Uncategorized
UK Gov’t Adviser: Police ‘Conflated’ Intelligence to Support Ban Against Maccabi Tel Aviv Soccer Fans
Soccer Football – UEFA Europa League – Aston Villa v Maccabi Tel Aviv – Villa Park, Birmingham, Britain – Nov. 6, 2025, Aston Villa’s Ian Maatsen scores their first goal. Photo: Action Images via Reuters
The British government’s independent adviser on antisemitism said on Monday that the West Midlands Police (WMP) department “conflated” evidence and used “inaccurate” intelligence when making the decision to ban Maccabi Tel Aviv fans from a Europa League soccer match in Birmingham last month.
“Some of the intelligence is not very good. Some of it’s not intelligence at all,” John Mann told the Home Affairs Committee in the British Parliament. “And the tactics used could have been better.”
Mann spoke to Parliament right before West Midlands Police Chief Constable Craig Guildford, Assistant Chief Constable Mike O’Hara, and Police and Crime Commissioner Simon Foster were questioned by the parliamentary committee about their move to ban Israeli soccer fans from the match between Maccabi and the UK’s Aston Villa at Villa Park on Nov. 6. The decision was made by police in collaboration with Birmingham’s Safety Advisory Group (SAG), a panel that includes Birmingham City Council. The match last month had heavy police presence and concluded with 11 arrests but no serious disorderly conduct.
WMP made its evaluation and decision about the ban based largely on intelligence given to the force by Dutch police commanders about violence that took place surrounding a Europa League match between Ajax and Maccabi Tel Aviv in the Netherlands last year, the MPs were told on Monday.
In November 2024, Maccabi fans were violently attacked by fans of the Dutch soccer team Ajax followed their match in Amsterdam. During the premeditated and coordinated violence, Maccabi fans were chased with knives and sticks in the streets, run over by cars, physically beaten, and forced by their attackers to say, “Free Palestine.” Amsterdam Mayor Femke Halsema called the attackers “antisemitic hit-and-run squads” who went “Jew hunting.”
Before the British police officials spoke to the Home Affairs Committee this week, Mann was questioned and said he “struggled” with some “inaccurate” details in the West Midlands police intelligence report that supported their banning of Maccabi fans. Last week the national police force of the Netherlands told The Times that several claims in the report were false and issued a statement explaining what it told West Midlands police.
Mann said the West Midlands intelligence report “conflates” facts and mentions several details that simply “didn’t happen” in relation to the Ajax-Maccabi match in Amsterdam on Nov. 8, 2024. He gave one example about a Maccabi and West Ham match mentioned in the report that never took place. Guildford admitted that it was noted in the report “due to some social media scrapping,” which included a “search through social media to see what’s trending.”
Mann said the intelligence report also falsely claimed Maccabi fans ripped down several Palestinian flags on game day in Amsterdam and threw members of the public in into a river. It further contained the false accusation that 5,000 Dutch police officers were deployed in response.
The report went on to falsely state that pro-Palestinian demonstrators and Israeli soccer fans were fighting in the streets of Amsterdam throughout the day on Nov. 6, 2024, according to Mann. He explained that reports from Amsterdam officials clearly indicate the violence only started after the match ended, and there was only one reported incident of a Palestinian flag being pulled down, on the day before the game. The report also referred to multiple incidents against taxi drivers, when there was only one incident the night before the match, Mann stated. “The suggestion that Macabi Tel Aviv fans were going around Amsterdam trying to find local people specifically from the Muslim community going into Muslim areas – that didn’t happen,” he added.
“I’ve looked at the intelligence report of the West Midlands Police and I struggle with some of the intelligence within it, including the intelligence about Amsterdam. It doesn’t concur with the discussions I had in Amsterdam and the facts I saw in Amsterdam,” Mann said. “Some of the stuff in the report simply doesn’t match the Amsterdam [police] reports and I think the evidence has been fitted to try and get a solution because obviously [if] you don’t have the Israeli fans, there’s no conflict … A banning of fans needs to be properly intelligence-led. The facts have slightly changed to fit the decision.”
“What you’re trying to say quite clearly is that is that the facts have slightly changed to fit the decision?” an MP asked Mann. “Correct. Correct. That would be a summary of what’s gone on here,” he replied.
In response, Guildford defended the ban against Maccabi Tel Aviv fans, saying the decision “wasn’t taken lightly” and was made after a “careful assessment.” The ban was the “best way of maximizing the safety” of everyone involved, O’Hara saud. “Had we allowed the fans and it had gone wrong I feel that I would be sitting here again anyway.”
