Feed aggregator

Sen. Bernie Sanders is demanding an immediate suspension of advanced artificial intelligence development and a permanent federal ban on artificial superintelligence, warning that the technology could enable devastating cyberattacks against America’s financial system, hospitals, electrical infrastructure and nuclear facilities.

The Vermont independent issued his warning Monday in a public confrontation with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, criticizing the technology executive’s suggestion that society may have to tolerate serious cybersecurity incidents as a consequence of making powerful AI systems widely available.

Sanders argued that Americans should not be expected to accept potentially catastrophic consequences in exchange for technological advances being pursued by some of the world’s wealthiest corporations.

“No, Mr. Altman. We won’t accept a severe AI cyberattack in exchange for ‘liberty,'” Sanders wrote on X.

“We must PAUSE advanced AI and permanently BAN artificial superintelligence before it is too late.”

The dispute began after Altman discussed the cybersecurity implications of increasingly sophisticated AI systems during an appearance last week on Politico’s “Decoded” podcast.

Altman predicted a “coming tidal wave of cybersecurity problems” as advanced AI capabilities become more accessible, particularly through open-source models that can be obtained and modified by users outside the companies that originally developed them.

He suggested that preserving broad access to the technology would involve accepting “some fairly severe cyber incidents” as part of the trade-off between technological freedom and security.

Sanders responded by questioning whether such an approach adequately considers the consequences of attacks against systems essential to everyday life.

“Should we ‘accept’ a global financial breakdown and massive economic pain if AI models hack into the international banking system?” Sanders asked.

The senator also raised concerns about cyberattacks that could disable hospitals, interrupt electricity supplies across large regions or compromise nuclear power facilities, potentially creating a disaster comparable to Chornobyl.

His criticism reflects a broader argument that AI developers should face enforceable restrictions before releasing systems capable of causing widespread damage.

Sanders accused influential technology executives of placing corporate profits and technological dominance ahead of public safety, arguing that the companies responsible for creating powerful AI systems must remain subject to government oversight.

“The creators of any AI model — open-source or not — are not above the law,” he wrote.

The confrontation follows the September 23 introduction of legislation by Sanders and Rep. Greg Casar, a Texas Democrat, that would establish some of the most far-reaching federal restrictions on artificial intelligence proposed to date.

Known as the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act, the measure would permanently prohibit the creation and deployment of artificial superintelligence while imposing a temporary halt on the development of certain advanced AI systems until federal safety requirements are established.

Artificial superintelligence generally refers to a hypothetical form of AI that would surpass human intellectual capabilities across a broad range of activities. Such systems do not currently exist in any publicly established, verified form, although major technology companies are investing heavily in research intended to develop increasingly capable models.

The legislation would establish a Cabinet-level Department of Artificial Intelligence with responsibility for overseeing advanced AI development, enforcing restrictions and implementing safety regulations.

It would also direct the federal government to pursue international agreements aimed at preventing the development of artificial superintelligence in other countries.

Under the proposal, individuals or organizations found guilty of violating certain provisions could face substantial criminal penalties, including prison sentences of up to 20 years.

The bill would also establish federal oversight of advanced AI models throughout their development, requiring regulators to examine systems for dangerous capabilities before they are released.

Among the abilities that would receive particular scrutiny are autonomous cyberattacks, resistance to shutdown commands, the development of biological or chemical weapons, and the capacity of AI systems to create increasingly powerful AI without human supervision.

The proposed federal agency would have authority to oversee the removal of dangerous capabilities and enforce restrictions against prohibited systems. Companies violating the law could face severe sanctions, while individuals responsible for certain offenses could receive lengthy prison terms.

Sanders has previously warned that allowing AI companies to determine their own safety standards creates unacceptable risks for the public.

“When you are racing towards a cliff, you don’t just ease up on the gas pedal. You hit the brakes. When the future of humanity is at stake, we cannot let a handful of Big Tech CEOs write their own rules,” Sanders said when introducing the legislation in September.

Casar has similarly argued that the federal government must act before AI systems become powerful enough to operate beyond meaningful human control.

The debate has gained urgency following reports of AI systems engaging in unauthorized cyber activity, including incidents in which advanced models demonstrated the ability to exploit computer vulnerabilities or behave in ways their developers had not intended.

Concerns about those capabilities have extended beyond Congress. Financial regulators in the United States and Europe have begun examining how increasingly autonomous AI tools could threaten banks and other financial institutions, particularly if compromised systems are used to conduct cyberattacks or disrupt essential operations.

President Donald Trump has taken a markedly different approach to the technology, making American leadership in advanced AI a major administration priority.

The administration has promoted the development of increasingly sophisticated systems and has established a federal initiative known as the Super Intelligence Force, reflecting its emphasis on expanding American technological capabilities.

Trump’s approach has placed the White House at odds with lawmakers who favor mandatory restrictions on the most powerful AI systems.

Altman, meanwhile, has argued that excessively restrictive regulations could leave the development of advanced technology concentrated in the hands of a small number of companies or governments, limiting the benefits of wider access.

Israel’s two major chareidi parties, Shas and United Torah Judaism, may decline to recommend either Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu or opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot to form the next government following the October 27 elections, according to senior sources familiar with discussions within the parties.

The possibility represents a significant departure from the longstanding political alliance between the chareidi parties and Netanyahu’s right-wing bloc, raising new questions about how Israel’s next government will be formed and whether the chareidi factions will participate in any coalition immediately after the election.

According to a report published Tuesday by The Jerusalem Post, sources within the chareidi political establishment believe that both Shas and UTJ may prefer to remain in the opposition until a satisfactory solution is reached regarding the military draft and the legal status of yeshiva bochurim.

