Fans of Irish band Kneecap surround a London court as a band member faces a terror-related charge
LONDON (AP) — Fans of the Irish-language hip-hop group Kneecap mobbed sidewalks outside a London court Wednesday as a member of the trio faced a terror-related charge in what he says is a politically motivated effort to silence the band's support for Palestinians before its appearance at the Glastonbury Festival.
Rapper Mo Chara, whose real name is Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, was released on unconditional bail after the hearing at Westminster Magistrates' Court. His next court appearance is scheduled for Aug. 20.
Chara is charged with one count of supporting a banned terrorist organization after he allegedly waved a Hezbollah flag during a Nov. 21 concert in north London. The case was filed after counterterrorism police were alerted to video of the incident posted online, London's Metropolitan Police Service said.
Prosecutor Michael Bisgrove told the court that support for the Palestinians and criticism of Israel were not the reasons for the charge filed against Chara.
'He's well within his rights to voice his opinions and solidarity, as is anybody else,'' Bisgrove said. 'The allegation in this case is a wholly different thing and deals with a video recording showing that, in November of last year, Mr. O hAnnaidh wore and displayed the flag of Hezbollah, a proscribed terrorist organization, while saying 'up Hamas, up Hezbollah.'''
Kneecap, which raps about drugs, working-class life and the reunification of Ireland, has supported the Palestinian cause throughout the war in Gaza. The band has been the center of controversy in Britain since last year, when the previous government sought to block an arts grant for the band, citing its anti-British politics. That decision was overturned after the Labour Party won last year's parliamentary election and Prime Minister Keir Starmer took office.
The trio is scheduled to perform at Glastonbury on Saturday, alongside performers including Neil Young and Olivia Rodrigo. The internationally watched music festival is a five-day event that attracts about 200,000 people to a farm outside the small town in western England every summer.
As they entered the courthouse, the members of Kneecap, all of whom hail from Northern Ireland, gave the thumbs up sign to hundreds of supporters who had gathered outside waving signs reading: 'Free Mo Chara' and 'Defend Kneecap.'
Before the hearing, the band posted billboards around London bearing the slogan 'More Blacks, More Dogs, More Irish, Mo Chara.' The message echoes the signs landlords placed in the windows of some London boarding houses in the 1950s, stating 'No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish.'
'British courts have long charged people from the North of Ireland with 'terrorism' for crimes never committed,' Kneecap said in a statement posted on social media. 'We will fight them. We will win.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kneecap's Mo Chara placed on unconditional bail as hundreds support star at court
Kneecap's Mo Chara has been unconditionally bailed after facing a terror charge. After being greeted by hundreds of supporters outside Westminster Magistrates' Court on Wednesday (18.06.25), the court heard that the issue was with the member of the Irish rap trio - whose real name is Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh - "displaying a flag in support of proscribed organisation Hezbollah" at their O2 Forum Kentish Town gig in London in November 2024, not voicing his opinions on Israel and Palestine, which he's "well within his rights" to do. Prosecutor Michael Bisgrove told the court: 'It's not about Mr Ó hAnnaidh's support for the people of Palestine or his criticism of Israel. 'He's well within his rights to voice his opinions and solidarity, as is anybody else. 'The allegation in this case is a wholly different thing and deals with a video recording showing that, in November of last year, Mr Ó hAnnaidh wore and displayed the flag of Hezbollah, a proscribed terrorist organisation, while saying 'up Hamas, up Hezbollah'. 'Of course, support for the one is not the same as support for the other. 'So the issue in this case, and the reason it has come to court, it centres on the apparent support by Mr O hAnnaidh of a proscribed terrorist organisation.' Ó hAnnaidh was subsequently released on unconditional bail until his next hearing on August 20. Not only was he supported by his bandmates - Naoise Ó Cairealláin and JJ Ó Dochartaigh - at the court, but hundreds of supporters turned up to stand in solidarity with the star, with calls of "Free Palestine" heard as he left the building. In a statement on Instagram regarding the terror charge, Kneecap wrote: "We deny this 'offense' and will vehemently defend ourselves. 'This is political policing. This is a carnival of distraction. "14,000 babies are about to die of starvation in Gaza, with food sent by the world sitting on the other side of a wall, and once again the British establishment is focused on us. 'We are on the right side of history. You are not. We will fight you in court. We will win.' Kneecap had shows cancelled as a result of the backlash but are still set to play Glastonbury's West Holts stage at Worthy Farm on Saturday, June 28 at 4pm - despite calls from MPs for them to be banned.
