
Even before Glastonbury Festival hate chants, UK Jews warned of alarming rise in antisemitism
Even before Saturday's performance by British rap-pop duo Bob Vylan -- in which the singer chanted "Death, death to the IDF [Israel Defense Forces]" -- Jews in Britain have said they no longer feel welcome, citing government inaction in addressing antisemitism.
"Bob Vylan's chant didn't come from an empty space," David Collier, an independent investigative journalist, told Fox News Digital.
Collier, who monitors "antisemitism inside anti-Zionist activity," said that "Vylan is so lost that he truly believed he was speaking up for humanity when he called for the death of 100,000s of young Israelis… the crowd who chanted along with him saw nothing wrong in echoing his call for genocide. No witnessing crew member backstage saw fit to pull the plug on the lights or sound, and the BBC never stopped its live coverage."
"The end product was a team effort that shows just how blind mainstream U.K. has become to a genocidal antisemitic ideology," he added.
According to the Community Security Trust, which records antisemitic incidents across Great Britain, attacks against Jews have surged, with some 3,528 incidents reported in 2024 and 4,296 in 2023 – the highest ever.
A survey of British Jewry published by the Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAM) in January 2025, showed that only one third (34%) believe the community has a long-term future in the U.K., and up to half said they had considered leaving Britain in the past two years due to antisemitism.
The poll also found that less than half of British Jews (43%) feel welcome in the U.K., with the majority saying they needed to hide their Judaism due to antisemitism. Less than one-tenth said they believe the authorities were doing enough to address and punish antisemitism.
Additionally, 92% said they view the media's bias against Israel as fueling the persecution of Jews in Britain. The BBC, respondents said, was the worst in terms of its coverage of matters of Jewish interest.
"It has been clear for a while that antisemitism has been normalized in the U.K. But the fact that it is now broadcast openly and plainly on the BBC with minimal outcry shows how bad the situation has become," CAM CEO Sacha Roytman told Fox News Digital.
"Incitement to violence should be a red line which forces the British government and the BBC to take all measures possible against these artists and make sure they do not have such a platform to spew their hate and violence ever again," he said.
Britain's center-left Prime Minister Keir Starmer belatedly condemned Vylan's performance, saying in a statement, "There is no excuse for this kind of appalling hate speech" and calling on the BBC "to explain how these scenes came to be broadcast," according to media reports.
Danny Cohen, a former BBC director, wrote in the Daily Telegraph on Sunday that the BBC was violating its own guidelines on hate speech and called on the government to take more action.
"The BBC has repeatedly shown itself unable to get its own house in order on antisemitism," he wrote, citing, "consistent Jew-hate and bias from reporters on BBC Arabic" and a recent "debacle" surrounding a tainted documentary about Gaza.
British Jewry's umbrella organization, the Board of Deputies, said in a statement that it would "continue to seek answers from the BBC about how that hateful content was allowed to be broadcast and to ensure there can be no repetition of this in the future."
It also condemned Glastonbury Festival, saying "its professed commitment to 'peace, unity, respect and hope' rings hollow when its stage is used to promote chants calling for death."
"What happened at Glastonbury is a symptom of a sickness in British society," said Nicole Lampert, a U.K.-based journalist and activist against antisemitism. "For me, and I say this with great sadness as a Brit and also as someone who spent many years as an entertainment journalist, this starts with the BBC."
Lampert said the BBC, which Britons pay for via their taxes, offers "very little nuance in the reporting" of the conflicts in the Middle East.
"There are meant to be rules in place which means that the BBC and its journalists are strictly neutral, but social media has shown that to be a lie," she said, adding "every day on every Jewish group I'm on, someone is saying 'I can't stay here.'"
In a post on X, Israeli Minister for Diaspora Affairs Amichai Chikli urged British Jews to "leave the country."
"The BBC has a long history of severe bias against Israel, but today a dark line was crossed by broadcasting calls for the murder of IDF soldiers," he wrote, adding that "when such incitement is normalized, those who fail to act, those who do nothing to stop it, bear responsibility for the blood of Jews and Israelis living in Britain."
Like the prime minister, the BBC belatedly released a statement saying it "should have pulled" the livestream of the performance and that Vylan's performance contained "utterly unacceptable" and "antisemitic sentiments."
"Millions of people tuned in to enjoy Glastonbury this weekend across the BBC's output, but one performance within our live streams included comments that were deeply offensive," the BBC said.
