boycott

Sept. 3 (UPI) — The House of Representatives on Thursday approved a bill to bar colleges and universities from participating in boycotts of Israel or preventing students taking part in exchange programs with the country.

The Protect Economic and Academic Freedom Act, which was backed by Republicans, passed in a 237-169 vote. Thirty-three Democrats broke with the rest of their party to vote for the bill, while two Republicans voted no.

According to the bill, colleges and universities that take part in federal student aid programs would be barred from participating in boycotts of Israel. Institutions that receive federal funds for international and foreign language programs would be required to certify they do not impose restrictions on students taking part in programs in Israel.

Students from Israel taking part in programs on their campuses also would be covered.

“This legislation is about a simple principle: our colleges and universities should not discriminate against Israel, Israeli institutions or Israeli students, and federal taxpayer dollars should never support institutions that engage in such discrimination,” said House Education Committee Chair Tim Walberg, R-Mich.

The ranking Democrat on the educational committee, Rep. Bobby Scott of Virginia, said the bill possibly violated the First Amendment.

“No college or university has embraced the BDS movement anyway,” he said. “So, we should combat antisemitism wherever it occurs, but we should not do so by punishing protected speech or conflating a student’s view with university policies.”

Most of the Democrats who voted in favor of the bill are facing tough re-election races in November, or back Israel. Rep. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey, who co-sponsored the bill, called it “narrow and tailored’ and needed to fight anti-Semitism.

“No student, no professor should be shut out of research, study abroad opportunities, or academic partnerships or feel unwelcome in the classroom because of where they are from or what religion they practice,” he said in a statement.

“Yet, that’s exactly what the boycott-divest-sanction movement seeks to do – targeting one country and one religion: Israel and Judaism.”

The legislation now goes to the Senate for debate.

THE new Ali G film is facing a cinema boycott as a major UK chain “have no plans” to show the sequel.

The movie mockumentary revives Sacha Baron Cohen‘s famous character after the original movie was unveiled 24 years ago.

The brand new film, Ali G: Who Iz I?, sees Sacha play the character once more in a ‘real-life’ setting.

But in a surprise move, Picturehouse Cinemas, which has 25 cinemas across the UK, will not show the upcoming film after its release in October.

Media watchdog NewsCord demanded cinemas to refuse to screen the film due to “satire using a cover for enforcing racist stereotypes”.

The platform claimed Baron Cohen had “enforced harmful stereotypes across marginalised communities through his characters”.

back in da house

Ali G movie mocks Ed Sheeran & reveals ‘new’ Julie replacing Kellie Bright

big news

Ali G movie title & release date confirmed after Sacha Baron Cohen revives role

So far they have sent around 27, 000 emails from supporters to cinemas nationwide to stress their concerns.

In a statement, Picturehouse confirmed to Metro: “We currently do not have any plans to screen this film on its release.”

NewsCord also claimed that the film’s studio Amazon MGM had “revived a racist caricature”.

Joining Ali G in the flick will be his girlfriend, Julie, played by actress and impressionist, Morgana Robinson.

She filmed the role alongside Sacha in secret over the course of a year and replaces EastEnders star Kellie Bright in the part.

In the movie, she will be revealed to be eight months pregnant – something that the characters struggle to get their head around.

In one of the clips from the film’s preview, they can be seen at a doctor’s office with Ali G begging the doctor to simply say that Julie is “bloated” and not actually pregnant – despite her visible baby bump.

He later puts her positive pregnancy test in his mouth and pretends to use it as a vape.

Elsewhere, the trailer sees Ali G poking fun at Ed Sheeran as he remarks on what the world has ‘survived’ since the original movie’s release in 2002 and insisted things had “turned to c**p”.

Speaking in the trailer, he said: “I’ve been gone for 20 years, chilling.

“And in that time, the world went to c**p.

“There’s been Wars. Covid. And Ed Sheeran.”

He continued: “I’m going to get back on top with a brand new thing called a ‘documentary.’

“For the first time ever, this is with real people not actors. For more than a year we let the cameras follow me everywhere.

“Nothing was off limits.”

The film is expected to be released in cinemas on October 23 with the movie being distributed by Amazon MGM.

