RSS
‘Only One Solution’: Pro-Hamas Dartmouth College Group Occupies Building, Injures Staff
Pro-Hamas activists at Dartmouth College strike a pose inside the anteroom of the Parkhurst Hall administrative building. They had just commandeered the area. Photo: New Deal Coalition via Instagram, Inc.
A pro-Hamas group at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire which calls itself the “New Deal Coalition” (NDC) commandeered the anteroom of the Parkhurst Hall administrative building on Wednesday but limited the demonstration to business hours, as its members went home when it was shuttered at 6pm.
Before leaving the building, however, the group contributed to injuries sustained by a member of President Sian Beilock’s staff and an officer of the school’s Department of Safety and Security officer, according to The Dartmouth, the college’s official campus newspaper.
College deans Anne Hudak and Eric Ramsey have since vowed to hold the group, which included non-students, accountable.
“While Dartmouth remains committed to dialogue, we want to be absolutely clear: there cannot and will not be any tolerance for the type of escalation we saw on our campus today,” the officials said in a statement quoted by The Dartmouth.
During the unauthorized demonstration, the agitators shouted “free, free Palestine,” words shouted only recently by another anti-Israel activist who allegedly murdered two Israeli diplomats outside the Capital Jewish Museum in Washington DC.
The following day, the group at Dartmouth defended the behavior, arguing that it is a legitimate response to the college’s rejection of a proposal — inspired by the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement — to divest from armaments and aerospace manufacturers which sell to Israel and its recent announcement of a new think tank, the Davidson Institute for Global Security, which it claims is linked to the Jewish state.
“We took this escalated action — one deployed several times in Dartmouth’s history to protest against apartheid — because Dartmouth funded, US-backed Israel has been escalating its genocidal assault on Palestine,” the group wrote. “In an effort to ‘dialogue,’ a group of students, staff, and faculty, and alumni spent months drafting extensively researched 55-page divestment proposal … How did the college respond? They rejected divestment on every single criteria and, the day after, announced that they are reinvesting in colonial genocide with the launch of the Davidson Institute for Global Security.”
The statement concluded with an ambiguous threat and an evocation of the memory of the Holocaust.
“So long as you fund actively imperialistic violence, we will continue to hold you accountable,” it said. “There is only one solution! Intifada! Revolution!”
Last week, Dartmouth College’s Advisory Committee on Investor Responsibility (ACIR) unanimously rejected a proposal urging the school to adopt the BDS movement against Israel.
“By a vote of nine to zero, the [ACIR] at Dartmouth College finds that the divestment proposal submitted by Dartmouth Divest for Palestine and dated Feb. 18, 2025, does not meet criteria, laid out in the Dartmouth Board of Trustees’ Statement on Investment and Social Responsibility and in ACIR’s charge, that must be satisfied for the proposal to undergo further review,” the committee said in a report explaining its decision. “ACIR recommends not to advance the proposal.”
A copy of the document reviewed by The Algemeiner shows that the committee evaluated the BDS proposal, submitted by the Dartmouth Divest for Palestine (DDP) group, based on five criteria regarding the college’s divestment history, capacity to address controversial issues through discourse and learning, and campus unity. It concluded that DDP “partially” met one of them by demonstrating that Dartmouth has divested from a country or industry in the past to establish its moral credibility on pressing cultural and geopolitical issues but noted that its analysis of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict lacks nuance, betraying the group’s “lack of engagement with counter arguments.”
ACIR added that DDP also does not account for the sheer divisiveness of BDS — which seeks to isolate Israel from the international community as a step toward its eventual elimination — and its potential to “degrade” rather than facilitate “additional dialogue on campus.”
It continued, “The proposal includes no compelling evidence on the level of support for divestment among students, among faculty, among staff, and among alumni. Moreover, the proposal is silent on the matter of how divestment can be treated as a consensus position in the face of what is almost certainly deep opposition to it among some members of the Dartmouth community.”
NDC is one of many campus groups which staged an end of year action aimed at coercing college officials into adopting anti-Israel policies.
At Yale University, a pro-Hamas group moved to cap off the year with a hunger strike, choosing to starve themselves inside an administrative building in lieu of establishing an illegal encampment.
