be showcased on the streets of Gaza from the back of trucks to celebratory cheers. Supposedly ordinary civilians but, in my opinion, animals — vermin — kicked at the lifeless bodies. Watching that footage should not be undertaken lightly, but there are Members in the Chamber who, I wish, should take such an opportunity: those who have criticisms of both sides in that conflict and those who have, frankly, been apologists for Palestinian terrorism by whatever name they choose to call it. They may well draw attention to scenes from Gaza, with which, I imagine, they are much more familiar, but I wonder how anyone who had seen that footage would be able to quite so enthusiastically defend Hamas, PIJ or the many ordinary Palestinians who joined the attack that day. Undoubtedly, they would then know why, across the Israeli political spectrum and the Israeli people, while different views exist on the conflict, there is unison in the determination that that will not be allowed to happen again and that whatever is required to prevent it must be done.

538 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Flagged Immigration, asylum, race, ethnicity and Travellers

Second assessment

Jev’s answers did not settle this record, so a second model, claude-opus-5-5, read the same text (without the MLA’s name or party) and gave its reasons on 21 October 2026. How the second assessment works

Verdict

Flagged

Public interest or divisiveness

Mixed

Against the published rubric

Much of the statement condemns terrorism and describes atrocities against civilians, which on its own would be legitimate. However, it goes beyond the perpetrators. It calls "supposedly ordinary civilians" "animals — vermin", refers to "the many ordinary Palestinians who joined the attack", and stresses the chant "Allahu Akbar" alongside "demonic zeal", portraying a people, and by implication a faith, in dehumanising terms. It also turns the subject onto fellow Members in the Chamber, branding those with "criticisms of both sides" as "apologists for Palestinian terrorism". That maps the foreign conflict onto political opponents here, which meets the rubric's tests for communal antagonism and escalation.

Public interest or divisiveness

Remembering victims of terrorism and condemning the 7 October atrocities is a substantial and legitimate purpose, and the descriptions of murdered civilians serve it. Alongside this, the dehumanising language about Palestinian civilians and the sarcastic attack on Members who criticise both sides deepen hostility and division rather than address any policy question. Both elements are substantial.

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:11 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification