RSS
Ben & Jerry’s Accuses Parent Company Unilever of Firing CEO Over Political Posts, Anti-Israel Activism
Tubs of ice cream are seen as a laborer works at a Ben & Jerry’s factory in Be’er Tuvia, Israel, July 20, 2021. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
Ben & Jerry’s has accused parent company Unilever of firing its CEO in retaliation for the ice cream producer’s political activism on social media, which includes calling for a permanent ceasefire to end the Israel-Hamas war.
Ben & Jerry’s — which was founded in 1978 by Jewish childhood friends Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield — and five directors of its independent board filed a lawsuit against Unilever and its US subsidiary, the New York-based corporation Conopco, in federal court in November 2024, claiming the companies are censoring its public advocacy. The ice-cream maker accused Unilever, a conglomerate based in London, and Conopco of violating its 2000 merger agreement, which created the independent board and gave it “primary responsibility for Social Mission Priorities and the Essential Integrity of the Brand.” Ben & Jerry’s has a history of outspoken advocacy on topics of social justice and human rights, including climate change, LGBTQ+ rights, and Black Lives Matter.
The Vermont-based ice cream company filed an amended complaint in the Southern District of New York on Tuesday that accused Unilever and Conopco of continuing to censor its political posts on social media. In one recent instance, Ben & Jerry’s said Unilever “blocked” the company from posting a message in solidarity with pro-Hamas activist and former Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil. Ben & Jerry’s wanted to write in support of free speech and link to a petition for Khalil’s release after he was arrested earlier this month by US authorities in accordance with an executive order signed by President Donald Trump cracking down on campus antisemitism and supporters of terrorist groups. Khalil’s deportation is pending a legal challenge by his lawyers.
Ben & Jerry’s also claimed Unilever stopped it from posting in December 2023 in support of a ceasefire to end the Israel-Hamas war that started two months earlier, after the deadly Hamas terrorist attacks in southern Israel. Unilever also allegedly stopped Ben & Jerry’s from posting on social media in support of Palestinian refugees in May 2024 because of the inappropriate timing of the message, since it would have coincided with an Iranian missile attack on Israel. Another claim is that Unilever did not let Ben & Jerry’s post in support of anti-Israel campus protests, which often turned violent, and their First Amendment rights in June 2024. Unilever’s response was that it had “reasonable concerns about the need to condemn the violence associated with the protests and support rights of Jewish students as well.”
“Unilever’s suppression of Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission has reached startling new levels of oppressiveness,” Ben & Jerry’s stated in its updated complaint this week. It also claimed Unilever was waging a “campaign of professional reprisals,” which led to the firing of Ben & Jerry’s CEO David Stever, who assumed the position in May 2023 after being a longtime tour guide for the company. Under Stever’s leadership, the company “outperformed Unilever’s ice cream portfolio” and was ranked #2 on the Brand 500 Authenticity Index in 2023 and 2024, according to Ben & Jerry’s.
“Contrary to their obligations under Section 6.14, Unilever has repeatedly threatened Ben & Jerry’s personnel, including CEO David Stever, should they fail to comply with Unilever’s efforts to silence the Social Mission. This month … Unilever followed through with their threats,” the lawsuit further stated.
Ben & Jerry’s said Unilever informed its board of directors about Stever’s firing on March 3, without following protocol outlined in the merger agreement, which says Unilever must consult with an advisory committee from the board before making decisions about the removal of a CEO. Ben & Jerry’s is accusing Unilever of removing Stever because of his “commitment to Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission and Essential Brand Integrity and his willingness to collaborate in good faith with the Independent Board, rather than any genuine concerns regarding his performance history.”
“Unilever has repeatedly failed to recognize and respect the Independent Board’ primary responsibility over Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission and Brand Integrity, including threatening Ben & Jerry’s personnel should the company speak out regarding issues which that Unilever prefers to censor,” stated the amended complaint this week. The lawsuit alleges that Unilever executives previously criticized Stever in his January 2025 performance review for “repeatedly acquiesce[ing] to the demands of the Independent Social Mission Board” by permitting certain social media posts.
Ben & Jerry’s wants the court to order Unilever to “prospectively respect and acknowledge” its independent board and its authority. It also wants Unilever to comply with the merger agreement and its policy regarding the appointment and firing of a CEO.
Ben & Jerry’s also claimed in its lawsuit this week that Unilever has violated its settlement agreement with the ice cream company by blocking its donations to two anti-Israel organizations: Jewish Voice for Peace and the Council on American Islamic Relations last year. Ben & Jerry’s is asking the court to order Unilever to pay the company $5 million that it will then disbursement to human rights and humanitarian organizations of its choosing.