Yale administrators refused to meet with the students for a discussion of their demands that the university’s endowment be divested of any ties to Israel, as well as companies that do business with it, according to the Yale Daily News. On the fourth day of the demonstration, Yale student affairs dean Melanie Boyd briefly approached the students at the site of their demonstration, Sheffield-Sterling-Strathcona Hall, advising them to leave the space because “the administration does not intend to hold any additional meetings.”
The group ended the hunger strike after just ten days, citing “deteriorating health conditions.”
In New York City, pro-Hamas students clashed with police during an unauthorized demonstration at City University of New York, Brooklyn College, continuing a series of days in which law enforcement has been deployed to quell extremist disturbances.
As seen in footage captured by “FreedomNews.TV,” students rocked officers with blow after blow to obstruct their being arrested for trespassing, prompting as many as six others to rush in to help with detaining one person at a time. The melees were unlike any seen on a US college campus this semester.
Reportedly, the aim of the group was to establish a pro-Hamas encampment on the East Quad section of campus, which they called a “Liberated Zone,” and several reports said that it attempted to block the entrance to the Tanger Hillel House after being prevented from doing so. FreedomNews captured several more fights between protesters and officers which were filmed in front of the Hillel building, where Jewish students socialize and seek support from their community.
“Tanger Hillel at Brooklyn College is appalled by the anti-Israel protest and encampment that took place on May 8, 2025 and violated campus policies and feared deeply troubling antisemitic rhetoric, including chants of ‘Say it loud, say it clear, we don’t want no Zionists here,’ and banners with inverted red triangles, a symbol widely recognized as a call for violence,” Tanger Hillel told The Algemeiner in a statement following the incident. “Targeting Hillel, the Jewish student center, is not a peaceful protest. It is harassment, intimidation, and an antisemitic act of aggression.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
The post ‘Only One Solution’: Pro-Hamas Dartmouth College Group Occupies Building, Injures Staff first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iran President Accuses Israel of Assassination Attempt in Interview with Tucker Carlson
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian delivers a speech in Tehran, Iran, April 18, 2025. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
In an interview released Sunday, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian told former Fox News host Tucker Carlson that Israel attempted to assassinate him, marking a dramatic new chapter in the already volatile tensions between Iran, Israel, and the United States.
Speaking to Carlson from Tehran, Pezeshkian claimed, “They did try, yes,” when asked directly whether Israel had attempted to kill him. “They acted accordingly, but they failed.”
The interview marks the first time Pezeshkian has spoken to a Western journalist since his election earlier this year and comes just weeks after a 12-day exchange of strikes between Iran and Israel, including Israeli airstrikes deep into Iranian territory targeting military sites and nuclear-linked personnel.
The interview, posted on Carlson’s independent media platform, did not touch on Iran’s nuclear program or human rights record, but instead focused on questions about war, trust, and the future of diplomacy. When asked if Iran seeks war with the United States or Israel, Pezeshkian said that it is not “in the interest of the United States to be involved in any kind of war in my region.”
He emphasized that Iran is open to resuming nuclear talks but added that trust had been badly damaged by the Trump administration’s 2018 withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal and continued US support for Israeli military operations.
Last month, Israel initiated a series of intense airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, most notably at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan, reportedly destroying above‑ground infrastructure and eliminating dozens of scientists. Shortly after, the US entered the fray under “Operation Midnight Hammer,” deploying B‑2 stealth bombers and submarine‑launched Tomahawk missiles to strike the same three sites in a coordinated effort with Israel on June 22.
The operations came amid fears from the US and international intelligence agencies that Tehran had rapidly advanced its nuclear enrichment program, bringing it dangerously close to weapons-grade capability. Since the collapse of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, Iran had steadily increased its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, operating advanced centrifuges in defiance of international limits. As of the latest IAEA reports prior to the recent war, Iran possessed enough enriched material to produce multiple nuclear weapons had they chosen to further refine it.
Carlson, who has previously interviewed controversial figures such as Russian President Vladimir Putin and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, offered a platform that was largely non-confrontational, focusing on eliciting Pezeshkian’s views rather than challenging them. This approach drew immediate criticism from analysts and rights advocates, who accused Carlson of giving an authoritarian regime unfiltered airtime.