New York Times
26 minutes ago
- New York Times
Live Updates: Trump Is Cryptic on U.S. Plans as Iranian Leader Is Defiant
News ANalysis Smokes after Israeli airstrikes in Tehran on Tuesday. In Iran, Israel is carrying out the kind of broad and brazen attack that it long threatened but never dared to enact before. For nearly two decades, Israel avoided all-out war with its biggest enemies. It fought contained conflicts with Hamas, but ultimately allowed the group to retain power in Gaza. It maintained an uneasy calm with the Lebanese militia Hezbollah, even as its fighters entrenched themselves in southern Lebanon. And despite planning a major assault on Iran, it limited its attacks to smaller, clandestine operations. Israel's massive, ongoing assault on Iran highlights an extraordinary shift in Israeli military doctrine since Hamas, Iran's Palestinian ally, attacked the country in October 2023. It is a change that has redrawn the power dynamics in the Middle East, unraveled Iran's regional alliance and enshrined Israel as the dominant military force in the region. Having given Hamas years to prepare for the Oct. 7 attack, Israel reversed course afterward to unleash one of the most destructive campaigns in recent warfare. It then assassinated most of Hezbollah's leadership and decimated large parts of southern Lebanon. Now, in Iran, it is carrying out the kind of broad and brazen attack that it long threatened but never dared to enact. 'We are changing the face of the Middle East,' said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel during a press briefing on Monday. 'And this could lead to far-reaching changes within Iran itself,' he added. For now, that second claim remains unproven. The Israeli military campaign has weakened Iran, but it has not yet destroyed the country's nuclear program or collapsed its government, and it may still fall short of both. The war could also devolve into an intractable quagmire with no exit strategy or offramp. Image Iranians lined up at gas stations in Tehran on Monday. Credit... Arash Khamooshi for The New York Times Mr. Netanyahu's broader point is harder to contradict. Hamas is no longer a threat to Israel. Hezbollah's influence over Lebanon — let alone the danger it poses to Israelis — is much diminished. The government in Syria, a pillar of Iran's regional alliance, was overthrown last December, in part because Hezbollah could no longer come to its aid. These tectonic shifts also speak to a vast change within the Israeli psyche and strategic outlook since Hamas's attack in October 2023. For Israel's critics, the attack was the inevitable consequence of the country's blockade of Gaza, occupation of the West Bank, and failure to resolve the Palestinian conflict through diplomatic concessions. Many Israelis have drawn the opposite conclusion: They believe that the October attack — the deadliest in Israeli history — stemmed from Israel's failure to pre-emptively and decisively defeat its enemies. 'In the 20 years before Oct. 7, we allowed threats to develop beyond our borders, trusting that our intelligence would give us prior warnings of any attack,' said Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israeli military intelligence. 'The trauma of Oct. 7 completely changed that mind-set and made us willing to take risks that we didn't take in the past,' General Yadlin said. 'We will no longer wait to be attacked, and we will not wait to be surprised.' The approach echoes Israel's strategic outlook in the early decades of its existence, when it often acted more swiftly and decisively to remove threats on its borders, General Yadlin said. The clearest example was in June 1967, when Israel pre-emptively attacked Egypt after the Egyptian military moved troops toward the Israeli border. Image Israeli fighter aircraft over the Sinai Peninsula of Egypt in June 1967. Israel's current approach in the Middle East echoes its strategic outlook in the early decades of its existence, when it often acted swiftly and decisively to remove threats on its borders. Credit... Israel Defense Forces, via Agence France-Presse — Getty Images 'As Egypt massed troops on our southern border, we did not wait to be surprised,' General Yadlin said. 