The British government did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital questions.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump shifts battleground in fight against 'brazen election interference' by Iowa pollster
President Donald Trump dropped his federal case against Iowa pollster J. Ann Selzer and the Des Moines Register on Monday and re-filed in state court after accusing them of "brazen election interference" with their final 2024 Iowa presidential poll. Trump, along with Iowa Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks and former Iowa State Senator Bradley Zaun gave their notice of dismissal "without prejudice" for the case at the Southern District of Iowa federal court, then refiled the case to the Polk County District Court. Trump's legal team originally requested the case be moved to state court in May after the defendants "removed" the case to federal court. A federal judge denied this request at the time. An attorney for the president confirmed to Fox News Digital that this lawsuit has only been dismissed in federal court, adding that the case is "very much alive." Former Pollster Ann Selzer Hits Back At Criticisms Over Iowa Poll: 'They Are Accusing Me Of A Crime' The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) chief counsel Bob Corn-Revere, who represents Selzer, also told Fox News Digital that no settlement has been reached regarding the lawsuit. Read On The Fox News App "President Trump and his two co-plaintiffs filed a notice of dismissal of their claims against Iowa pollster J. Ann Selzer and the Des Moines Register after losing a bid to remand the case to state court. This maneuver was not in response to any settlement and is a transparent attempt to avoid federal court review of the president's transparently frivolous claims. The case was refiled in state court today, one day before an Iowa law intended to provide strong protections against baseless claims like these — an 'anti-SLAPP' statute — goes into effect. The procedural gamesmanship is obvious and improper. Whatever court ultimately reviews this matter, FIRE will defend J. Ann Selzer's First Amendment rights, and we remain confident the courts will see through this sham lawsuit," he added. Lark-Marie Anton, a spokesperson for the Des Moines Register, was critical of Trump's legal team, claiming he is only attempting to "avoid the inevitable outcome" of his complaint being dismissed in court. "After losing his first attempt to send his case back to Iowa state court, and apparently recognizing that his appeal will be unsuccessful, President Trump is attempting to unilaterally dismiss his lawsuit from federal court and re-file it in Iowa state court," Anton said. "Although such a procedural maneuver is improper, and may not be permitted by the Court, it is clearly intended to avoid the inevitable outcome of the Des Moines Register's motion to dismiss President Trump's amended complaint currently pending in federal court." She added, "The Des Moines Register will continue to resist President Trump's litigation gamesmanship and believes that regardless of the forum it will be successful in defending its rights under the First Amendment." The lawsuit was originally filed in December in Polk County, Iowa and sought "accountability for brazen election interference committed by" the Des Moines Register (DMR) and Selzer "in favor of now-defeated former Democrat candidate Kamala Harris through use of a leaked and manipulated Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll conducted by Selzer and S&C and published by DMR and Gannett in the Des Moines Register on Nov. 2, 2024." "The Harris Poll was no 'miss' but rather an attempt to influence the outcome of the 2024 Presidential Election," the lawsuit stated at the time, adding that "defendants and their cohorts in the Democrat Party hoped that the Harris Poll would create a false narrative of inevitability for Harris in the final week of the 2024 Presidential Election." Iowa Pollster Ann Selzer Suggests Her Data Could Have Galvanized Republican Voters Into Proving It Wrong Selzer released her final Des Moines Register-sponsored poll showing then-Vice President Kamala Harris leading Trump by three points in Iowa just three days before the election. That shock poll showed a seven-point shift from Trump to Harris from September, when he had a four-point lead over the vice president in the same poll. Selzer's poll was hyped up by the media in the days leading up to the election as her polling predictions had been historically accurate. Many suggested it implied a monumental shift in Midwest support for the then-Vice President in a largely red state. Trump ultimately beat Harris in Iowa by more than 13 percentage points. Shortly after the election, Selzer announced in an op-ed for the Des Moines Register that she was done with election polling and was moving on to "other ventures."Original article source: Trump shifts battleground in fight against 'brazen election interference' by Iowa pollster


Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Anti-Israel band plays victim after being hammered for saying ‘death to the IDF' during music festival
