What is the IDF? Bob Vylan's US visa revoked after chant against Israeli military at Glastonbury Festival
Amid heightened tensions between Israel and Iran, British rap punk duo Bob Vylan are being investigated by police over chants of "death, death" to the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) at the Glastonbury Festival over the weekend. Their visas have been revoked by the US, ahead of their tour in late October, according to CNN. Bob Vylan perform on the West Holts Stage, during the Glastonbury Festival at Worthy Farm in Somerset. England, Saturday.(AP)
The US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau informed that the US State Department has "revoked" visas for Bob Vylan members due to their "hateful tirade at Glastonbury, including leading the crowd in death chants'. He added that foreigners glorifying "violence and hatred are not welcome visitors to our country.'
On Saturday, rapper Bobby Vylan was spotted shouting, 'free, free Palestine' and later led crowds to chant against the Israeli military. In viral videos, the rapper could be heard, shouting in the mic, 'Alright, but have you heard this one though? Death, death to the IDF.'
Avon and Somerset Police were looking into whether a criminal offence was committed at the event, which was attended by thousands of people. Organizers noted that they were 'appalled' by the remark, while the Israeli embassy was 'deeply disturbed' over it.
Also read: Charli XCX calls out 'boomer' criticism of using autotune for her Glastonbury performance: 'The most boring take ever' IDF: What is it?
Founded in 1948, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) refers to the armed forces of Israel, comprising the army, navy, and air force.
After its formation, the IDF roped in soldiers and weapons from several other Jewish paramilitaries, such as the Haganah and Stern Gang. These were involved in Israel's 'War of Independence,' Independent reported.
The war is often termed as 'Nakba', which is the Arabic for catastrophe, by Palestinians, since a large number of people were driven from their houses into refugee camps.
Also, part of the IDF were personnel from Britain's 'Palestine regiment' that stood against the Axis powers during World War II.
On its official website, IDF states that all the ground, aerial and naval operations are conducted "first and foremost" for the sake of defending the country and its civilians. It claims to face multiple terrorist organizations like Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad.
Data from the International Institute for Strategic Studies suggests that the IDF includes nearly 169,500 active personnel and 465,000 reservists. The Israeli Navy boasts six submarines, eight missile boats and 38 patrol boats.
In terms of air defence, the IDF has hundreds of aircraft, including a large fleet of F-35 fighter jets.
'Defense is our mission — security is our goal," IDF states on its website. FAQs 1. How does Israel's conscription policy work?
Any Israeli citizen, who is over the age of 18 and is Jewish or Druze must serve in the Israeli military. Men must serve for 32 months, while women are enlisted for 24 months. 2. When was Bob Vylan scheduled to perform in the US?
The group was slated to go on a US tour starting late October. 3. What is Bob Vylan?
It is a band formed in Suffolk in 2017 by Bobbie Vylan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
41 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Zohran Mamdani was born into privilege. Can he really speak for the working class?
Written by Sabine Ameer In a political moment where the language of socialism has entered mainstream American discourse, few figures have captured the attention of younger, progressive voters like New York State Assembly member Zohran Mamdani. He's charismatic, speaks the language of class struggle fluently, and has successfully branded himself as a democratic socialist — a welcome generational shift away from the political establishment that has long dominated American politics. But as Mamdani gains national attention, a larger question emerges: Can someone born into layers of social and cultural privilege authentically represent the working class? Let's be clear — Mamdani's political rise is significant. As a young Muslim politician, an artist-turned-legislator, and a vocal supporter of housing justice and Palestine solidarity, he has challenged the norms of American electoral politics. In doing so, he has provided inspiration for many Millennials and Gen Z voters who feel politically alienated. However, while his policy positions are progressive, his personal background reflects the same cultural and class capital that has historically defined elite access in American public life. Mamdani is the son of Mira Nair, a globally celebrated filmmaker, and Mahmood Mamdani, a prominent academic at Columbia University. His upbringing was not one of economic hardship, nor one marked by the structural inequalities that define the lives of working-class New Yorkers. His family's cultural influence and access to elite institutions cannot be ignored — they are part of the architecture that enabled his platform to grow as rapidly as it did. This is not to say that children of privilege should be disqualified from public office. But when someone speaks on behalf of the working class, are they doing so as an ally — or as a representative? And what obligations come with each? There's an important distinction to be made between having solidarity with working-class struggles and embodying them. Solidarity demands listening, humility, and redistribution of power — not just rhetoric. Representation, on the other hand, implies shared experience. When Mamdani — despite his policy alignment with working-class movements — positions himself as a political outsider, it raises tension. He may be an outsider to entrenched political machines, but he is not an outsider to privilege. The issue here is not individual blame but perhaps it reflects a broader trend in left-wing American politics, where well-educated, upwardly mobile individuals increasingly speak in the language of class struggle. The result is often a symbolic