Fontaines DC display words ‘Israel is committing genocide' on screen at London gig
Lead singer Grian Chatten performed in front of the 45,000-strong crowd dressed in a kilt and a Sinead O'Connor t-shirt, the Independent reported.
A post shared by Fontaines D.C. (@fontainesband)
A piece of music equipment on the north London stage was wrapped in a Palestinian flag and 'Israel is committing genocide. Use your voice' came up on the screens after the last song.
The show comes after multiple artists voiced support for the people of Palestine at the Glastonbury music festival in June.
Last week, the US revoked entry visas for members of British punk-rap duo Bob Vylan following their Glastonbury Festival set, during which frontman Bobby Vylan led the crowd in a controversial chant against Israel's military.
Performing on the festival's West Holts Stage on Saturday, the artist shouted 'Free, free Palestine' before encouraging the audience to chant, 'Death, death to the IDF (Israel Defense Forces).' Video of the moment quickly spread online, sparking backlash.
Meanwhile, Irish rap group Kneecap drew one of the festival's largest crowds at the West Holts Stage. Dozens of Palestinian flags flew in the crowd as the show opened with an audio montage of news clips referring to the band's critics and legal woes.
Between high-energy numbers that had fans forming a large mosh pit, the band members — sporting keffiyehs — led the audience in chants of 'Free Palestine' and 'Free Mo Chara.' They also aimed an expletive-laden chant at UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who has said he didn't think it was 'appropriate' for Kneecap to play Glastonbury.
One member wore a T-shirt emblazoned with 'We Are All Palestine Action,' referencing the direct-action network that targets arms factories supplying Israel.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
4 hours ago
- Arab News
Music trade bodies concerned about BBC's changes to airing live performances
DUBAI: Music trade bodies have accused the BBC of making 'arbitrary and disproportionate' changes to its broadcasting and streaming of live music events following the controversy around Bob Vylan's Glastonbury performance. During the punk rap duo's set at the festival on June 28, they led the crowd in pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli military chants like 'free, free Palestine' and 'death, death to the IDF.' The BBC livestreamed the performance in full leading to a backlash from the government. BBC Director-General Tim Davie ordered the content to not be featured in any other coverage. However, due to a technical issue the stream was available on the BBC iPlayer for about five hours. Davie and BBC chair Samir Shah have both apologized. The BBC said in a statement: 'Warnings appeared on the stream on two occasions and the editorial team took the decision not to cut the feed. This was an error.' Music industry trade bodies and experts now say the BBC is overreacting. 'The BBC is absolutely fundamental to the continued success of British music and particularly vital to supporting our new and emerging artists' development,' said David Martin, head of the Featured Artists Coalition, a UK trade body that supports music artists. The FAC supported the network's public service broadcasting remit, which understandably came with responsibilities and standards, he said. 'If those standards have been breached, then there should be appropriate guidelines to follow. But the idea of preemptively grading artists according to their risk factor feels arbitrary and disproportionate and a dangerous step toward censorship.' Such an approach could 'curtail artistic freedom' and 'inadvertently punish those who are simply expressing their views,' he said. Naomi Pohl, general secretary of The Musicians' Union, stressed the importance of the BBC and its role in the music industry. 'It's such a shame there has been this shadow cast over this year's Glastonbury coverage, because it has had fantastic viewing figures. It's been all over iPlayer and people have been tuning in live,' she said. 'We need to talk to the BBC about it directly. But I don't want to see any broadcasters now broadcasting fewer live events because they don't want to take the risk. The whole of the music industry will be feeling that, because it's so crucial to us to have the BBC.' A BBC spokesperson said the broadcaster stood by its decision to make changes to livestreaming music performances. 'We will continue to bring audiences a range of music performances, both live and on-demand and we respect artists' freedom of expression,' the person said. 'However, Bob Vylan's offensive and deplorable behavior on one of our Glastonbury livestreams was completely unacceptable and we are sorry it appeared on the BBC. 'This is why we have made immediate changes to livestreaming music events and these, alongside our editorial guidelines, will shape our plans going forward.'