Unilever defended itself by saying that it “exercised its right to withhold consent to donate” after researching JVP and CAIR, and discovering that both groups have made “made inflammatory comments” about the Oct. 7 Hamas massacre in Israel.
A plaintiff included in the lawsuit against Unilever is Anuradha Mittal, chairman of Ben & Jerry’s independent board of directors. When Bloomberg News previously visited her office, it reported that it is decorated with a “Free Palestine” placard and a poster of two Palestinian men embracing next to a barbed wire fence. The poster included a message in Arabic that said, “Support the Intifada.” In 2018, on Israel’s Independence Day, Mittal tweeted, “The catastrophe continues #Nakba70 years later #palestine bleeds Boycott Divest Sanctions #israel.”
On Wednesday, Unilever filed a motion to dismiss Ben and Jerry’s complaint. The British conglomerate claimed in part that Ben & Jerry’s independent board members do not have the right to bring lawsuits on behalf of the company. Also, Ben & Jerry’s did not allege that it suffered any damages as a result of Unilever’s alleged breach of the settlement agreement, Unilever added.
Unilever noted that its issues with Ben & Jerry’s are a “direct result” of the board’s decision to get involved in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and share its opinions so publicly “without any regard to the negative impact” on both companies. Unilever insisted that if anything, Ben & Jerry’s decision in 2021 to stop selling its products in Israeli territories resulted in “severe consequences” for both companies.
In July 2020, Ben & Jerry’s independent board unanimously passed a resolution to end distribution of Ben & Jerry’s products in eastern Jerusalem and in the West Bank. The company made the announcement a year later in July 2021, saying in a released statement: “We believe it is inconsistent with our values for Ben & Jerry’s ice cream to be sold in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”
The announcement led to “multiple lawsuits” in the US and Israel targeting Unilever for being in violation of laws against the anti-Israel boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, as well as accusations of antisemitism, “severe” sanctions, and the divestment of “hundreds of millions of dollars” in Unilever’s stock, Unilever claimed in its motion to dismiss on Wednesday.
“Unilever … continues — to this day — to suffer the consequences of that decision. B&J’s and/or Unilever still remain on at least nine states’ anti-BDS lists and Indonesia has a ‘fatwah’ on Unilever. These are just two examples of the world-wide response to the Board’s decision that have negatively impacted B&J’s and Unilever,” the company stated. “Unilever continues to support B&J’s and its social advocacy work. Over time, the social mission of B&J’s shifted, but in recent years it has come to a head as B&J’s seeks to advocate for one-sided, highly controversial, and polarizing topics that put Unilever, B&J’s, and their employees at risk.”
In 2022, Unilever sold its Ben & Jerry’s property rights to a local distributor in Israel, who resumed selling the ice cream products in eastern Jerusalem and the West Bank with Hebrew and Arabic labeling. Ben & Jerry’s sued Unilever for its actions. The 2022 lawsuit ended with a settlement agreement that requires Unilever to “respect and acknowledge the Ben & Jerry’s Independent Board’s primary responsibility over Ben & Jerry’s Social Mission and Essential Brand Integrity” and “work in good faith with the Independent Board to ensure that both are protected and furthered.”
The post Ben & Jerry’s Accuses Parent Company Unilever of Firing CEO Over Political Posts, Anti-Israel Activism first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Conservative Pro-Israel Advocate Charlie Kirk Assassinated at University Event in Utah
Charlie Kirk, a conservative activist credited with amassing youth support for the Republican Party, speaking at the inauguration of Donald Trump in January. Photo: Brian Snyder via Reuters Connect
Conservative activist and staunch pro-Israel advocate Charlie Kirk died on Wednesday after being shot during an event at Utah Valley University, according to a statement by US President Donald Trump posted to the Truth Social media platform. He was 31 years old.
“The great, and even Legendary, Charlie Kirk, is dead,” Trump wrote. “No one understood or had the Heart of the Youth in the United States of America better than Charlie. He was loved and admired by ALL, especially me, and now, he is no longer with us. Melania and my Sympathies go out to his beautiful wife Erika, and family.”
He added, “Charlie we love you!”
Kirk — founder of the Turning Point USA nonprofit, which is credited for drawing masses of young people, typically a reliable voting bloc for Democrats, to the Republican Party — was answering audience questions when a gunman fired off the fatal shot which impacted his neck, causing him to become limp and bleed profusely.