radicalism that resonates with disaffected voters but doesn't always translate into structural change — or inclusion. Consider the landscape: Many millennials in New York today — those working two jobs, struggling to pay rent, saddled with debt — don't have the time or stability to pursue careers in electoral politics. Their barriers to entry are logistical, not ideological. That someone like Mamdani could move from cultural spaces like hip-hop and theatre into elected office by 30 is not just a story of political ambition; it's also a story of access. To be fair, Mamdani is not alone in this paradox. Many progressive leaders come from families with social capital, and that doesn't make their work meaningless. But what it does require is transparency, and a willingness to confront how that access has shaped their political journey. It also requires building and mentoring leadership from within the communities most affected by inequality — not just speaking on their behalf. This is, ultimately, a question of social mobility and credibility. The symbolism of a 33-year-old winning a Democratic primary in New York should be tempered by the reality that most working-class 33-year-olds are locked into 9-to-5s, debt cycles, and housing precarity — not rapping one day and running for office the next. Political glamour can easily overshadow the hard truth that most people don't have the luxury to move fluidly between creative industries and state legislatures. If we're going to build a more inclusive political future, we need to be honest about how class operates within even our most progressive movements. We need to ask: Who gets to speak? Who gets funded? Who gets published, profiled, and promoted? And most importantly — who is missing from the room? Zohran Mamdani may be advancing important policy debates. But the movement for working-class empowerment must be cautious not to confuse voice with vantage point, or style with structure. It's not about cancelling anyone — but about demanding more complexity from our narratives, and more equity in our coalitions. Because in the end, real representation isn't about optics — it's about power. The writer is a doctoral researcher in Politics and International Relations at the University of Glasgow, United Kingdom
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Turkey BURNS; Thousands FLEE, Choppers Deployed As Wild Flames ‘Go Out Of Control'
Ceasefire Under Threat? Iran Doubts Israel's Commitment, Says 'Finger On The Trigger…' | DETAILS Iran's top military commander has warned that the Islamic Republic does not trust Israel to honor the current ceasefire, just six days after a brutal 12-day air war. In a call with Saudi Arabia's defense minister, Gen. Abdolrahim Mousavi said Iran remains on alert and ready to respond with force if provoked. The conflict, which began with Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear and military sites, killed top commanders and triggered a massive Iranian missile-and-drone retaliation that left dozens dead in Israel. Despite the truce, both sides are bracing for further escalation as distrust and regional tensions remain high.#IranChinaDeal #MiddleEastTensions #AirPowerShift #MilitaryStrategy #Geopolitics #DefenseNews #GlobalSecurity #J10C #ChengduJ10C #FighterJets #AirForceModernization #IranIsraelConflict #PersianGulfCrisis #IranAirForce #IDFStrikes 866.6K views | 22 hours ago
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 hours ago
- Business Standard
Harvard 'violated' civil-rights law on Jewish students' safety: Trump admin
The Trump administration has found Harvard University in violation of federal civil-rights law for "failing to protect" Jewish and Israeli students, escalating a battle that could cost the university its federal funding. In a letter sent to Harvard President Alan Garber and viewed by The Wall Street Journal, federal attorneys said the university had acted with 'deliberate indifference' to concerns raised by Jewish and Israeli students who reported feeling unsafe on campus. The letter warned that failure to implement 'adequate changes immediately' would result in the loss of all federal financial support and affect Harvard's relationship with the federal government. 'Harvard may of course continue to operate free of federal privileges,' it stated, 'and perhaps such an opportunity will spur a commitment to excellence that will help Harvard thrive once again.' Harvard denies govt findings While the Ivy League university has not publicly commented on the latest development, a spokesperson told The Wall Street Journal that the university had taken substantive steps to combat antisemitism and foster civil discourse. 'Harvard is far from indifferent on this issue and strongly disagrees with the government's findings,' the spokesperson said. The university, they added, had strengthened policies, enforced disciplinary measures, and promoted respectful dialogue. The letter also detailed reports of assaults, harassment and antisemitic imagery on campus, such as a dollar sign inside a Star of David and a defaced Israeli flag featuring a swastika. It also accused Harvard of failing to take action over a two-year period. Donald Trump vs Ivy League universities In May, the Trump administration issued a similar notice of violation to Columbia University following an investigation into the alleged harassment of Jewish students. Columbia, like Harvard, is now in negotiations with the federal government over its funding and governance. The accusation follows earlier moves by the administration, including freezing $2.3 billion in research funding and demanding federal oversight of admissions, hiring, and campus speech. Harvard rejected those demands and sued, citing violations of free speech and due process. Talks between White House and Harvard stalled Despite the escalating tensions, Trump signalled earlier this month that progress might be possible, posting on social media that Harvard had acted 'extremely appropriately' during negotiations and appeared committed to 'doing what is right'. However, the latest reports indicate that for now, talks between the White House and Harvard have stalled.