British punk-rap duo Bob Vylan doubled down on their anti-Israel statements on Tuesday after being slammed for uttering them during a performance at the Glastonbury music festival over the weekend. In a post shared to their Instagram page, the musicians declared that they're being "targeted" after being criticized and having their visas removed by the U.S. government for saying "Death to the IDF [Israel Defense Forces]," and other anti-Israel slogans during their set at the premier British music festival. "We are getting targeted for speaking up. We are not the first. We will not be the last. And if you care for the sanctity of human life and freedom of speech, we urge you to speak up, too," the post stated. "We are not for the death of Jews, Arabs or any other race or group of people," Bob Vylan continued. "We are for the dismantling of a violent military machine. A machine whose own soldiers were told to use 'unnecessary lethal force' against innocent civilians waiting for aid. A machine that has destroyed much of Gaza." During their set on Saturday, one of the members of the London-based rap group shouted, "Death, death to the IDF [Israel Defense Forces]," several times before turning the microphone toward the crowd to get attendees to repeat the chant. Videos from the crowd's view showed several Palestinian flags waving as the performer and attendees shouted back and forth. Elsewhere during the performance, he chanted, "Free, Free, Free Palestine," as well as, "Hell yeah, from the river to the sea. Palestine must be, will be inshallah, it will be free." The anti-Israel chanting went viral on social media, prompting complaints from even the U.K. government. The BBC reported that British Prime Minister Keir Starmer called the words "appalling hate speech." The BBC, which broadcast the festival live, removed the Bob Vylan set from its iPlayer. The British network also told The Associated Press that it had issued a "very strong and discriminatory language" warning label during its livestream of the event. Festival organizers released a statement on Instagram condemning the stunt. "Glastonbury Festival was created in 1970 as a place for people to come together and rejoice in music, the arts and the best of human endeavour," they wrote. British police in Somerset and Avon even reviewed videos of Bob Vylan's performance to "determine whether any offenses may have been committed that would require a criminal investigation." The U.S. State Department revoked the band's visas ahead of their U.S. tour later this year. A senior State Department official told Fox News Digital Monday, "The secretary of state has been clear – the U.S. will not approve visas for terrorist sympathizers." Secretary of State Marco Rubio has issued multiple warnings that the State Department will rescind visas for "terrorists" and those affiliated with them. In their response, the band said the heat on them was a "distraction" from what Israel is doing in Gaza. "We, like those in the spotlight before us, are not the story. We are a distraction from the story, and whatever sanctions we receive will be a distraction. The government doesn't want us to ask why they remain silent in the face of this atrocity? To ask why they aren't doing more to stop the killing? To feed the starving," they wrote.


Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
Appeals court allows Georgetown researcher, previously detained by ICE, to remain free
Rather, the evidence that Suri had been targeted over his First Amendment-protected speech — and that the administration had intended to deport him quickly, with minimal due process — warranted the judge's intervention, the 4th Circuit panel ruled. Suri, a native of India who was studying and teaching at Georgetown under a student visa, was arrested amid a crackdown by the Trump administration on foreign academics residing in the United States who had expressed support for Palestinian causes or participated in pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel protests. Secretary of State Marco Rubio revoked visas for many of them, igniting quick deportation proceedings, claiming their activism had veered into antisemitism — claims the targeted students and researchers have denied. Rubio's determinations have met pointed condemnations in federal courts, where judges have described them as an unconstitutional attack on First Amendment-protected speech. And the 4th Circuit panel noted that the Trump administration largely declined to challenge that conclusion, instead arguing that federal courts simply didn't have authority to hear the cases at all. There were warning signs, however, for Suri's camp. The lone dissenter on the appeals panel, Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, contended that Suri's race to a Virginia federal court gave short shrift to the parallel immigration and deportation proceedings. Wilkinson, a Reagan appointee, worried that the intensifying rush by deportees to seek relief from federal courts was quickly becoming a way to frustrate immigration proceedings meant to be largely shielded from judicial review. Allowing Suri's case to proceed in federal court and immigration court 'would presage a perennial clash of rulings and orders between two different sets of federal tribunals,' Wilkinson wrote. Wilkinson predicted 'severe systemic damage' if immigration detainees are allowed to pursue legal challenges outside the immigration-court process. But the appeals court's majority called Wilkinson's concern 'speculative' and said the dangers of parallel court cases paled compared to the risks of unwarranted and illegal detentions of immigrants. 'We cannot so easily consign an individual's liberty to the concerns of bureaucratic tidiness. The Constitution does not yield to administrative convenience, and due process is not suspended merely because two courts may be asked similar questions,' Wynn wrote. 'Our courts should not become sanctuaries for efficiency at the expense of justice.' The Trump administration could ask the full bench of the 4th Circuit to take up the issue or appeal to the Supreme Court.