The emerging approach would allow the parties to avoid committing themselves to either Netanyahu or Eisenkot while maintaining their ability to negotiate with whichever political camp seeks their support.

However, the discussions have not resulted in any formal decision, and the parties’ rabbinic leadership has not issued a definitive ruling instructing their representatives to refrain from recommending a candidate.

The reported shift comes amid considerable frustration within the chareidi community over the outgoing government’s failure to secure comprehensive legislation protecting yeshiva students from military conscription.

Despite years of cooperation with Netanyahu and his political allies, the chareidi parties have struggled to obtain legislation that would provide lasting legal protection for those engaged in full-time Torah study.

The problem has been compounded by concerns that even if the Knesset approves a new draft law, the High Court of Justice could subsequently invalidate it, leaving yeshiva students exposed to renewed legal uncertainty.

For that reason, sources familiar with the discussions say that passage of legislation alone might not be sufficient to persuade Shas and UTJ to enter a coalition.

Instead, the parties may insist on assurances that any arrangement governing the status of yeshiva students will survive judicial scrutiny and remain enforceable.

The emerging position is particularly significant because of the role the president plays after Israeli elections. Following the vote, President Isaac Herzog will consult representatives of the elected parties before deciding which Knesset member should receive the first opportunity to assemble a governing coalition.

Although party recommendations are not legally binding, they provide an important indication of which candidate can command parliamentary support.

If Shas and United Torah Judaism decline to recommend anyone, their decision would leave both Netanyahu and Eisenkot without the immediate backing of parties that could be important to assembling a majority.

The possibility also comes as parties seeking to replace Netanyahu are considering parliamentary strategies that could allow them to exercise influence even before a new government is established.

One proposal under discussion involves replacing Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana after the newly elected Knesset is sworn in.

Opposition parties believe that electing a new speaker could allow them to shape the parliamentary agenda and establish control over important Knesset committees, including the House Committee and the Constitution, Law and Justice Committee.

Those committees could then advance legislation on matters such as establishing a state commission of inquiry into the October 7 attacks and imposing a two-term limit on the office of prime minister.

Such a strategy would not automatically remove Netanyahu from office or guarantee that the opposition could form a government. Nevertheless, it could allow parties opposed to Netanyahu to advance legislative initiatives while he continues serving as caretaker prime minister.

According to the chareidi sources, however, neither Shas nor UTJ is currently expected to actively assist efforts to remove Ohana from the speakership.

It remains unclear whether their representatives would vote against such a move, abstain, or simply avoid participating in the vote.

The sources also suggested that if the opposition can assemble sufficient support to elect a new Knesset speaker, that parliamentary alignment could become the basis for negotiations over forming a government.

Among the possibilities being discussed is a minority government relying on outside support from the Arab Ra’am party, or a coalition that includes Ra’am directly.

At the same time, the chareidi parties are reportedly reluctant to become involved in efforts to replace Netanyahu unless their central demands regarding the draft are addressed.

Another scenario being examined would involve establishing a government without Shas and UTJ initially, then attempting to bring them into the coalition after legislation concerning yeshiva conscription has been enacted.

Yet sources within the chareidi establishment question whether such an arrangement would resolve the fundamental problem, given the possibility of renewed intervention by the High Court.

The developments follow public statements by newly appointed United Torah Judaism chairman MK Yaakov Asher, who declared Monday that his party would no longer consider itself automatically aligned with any political bloc.

In an interview with Kikar HaShabbat, Asher revealed that Rav Dov Landau had explicitly instructed the party leadership to stop identifying with the traditional political camps.

Asher said that UTJ’s participation in a future government would depend on concrete achievements rather than promises made during coalition negotiations.

He insisted that the party would not enter or support a government until legislation regulating the status of yeshiva students had actually been passed.

Asher also acknowledged mistakes made during the outgoing government’s term, particularly regarding the handling of judicial reform and the failure to secure legal protections for yeshiva students.

His remarks reflected a growing determination within Degel HaTorah to avoid repeating a situation in which the party joins a coalition based on commitments that are subsequently delayed or left unfulfilled.

The uncertainty surrounding Shas is more complicated.

Shas chairman Aryeh Deri has previously expressed strong support for Netanyahu and rejected the possibility of joining a government led by Eisenkot.

In a July interview, Deri stated, “We support Netanyahu, period,” while identifying the right-wing and religious parties as Shas’s natural political partners.

However, comments made by Rav Yitzchok Yosef, a leading spiritual authority associated with Shas, suggested that the party’s relationship with Netanyahu was not necessarily beyond reconsideration.

During a July address, Rav Yosef expressed frustration with Netanyahu’s handling of chareidi concerns and suggested that Eisenkot might prove more receptive to dialogue.

Eisenkot, for his part, has indicated that he would consider cooperation with Shas only if it accepted his principles concerning Israel’s Jewish and democratic character and the obligation of citizens to participate in military or national service.

Those conditions illustrate the substantial differences that would need to be addressed before any political understanding could emerge between Eisenkot and the chareidi parties.

The two chareidi factions nevertheless continue to coordinate closely on their shared political interests.

On Sunday, Shas and United Torah Judaism signed a surplus-vote agreement ahead of the election, allowing their parties to pool remaining votes during the allocation of Knesset seats, provided both pass the electoral threshold.

The agreement also underscored their intention to cooperate on matters affecting the chareidi community in the next Knesset, regardless of the eventual composition of the government.

UTJ candidate Moshe Rosenthal recently reinforced the party’s position in an interview with Kol Barama, saying that its participation in a future coalition would depend on legislation protecting yeshiva students that could withstand High Court review.