The interview represents a strategic media move by Iran. Pezeshkian’s decision to speak with Carlson, who retains a large conservative audience in the US despite his departure from Fox, appears to be an effort to bypass traditional diplomatic channels and communicate directly with American viewers. Iranian state media quickly broadcast subtitled clips of the interview, using Pezeshkian’s comments to frame Iran as reasonable and under threat.
US officials have not yet publicly responded to the interview or the assassination allegation. The State Department declined CNN’s request for comment. However, the timing of the interview and its substance may complicate an already fragile diplomatic landscape. With the Trump administration under pressure to manage growing instability in the Middle East, Pezeshkian’s remarks could potentially deepen distrust between the US and Tehran.
Carlson’s interview with Iran’s president has reignited criticism from some conservative commentators and political figures, who accuse him of promoting anti-Israel sentiment and aligning too closely with America’s geopolitical adversaries. Critics point to Carlson’s recent rhetoric questioning US support for Israel and his willingness to offer uncritical platforms to leaders like Vladimir Putin and now Masoud Pezeshkian. For some on the right, this represents a departure from traditional conservative foreign policy views that strongly support Israel and take a hard line on adversarial regimes. The backlash underscores growing fractures within the conservative movement over nationalism, non-interventionism, and America’s role abroad.
The post Iran President Accuses Israel of Assassination Attempt in Interview with Tucker Carlson first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
BBC Music Chief Steps Back from Duties After Glastonbury Live Stream of Rap Duo Bob Vylan Chanting ‘Death to IDF’
BBC headquarters in central London. Photo by Vuk Valcic / SOPA Images/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
The BBC’s Director of Music Lorna Clarke has reportedly stepped back from her day-to-day duties after the corporation apologized for streaming a live performance by the British punk rap duo Bob Vylan at the Glastonbury Festival, during which they lead the audience in chanting “Death to the IDF,” a reference to the Israel Defense Forces.
The BBC said on Thursday that a small number of senior staff members have been told to pull back from their daily duties covering music and live events after the BBC streamed Bob Vylan’s Glastonbury set in late June. Clarke is reportedly among that small group of senior staffers, The Times reported. According to the BBC’s website, Clarke is responsible for six national popular and classical music networks, as well as live music events, and has over 30 years of broadcasting experience.
Bob Vylan’s lead singer Pascal Robinson-Foster led the crowd in chanting, “Free, free Palestine” as well as “Death, death to the IDF,” during the duo’s Glastonbury set on June 28 at the event in Somerset, England. The performance was available to watch on BBC via a live stream on iPlayer.
Following the incident, Bob Vylan was removed from the lineup for England’s Radar Festival and France’s Kave Fest, their US visas were revoked ahead of their North America tour, and they were dropped by the United Talent Agency. Bob Vylan is also banned from opening for the US-based band Gogol Bordello in Germany later this year by the Live Music Hall venue, Rolling Stone reported.
BBC Chairman Samir Shah said in a statement on July 3 that the corporation was wrong for transmitting Bob Vylan’s anti-IDF exhortations.
“I’d like first of all to apologise to all our viewers and listeners and particularly the Jewish community for allowing the ‘artist’ Bob Vylan to express unconscionable antisemitic views live on the BBC,” he said. “This was unquestionably an error of judgment. I was very pleased to note that as soon as this came to the notice of [BBC Director-General] Tim Davie — who was on the Glastonbury site at the time visiting BBC staff — he took immediate action and instructed the team to withdraw the performance from on-demand coverage.”
“I am satisfied that the Executive is initiating a process to ensure proper accountability for those found to be responsible for the failings in this incident,” he added. “While it is important that the process is carried out fairly and correctly, it is equally important that the Executive takes decisive action. The Board fully supports the Director-General and the swift actions taken by him and his team to identify these errors and address them.”
In a separate statement, the BBC apologized for live streaming Bob Vylan’s “offensive and deplorable behavior.” The corporation insisted “there can be no place for antisemitism at, or on, the BBC” and admitted that “errors were made both in the lead-up to and during Bob Vylan’s appearance.” The BBC said it was taking action to “ensure proper accountability for those found to be responsible” for the broadcast.