Arab News
6 hours ago
- Arab News
How Western governments avoid confronting Israel
Flying in the teeth of mass public opinion, governments allergic to getting tough with Israel have deployed a host of tactics to put off implementing any measures that might hold it to account. In doing so, they have been prepared to smash much-cherished ethical principles and norms, as well as international law. Keeping the US administration happy is a cornerstone of the approach of many leaders, no matter how many atrocities or crimes against humanity Israel perpetrates. This has contaminated the entire international system. The most egregious failing is not just to ignore the crimes, but to be complicit with Israel's genocide in Gaza and its regime of apartheid. But the complicity brings additional side effects — notably the trivialization of values most of us hold dear. Above all, this has meant hollowing out the international legal system. The international Court of Justice and International Criminal Court are only respected when ruling against the foes of Western powers. When the latter issued an arrest warrant for Israeli leaders, the US sanctioned the court's key actors. The UK has been an alarming exemplar of this. The actions of the government have trivialized terrorism, racism and antisemitism, while belittling genocide, war crimes and rape. Last week, the British government decided to proscribe as terrorist a pro-Palestine protest group that engages in direct action. It is now a criminal offence to join or to express support for Palestine Action, punishable by up to 14 years in prison. This move came as part of a bill that lumped it together with two genuinely violent neo-Nazi organizations, helping to ensure the legislation passed through Parliament. This came after four members of Palestine Action, protesting against Israel's genocide, broke into a British military base and spray painted aircraft red. Vandalism, yes; criminal, certainly; but hardly terrorism. The farcical nature of the legislation was exposed when police arrested 27 protesters on the day it came into effect. One of them was an 83-year-old female priest. Terrorism should always be treated as a serious offence. Yet those who spray paint buildings and aircraft are now in the same category as those who blow themselves up at pop concerts, for example. Police resources risk being diverted away from genuinely violent groups. This will, by design, have massive implications for the right to protest and the right to free speech. The chilling effect on the movement for Palestinian rights will be Arctic. It echoes the way in which ministers in the previous government described pro-Palestinian protests as 'hate marches.' Racism and antisemitism have also been trivialized and for similar reasons. The weaponization of antisemitism by anti-Palestinian groups has often been echoed in government statements. The weaponization of antisemitism by anti-Palestinian groups has often been echoed in government statements. Chris Doyle A once pretty obscure rap act has become known globally owing to one of its member's chant at the Glastonbury Festival of 'death, death to the IDF.' All death chants are vile, but this soon mutated in headlines into being an antisemitic chant calling for the killing of Israelis, which it was not. The Israeli army has been conducting genocide and war crimes, livestreamed to the world. The British government has voiced more criticism of the BBC for not cutting its live feed of this show than it has of the incitement to genocide by Israeli leaders. Serious acts of antisemitism are all too frequent, such as the arson attack on the oldest synagogue in Melbourne last week. So, when government ministers pitch in to this weaponization, it jeopardizes the fight against real antisemitism. It blurs the line between legitimate political speech and prohibited speech. As for anti-Arab racism, this remains the least discussed and researched form of racism imaginable. This is quite something when the people of Gaza are the victims of genocide and all Palestinians under Israeli control suffer from varying degrees of institutionalized discrimination as part of its regime of apartheid. All this threatens freedom of speech. Add to that the way in which many states or cities have banned pro-Palestinian demonstrations or even the flying of the Palestinian flag. Israel has destroyed every single university in Gaza, but in the US the issue has been reduced to alleged antisemitism on college campuses. It is a deliberate exercise in distraction and diversion. Get the debate on to antisemitism or the nature of protests and the media focus switches away from the real crimes on the ground — every single day, the Israeli military's killing and starvation machine is at work in Gaza. The distraction allows governments to avoid having to answer why they are doing so little to stop Israel. The combination of trivialization and distraction is part of the complicity of these governments. They treat the public as fools, but people are not blind to their leaders' abject moral failure on Palestine.