Rosenthal also emphasized that the final decision regarding political alliances would be made by the gedolei Yisroel following the election.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump delivered a forceful warning to Yemen’s Iranian-backed Houthi terrorists on Tuesday, accusing the group of deliberately attacking Saudi Arabia to send oil prices higher ahead of the November 3 US midterm elections and warning that he would remember their actions long after Americans cast their ballots.

In a sharply worded message posted on Truth Social, Trump suggested that the Houthis had failed to learn from the devastating American airstrikes carried out against their positions last year. He also raised the possibility that Iran was behind the renewed attacks, portraying the Houthi campaign as an effort to manipulate global energy markets and influence American politics.

“The Houthis are behaving very badly. I thought they learned their lesson a year ago when we bombed the …. out of them and, at their request, stopped,” Trump wrote.

The president expressed frustration that the terrorist organization had resumed its activities after an extended period of relative quiet, suggesting that the renewed aggression was being encouraged by Tehran.

“They’ve been silent for a long time, but now they’ve emerged again, probably at the behest of Iran, which is a Failing Nation, with No Navy, No Airforce, the World’s Worst Economy, and 301% Inflation,” he continued.

Trump specifically accused the Houthis of targeting Saudi Arabia with the intention of creating instability in the international oil market. His comments came amid renewed fighting involving Houthi forces and Saudi-backed military elements in Yemen, raising concerns about the security of Saudi territory and regional energy infrastructure.

The Houthis have repeatedly used missiles and drones to threaten neighboring countries and international shipping routes. Their ability to strike targets beyond Yemen’s borders has made the organization a persistent security concern for Saudi Arabia and other countries in the region.

The latest escalation has brought renewed attention to the vulnerability of energy infrastructure in the Persian Gulf region, where military confrontations can create uncertainty about oil production, transportation, and supply.

Trump argued that the timing of the Houthi attacks was politically motivated, accusing the group of attempting to raise fuel costs for American consumers in the final weeks before the congressional elections.

The group has returned “in a very nasty way, hitting Saudi Arabia, and purposefully trying to drive up Oil Prices, probably prior to the U.S. Elections – NOT NICE,” he declared.

The president then directed a warning at the Houthis regarding their apparent belief that the approaching elections might influence Washington’s response.

“Somebody should explain to them that I’m not running in the Elections, I’ve already won, IN A MASSIVE LANDSLIDE, but I’ll be there after the Elections, and I will never forget!” Trump wrote.

{Matzav.com}

A fierce confrontation between Israel’s Litvish chareidi leadership and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich erupted Tuesday morning, as the Hebrew Yated Ne’eman, the official newspaper of Degel HaTorah, published a blistering editorial condemning the Religious Zionism chairman over his recent remarks concerning Rav Dov Landau, Rosh Yeshiva of Slabodka and one of the leading gedolei hador.

The editorial accused Smotrich of displaying extraordinary disrespect toward gedolei Yisroel, exploiting the chareidi parties when their parliamentary support benefited him, and then turning against their rabbinic leadership for political gain. It also reinforced Degel HaTorah’s declaration that the chareidi community should no longer be considered an automatic component of Israel’s right-wing political bloc.

The extraordinary attack followed comments Smotrich made at a Channel 7 conference, where his criticism of Rav Landau provoked outrage among chareidi representatives and their supporters.

Yated Ne’eman opened its editorial with a particularly sharp reference to the Gemara’s account of someone who wished to bite a Torah scholar like a donkey.

“Who will give me a Torah scholar so that I may bite him like a donkey?” the editorial began, describing Smotrich’s remarks as the equivalent of a donkey’s hollow braying.

The newspaper accused the finance minister of having crossed a fundamental boundary by speaking against Rav Landau, whom it described as one of the foremost spiritual authorities of the generation.

It branded Smotrich the “king of ingrates,” arguing that he had readily accepted cooperation from the chareidi parties whenever their support advanced his own political interests.

The editorial maintained that Smotrich had relied on chareidi votes to advance the agenda of the Religious Zionist movement but was now attempting to win additional political support by attacking the very rabbinic leadership whose representatives had helped sustain the coalition.

“When he needed the chareidi vote, he knew exactly where to find it. Now that he is seeking the next vote, he is prepared to trample the hand that was extended toward him,” the newspaper charged.

The criticism went well beyond conventional political disagreements, portraying Smotrich’s remarks as part of a broader confrontation between the Religious Zionist political establishment and the chareidi yeshiva world.

Under a section comparing the current situation to historical campaigns against Torah institutions, the editorial argued that the hostility toward the yeshivos had reached an intolerable level.

“Making a mistake can be forgiven. Going astray is his own problem. Even ideological disagreement is part of public life. But opening one’s mouth against the gedolei hador is one step too far,” the editorial declared.

It then accused Smotrich and his political allies of waging a campaign against the yeshiva world more severe than those conducted by previous foreign rulers of Eretz Yisroel.

“Even the British Mandate government in Eretz Yisroel did not wage war against the yeshiva world the way Smotrich and his associates are doing in the name of ‘redemption.’ Not even an Arab government!” the newspaper asserted.

The editorial also questioned Smotrich’s Torah credentials and challenged his claim to represent a religiously committed political movement.

“Smotrich, even if he were to study his entire life, would not reach even the smallest fraction of what a cheder child knows, yet he dares to speak with such insolence toward gedolei Yisroel,” the newspaper wrote.

It went on to attack the ideological foundations of Religious Zionism, questioning how a movement that describes the establishment of the State of Israel as the beginning of redemption could justify policies that, in the newspaper’s view, undermine the Torah world.

