US to revoke visas for Glastonbury band over anti-Israel chant
WASHINGTON: The United States said Monday it was revoking visas for the British punk-rap group Bob Vylan which led a chant at the Glastonbury festival calling for death to the Israeli military.
'Foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors to our country,' Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau posted on X.
BBC 'regrets' not pulling Glastonbury stream after anti-Israel remarks
British public broadcaster the BBC apologised Monday for not pulling a live stream of a punk-rap group's performance at the Glastonbury festival when they made anti-Israel remarks. 'With hindsight we should have pulled the stream during the performance. We regret this did not happen,' the broadcaster said of Bob Vylan's show, in which the group led the crowds in chants of 'Death to the IDF', the initials of the Israeli military.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer said after there was 'no excuse for this kind of appalling hate speech'.
The BBC said that 'millions of people' watched its coverage of the festival 'but one performance within our livestreams included comments that were deeply offensive'.
'The BBC respects freedom of expression but stands firmly against incitement to violence,' it added.
UK govt condemns 'death to the IDF' chants at Glastonbury
'The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves.'
Media watchdog Ofcom warned Monday that it was 'very concerned' and that the BBC had questions to answer.
'We have been speaking to the BBC over the weekend and we are obtaining further information as a matter of urgency,' it added.
Controversy descended on this year's event before it even began over the inclusion of Irish rap trio Kneecap, one of whose members was recently charged under terror legislation.
During their show on Saturday, one Kneecap member wore a T-shirt dedicated to the Palestine Action Group, which is about to be banned under UK terror laws.
The chants about Israel's military were led by Bob Vylan's frontman Bobby Vylan, and were broadcast live on the BBC.
Glastonbury's organisers said the the comments had 'very much crossed a line'.
'We are urgently reminding everyone involved in the production of the festival that there is no place at Glastonbury for antisemitism, hate speech or incitement to violence,' the festival said in a statement.
Avon and Somerset police said Saturday that video evidence would be assessed 'to determine whether any offences may have been committed that would require a criminal investigation'.
The incident has caused a diplomatic headache for the UK, with the Israel embassy issuing a statement saying 'it was 'deeply disturbed by the inflammatory and hateful rhetoric expressed on stage at the Glastonbury Festival'.
Kneecap, which has made headlines in recent months with its pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel stance, also led crowds in chanting abuse against Prime Minister Starmer.
Starmer and other politicians had said the band should not perform after its member Liam O'Hanna, known by his stage name Mo Chara, was charged with a terror offence.
He appeared in court this month accused of having displayed a Hezbollah flag while saying 'Up Hamas, Up Hezbollah' at a London concert last year. A video of the concert resurfaced and caused controversy.
The Iran-backed Lebanese group Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas are banned in the UK, where it is an offence to express support for them.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
2 hours ago
- Business Recorder
End of politics?
Since the Pahalgam attack on April 22, politicians have almost disappeared from prime-time TV shows in Pakistan. The Pakistan-India conflict and then the Iran-Israel war, these turbulent events led news organisations to troop in national security and foreign policy experts to their studios in place of the regular talking heads. Political discussions evaporated into this air. And politics? Here's the funny thing about politics. It is struggling to return to prime time even now when the conflicts have ended. There's always the politics around these conflicts, but such topics also bring forth the national security brigade of commentators and experts. It is a strange phenomenon and TV anchors, and their teams are struggling to find political topics that can find traction in such times. But the issue is far bigger than TV. The new normal is reflecting a new reality: politics as we know it is slowly receding into the background. The signs are everywhere. The ruling coalition has settled into the rhythm of the hybrid system. Their comfort with hybridity is such that the Defence Minister has praised it on record. The functional power matrix has been firmly superimposed over the theoretical one, and all in the governance structure have embraced it with gleeful willingness. There's not much politics on display inside the Red Zone because the pecking order is as clear as day. The opposition, which usually generates the momentum of politics, is fractured and subdued. No street agitation, no boisterous rallies, no alliance-making and anti-government mass movements, no legislative offensives, and no grand narrative building. It is almost as if the opposition has gone into hibernation. The courts – generators of much news flow – have also stopped making waves. Predictable decisions at predictable times have become yawn-worthy. Gone are the days when the superior judiciary was driving political momentum through its remarks and judgements. So why has everyone gone quiet? Take the ruling coalition first. All parties know full well they are in power because of the requirements of hybridity. Theirs is an inorganic ascent to power. The sustainability and longevity of their power depends fully on their utility within this existing hybridity. This utility is, in many ways, dependent on their ability and willingness to flow gently with the tide and never swim against it. As junior partners within the system, it is