Since the advent of his career, Kirk has been a faithful supporter of Israel, taking on activists of both the far left and far right who promoted rising antisemitism and sought to undermine the US-Israel alliance.
“There’s a dark Jew hate out there, and see it, and I see it,” Kirk told a student during a podcast episode which aired earlier this year. “Don’t get yourself involved in that. I’m telling you it will rot your brain. It’s bad for your soul. It’s bad. It’s evil. I think it’s demonic.”
Born on Oct. 14, 1993, in Arlington Heights, Illinois, Kirk formally entered the political arena in 2012, five months before the reelection of former President Barack Obama, to found Turning Point USA (TPUSA) — which served as a bellwether of declining youth support for the progressive consensus on race, free speech, and economics that took hold in American college campuses in the 1960s.
TPUSA grew rapidly, challenging campus primacy of the College Republicans organization and exuding confidence in conservative ideas at a moment when political scientists and other experts speculated that the Republican Party would decline to the point that the Democratic Party would achieve long-standing majorities in local and federal government.
Following news of Kirk’s death, the Jewish community deluged social media with tributes to Kirk and prayers for his family and friends.
“Please stop what you’re doing and pray for our friend Charlie Kirk. Many in the Jewish community are reciting chapters from the Book of Psalms, and I ask you do the same,” Shabbos Kestenbaum, a Jewish civil rights advocate, tweeted. “Something is deeply broken in America. The political violence must END. GOD HELP AMERICA.”
“We have no words,” StopAntisemitism, a Jewish civil rights advocacy group, tweeted.
Meanwhile, Jewish conservative influencer Emily Austin said, “With deep pain and sorrow, we mourn the passing of Charlie Kirk. May he rest in peace, and may God welcome him into His eternal care. This is a profound loss for the world — Charlie was a truly blessed soul whose impact will never be forgotten.”
Kirk is survived by his wife, Erika, and his two young children.
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
RSS
Lebanon’s Army to Disarm Hezbollah Near Israeli Border Within 3 Months in First Step to Restore State Control
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam, and members of the cabinet stand as they attend a cabinet session to discuss the army’s plan to disarm Hezbollah, at the Presidential Palace in Baabda, Lebanon, Sept. 5, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mohamed Azakir
Lebanon’s army plans to fully disarm Hezbollah near the Israeli border within three months, the first step in the Lebanese government’s plan to restore authority and curb the influence of the Iran-backed terror group within the country.
On Tuesday, Lebanon’s Foreign Minister Youssef Raggi confirmed to AFP that the government received a five-stage plan last week from the military to enforce a policy placing all weapons under state control.
The move follows Lebanese authorities’ approval last month of a US-backed initiative to disarm Hezbollah in exchange for a halt to Israeli military operations in the country’s south.
Amid mounting international pressure to disarm the terrorist group, Lebanon’s cabinet tasked the army with developing a strategy to establish a state monopoly on arms.
For years, Israel has demanded that Hezbollah be barred from carrying out activities south of the Litani, located roughly 15 miles from the Israeli border.
However, Hezbollah has pushed back against any government efforts, insisting that negotiations to dismantle its arsenal would be a serious misstep while Israel continues airstrikes in the country’s south.
The terrorist group has even threatened protests and civil unrest if the government tries to enforce control over its weapons.
But as Hezbollah emerged weakened from a yearlong conflict with Israel, calls for the Islamist group’s disarmament have gained new momentum, reshaping a power balance it had long controlled in Lebanon.
Last fall, Israel decimated Hezbollah’s leadership and military capabilities with an air and ground offensive, following the group’s attacks on Jerusalem — which they claimed were a show of solidarity with the Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas amid the war in Gaza.
In November, Lebanon and Israel reached a US-brokered ceasefire agreement that ended a year of fighting between the Jewish state and Hezbollah.
Under the agreement, Israel was given 60 days to withdraw from southern Lebanon, allowing the Lebanese army and UN forces to take over security as Hezbollah disarms and moves away from Israel’s northern border.
However, Israel maintained troops at several posts in southern Lebanon beyond the ceasefire deadline, as its leaders aimed to reassure northern residents that it was safe to return home.
Jerusalem has continued carrying out strikes targeting remaining Hezbollah activity, with Israeli leaders accusing the group of maintaining combat infrastructure, including rocket launchers — calling this “blatant violations of understandings between Israel and Lebanon.”