The character was first introduced by Sacha on Channel 4‘s The 11 O’Clock Show in 1998 before the character became even more widely known for the 2000 sketch comedy series, Da Ali G Show.

Dutch group Christians for Israel is taking the government to court in the Netherlands over its plans to introduce a ban on importing goods from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and Golan Heights.

The ban, which was announced in July, is due to take effect on September 22 and will run for three years. It bars importing, buying and selling goods produced in Israeli settlements, as well as intermediary services and any attempt to circumvent the rules.

But the Israel Product Centre (IPC), part of Christians for Israel (CvI), a Dutch evangelical organisation which a recent study found has donated about $300,000 to illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank, has responded by filing summary proceedings against the state, with the hearing due today.

Here’s what we know about this case.

What is the case about?

The IPC has issued summary proceedings against the Dutch state, seeking to block the July decree.

The IPC argues the measure is “one-sided” and that the window it now has to clear its existing stock – some 20,000 bottles of wine – is too short.

It is also arguing that a national ban conflicts with the European Union’s principle of free movement of goods.

A verdict is not expected for about two weeks.

How has this case come about?

EU rules have long required goods from illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank to be labelled by their origin – Palestine – rather than as “product of Israel”, but the bloc has not placed an outright ban on trading with Israeli settlements. That remains up to individual countries.

In February 2020, the Dutch advocacy group DocP urged consumers to file complaints with the Dutch food safety authority, NVWA, if they found wine and Dead Sea cosmetics had been mislabelled.

Following complaints, the IPC changed its labelling to “product uit een Israelisch dorp in Judea & Samaria [product from an Israeli village in Judea and Samaria],” which it argued accurately reflected the exact geographical and administrative reality of the origins of the products without deceiving the buyer. Judea and Samaria is the biblical name used by the Israeli government to refer to the West Bank. DocP argued this fell short of the requirement to label products correctly, and continued its campaign.

In 2021, the NVWA agreed and fined the IPC 2,100 euros (about $2,500) for mislabelling goods.

Then, in July 2024, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion that Israel’s presence in the occupied Palestinian territory is unlawful and must end “as rapidly as possible”.

This shifted the legal argument beyond mere consumer labelling, with the court saying countries should take steps to prevent trade or investment relations which help to maintain the unlawful presence of Israeli settlers in the Palestinian territories.

The lower house of the Dutch parliament acted on that in September 2025, proposing an import ban.

The national decree against importing goods from Israeli settlements was made in July this year.

Does Christians for Israel describe the West Bank as ‘Israel’?

CvI describes the West Bank as a “disputed territory” rather than accepting the international legal description of it as “occupied Palestinian territory”.

It says it believes that Israel has strong claims to sovereignty there and that Jews have a right to live there.

The vocabulary matters in a legal sense, as “disputed territory” is not the same as “annexed territory”, therefore, the legal apparatus which would make settlement trade unlawful doesn’t straightforwardly apply.

The group’s stated reasons for funding projects there, it says on its website, are rooted in the Bible; it cites Ezekiel 47:21-23: “Peace for the Jewish people and resident foreigners inheriting alongside the tribes of Israel.”

However, the ICJ’s July 2024 advisory opinion is clear that the Fourth Geneva Convention’s Article 49(6) and successive Security Council resolutions treat the territories as occupied and the settlements as unlawful.

How have other Christian organisations in the West responded to trade with settlements?

Western churches are split on the issue, with CvI sitting at one end of the spectrum.

Mainline Protestants, including the Presbyterian Church in the United States, have divested shareholdings in Caterpillar, HP and Motorola Solutions as early as 2014, and from Israeli bonds in 2024. The United Methodist Church has opposed Israeli settlements since 1996 and sold its Israeli bond holdings last August.

The World Council of Churches called for sanctions against illegal Israeli settlements in 2025, divestment and an arms embargo.

The Vatican calls settlements an obstacle to peace but has avoided divestment so far.

Christian Zionist bodies, however, including Christians United for Israel (CUFI) and the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem, send funding for settlements and fight against boycotts.

How significant is this ban?

It is significant considering that the Netherlands is one of only four EU countries currently imposing a ban on trade with illegal Israeli settlements.