“What kind of redemption is there in a Zionism that persecutes what is most precious and sacred to the Jewish people, while seeking to present itself as ‘the beginning of our redemption,’ when its actions represent the beginning of redemption’s collapse?” the editorial asked.

Beyond its denunciation of Smotrich personally, the editorial addressed the wider political implications of the confrontation, particularly Degel HaTorah’s increasingly explicit rejection of its longstanding identification with Netanyahu’s right-wing bloc.

The newspaper acknowledged that the chareidi parties had spent years cooperating with right-wing political factions, but argued that the relationship had been based on circumstances and practical considerations rather than any permanent ideological alliance.

Using the analogy of residents sharing an apartment building, the editorial suggested that Smotrich’s conduct had made continued political cooperation increasingly untenable.

“True, circumstances led us to live in a shared building, but Smotrich has now placed a warning notice on the property’s registration. Dangerous structure,” the editorial stated.

The newspaper concluded by drawing a sharp distinction between the chareidi community and both of Israel’s principal political camps, declaring that neither the right nor the left could be relied upon to defend Torah interests.

“We are neither right nor left, but the donkey’s braying explained very well why the forced but longstanding relationship has unraveled and everything is now open again,” the editorial declared.

It ended with an unequivocal assertion of political independence: “There is a right-wing bloc hostile to Torah and a left-wing bloc hostile to Torah — and we are a bloc of our own: the bloc of Torah!”

{Matzav.com}

United Torah Judaism is attracting 52% support among Israel’s chareidi voters, while Shas has strengthened its standing within the community, according to new polling figures presented by Dudi Dror of the Askria polling institute ahead of Israel’s upcoming Knesset elections.

The findings indicate that chareidi voters who had previously expressed uncertainty about their electoral choices are increasingly returning to the established chareidi parties as Election Day approaches. However, Dror cautioned that Shas’s improved performance within the chareidi community does not necessarily translate into stronger support among the broader Israeli electorate.

Speaking with Avi Mimran on Kol Chai Radio’s main news program, Dror explained that the proportion of undecided chareidi voters had previously stood at approximately 14%, but that number has begun declining as the election draws nearer.

“Apparently, the campaigns are working,” Dror observed.

According to the figures he presented, United Torah Judaism currently enjoys the backing of 52% of the overall chareidi electorate. When undecided voters are excluded, its share rises to approximately 57% to 58% among those who have settled on a party.

Shas has also registered an increase, climbing from approximately 20% to 24% support among chareidi voters. Among respondents who have already made their electoral decisions, the party receives roughly 27%.

Meanwhile, approximately 8% of chareidi voters indicate that they intend to support parties outside the traditional chareidi political framework.

Dror emphasized that the increase in support for Shas among chareidim should not be confused with an overall electoral surge for the party.

He estimated that Shas’s support within the chareidi sector accounts for approximately four Knesset seats. At the same time, the party has been losing ground among traditional and non-chareidi voters, groups that have historically contributed significantly to its electoral strength.

According to Dror, much of the movement reflected in the latest figures involves voters shifting their preferences within the same general political bloc, rather than crossing from one ideological camp to another.

A significant part of Dror’s analysis focused on younger chareidi voters, particularly those between the ages of 18 and 22 who will be participating in a Knesset election for the first time.

He warned that surveys conducted primarily online may produce a misleading picture of this population, since many young chareidi men spend their days in yeshiva and are less likely to participate in internet-based polling.

“Trying to sample an 18- to 22-year-old chareidi young man online is difficult, because he is usually in yeshiva,” Dror explained.

According to his findings, telephone interviews with young chareidi voters reveal stronger identification with the established chareidi parties than some internet surveys suggest.

Dror also addressed support for Motti Leitner, whose political movement has attracted attention among voters dissatisfied with the traditional chareidi parties. He estimated Leitner’s support at approximately 3% of the chareidi electorate, with greater backing among voters aged 25 and older.

The latest figures contrast with earlier polling conducted by Askria. In September, Dror reported an unusually high level of uncertainty among chareidi voters compared with the corresponding period before the 2022 elections, when only approximately 5% to 6% had remained undecided ten weeks before Election Day.

The new findings also come as broader national polls show difficulties for the established chareidi parties. Recent election surveys have generally placed Shas and United Torah Judaism at a combined 14 to 15 Knesset seats, compared with the 18 seats they won together in the 2022 election.

Dror cautioned against treating any individual poll as a definitive prediction of election results, emphasizing that surveys provide a picture of public opinion at a particular moment rather than a precise forecast of what will happen at the ballot box.

He explained that Askria attempts to improve the accuracy of its research by examining characteristics specific to the chareidi community, including whether male respondents are studying in kollel.

The institute also employs chareidi interviewers to conduct telephone surveys, an approach intended to reach segments of the community that might otherwise be underrepresented.

“The more knowledge you bring,” Dror explained, the better researchers can represent the population they are attempting to measure.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu personally urged President Donald Trump last week to consider launching another major military offensive against Iran before Israel’s October 27 elections, citing alarming new developments in Tehran’s nuclear program, according to a report Tuesday evening by Barak Ravid of Channel 12 News and Axios.

Trump reportedly responded by encouraging continued military preparations but stopped short of authorizing an attack, leaving open the possibility of renewed hostilities just weeks before elections in both Israel and the United States.

The revelations come amid growing concern within Israel’s defense establishment that a new confrontation with Iran could trigger massive retaliatory missile attacks, potentially forcing the postponement of Israel’s national elections. The American midterm elections are scheduled for November 3, one week after Israelis are set to vote.