He also denied “fitting” evidence to support the ban and discredited suggestions of a “conspiracy” within the police force to target Maccabi fans, saying they were “completely wrong and misleading.”
“We’ve acted with integrity. My assurance to yourselves as a panel is that we were not influenced in any way, shape, or form by anybody politically,” he argued. “We did our service to the best of our ability, and the officers acted in line with their training and professionalism.”
Guildford told the Home Affairs Committee that his chief inspector had a virtual meeting on Oct. 1 with three Dutch police commanders and discussed the violence last year when Maccabi played Ajax in Amsterdam. Guildford said he trusted what his chief inspector was told during the meeting and the information they received from Dutch police “swayed” the police force’s assessment not to allow Maccabi fans to attend Villa Park for the game on Nov. 6. The information provided by Dutch police “certainly influenced the way our assessment was heading,” Guildford said.
“The information provided from the Dutch was very, very clear in terms of they reflected on the days before, during, and after the match as a result of clashes between the Maccabi ultras and the local Muslim community,” he explained. “In terms of what we were told, the ultras were very well organized, militaristic in the way that they operated. They attacked members of the local community, including taxi drivers. Tore down flags. People were thrown into the river.”
He added that the Dutch commanders were “unequivocal” that they “would never want to have Maccabi Tel Aviv playing in Amsterdam again in the future.” He also said that Dutch police “probably underestimated the level of threat and risk” from Israeli soccer fans and changed their account of what they told British counterparts in the virtual meeting on Oct. 1 because they were under political pressure.
O’Hara said Sebastiaan Meijer, a spokesman for the Amsterdam division of the Dutch police, “naysayed” some of the intelligence and made it “very clear they’re under a lot of pressure, in their words, from City Hall.”
Mann told MPs he suggested to West Midlands police and the Birmingham City Council alternative solutions before they announced the ban against Maccabi fans, which included ideas like having Maccabi supporters escorted by police in and out of the stadium to avoid any confrontations. Another suggestion he made was changing the game’s kickoff to an earlier time in the day so visiting Maccabi fans did not have to stay overnight in Birmingham, which could reduce the risk of violence ensuing in the area surrounding the stadium. Mann also told the committee he talked to both Ajax and Maccabi Tel Aviv regarding the concerns ahead of the match, and said both teams handled it “maturely and sensibility” and were “extremely cooperative.”
“I was surprised at the decision to ban the fans. I don’t think that was the most appropriate decision nor the most sensible decision,” Mann noted.
Uncategorized
Feds say Cisco likely failed to protect pro-Palestinian workers from harassment
(JTA) — Cisco Systems likely violated the civil rights of Palestinian, Arab and Muslim employees, a federal agency has found, after employees were subjected to harassing messages — some of them posted by employees in an internal forum called the Connected Jewish Network.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission determined in June that there was “reasonable cause to believe” Cisco subjected the employees to a hostile work environment based on their national origin, religion or association in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The determination follows on media reports and an EEOC probe into an ugly climate at the tech company following the Oct. 7, 2023, deadly attacks by Hamas on southern Israel. Pro-Palestinian employees called on the company to end its business dealings with Israel, while Jewish employees said the company had failed to protect them from harassment by pro-Palestinian employees.
The EEOC case, however, turned in part on messages shared in the internal Connected Jewish Network forum. A complaint filed by Legal Aid at Work, which represented the Muslim and pro-Palestinian employees, said employees on the Jewish forum had “repeatedly glorified violence, joked about sending people to their deaths” and “labeled Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims as murderous, violent, terrorists.”
“This is a massive multinational corporation with all the resources in the world and they couldn’t get it right,” Christopher Ho, a director at Legal Aid at Work, told the Guardian, which reported on the EEOC finding last month. “Thankfully the EEOC did.”
Ho said Cisco had “at best failed to take their harassment seriously” and through its inaction had sent “the implicit message that its pro-Palestinian employees were unworthy of protection.”
The letter is not a binding ruling, and both sides said the EEOC has indicated it will not sue. The finding could nonetheless strengthen employees’ cases if they pursue their own lawsuits. The employees are considering collective and individual litigation, according to media reports.
The case examines the period after a group of mostly Palestinian, Arab and Muslim employees called Bridge to Humanity circulated an open letter urging Cisco to end its business dealings with the Israeli military. More than 1,700 employees signed the letter. The employees said they were subsequently subjected to racist and Islamophobic harassment.
In August 2024, employees — including some concerned Jewish employees — filed a 76-page ethics complaint accusing more than a dozen colleagues of creating a hostile work environment through posts on the Connected Jewish Network, which was visible to all company employees, according to the Guardian.