'Now, we are reviving that doctrine.' Israel's new approach is the culmination of months of re-evaluation, during which the military's confidence — crushed by the failures of Oct. 7 — was gradually restored. While Israel's approach to Hamas was immediately wrathful, the country was initially wary of taking on Hezbollah and Iran. Mr. Netanyahu called off a pre-emptive attack on Hezbollah in the first week of the war in 2023, amid fears that Israel would struggle to maintain a multi-front war against the Iran-led alliance. For nearly a year, Israel fought only a low-level border conflict with Hezbollah. Despite increasing clashes with Tehran in 2024, Israel limited its strikes on Iran to avoid an all-out conflict. Israel's approach began to change last September, when a sequence of unexpected moves allowed Israel to decimate much of Hezbollah's senior leadership. That increased Israel's confidence and prompted its leaders to order a more decisive assault on the group. Troops invaded southern Lebanon and the air force killed Hezbollah's secretary general, Hassan Nasrallah. Israel then severely weakened Iran's air defense systems and successfully repelled massive barrages of Iranian missiles, giving Israel greater confidence in its offensive and defensive abilities. More than a year after Oct. 7, Israeli leaders finally concluded that they had a rare window of opportunity to mount a decisive blow against Iran's nuclear program. Image An oil storage west of Tehran was hit by Israeli airstrikes on Sunday. Credit... Arash Khamooshi for The New York Times Though Israel's new approach has undercut Iran's regional influence, it has done little to resolve Israel's oldest and most intractable problem: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In Gaza, Israel's retaliation has led to widespread destruction and bloodshed, reinstating a fearsome sense of Israeli might and reducing Hamas's threat for a generation. But the conflict has provided no clear long-term trajectory for either Gaza or the wider Palestinian question. Mr. Netanyahu has consistently ignored opportunities to end the war, balking at the idea of either leaving Hamas's remnants in charge or allowing other Palestinian groups to take over. 'Instead, we are left with only bad options,' said Tzipi Livni, a former Israeli foreign minister. 'Either occupation or chaos, rather than a diplomatic process involving moderate regional and Palestinian stakeholders that could change the reality on the ground for both Palestinians and Israelis.' A similarly aimless dynamic could yet emerge in Iran, analysts said, if the Israeli leadership fails to clearly define its goals there and set an exit strategy. For now, Israeli officials hope the United States will join the attack and help Israel destroy Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities. If the United States stays away, and if Iran refuses to stop the enrichment by choice, it is unclear whether Israel's forceful new doctrine will achieve the kind of game-changing outcomes that many Israelis desire. 'One wonders whether effective military performance is matched by a sober political vision,' said Nimrod Novik, a former senior Israeli official and a fellow at Israel Policy Forum, a research group in New York. 'Or, like in Gaza, we are left without an endgame. Time will tell.' Johnatan Reiss and Gabby Sobelman contributed reporting.