RSS
Israeli Military Expert: Doha Strike Was Backed by US and Qatar Coup, Will Bring Hostage Deal Closer
A damaged building, following an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders, according to an Israeli official, in Doha, Qatar, Sept. 9, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa
Israel’s unprecedented strike on Hamas leaders in Doha this week was not a rogue act of military aggression, but rather the outcome of quiet coordination between Qatar and the US that could bring a hostage deal closer, Israeli intelligence expert Eyal Pinko said on Wednesday.
The strike, which officials have said was planned months ago, came a day after 10 Israelis were killed by Hamas in Gaza and Jerusalem. Four were soldiers who died in an attack on an Israeli tank in northern Gaza. The separate shooting attack in Jerusalem, in which six Israelis were killed and several more wounded, was the “straw that broke the camel’s back,” Pinko, a national security expert who served in Israeli intelligence for more than three decades, said in a press briefing.
Pinko contended that while Qatar publicly condemned the attacks, it also enabled them. “I am sure they were involved and the attack was coordinated with the [Qataris],” Pinko later told The Algemeiner.
The most recent round of negotiations to secure a Gaza ceasefire and hostage-release deal were nothing more than a “deception” by the US and Israel designed to gather Hamas leaders in one place “in order to set the timing to eliminate them,” he said.
Pinko said the strike should also be seen in light of US President Donald Trump’s impatience with the stalled hostage talks, arguing it showed Trump was on board with assassinations of Hamas leaders despite public declarations that he was “very unhappy” with the attack. He also pointed to Trump’s comments from last month, in which the US president predicted the Gaza conflict would reach a “conclusive ending” within two or three weeks.
Qatar, which has long hosted Hamas’s exiled leadership, benefits strategically from replacing the terrorist group’s leaders loyal to Iran with figures it can trust, Pinko maintained. Doha holds billions of dollars belonging to Hamas officials and has no interest in letting Ankara or Tehran displace it as the group’s patron. The timing of the attack is also significant, Pinko said, coming in the wake of Israel’s strikes against Iran’s nuclear program over the summer. “Iran is in a very bad situation. Qatar can easily overcome Iran,” he said.
Pinko further argued that the strike may serve to bring forward the release of the Israeli hostages still being held in Gaza since Hamas itself was no longer a coherent negotiating partner. The terrorist group operating in Gaza had become fragmented, “divided into five families that are fighting each other” and sometimes giving the impression that “they hate each other more than they hate Israel,” Pinko said. Recent talks proved “there was no longer a decisionmaker in Hamas,” and this disarray had allowed Hamas leaders to drag out the process with unrealistic demands. Removing those figures, he argued, would leave room for Qatar to install leaders who could cut a deal. “This will make the negotiation process much faster,” he said.
Pinko’s assessment stands in stark contrast to the fears of some of the families of the remaining 48 hostages held in Gaza, who said in a statement they had “grave fear” the Doha strike could sabotage the chances of bringing their loved ones home.
He placed the operation in a wider context, linking it to the revival of the Abraham Accords and US efforts to build a trade corridor from India through the Gulf to Israel and Europe as a counterweight to China’s trillion-dollar Belt and Road initiative, ending with Gaza as a key trade hub. “Trump is very serious in making the northern part of the Gaza Strip as [having] US autonomy. That will be the end of the American belt and road initiative to compete with the Chinese,” he said.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday called on Qatar, which “gives safe haven [and] harbors terrorists,” to expel them or bring them to justice, adding that if they don’t, “we will.”
Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, for his part said his country would retaliate over the strike, and accused Netanyahu of “wasting” Qatar’s time in negotiations and “leading the Middle East to chaos.”
Pinko called out Doha for its “duplicity” in pretending to be a peacemaker on the one hand, while “fueling Hamas and hatred” in the US and Europe, on the other.
“They are against Israel in their DNA. They don’t want Israel to exist,” he said. “So Gaza and Hamas are a very important asset for them.”
Some critics have denounced the Doha strike as a violation of international law, but international law experts note that Article 51 of the UN Charter recognizes a state’s inherent right to self-defense and that this right is not confined by geography if attacks are directed from outside its borders. The so-called “unwilling or unable” doctrine holds that if a host country does not act against militants on its soil, the victim state may use proportionate force.
The US relied on this doctrine when it killed Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in a 2011 operation that was widely hailed by Western governments and the UN, whose then secretary-general Ban Ki-moon said at the time that he was “very much relieved by news that justice has been done” and called it “a watershed moment in our common global fight against terrorism.”