The BBC also said Bob Vylan were one of seven Glastonbury acts considered “high risk” following a risk assessment process done ahead of the festival, but the duo was ultimately found suitable for live streaming “with appropriate mitigations.” The broadcaster said it would make “immediate changes to livestreaming music events” so that in the future “any music performances deemed high risk by the BBC will now not be broadcast live or streamed live.”
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned the anti-IDF chant as “appalling hate speech.” Glastonbury head Emily Eavis and organizers of the event said in a joint statement that they were “appalled” by Bob Vylan’s behaviour at Glastonbury.
“Their chants very much crossed a line and we are urgently reminding everyone involved in the production of the Festival that there is no place at Glastonbury for antisemitism, hate speech, or incitement to violence,” they said. “Glastonbury Festival was created in 1970 as a place for people to come together and rejoice in music, the arts and the best of human endeavour. As a festival, we stand against all forms of war and terrorism. We will always believe in — and actively campaign for — hope, unity, peace and love.”
Bob Vylan shared a statement on Instagram further explaining their “Death to the IDF” chant. “We are not for the death of Jews, Arabs or any other race or group of people. We are for the dismantling of a violent military machine,” they wrote. “A machine whose own soldiers were told to use ‘unnecessary lethal force’ against innocent civilians waiting for aid. A machine that has destroyed much of Gaza. We, like those in the spotlight before us, are not the story. We are a distraction from the story. And whatever sanctions we receive will be a distraction.”
Bob Vylan performed at Glastonbury on the West Holts stage ahead of Kneecap, an Irish rap group that shared a “f–k Israel, free Palestine” message on stage at the Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival in April. A member of Kneecap has also been charged for allegedly expressing support for Hezbollah, which is a US- and UK-designated terrorist organization. During their own set at the Glastonbury Festival, Kneecap expressed support for Palestine and criticized the British and American governments.
The post BBC Music Chief Steps Back from Duties After Glastonbury Live Stream of Rap Duo Bob Vylan Chanting ‘Death to IDF’ first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Hezbollah Rejects US-Backed Disarmament Proposal
Hezbollah leader Sheikh Naim Qassem delivers a speech from an unknown location, Nov. 20, 2024, in this still image from video. Photo: REUTERS TV/Al Manar TV via REUTERS.
Hezbollah has vowed to keep its weapons, rejecting a US-backed disarmament proposal amid increasing pressure from the Lebanese government and Israeli threats following new airstrikes and a cross-border incursion.
“This threat will not make us accept surrender,” Hezbollah chief Sheikh Naim Qassem said in a televised speech on Sunday, warning they will not abandon their weapons and insisting that Israel’s “aggression” must first stop.
“How can you expect us not to stand firm while the Israeli enemy continues its aggression, continues to occupy the five points, and continues to enter our territories and kill?” said Qassem, who succeeded longtime terrorist leader Hassan Nasrallah after Israel killed him last year.
Hezbollah’s response came as the Lebanese government involved the Iran-backed terror group while crafting a reply to US envoy Tom Barrack’s proposal, which called for Israel to halt attacks on Lebanese soil in exchange for the group’s disarmament.
“We will not be part of legitimizing the occupation in Lebanon and the region. We will not accept normalization [with Israel],” Qassem said in his speech.
“America’s equation asking us to choose between being killed or surrender does not concern us and we will cling to our rights,” the terrorist leader continued.
On Monday, Barrack said he was “unbelievably satisfied” with Lebanon’s response to Washington’s recent proposal on disarming Hezbollah, following meetings between American and Lebanese leaders in Beirut.
This latest proposal, presented to Lebanese officials during Barrack’s visit on June 19, calls for Hezbollah to be fully disarmed within four months in exchange for Israel halting airstrikes and withdrawing troops from the five occupied posts in southern Lebanon.
Speaking to reporters after meeting with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun on Monday, Barrack said he had received the official response but did not disclose any details about its contents.
“What the government gave us was something spectacular in a very short period of time,” Barrack said. “I’m unbelievably satisfied with the response.”
The US envoy said he believed “the Israelis do not want war with Lebanon.”
“Both countries are trying to give the same thing — the notion of a stand-down agreement, of the cessation of hostilities, and a road to peace,” Barrack continued.
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 group 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.”
The post Hezbollah Rejects US-Backed Disarmament Proposal first appeared on Algemeiner.com.