According to the report, which cited two senior American administration officials, a senior Israeli official, and another individual familiar with the discussions, Netanyahu raised the possibility of resuming large-scale military operations during conversations with Trump last week.

The Israeli prime minister reportedly argued that recent Iranian nuclear activities had created new security concerns requiring serious consideration of immediate military action. The report did not publicly specify the nuclear developments Netanyahu identified or provide an independent assessment of their significance.

One senior American official said Trump did not dismiss Netanyahu’s proposal and indicated that preparations should move forward. However, the president offered no commitment regarding whether an operation would actually take place or when it might begin.

Israeli officials initially came away from the discussions believing Trump might support a new offensive. That impression subsequently weakened as American officials indicated that the president had not reached a final decision.

The uncertainty is particularly significant because Trump publicly declared last Thursday that the United States would not resume attacks against Iran before the November 3 midterm elections.

In his announcement, Trump said that despite Iran’s weakened military and economic position, Washington intended to maintain its pressure campaign while avoiding renewed strikes during the weeks preceding the American vote.

The president also pointed to continuing diplomatic contacts with Tehran, which American officials have described as productive, although major disagreements remain unresolved.

Despite Trump’s public statement, military preparations have reportedly continued. US Central Command and the IDF have been examining operational options in the event that political leaders authorize another round of fighting.

Earlier reporting indicated that the Pentagon had instructed American military commanders to complete preparations for potentially extensive strikes against Iranian targets. Those preparations reportedly included options involving Iranian nuclear facilities, energy infrastructure, and other strategic installations.

The possibility of renewed fighting has generated considerable unease among senior Israeli military officials, particularly because of the potential consequences for the upcoming Knesset elections.

IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir reportedly raised the issue directly with his American counterpart, Gen. Dan Caine, warning that a major American-Israeli operation could provoke a substantial Iranian missile response against Israel.

Such an escalation could disrupt civilian life throughout the country and interfere with the ability to conduct national elections on October 27.

According to previous reports, American military officials informed Zamir that they had received instructions to prepare for a significant attack within approximately three weeks, placing the potential operation immediately before Israel’s election.

Zamir reportedly cautioned that the resulting Iranian retaliation could make it impossible to hold the vote as scheduled.

The military discussions have also become entangled in questions surrounding the political calculations of both governments.

American officials cited in Tuesday’s report suggested that Netanyahu’s approaching election may be influencing his interest in renewed military action. One official characterized the prime minister as believing that leading Israel during wartime strengthens his political standing.

That assessment represents the official’s interpretation of Netanyahu’s political considerations, rather than an established explanation for his actions.

A separate disagreement has emerged over which leader originally proposed accelerating military operations.

According to the report, Netanyahu told senior Israeli defense officials that Trump had raised the possibility of striking Iran before the elections. American officials familiar with the conversations, however, attributed the initiative to Netanyahu.

The disagreement over the origin of the proposal follows another report over the weekend claiming that Washington had encouraged Israel to conduct a unilateral attack against Iran, potentially allowing the United States to avoid the political consequences of direct American involvement. Two American officials and one Israeli official subsequently disputed that account, saying Washington had made no such request.

Within the Trump administration, officials are also divided over whether renewed military action would advance American objectives.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and senior commanders at US Central Command are reportedly among the strongest advocates of another major offensive. Other presidential advisers favor maintaining economic sanctions and financial pressure against Tehran rather than immediately reopening large-scale hostilities.

The diplomatic situation remains unresolved. Qatari mediators are awaiting Iran’s response to the latest American proposal aimed at ending the conflict, including demands for concessions involving Tehran’s nuclear activities.

American officials have indicated that negotiations remain technically active, although there has been little indication of a breakthrough.

The report also identified a specific Israeli concern regarding Iran’s possible use of Pickaxe Mountain, an underground site, for uranium enrichment. Israeli intelligence reportedly believes Tehran is attempting to restore multiple components of its nuclear program, raising questions about the effectiveness of previous military operations.

Netanyahu’s office denied that the prime minister was pressing Trump to attack Iran before the elections, saying that he maintains regular contact with the president and senior American officials but does not disclose the contents of those conversations.

A White House official went further, disputing the report that the two leaders had discussed restarting the war and reiterating Trump’s publicly stated position against attacking Iran before the American midterms.

Meanwhile, Trump indicated Tuesday that a decision regarding Iran could be approaching. Speaking to reporters, the president described Iran as a failed country and said, “we will make a decision on Iran very soon.”

A significant political realignment is taking shape within Agudas Yisroel following a newly signed agreement bringing Vizhnitz-Merkaz into the growing alliance between Belz and Shlomei Emunim, a development that could substantially alter the balance of power among the chassidishe factions of United Torah Judaism.

The agreement was signed Monday evening by Elyakim Stark, the newly designated Belz representative on the United Torah Judaism electoral list, and Shlomo Greenberger, chairman of the political committee of Vizhnitz-Merkaz.

Following the signing, the two representatives visited the Vizhnitzer Rebbe of Vizhnitz-Merkaz to receive his bracha.

The agreement represents a notable shift in the internal politics of Agudas Yisroel, where Vizhnitz-Merkaz had previously been associated with the political camp led by Ger.

The new arrangement strengthens the Belz–Shlomei Emunim bloc, which has been working to expand its influence ahead of the next Knesset elections.

The agreement followed several months of political maneuvering and discussions concerning the future representation of Vizhnitz-Merkaz within Agudas Yisroel.

Sources familiar with the negotiations indicated that Greenberger, a businessman involved in advertising who assumed responsibility for much of the chassidus’s political activity over the past year, played a central role in developing the new relationship.