Trade from illegal settlements to the EU is estimated to be worth up to $400m per year.

The Netherlands is also a big market for the illegal settlements; a recent investigation by legal advocacy group Global Echo, which analysed thousands of shipments from Israeli settlements between 2017 and 2026, shows that within the EU, the Dutch market is the largest importer of goods from illegal settlements, with about 30 percent destined for or passing through the country.

Which European countries have banned products from West Bank settlements?

Spain has banned all imports of products from illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, including the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, since September 2025. The decree also enforces an embargo on defence exports and dual-use technology to Israel, bans ships carrying military fuel for Israel from Spanish ports, and restricts advertising for services or goods linked to Israeli settlements.

Ireland’s parliament approved the text of its Israeli Settlements (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill in May and the bill was signed into law in July. It covers all goods produced in Israeli settlements, but excludes services.

Belgium’s federal government approved a draft royal decree in July introducing a specific regime for goods from Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The precise details of the new law will be determined by the government in due course.

Slovenia imposed restrictions on imports from Israeli settlements under its previous government, but the new conservative government reversed them in June 2026.

The EU as a bloc remains deadlocked over whether a ban counts as foreign policy requiring unanimity or trade policy needing only a qualified majority, with ministers not meeting again in a decision-making format until October.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar last year described the push by some European governments to implement the ICJ advisory opinion as “shameful”.

Which European countries still allow trade with West Bank settlements?

Nearly all of them.

Outside the three European Union states which still have bans in place, settlement goods can be sold legally everywhere, including in most of the EU.

At a July 2026 meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels, which addressed trade from Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories, Germany, Austria, Czechia and Hungary were opposed to an EU-wide ban.

Beyond the EU, the United Kingdom does not forbid trade with illegal Israeli settlements, although new Prime Minister Andy Burnham is reportedly considering a ban. In a recent parliamentary briefing, Amnesty International called on the UK government to implement a ban.

It said: “The argument for a UK ban on trade with settlements is clear. The UK government itself accepts it should take stronger action in response to settlement expansion and annexation. The International Court of Justice has directed states not to trade with Israel in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory; and there is precedent in UK law and policy to not trade with illegally occupied lands, ie Crimea and other illegally occupied parts of Ukraine.”

To ensure this doesn’t happen in the future, please enable Javascript and cookies in your browser.

If you have an ad-blocker enabled you may be blocked from proceeding. Please disable your ad-blocker and refresh.

AVROTROS says escalating international conflicts are undermining the event’s neutrality and fuelling divisions.

The public broadcaster in the Netherlands has announced it will not participate in next year’s Eurovision Song Contest because the event can “no longer be considered neutral” due to ongoing divisions over the war in Gaza.

“It is undeniable that international conflicts are increasingly affecting the Contest, undermining its neutral character. The Eurovision Song Contest has therefore become a platform for division,” said Taco Zimmerman, Director-General of AVROTROS, in a statement on Monday.

The widely-watched show has recently faced a series of boycotts over Israel’s participation. Organisers announced earlier this month that they would exclude any country involved in an armed conflict from hosting the competition.

“However, the recently announced changes… do not provide sufficient confidence that the independent and neutral character of the Eurovision Song Contest has been restored,” the AVROTROS statement added.

Israel finished second in the competition – the world’s largest live televised music event – in both 2025 and 2026.

Next year’s Eurovision is due to be held in Bulgaria’s Black Sea city of Burgas, after Bulgarian singer Darina Yotova, known as Dara, won this year’s contest in Vienna, Austria, with her catchy floor-filler ‘Bangaranga’. The contest on May 15 will be the first time the Balkan nation has hosted.

Since its launch in 1955, Eurovision has become the ultimate pop platform, catapulting Swedish icons ABBA to worldwide fame, while also boosting the careers of artists such as Celine Dion, Cliff Richard and Olivia Newton-John.

However, this year’s competition pulled in 131 million viewers, 35 million fewer than last year, after five countries boycotted over Israel’s participation. The Netherlands, Iceland, Spain, Ireland, and Slovenia all pulled out, with the latter three refusing to broadcast the show at all.