The episode was not one-sided. Wired magazine, in a 2024 investigation into the dispute, reported that some Jewish Cisco employees also believed the company had failed to protect them from harassment by pro-Palestinian employees. One former employee told the magazine that Cisco leadership could have done more to “reduce the mess across the board.”
Legal Aid at Work believes this is the first EEOC finding against a major tech company involving discrimination against workers engaged in pro-Palestinian advocacy. Since the Oct. 7 attacks, the EEOC has made combating workplace antisemitism a major policy and enforcement priority, with scrutiny on academia and the private sector increasing under the Trump administration.
Cisco has disputed the EEOC’s determination, saying it had “thoroughly investigated all concerns and took appropriate action.” The company previously said it had removed some comments, issued discipline warnings and provided coaching to multiple employees.
The post Feds say Cisco likely failed to protect pro-Palestinian workers from harassment appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Mahmoud Khalil sues Columbia University citing ‘hostile environment’ for pro-Palestinian students
Mahmoud Khalil, the Palestinian Columbia University alum who was detained by the Trump administration last year, is suing his alma mater along with an Israeli dean of the school he attended for facilitating a “hostile environment” for pro-Palestinian students.
Khalil became a national symbol of the campus pro-Palestinian protest movement when he was detained in March 2025 after the government accused him of being aligned with terrorists. On Monday, he filed a civil rights lawsuit in federal court accusing the school of engaging in months-long “deliberate indifference” toward the harassment of pro-Palestinian students on campus, including at the hands of right-wing pro-Israel groups.
He contends that Columbia’s alleged indifference ultimately helped to lead to his 104-day detention by federal immigration authorities, during which he missed the birth of his first child, before being released after a federal judge ruled his detainment was likely unconstitutional. He is joined in the suit by members of the School of International and Public Affairs Palestine Working Group, a pro-Palestinian student group on campus.
“Columbia laid the groundwork for my targeting by the Trump administration through its deliberate indifference and discrimination aimed at intimidating Palestinian students,” Khalil told reporters at a press conference in New York on Monday.
SIPA’s Dean Keren Yarhi-Milo speaks during a book talk for Fareed Zakaria’s new book, “Age of Revolutions: Progress and Backlash from 1600 to the Present” at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs on April 3, 2024 in New York City. (Shahar Azran/Getty Images)
In addition to the university, the suit also names Keren Yarhi-Milo, the dean of the Columbia School of International and Public Affairs, who is Israeli-American, as a defendant. The complaint says that Yahi-Milo had unfairly accused Khalil, while a student in the school, of antisemitism and harassment.
In a statement to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Columbia representatives defended Yarhi-Milo in general terms.
“Throughout her time at Columbia and during her service as dean, Dean Yarhi-Milo has worked with and supported students of all backgrounds, including our Palestinian, Arab, and Muslim students,” the statement reads. “The University is grateful for her tireless efforts on behalf of our students and her commitment to a campus free of discrimination and harassment.”
Columbia representatives declined to comment further on the lawsuit but said that “creating a campus environment where every member of our community feels welcome, supported, and safe is fundamental to who we are as a university. It is also a responsibility we take seriously.”
A leading figure of the encampment movement that began at Columbia before spreading to schools across the country, Khalil was the first pro-Palestinian student protest leader to be detained by the Trump administration and spent months in an immigrant detention center despite holding a green card.
In the months since a federal judge ordered his release, Khalil has filed a number of lawsuits, including against pro-Israel groups that he said “conspired” with the government to target him. He has also sued Columbia before, for disclosing student records as part of a congressional investigation.
Khalil’s latest lawsuit against Columbia claims the school violated Title VI protections for him and his fellow plaintiffs based on their ethnic identity, national origin or “affiliation with Palestine.” The lawsuit invokes the same federal civil rights law that Jewish and Israeli students have used in discrimination claims against universities, some of which have resulted in settlements.
Columbia itself signed a controversial agreement with the Trump administration last year to resolve federal civil rights investigations, paying $221 million and agreeing to a number of concessions in order to free up hundreds of millions in federal funding. During his press conference Monday, Khalil called such settlements “disgraceful.”
The suit notes that, as a student, Khalil called Yarhi-Milo “genocidal” in a message to fellow students. The suit then describes a subsequent internal university investigation into Khalil as “unfounded and retaliatory,” and claims the school “repeatedly launched meritless allegations of antisemitism against Mr. Khalil” prior to his federal detention.
During the press conference, Khalil accused Yahi-Milo of being someone who “weaponizes her identity to shield herself from legitimate concerns and criticism.” Khalil added, “Her priority has never been her students, me and my fellow students here. Her priority has always been Israel.”