expected of them to lend a hand when needed, keep the formal system of constitutional system chugging along, and not create waves when none are needed. When was the last time the ruling parties had a big political event? When was the last time they created noise – even governance related - that reverberated across the country? When was the last time they actually collided with the opposition? Silence suits them. It does not suit the opposition. And yet, silence is what they too are generating. All their initiatives have fallen by the wayside. There is no coherence in the PTI's plans; no clarity in their strategy; and no resonance in their narrative. If they do succeed in making any noise, it is against each other. This may be one reason that PTI's allies have also gone quiet. When was the last time you saw or heard Mahmood Khan Achakzai on the media? When was the last time you heard Shahid Khaqan Abbasi convene a meeting for a grand alliance? The only activity that the PTI can generate is the struggle to get into Adiala jail to see Imran Khan. As for Khan, he cannot expect much relief from the courts. Judgements rendered on military courts trial and on the reserved seats, among others, have confirmed that PTI will continue to see its space shrink in every way. The superior judiciary is in no mood to make waves. Is this the new normal then? Scan the months ahead and there is little to suggest that politics will make a grand comeback. The May 9 judgement, when it comes, will create some ripples, but these too will be predictable ones. Token protests by PTI may generate some headlines for a day or two, but that's about it. Inside the parliament, legislative politics will go even quieter. Now that the ruling coalition commands a two-thirds majority after the SC reserved seats judgement, it has no need to engage the opposition for making laws and constitutional amendments. In fact, the power to amend the constitution means that the ruling coalition can now further suppress politics as we know it by making sweeping changes that curtail space for dissent. They say you should be careful what you wish for lest you get it. We have been yearning for stability for years. If such stability means the silence echoing across the land, then yes, we may have what we wanted. The end of politics is upon us. For now. And yet… 'Every new beginning comes from some other beginning's end'. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
4 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Dealing with Indian intransigence
EDITORIAL: The failure of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation's (SCO's) defence ministers' summit to end with the signing of a joint communique marked a rare breakdown in consensus within a forum traditionally known for its predisposition for collective action. The disharmony on display can be directly attributed to India's stubborn refusal to endorse a joint declaration that omitted reference to its version of events with respect to the Pahalgam incident and its narrative on cross-border terrorism. Ever since the Pahalgam tragedy and the stinging defeat that New Delhi was handed during Operation Sindoor, one can observe a hardening pattern of Indian intransigence, where it consistently refuses to explore any avenue for mending ties with Pakistan. This obstinacy not only continues to strain bilateral relations, it is now clearly also derailing multilateral forums, with Indian foreign policy increasingly characterised by obstructionism and an unwillingness to engage in constructive, consensus-driven diplomacy. In fact, one could argue that such obstructionism has long predated recent events, as evidenced by the stagnation of the SAARC forum, which remains effectively paralysed due to India's inflexible posturing. SAARC had the potential to emerge as a dynamic forum, harnessing the collective energy and potential of South Asia; yet today, it lies dormant, crippled by the dysfunctional India-Pakistan relationship. While one could argue that both nations share responsibility for this paralysis, India's disproportionate influence in South Asia has allowed this bilateral dysfunction to completely hijack opportunities for regional cooperation on trade, security, economic connectivity, climate resilience and human development, leaving the entire region poorer in every dimension. Now, the same pattern threatens to undermine more influential forums like the SCO. New Delhi must realise, however, that adopting a similarly rigid approach at the SCO – where heavyweights like Russia and China hold sway – will only serve to deepen its isolation and alienate key forum members that value consensus and pragmatic cooperation. Just days ago, India refused to sign an SCO statement condemning Israeli strikes on Iran, taking issue with Israel being termed as the aggressor, while last year Prime Minister Narendra Modi conspicuously absented himself from the organisation's summits held in Kazakhstan and Pakistan. New Delhi also withdrew from the group's 2030 Economic Development Strategy over fears that it was too China-centric. It goes without saying that while such obstructionism may serve short-term political posturing to cater to a domestic audience, it risks sabotaging India's ambitions for global leadership, as such juvenile brinkmanship is self-defeating and undermines New Delhi's credibility on the world stage. Insofar as the SCO communiqué is concerned, India's inability to convince forum members to endorse its narrative on Pahalgam – failing to produce any evidence to implicate Pakistan even two months after the attack – exposes not only the hollowness of its claims, but also underscores the extreme recklessness of its subsequent actions, from the ill-conceived Operation Sindoor to the unprecedented suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty that threatens to jeopardise Pakistan's water security and food production systems. In this context, Indian Home Minister Amit Shah's recent declaration that the IWT will never be restored and that waters meant for Pakistan will be diverted towards Rajasthan through new canals is highly troubling. Notwithstanding the technical feasibility of such a project, it is New Delhi's unyielding intent on the matter that is truly alarming, as it remains bent upon weaponising water resources. While Pakistan was able to thwart India's designs during the SCO summit, the fact is that ultimate diplomatic victory will be measured by our ability to mobilise sustained international pressure that creates tangible costs for Indian intransigence and secures irreversible protections for the country's water rights. Anything short of this risks severing our agricultural and economic lifelines. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
