For a while, British security services simply had more up-to-date experience of handling various forms of terrorism than other places. They developed a host of skill-sets and techniques. Close combat stuff, surveillance, and much else. These were shared.

More recently this has very much been the case with Israel. Particularly with regards the rise of suicide attacks. They developed tactics and doctrine. These, again, were shared. Their advances covered a wide range of skills too. It’s from them that LEO and soldiers dealing with-

potential suicide terrorists changed where on the body they aimed when killing them, for example.
This is a good thing.
If this little fact causes you to write things like this: you’re at best, an idiot.

For now, any supposedly bad thing a security force does is the fault of Israel if some propels from that force updated their counter terrorism policies with the help of Israeli expertise. Regardless of whether it’s actually got anything to do with the specific training.

*people. Not propels???

Slight and obvious addendum:
What ever tactics, techniques and policies Israel shares, the extent and detail of their subsequent employment is entirely, and clearly, the responsibility of whichever force adopts them. If the discussion is about the origins and development of

tactics then it's relevant. If, as in this case, it's broad stroke morality claptrap, then you know what's actually happening. It wouldn't be a statement of fact but an attempt to morally condemn.