The negotiations reportedly gained momentum after disagreements emerged between Vizhnitz-Merkaz and the Ger-aligned leadership over the position of Rav Yaakov Waltzer, secretary of the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah of Agudas Yisroel.

Waltzer is affiliated with the other major Vizhnitz chassidus, based in Kiryas Vizhnitz in Bnei Brak, which has longstanding differences with Vizhnitz-Merkaz.

According to the reports, approximately two months ago representatives of Vizhnitz-Merkaz approached Ger and sought Waltzer’s removal from his position.

The proposal reportedly called for Ger to initiate the move, thereby avoiding the appearance of an internal dispute between the two Vizhnitz communities.

When the request was rejected, Vizhnitz-Merkaz began pursuing discussions with Belz and Shlomei Emunim, ultimately leading to Monday’s agreement.

The political significance extends beyond the addition of another chassidus to the Belz–Shlomei Emunim camp.

The agreement potentially brings thousands of additional voters into the alliance while also adding another Rebbe represented on the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah to the political grouping.

Sources within Belz described the agreement as part of a broader effort to expand the alliance and indicated that negotiations are already underway with additional chassidishe communities.

One source associated with the discussions said the move provides the bloc with thousands of additional votes and another Rebbe on the Moetzes, adding that efforts are now focused on bringing another community into the arrangement.

The development also carries implications for Ger, which has traditionally exercised considerable influence within Agudas Yisroel through its Central Faction.

Ger maintains a close political relationship with the other Vizhnitz chassidus, represented in United Torah Judaism by MK Yaakov Tessler.

With Vizhnitz-Merkaz now aligning itself with Belz and Shlomei Emunim, the two major Vizhnitz communities will find themselves associated with competing political blocs.

Observers of chareidi politics say the agreement reflects a continuing effort by the Belz–Shlomei Emunim alliance to consolidate its influence and challenge the longstanding political arrangements within Agudas Yisroel.

The realignment comes as the chareidi parties face significant challenges, particularly the unresolved military draft controversy and the question of how the next government will address the status of bnei yeshivos.

The agreement does not by itself determine the allocation of positions on the United Torah Judaism electoral list, but it could influence future negotiations over representation and political priorities.

The signing ceremony and subsequent visit to the Vizhnitzer Rebbe were photographed by Yehoshua Prochter, with images published Tuesday in the chareidi media.

Sources close to the Belz–Shlomei Emunim alliance say Monday’s agreement is intended to be the beginning of a broader expansion, with discussions involving other communities already underway.

{Matzav.com}

The U.S. dollar climbed toward its highest level in approximately 18 months on Monday, gaining ground against major international currencies and the Israeli shekel as investors weighed escalating tensions in the Middle East and awaited important American inflation figures expected later this week.

The dollar advanced approximately 0.37% against the shekel, reaching roughly 3.07 shekels per dollar. The increase came as global currency markets reacted to geopolitical uncertainty, fluctuations in energy prices, and changing expectations regarding the Federal Reserve’s next interest rate decision.

The U.S. Dollar Index, which tracks the American currency against a basket of six major foreign currencies, increased 0.2% to 102.43, placing it near its strongest level in a year and a half.

Financial market positioning also indicates that investors have become considerably more optimistic about the dollar’s prospects.

During the week ending October 7, positions reflecting expectations of further dollar appreciation reached approximately $36 billion, compared with just $8.4 billion three weeks earlier. Much of that increase involved positions against the euro.

Investors are now focused on Wednesday’s scheduled release of the U.S. Consumer Price Index, a closely watched inflation measure that could influence expectations for future interest rate decisions.

According to CME FedWatch data cited in the report, traders currently assign an 81% probability to the Federal Reserve leaving interest rates unchanged at its October meeting. That compares with a 51% probability one month earlier.

The shift follows last month’s Federal Reserve rate increase, described as the central bank’s first hike since 2023.

A decision to maintain current borrowing costs would indicate that policymakers are waiting for additional evidence about inflation and the broader economy before considering another adjustment.

The Middle East conflict has added another layer of uncertainty, particularly in energy markets, where renewed Houthi attacks against Saudi Arabia and strikes on two oil tankers over the weekend have heightened concerns about regional supplies.

Brent crude futures initially slipped approximately 0.5% to $104 per barrel during Monday’s trading before reversing direction. By later in the day, Brent had climbed to approximately $107.17 a barrel, reflecting renewed concerns about disruptions to oil production and transportation.

Oil prices have remained substantially elevated amid the regional fighting, with Brent trading roughly 45% above its level before the outbreak of the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran.

The energy market has also been reacting to President Trump’s announcement of an agreement between Russia and Ukraine to suspend attacks on energy infrastructure. However, uncertainty surrounding the implementation of that arrangement has limited its calming effect on oil prices.

The euro, meanwhile, continued its downward trend against the dollar, falling 0.22% to approximately $1.1176 after five consecutive weeks of losses.

Concerns about France’s government finances have contributed to pressure on the European currency, with investors increasingly uneasy about the country’s debt burden and the political challenges surrounding efforts to reduce its budget deficit.

The yield difference between French and German 10-year government bonds stood at approximately 140 basis points, reflecting the additional compensation investors are demanding to hold French debt.

Elsewhere in currency trading, the dollar rose to approximately 158.61 Japanese yen, while the British pound remained relatively steady at around $1.323.

India’s rupee strengthened approximately 1.1% to 95.7 per dollar after the country’s central bank introduced measures designed to ease pressure on the currency, including redirecting certain dollar purchases by oil companies away from the regular foreign exchange market.