The lawsuit’s examples of indifference include a claim that Columbia failed to intervene when a right-wing group, Accuracy in Media, labeled some of the members of Palestine Working Group as “Columbia’s Leading Antisemites” in messages on the side of trucks driven near campus for months after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks. The group had targeted pro-Palestinian students in a similar fashion at several campuses.
Joseph Howley, a classics professor at Columbia who is Jewish, spoke at the press conference in support of Khalil, whom he called a friend. “We all see how the university’s anti-Palestinian racism has directly endangered its students,” said Howley, who wore a Jews for Racial and Economic Justice hat and a “Not In Our Name” shirt. “I won’t be wasting any more time on town halls or listening sessions or imagining anything.”
In a statement to JTA, Accuracy in Media president Adam Guillette said his group “uses publicly available information, and we are steadfastly opposed to doxxing. We pledge to continue delivering accountability to pro-Hamas radicals across the country.”
The post Mahmoud Khalil sues Columbia University citing ‘hostile environment’ for pro-Palestinian students appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Ed Sheeran says it wasn’t his call to drop Macklemore over ‘Free Palestine’ remarks
(JTA) —
Pop superstar Ed Sheeran said he wasn’t behind his tour’s recent decision to drop opening act Macklemore following the rapper’s recent pro-Palestinian remarks at a stadium show.
“I am not complicit,” Sheeran wrote in a statement on Instagram Tuesday, saying that Macklemore leaving the tour “was the promoter’s decision, it was not mine.” These were his first public words on the controversy that has gathered steam over the last 24 hours.
Hours after Sheeran’s comments, three of his other supporting acts announced they would be leaving his tour. All three acts — Aaron Rowe, Beoga and Finneas — posted pro-Palestinian solidarity statements to Instagram in their announcements.
Sheeran’s own note added, “I am appalled by the conflict between Israel and Palestine.” The British singer-songwriter wrote that he had been “involved in direct talks” between Robert Kraft and various promoters “to try and find a mutual resolution for all.”
Kraft, the Jewish and pro-Israel billionaire who owns one of the stadiums where Sheeran and Macklemore had been scheduled to play, said on Monday that he had told Sheeran’s team that Macklemore wouldn’t be allowed to perform there.
In his own statement to JTA, Kraft had said that Macklemore’s recent performance at New Jersey’s MetLife stadium, at which the rapper accused Israel of genocide and broadcast images from Gaza, “has been deeply offensive and hurtful to the Jewish community.” Pop star Pink, who is Jewish, also criticized Macklemore following the performance.
Sheeran didn’t mention Jews in his statement, but noted, “I have always used my platform and music to bring people from all backgrounds and cultures together and this won’t ever change.”
US rapper, singer, dancer and DJ, Benjamin Haggerty, known as Macklemore, performs at the Goldencoast Rap Festival in Corcelles-les-Monts, near Dijon, central-eastern France, on August 30, 2026. (Arnaud Finistre / AFP via Getty Images)
He also had some veiled criticism of his tourmate’s methods. “Those who come to my shows do not expect a political forum,” Sheeran wrote. “I respect Macklemore’s strength of purpose to stand up for what he believes. However, there is room for multiple approaches to the same end: peace… If we only focus on shouting the loudest, nothing will ever change.”
The other acts who announced they were leaving Sheeran’s tour didn’t agree. Some had strong words for Kraft and Zionism.
“As Irish people we know all too well about genocide, forced famine and violent occupation,” Rowe wrote in his own statement. “I cannot stand by and allow billionaires to use their position of power to silence the rightful voices of those who speak up against Israeli genocide and who highlight the savage murder of children.”
“It’s important that everyone knows that the real enemy is the zionist lobby,” Beoga, also an Irish act, wrote in the band’s own statement. “Research how much Robert Kraft has done to fight the BDS movement. That will give you a sense of what we’ve all been up against.”
In a shorter statement, Finneas said, “Artists must not be silenced when they speak up for the oppressed.” He added, “I stand with Palestine and its people.”
The Israeli-American Council, which organized a boycott against Macklemore following his New Jersey show, criticized Sheeran from the other direction in a new statement to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
“It’s time to take responsibility for giving a stage to antisemitic messaging,” the IAC said, of Sheeran. “This isn’t just ‘criticism of Israel.’ It’s a message that crosses the line between legitimate political criticism and antisemitism. This is Ed Sheeran’s stage, it’s the tour that carries his name — and so the responsibility for what happens on it is his too.”
The post Ed Sheeran says it wasn’t his call to drop Macklemore over ‘Free Palestine’ remarks appeared first on The Forward.