Arab News
7 hours ago
- Arab News
How the 7/7 bombings impacted British society and why it remains relevant 20 years on
LONDON: On July 7, 2005, four men joined millions of commuters during London's morning rush hour, making their way into the UK capital's labyrinthine public transport network. At around 8:49 a.m., Shehzad Tanweer, from Leeds in the north of England, detonated a home-made bomb on a Circle Line train between Liverpool Street Station and Aldgate. Within 90 seconds, Mohammad Siddique Khan, also from Leeds, blew himself up on a second Circle Line train between Edgware Road and Paddington station, and Germaine Lindsay, from Aylesbury, bombed a Piccadilly Line train as it left Kings Cross St Pancras, heading towards Russell Square. The blasts killed 42 people, including the three bombers, and left hundreds more wounded. Nearly an hour later, at 9:47 a.m., 18-year-old Hasib Hussein attacked the number 30 bus, traveling from Marble Arch to Hackney Wick, at Tavistock Square. The bus had driven via Euston Station, where commuters, exiting the London Underground, had been forced to make alternative transport arrangements due to the earlier attacks on the tube. The fourth explosion left another 13 people dead, blowing the roof of the double-decker clean off. Adel Darwish, the veteran parliamentary reporter and historian, recalled that the day had started like any other. 'I was on my way to Parliament. I was waiting for the tube, and then there was some kind of disruption to the network. I took a cab and went to Parliament,' he told Arab News. On arrival, Darwish recalled how he had been on his way to a briefing about UK involvement in the Middle East on the other side of Parliament Square, when he suddenly became aware of how empty the normally bustling center of British politics was. 'For the first time, you could actually see some special forces from the police with guns. I mean, that is something we're not used to. It's not like America. So, that was something, some kind of feeling of there being something alien that was happening.' Asharq Al-Awsat columnist Eyad Abu Chakra was also on his way in to work at his central London offices at the time of the attacks. 'When I left home, I saw on teletext that there was an incident on a bus,' he said. 'When I arrived at Waterloo (Station) … it was so crowded. There was a police presence. You could tell there was something big.' In the days before social media, and in the heat of the confusion, Darwish said information was scarce. 'The telephone networks started to go in and out,' he said, describing how signals were affected by a sudden surge in people in London attempting to contact loved ones and find out what had happened. Chakra added: 'I started to receive phone calls from colleagues from the Middle East asking me, because they thought that I should know much better than they did. (But) things were so intense, we could not comprehend what was going on anyway.' The attacks were the first known case of suicide bombings in the UK, and the worst terrorist attack on the country since the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over the Scottish town of Lockerbie in 1988. In all, 52 members of the public were killed, 32 of whom were British, with others hailing from as far afield as Nigeria and Afghanistan. In addition, 784 people were injured in the blasts. Despite the onset of the so-called 'War on Terror' following the Al-Qaeda attacks on the US on Sept. 11, 2001, the UK, with its sizable, well-established Muslim communities, had experienced relative stability despite significant British involvement in the Middle East. However, security services were not relaxed about the possibility of an attack on British soil. In March 2004, Operation Crevice had uncovered a plot to commit attacks on the UK after police raided properties in four counties surrounding London, eventually leading to five men being convicted of terrorism offences. Another cell of 13 people was discovered in Luton in August that year after the arrest of alleged Al-Qaeda operative Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan in Pakistan. Coming in the wake of the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, and the subsequent toppling of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in 2003, the motivation for the 7/7 attacks was conveyed via recorded video messages left by the bombers before they set off for London from Luton. The four, all British citizens, had not been known to the authorities as threats beforehand, the then Home Secretary Charles Clarke confirmed, although it later transpired Khan had links to the Luton cell. In his address, Khan praised Al-Qaeda leaders Osama bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahiri and Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, and blamed Western military involvement in the Middle East and elsewhere for turning him into 'a soldier.' In his video, Tanweer added that the UK government was complicit in the 'genocide of 150,000 innocent Muslims in Fallujah,' and blamed it for the 'problems in Palestine, Afghanistan and Iraq.' Arab News Editor-in-Chief Faisal J. Abbas was based in London at the time of the attacks. 