Berlin police clear occupied lecture hall, launch investigations
The suspected offences include aggravated trespassing, incitement of the people, serious breach of the peace, resistance against law enforcement, and the use of symbols linked to unconstitutional or terrorist organizations, a police statement said on Thursday.
According to police, some activists allegedly poured an unknown liquid, possibly urine, on officers and threw pyrotechnics at the Wednesday protest.
The reason for the occupation was the threatened deportation of four foreign students - three from EU countries and one from the US - following pro-Palestinian protests at the Free University, a different university in Berlin. The four are accused of threatening university employees with axes and clubs during protests in October.
During the hours-long eviction operation at Humboldt University on Wednesday evening, two individuals attacked emergency services and resisted arrest. Two officers sustained hand injuries but remained on duty, police said.
At the request of the university leadership, police cleared the occupied hall by deploying roughly 350 officers.
Protesters had barricaded the lecture hall doors from the inside. Officers gradually led the occupants into the courtyard, checked their identities, and ordered them to leave the premises.
Police reported that 89 people had been inside the hall and about 120 had gathered on the street.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
IDF steps up Samaria anti-terror raids by 90%
Israeli security forces have increased their counter-terrorism raids throughout Samaria by more than 90%, the commander of the Israel Defense Forces' Samaria Brigade, Col. A., said over the weekend. During a meeting with civilian security guards of Jewish communities in the area, Col. A. also revealed that the security forces' activities have led to a decrease of 75% in stone-throwing attacks, Arutz 7 reported. The brigade commander stressed the military's commitment to working in close cooperation with local security. Advertisement 3 Israeli forces during counter-terrorism activity in Judea and Samaria, in an IDF image published on April 21, 2025. IDF On Thursday, the IDF announced it had arrested some 400 wanted Arab terrorists as part of its operations across Judea and Samaria last month. During the June 13–24 'Operation Rising Lion' targeting Iran, Israeli security forces intensified counter-terror efforts across Judea and Samaria, conducting more than 2,500 raids, according to the IDF. Advertisement In addition, the IDF, Israel Border Police, and Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) dismantled six Palestinian terrorist cells that had been planning attacks against Israeli civilians and security forces. Israel's Ynet outlet, citing security sources on June 23, reported that Iran views terrorist groups in Judea and Samaria as its 'last proxy' and was working to fuel further violence in the aftermath of the war. 3 An IDF soldier pictured in Samaria. IDF 3 An Israeli soldier enforces a no-go order during an attempt to cross into the Tulkarm refugee camp in the West Bank. Nasser Ishtayeh/SOPA Images/Shutterstock Advertisement Over the weekend, Israel's security forces arrested three suspected members of a terrorist cell in northern Samaria who, according to officials, were planning an imminent attack. Two of the suspects were arrested in eastern Barta'a, an Arab village in Samaria near the border between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, based on Shin Bet intelligence. The third suspect was detained later.
Miami Herald
6 hours ago
- Miami Herald
WATCH: Porsche 911 GT3 RS Catches Fire, Goes Airborne In Nürburgring Crash
The Nürburgring has earned its nickname as the Green Hell once again after an explosive crash between a BMW M2 Competition and a 992 Porsche 911 GT3 RS collided on a high-speed section of the circuit, completely destroying both German sports coupes. The videos uploaded to social media show the moment of impact from the Porsche driver's perspective and from a surveillance camera alongside the track, revealing that a misunderstanding between the two drivers led to both of them jockeying for the same bit of tarmac at the same time, and the internet is divided over which driver should take the bulk of the blame. The video from the GT3 RS driver's perspective shows that the Porsche driver was approaching the Bimmer at high speed after exiting a right-hand turn. As the circuit curved to the left, the slower-moving M2 moved over to the right side of the track. It seems that the fast-approaching Porsche driver had assumed this was an invitation to overtake, as passing on the Nordschleife during these Touristfahrten sessions (when the circuit turns into a tolled public road) should always be done on the left unless it cannot be avoided. Normally, the slower car indicates to the right and moves over, thereby informing the following driver that the slower car is aware of their presence and won't cut across the track, but in this case, the M2 driver didn't activate their turn signal. This suggests that the M2's movement to the right side of the track was to prepare the car for the approaching left-hand bend, not to yield to the Porsche. Thus, both cars arrived at the same apex with the Porsche marginally ahead, the Bimmer driver turned into the right rear of the 911, effectively performing a PIT maneuver on the 911. This caused the Porsche to deviate right, and as it careened toward the barriers, it took the Bimmer with it. On impact, a fiery explosion occurred, and the Porsche was sent flying through the air. The entire front end was ripped off, and a suspension arm (still attached to the brake disc and caliper) landed nearly a hundred feet away. Happily, both drivers survived, but things could have been much worse. Perhaps the M2 driver ought to have been aware of the approaching GT3 RS; slower cars are obliged to move over for quicker traffic on the Nordschleife, but as discussed above, there is a correct way to do this: in conjunction with a turn signal activation. It should also be noted that slower traffic should move over when it is safe to do so, not the very