In Israel, the Bank of Israel’s official representative exchange rate for Monday was set at 3.078 shekels per dollar, representing an increase of approximately 0.75% from the previous published rate. The euro’s representative rate stood at 3.4422 shekels.

The next major test for currency markets will come Wednesday with the release of U.S. inflation figures. Economists are expecting consumer prices to show continued pressure from rising energy costs, a development that could influence whether the Federal Reserve maintains its current interest rate or considers additional increases in the months ahead.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli security forces have thwarted a planned ISIS-inspired terrorist attack targeting IDF soldiers in Yerushalayim’s Old City, arresting an 18-year-old Israeli Arab who allegedly pledged allegiance to the Islamic State terrorist organization and spent the past year preparing to carry out an attack.

The suspect, identified as Mustafa Jabrin, a resident of Umm al-Fahm in northern Israel, was arrested following a joint investigation by the Shin Bet security agency and the Israel Police’s Coastal District Central Unit.

Details of the investigation were cleared for publication Tuesday, October 13, after authorities completed their investigation and submitted a prosecutor’s declaration ahead of an expected indictment.

According to the Shin Bet and police, investigators uncovered evidence that Jabrin had pledged allegiance to ISIS and was actively planning to attack Israeli soldiers stationed in or around the Old City.

The investigation, conducted over the past month, focused on suspicions of serious national security offenses, membership in a terrorist organization and preparations to commit an act of terrorism.

Authorities said the suspect’s involvement with ISIS and his alleged plans to attack Israeli soldiers dated back approximately one year.

Following his arrest, detectives searched his home in Umm al-Fahm, where they confiscated evidence and digital materials that investigators say reinforce suspicions of his support for the terrorist organization and his involvement in planning the attack.

Security officials have not publicly disclosed the precise method of attack Jabrin allegedly intended to use, whether he had obtained weapons or explosives, or whether a specific date had been selected.

Investigators have also not indicated whether other individuals were involved in the alleged plot.

The investigation has now reached the prosecution stage, with authorities announcing Tuesday that sufficient evidence had been gathered to submit a prosecutor’s declaration, a procedural step that generally precedes the filing of criminal charges.

The suspect is expected to face charges relating to membership in a terrorist organization and planning a terrorist attack.

The case highlights continuing concerns among Israeli security officials about the influence of ISIS propaganda on individuals inside Israel, including Israeli citizens who become radicalized and allegedly seek to carry out attacks against soldiers and civilians.

In August, Israeli authorities announced the arrests of two young men from northern Israel suspected of planning ISIS-inspired attacks against security forces, including a proposed attack targeting officers and Jewish soldiers on Har Habayis.

Other ISIS-related investigations have involved alleged plots against military installations and civilian locations.

The latest investigation involved close cooperation between the Shin Bet and the police, with authorities saying their joint efforts enabled them to identify the suspect and prevent the alleged attack before it could be carried out.

The Shin Bet and Israel Police said they would continue working together to identify terrorist threats, disrupt planned attacks and bring suspects involved in terrorism to justice.

Kimberly Guilfoyle has resigned as U.S. ambassador to Greece after the White House requested her departure following allegations that she solicited money from a political donor to cover personal expenses, including a $100,000 American Express bill.

The resignation, announced Tuesday, October 13, follows a Wall Street Journal investigation that reportedly uncovered text messages in which Guilfoyle sought financial assistance from a donor before receiving Senate confirmation for the diplomatic position.

Guilfoyle, who was previously engaged to Donald Trump Jr. and was once married to California Governor Gavin Newsom, denied the allegations while making clear that she remains loyal to President Donald Trump and his administration.

In a statement published on X, Guilfoyle expressed appreciation for the opportunity to serve and emphasized that her departure would not alter her political allegiances.

“My gratitude and respect for President Trump and Secretary Rubio remain unwavering. I am proud of what we accomplished together, and I will always be a loyal supporter of President Trump and his mission to Make America Great Again,” Guilfoyle wrote.

“While my time as Ambassador may be coming to an end, my commitment to President Trump, the America First movement, and the country I love will never end.”

Her announcement came several hours after newly appointed White House press secretary Katie Zacharia publicly confirmed that the administration had asked Guilfoyle to relinquish her position.

The controversy erupted following reports that Guilfoyle had contacted a Trump donor seeking $100,000 to settle an American Express account while awaiting confirmation as ambassador.

The disclosures raised questions about whether Guilfoyle had improperly solicited personal financial assistance from individuals with political connections while preparing to assume a senior diplomatic appointment.

The allegations have also prompted scrutiny of her relationships with donors and whether any requests for money were connected to her anticipated role representing the United States overseas.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio was reportedly displeased by the controversy, which placed additional attention on the State Department and the administration’s handling of the matter.

Despite the White House’s decision to seek her resignation, Guilfoyle insisted that the accusations against her were untrue and pledged to challenge them.

“I also want to address the recent allegations against me,” she wrote.

“These allegations are false, and I intend to vigorously defend my name, my reputation, and my integrity. I have dedicated my professional life to fighting for justice, standing up for what is right, and defending the values that make America exceptional. I will not allow false accusations to define my decades of public service.”

The allegations involve Eric Deters, a businessman and Trump supporter who claims Guilfoyle sought the payment in July 2025, shortly before her Senate confirmation hearing.

Deters has alleged that Guilfoyle offered to help him obtain access to senior administration officials in exchange for financial assistance. Guilfoyle’s attorneys have disputed his account, arguing that he owed her money for previously performed speaking and consulting services.

The Wall Street Journal also reported allegations concerning Guilfoyle’s conduct while serving in Athens, including her relationships with Greek business interests, the acceptance of hospitality and other benefits, and the use of her diplomatic position to advance private commercial interests.