News24
an hour ago
- News24
UK declines Malema visa application due to his ‘extremism'
The United Kingdom has refused to grant EFF leader Julius Malema a visa due to his support for Hamas and a statement he made about cutting the throat of whiteness. The UK's Home Office says Malema's future applications are unlikely to succeed unless he changes his stance. His presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good, said that country's authorities. The United Kingdom has refused to grant EFF leader Julius Malema a visa due to his 'extremism', which that country said includes his support for Hamas and a call to 'slaughter white people'. The UK Home Office secretary said Malema's presence in the UK was not conducive to the public good. This is Malema's second unsuccessful attempt to visit the UK. The UK's Home Office told the firebrand leader that his application for a visit visa to the United Kingdom had been refused and that future applications were unlikely to succeed. 'Any future UK visa applications you make will be considered on their individual merits, however, you are likely to be refused unless the circumstances of your application change,' said the UK Visas and Immigration Decision Making Centre in a letter dated 17 June 2025 and seen by News24. 'In relation to this decision, there is no right of appeal or right to administrative review.' READ | Malema sees red after UK visa not approved in time to address students at Cambridge University The Home Office secretary said while Malema has previously held visas to travel to the UK, after reviewing his latest visa application, the authorities noticed his support for Hamas – an organisation which is considered a terrorist group and is forbidden in the UK – and his call for the slaughter of whiteness. 'I note that you have made statements in support of Hamas, an organisation who are proscribed in the United Kingdom. In an address outside the Israeli Embassy on the 23rd of October 2023, days after the October 7th attack on Israel, you stated that when your political party took over following the 2024 South African elections that you were 'going to arm Hamas and make sure Hamas got the necessary equipment to fight for their freedom',' reads the letter. 'During this same address, you state that Hamas had no option but to fight for their freedom. Additionally, in October 2023 you posted on the EFF's X site in relation to the events on October the 7th that there 'is nothing wrong Hamas (sic) did'. 'In April 2024, the EFF, the political party which you lead, posted on X that the 'Palestinian people have the fullest right to take up arms against apartheid Israel, and that the EFF supports the armed struggle of Hamas and Hezbollah'.' The Home Office also cited an interview Malema did in October 2024, where he argued that the Hamas attack on Israel was a 'legitimate act of resistance', stating that 'Hamas legitimately resisted Israel's occupation of Palestine on that day. It was not an act of war. It is a battle for the freedom of the Palestinians.' In addition, the Home Office secretary wrote: I note that you have made statements calling for the slaughter of white people or hinted that it could be an acceptable option in the future. 'In 2016, you said that your political party was 'not calling for the slaughter of white people, at least for now'. 'In February 2022 you appeared at the South African Equality Court after previously calling for the slaughter of white people. During this appearance, the presiding judge requested that you never repeat such words in the future. You responded that: 'I cannot guarantee the future. I am not a prophet. I said that if things don't change, there will be a revolution affecting all of us – and that will include me and black people in suburbs. Those rising up from townships will accuse us of abandoning them in squalor and in poverty. We will all be in serious trouble… It may not be me [calling for the slaughter of white people]. But it could be me. What will necessitate such a thing? I can't guarantee I can't or won't call for the slaughter of white people. But why would I make a pledge to say I definitely won't call for that? I won't do it'.' The Home Office said Malema went on to post on the EFF's X site, 'When the time comes and the conditions on the grounds necessitate that arms must be taken, we will do so without hesitation.' 'I consider that the above statements, in particular the fact that you have justified the actions of a proscribed terrorist organisation and stated your intention to support and arm them, mean your presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good. I note that we have not seen any information that indicates that you have spoken out against Hamas or the actions they have undertaken. Malema has previously stated that 'cutting the throat of whiteness' refers to a system of white supremacy and not white people. But the Home Office secretary said: Taking the above into account, your presence in the UK has been assessed as non-conducive to the public good on the grounds of your conduct, character and associations, which makes it undesirable to grant you entry to the UK. 'I consider that the above statements, notably that your political party would arm a proscribed organisation and other statements you made justifying the actions of proscribed terrorist organisations, mean your presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good,' said the letter. The Home Office advised Malema that there is no right of appeal against its decision or right to its administrative review. It said any future UK visa applications would likely be refused unless he provided 'compelling new evidence with your next application'. An application for entry clearance, permission to enter or permission to stay in the UK is refused where the applicant's presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good because of their conduct, character, associations or other reasons, including convictions which do not fall within the criminality grounds. According to the Home Office, a person's presence in the UK may be considered not conducive to the public good if the individual has been involved in unacceptable behaviour, including past or current extremist behaviour. Unacceptable behaviour covers an individual who uses any means or medium to express views which incite, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of beliefs. The UK government's definition of extremism considers that extremists can incite hatred, erode democratic institutions, social capital and cohesion. It says extremism is the promotion or advance of an ideology based on violence, hatred or intolerance, that is characterised by behaviour against a group, or members of it, that seeks to negate or destroy their rights to live equally under the law and free of fear, threat, violence and discrimination.