4 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Rogue states
The US-led west has created new forms and methods of exercising its hegemony over the rest of the world. The colonial history of the past two centuries is already filled with atrocities committed against the colonised in the name of a 'civilising' mission. In later times, and particularly since the decolonisation process following World War II, the US-led west has developed an extensive theoretical and ideological narrative to justify its so-called 'rules-based order'. The unanswered questions this gives rise to are 1) What rules? 2) Whose rules? 3) How, after delineating these 'rules', does the US-led west see fit to violate them in letter and spirit wherever its interests are involved, including, first and foremost, global hegemony? While the guns have fallen silent in the recent wars between Pakistan and India and Iran and Israel, with the US in tow to the latter, these conflagrations have given new life to the questions posed above. In the case of Pakistan and India, yes, we managed to get the better of India after it launched attacks across the international border, but our subsequent emphasis on dialogue between the two contending sides appears to be a fond hope at best, given Prime Minister Narendra Modi's embarrassment. The likelihood is that new forms of action will now replace India's open cross-border hostilities, including sabotage and covert actions. As far as the Iran-Israel-US conflagration goes, it is by now obvious to even the purblind that Israel is the settler colonialist cat's paw of the US-led west, supplied, armed and encouraged in its outrageous behaviour with its neighbours near and far and the Palestinians by its 'masters'. If this seems an oversimplification, one may concede that occasionally Israel jumps the gun or acts (has acted) in ways unpalatable to western interests, but these are lovers' quarrels soon settled. In the case of Iran, the ostensible aims of the Israeli and US attacks seem far from achieved. If Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's thirty year bellicosity regarding Iran's transition to a nuclear weapons power ('any day now', repeated ad nauseam by this mischief maker) has led logically and inexorably to its 14-day barrage against Iran, capped by Trump's belligerent strikes on Iran's nuclear sites, neither has succeeded in the aims trotted out by both. Neither has Iran's nuclear capability been irreparably harmed, nor has the much desired in Washington and Tel Aviv regime change in Tehran occurred. On the contrary, Iran has safeguarded its 60 percent enriched uranium and the Iranian people, even those not well disposed towards the mullah regime in Tehran, have rallied in defence of their country. In other words, the Israeli-US assault on Iran has proved an utter failure. Israel, on the other hand, has for perhaps the first time, received a small dose of what it has been dishing out with gay abandon to the hapless, defenceless Palestinians and their dwindling number of sympathisers in Lebanon and Yemen. It is perhaps too soon to speculate, but Israel's much vaunted impenetrability has certainly been dented, even if not completely demolished. This is bound to have some impact on new emigration into Israel, if not an outflux of fearful Israelis to safer climes. But the bitter fact has now, in the light of what has transpired since October 2023, to be frankly acknowledged that the hopes of Hamas in attacking Israel in an unprecedented manner and capturing hostages to bargain with have been dashed. It appeared that Hamas was attempting to nullify the growing ranks of Arab countries succumbing to the 'temptation' of joining the ranks of their brother countries in signing onto the so-called Abraham Accords floated by Trump in his first term. In essence these were meant to pave the way for recognition of, and peace with, Israel as an undeniable and settled fact of life. In return, the Arab states being wooed were promised generous largesse emanating from Washington's banquet table. If Deputy Premier and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar's denial statement the other day is taken note of, it seems Pakistan too is being 'wooed' by certain quarters to sign on to this ignominious surrender and betrayal of the Palestinians. Though a 'peace' of sorts reigns, Iran's perception of doubting Israel's respect for the ceasefire hits the nail on the head, particularly if Trump's statement about bombing Iran again if necessary is taken into account. Why is Iran being 'blessed' by so much of this unwanted attention? The logical answer is that after weakening Iran's allies Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, the hegemonic dreamers in Washington are desirous of delivering the final blow that will cleanse the Middle East of any semblance of resistance to their desired goal of complete hegemony. To achieve this, objective analysis suggests they can go to any lengths. In the process of course, the violation of their own professed 'rules-based order' would justify classifying the US as a rogue state. As for Israel, it has never subscribed to any international rules of behaviour and is therefore more than deserving of this appellation. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