instant they see another car in their rearview mirror. With the preceding turns being rather technical, it seems a little unreasonable for the M2 driver to be prepared for a move up the inside when the Porsche appeared to have only just closed the gap to its rear bumper. On the other hand, the Porsche driver might argue that the speed with which they were approaching should have been obvious to the BMW driver, and the way in which the M2 abruptly moved to the right side of the track might have looked like an invitation to pass. We don't have more video evidence of the preceding miles, but based on the crash itself, we're inclined to side with the Bimmer driver on this one. Sure, both drivers could have done something differently, but the M2 driver had the right to that piece of asphalt, and the Porsche driver seemed a little overeager to prove that the GT3 RS was quicker. Some commenters have proclaimed that this sort of incident is the result of amateurs trying to replicate YouTube personality Misha Charoudin's style of Nürburgring video, but his fans will argue that Charoudin has always campaigned for greater safety and has tried to discourage reckless behavior on the Nürburgring. What do you think? Let us know in the comments below. Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Rare trial to begin in challenge to Trump-backed deportations of pro-Palestinian campus activists
By Nate Raymond BOSTON (Reuters) -Groups representing U.S. university professors seeking to protect international students and faculty who engage in pro-Palestinian advocacy from being deported are set to do what no other litigants challenging the Trump administration's hardline immigration agenda have done so far: Take it to trial. A two-week non-jury trial in the professors' case scheduled to kick off on Monday in Boston marks a rarity in the hundreds of lawsuits that have been filed nationally challenging Republican President Donald Trump's efforts to carry out mass deportations, slash spending and reshape the federal government. In many of those cases, judges have issued quick rulings early on in the proceedings without any witnesses being called to testify. But U.S. District Judge William Young in keeping with his long-standing practice instead ordered a trial in the professors' case, saying it was the "best way to get at truth." The lawsuit was filed in March after immigration authorities arrested recent Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil, the first target of Trump's effort to deport non-citizen students with pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel views. Since then, the administration has canceled the visas of hundreds of other students and scholars and ordered the arrest of some, including Rumeysa Ozturk, a Tufts University student who was taken into custody by masked and plainclothes agents after co-writing an opinion piece criticizing her school's response to Israel's war in Gaza. In their cases and others, judges have ordered the release of students detained by immigration authorities after they argued the administration retaliated against them for their pro-Palestinian advocacy in violation of the free speech guarantees of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment. Their arrests form the basis of the case before Young, which was filed by the American Association of University Professors and its chapters at Harvard, Rutgers and New York University, and the Middle East Studies Association. They allege the State Department and Department of Homeland Security adopted a policy of revoking visas for non-citizen students and faculty who engaged in pro-Palestinian advocacy and arresting, detaining and deporting them as well. That policy, they say, was adopted after Trump signed executive orders in January directing the agencies to protect Americans from non-citizens who 'espouse hateful ideology' and to "vigorously" combat anti-Semitism. Secretary of State Marco Rubio in late March said he had revoked more than 300 visas and warned that the Trump administration was looking every day for "these lunatics." The goal, the plaintiffs say, has been to suppress the types of protests that have roiled college campuses after Israel launched its war in Gaza following the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. Trump administration officials have frequently spoken about the efforts to target student protesters for visa revocations. Yet in court, the administration has defended itself by arguing the plaintiffs are challenging a deportation policy that does not exist and cannot point to any statute, rule, regulation or directive codifying it. "We don't deport people based on ideology," Homeland Security Department spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem "has made it clear that anyone who thinks they can come to America and hide behind the First Amendment to advocate for anti-American and anti-Semitic violence and terrorism - think again. You are not welcome here," McLaughlin said. The trial will determine whether the administration has violated the plaintiffs' First Amendment free speech rights. If Young concludes it has, he will determine a remedy in a second phase of the case. Young has described the lawsuit as "an important free speech case" and said that as alleged in the plaintiffs' complaint, "it is hard to imagine a policy more focused on intimidating its targets from practicing protected political speech." The case is the second Trump-era legal challenge so far that has gone to trial before Young, an 84-year-old appointee of Republican President Ronald Reagan. While other Trump-era cases have been resolved through motions and arguments in court, the veteran jurist has long espoused the value of trials and in a recent order lamented the "virtual abandonment by the federal judiciary of any sense that its fact-finding processes are exceptional. Young last month after another non-jury trial delivered civil rights advocates and Democratic-led states a win by ordering the reinstatement of hundreds of National Institutes of Health research grants that were unlawfully terminated because of their perceived promotion of diversity, equity and inclusion.