'July 7 forced the UK to look into its own backyard and see what has been done in the name of tolerance and freedom of speech,' he said. 'I am referring to hate preachers such as Abu Hamza Al-Masri, who was not only inciting against the UK, but was doing so under police protection.' Abu Hamza, the radical cleric who preached at Finsbury Park Mosque in north London, notorious for replacing his hands, lost in an explosion in Afghanistan, with hooks, became the focus of attention on extremist rhetoric in the UK. He was eventually convicted in 2006 of 11 charges relating to terrorism and extremism. The judge presiding over the case said he had 'helped to create an atmosphere in which to kill has become regarded by some as not only a legitimate course but a moral and religious duty in pursuit of perceived justice' in the UK. The domestic response to the attacks was mixed. The far-right British National Party used them as an opportunity to self-promote, distributing leaflets ahead of a by-election in London just a week after, featuring an image of the bombed number 30 bus. A report by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia said it had identified cases of arson against mosques in the UK after the attacks, and that many Muslims reported feeling nervous to go outside. Abbas, though, said the response of the authorities to the attack was positive. 'As an Arab and Muslim immigrant to the UK at the time, and a professional journalist who reported on the attacks, I cannot but commend the UK authorities for keeping calm and carrying on; the way the situation was firmly handled but without creating a scare is admirable,' he said. 'I still remember the press conference of the Metropolitan Police's chief, Sir Ian Blair, hours after the attacks, where he refused to associate Islam with terror, and as such, reassuring the majority of British Muslims who didn't endorse such horrendous violence.' Darwish, too, highlighted the clear and consistent messaging by the UK government under then Prime Minister Tony Blair. 'They were actually approaching community leaders — Christian, Muslim community leaders — in order to make sure that nothing really broke down. So that was actually quite a good move by the Home Office,' he said. Chakra noted how, even while the incident was ongoing in London, the public remained tolerant and calm. '(In) this country, there is no knee-jerk reaction. Everybody was so composed, so tolerant, so open-minded,' he said. 'The people reacted with responsibility, with tolerance, with, I think, solidarity … It was an experience I will never, never forget.' However, he warned that despite an ingrained British sense of 'fair play,' the world was heading in an ever-more polarized direction, and that the UK was 'not immune' to such political trends. The July 7 attacks, he added, had played their part in robbing the UK of its political 'innocence' that once set it apart. 'There is no doubt in my mind that … 7/7 was, in one way or another, the … British scenario of Sept. 11, but of course, on a much smaller scale,' he said. 'However, I think lots of developments took place since then. Globally, we are now seeing lots of events that have been extremely influential in our way of thinking. 'I can never underestimate the danger that Brexit brought to the political scene. I think Brexit was the polite expression of xenophobia, to put it mildly. The 'we and they' scenario in Britain has escalated a lot with Brexit. I think the consensus politics that we used to talk about is gone.' The July 7 attacks proved a precursor to more major terrorist incidents in the UK. On March 22, 2017, Khalid Masood drove into pedestrians on Westminster Bridge, killing four and injuring dozens, then fatally stabbed a police officer outside Parliament before being shot dead. On 22 May that year, a suicide bomber, Salman Abedi, detonated a homemade device in the foyer of Manchester Arena as crowds were leaving an Ariana Grande concert. The attack killed 22 people, including children, and injured over 100. Then on June 3 that same year, three attackers drove a van into pedestrians on London Bridge, killing two people, before crashing near Borough Market. Armed with large knives and wearing fake explosive vests, they stabbed people in the market area, killing six more and injuring 48. All three attackers were shot dead by police. An independent coroner's inquest into the 7/7 attacks in 2011, overseen by Lady Justice Hallett, found that the 52 victims of the bombers were unlawfully killed, but that no additional security service measures could have prevented the attacks.
