Debate contribution: Illegal US and Israeli Attacks on Iran

Debate contribution by Mr David Brooks on 16 March 2026.

MLA

Mr David Brooks

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

16 March 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Illegal US and Israeli Attacks on Iran

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5449253

Read the official Assembly record

Text

No, I will not. I watched the parade just across from the memorial to those who lost their lives in the Bayardo Bar bomb attack. The families who lost loved ones in those two tragedies might ask what business Sinn Féin, which continues to lionise those who murdered men, women and children, has feigning some respect for life, law and peace. The motion states that the Assembly:

"regrets that many civilians have died and will die".

They might ask how loud or visible Sinn Féin was when Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was mass-murdering tens of thousands of his own citizens in recent months for dissenting. In Northern Ireland, we know all too well the cost of violence and the perils of extremism. We recognise that there comes a time when action must be taken against those who reject peace and embrace intimidation. We understand the anguish of communities that face threats from militias backed by Tehran. We know the fear felt by Jewish communities who are under constant missile bombardment from Iranian proxies. I disagree with nationalists on Palestine, and, having witnessed last week the uncensored filming of some of the barbarity that Iranian proxies carried out on 7 October, I know with whom I stand. It is, however, astounding to me that nationalists, some of whom I hear at the Education Committee each week railing against faith and culture in our schools, find themselves committing to apologism for an oppressive Islamic regime whose vile treatment of women is a matter of record and whose oppression and murder of their own people has been witnessed at its most acute in recent months. Those murders were, largely, carried out by the IRGC. The IRGC targets not only its own people but Jewish communities here in the UK, and the UK Government should not hesitate to designate it as a terrorist organisation. It seems that loathing of Israel is so great that even the most evil of actors can be excused. Before Members opposite intervene to distance themselves from that, let me be clear: this is apologism for the status quo in Iran. You do not get to say —.

Yes, I will.

A number of players in the region have human rights issues to respond to.

You do not get to say, though, that you are championing women's rights, sending love and light, no doubt, across the globe, when you then come to this place and repeat Iranian talking points in order to frustrate the hopes of the women of Iran, and the people of Iran generally, to throw off the shackles of an extreme Shiite Islamist regime. The Iranian regime has, for decades, sought to destabilise the Middle East, foster terror and hold millions of voices in chains. Many thousands of ordinary people caught between oppression and fear will privately be celebrating the weakening of a regime that has silenced dissent and crushed protest with lethal force. Talk of "self-determination" in the motion is disingenuous or, at best, naive nonsense.

Diplomacy has routinely failed. Iran continues to seek to enrich uranium far beyond what is required for civil uses. It has restored the capacity to produce over 170 long-range missiles a month. It has continued to weaponise terrorist proxies across the region against Israel, against shipping in the region and against allies. Members here talk of UN charters, but I have to ask what the UN has done to meaningfully change the destiny of the Iranian people, including the women of Iran, as they have been slaughtered. Fancy words, tough talk and harsh letters have proven fruitless. The peaceful, democratic solutions have not led to the freedom of the Iranian people, just as UN peacekeepers in southern Lebanon have proved as useful as a chocolate fireguard in defending the communities of Israel from Hezbollah attack. If the UN is continually disregarded and disrespected, that is not least because it has repeatedly shown itself to be toothless and impotent in dealing with threats. Speaking of toothlessness, I have criticised the Republic of Ireland's lack of defence investment on a number of occasions in this place, but I can say that, on all fronts, the British Government's response to this situation has been lamentable. It has highlighted the sore need to rebuild our armed forces to reflect and enable the strength and ability of those who serve. We welcome the commitment to increased defence spending, but, if we only plan to get to 2·5% by 2027, that is not enough. It is unfortunate that successive Governments have failed to increase defence spending adequately. We will continue to urge the Government to go faster in that regard. Members on the opposite Benches may have missed me say earlier that hordes of Iranian people at home and abroad have openly celebrated the downfall and death of the Ayatollah. They want their country back; they want freedom — freedom that UN diplomacy has shown no ability whatsoever to deliver. Those who speak against military action, whether they accept it or not —.

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.

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

Assessment

Flagged Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice)

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:13 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

A second, larger AI model can read this record again, without being told the MLA’s name or party, against the same published rubric. It also asks whether the activity mainly serves the public interest or mainly advances division. Its verdict replaces the current one, whichever way it goes, and its reasons are published here. Each record can have one second assessment.

If you still think the record or its classification is wrong after that, or the record itself has a factual error, you can challenge it. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.