Her legal representatives have maintained that she complied with applicable State Department ethics and gift-reporting requirements.

The controversy intensified Monday when Trump was questioned about whether he intended to remove Guilfoyle from her diplomatic assignment.

“Well, we’re looking at it. Yeah, we’re not happy,” the president told reporters.

By Tuesday morning, the administration had reached its decision, with Zacharia confirming the request for Guilfoyle’s resignation during her first White House press briefing.

The White House nevertheless offered a positive assessment of her service, with Zacharia describing Guilfoyle as a valuable member of the administration and extending good wishes for her future.

The State Department’s Office of Inspector General has reportedly opened an examination of the allegations, which could continue independently of Guilfoyle’s departure from her ambassadorial position.

Guilfoyle, a former prosecutor and Fox News personality, was nominated by Trump in December 2024 and subsequently confirmed by the Senate. Her appointment followed the end of her engagement to Donald Trump Jr.

Photos: A. Eisenbach

Rabbanim and Dirshu representatives from around the world gather in the city of the Vilna Gaon at the close of a tefillah journey through Belarus and Lithuania.

Late last week, Dirshu held its 31st international convention in Vilna, bringing to a close a journey of tefillah and chizuk through Belarus and Lithuania. Over the course of the trip, the delegation visited the kevarim of the Vilna Gaon, the Chofetz Chaim, Rav Chaim of Volozhin and Rav Boruch Ber Leibowitz. The journey concluded with the convention in Vilna and a siyum on Maseches Yoma as part of Dirshu’s Amud HaYomi program.

The delegation arrived at the convention hall directly from the Vilna cemetery, where they davened at the kevarim of the Vilna Gaon, Rav Chaim Ozer Grodzinski and Rav Yitzchak Rabinowitz of Ponevezh, saying Tehillim for the needs of individuals and of Klal Yisrael.

The convention was attended by rabbanim and roshei yeshiva from Eretz Yisrael, America and Europe, together with members of Dirshu’s leadership and the organization’s representatives from communities around the world.

Rav Nissan Kaplan opened the program, speaking about the impact Dirshu has had across the Torah world. He then introduced a young bochur, the son of one of Dirshu’s representatives in France, who had been inspired at the previous convention to join the Amud HaYomi and had now completed Maseches Yoma.

The keynote address was delivered by Rav Eliezer Yehuda Finkel, Rosh Yeshivas Mir, who spoke about what sets Dirshu apart: its ability to give avreichim and lomdim aspirations in Torah that they did not have before.

Dirshu’s president, Rav Dovid Hofstedter, was honored with making the siyum. In his remarks, he tied together the opening and closing of Maseches Yoma, and noted that when the Satan sees Klal Yisrael succeeding and rising higher, he gains strength and seeks to interfere, and our obligation is to strengthen ourselves and overcome him. Following the siyum, the entire delegation rose for an extended, joyous dance l’kavod haTorah, with the rabbanim dancing in the center of the hall.

The convention closed with an address by Rav Yehuda Toledano, head of the Chazon Baruch institutions in France, who encouraged those present to strive for growth in Torah and ruchniyus and to be mekadesh shem Shamayim.

At the conclusion of the convention, the delegation returned to the kever of Rav Boruch Ber Leibowitz in Vilna for tefillah before heading to the airport. Their flight landed in Eretz Yisrael on Friday morning.

A 32-year-old Palestinian man with a reported history of involvement in security-related incidents was arrested in Bnei Brak after security personnel spotted him photographing and recording the underground Aharonovitch light rail station, raising suspicions that he may have been gathering intelligence for a possible terrorist attack.

The suspect, a resident of Yehuda and Shomron who was allegedly in Israel illegally, initially attempted to conceal his identity by posing as an Israeli citizen from the Arab city of Tayibe. Police subsequently determined his actual identity and discovered that he had previously been linked to security incidents, including suspected involvement in attacks against Israeli targets.

The incident occurred Monday morning when security guards monitoring the underground light rail station noticed a man moving around the facility and using his cellphone to record various areas of the station.

His conduct appeared inconsistent with that of an ordinary passenger, prompting the guards to become suspicious and summon police.

Officers from the Tel Aviv District Police’s light rail unit arrived at the scene and began questioning the individual about his presence at the station and the purpose of his recordings.

During the initial questioning, the man allegedly provided an Israeli identification number and claimed to be a resident of Tayibe, apparently hoping to convince officers that he was legally present in the country.

However, a subsequent examination of his identifying information revealed that he was actually a Palestinian resident of Yehuda and Shomron who lacked authorization to enter or remain in Israel.

Police also determined that the suspect had allegedly supplied false personal details in an attempt to avoid being taken into custody.

Further checks of his background reportedly uncovered an additional concern: authorities found that he had previously been involved in security-related incidents and was suspected of having participated in terrorist attacks directed against Israeli targets.

The discovery intensified suspicions surrounding his decision to photograph the underground transportation facility, although investigators have not yet publicly established whether the recordings were intended for terrorist reconnaissance.

The man was arrested at the scene and transferred to the Bnei Brak police station for further questioning.

Investigators are seeking to determine why he was documenting the underground station, whether he was acting on instructions from another individual or organization, and what he intended to do with the footage.

Police are also examining whether the recordings were connected to preparations for a possible attack or had another purpose.

The suspect is scheduled to appear Tuesday morning before the Tel Aviv Magistrate’s Court, where police will request an extension of his detention to allow the investigation to continue.

The Aharonovitch station is part of the Tel Aviv metropolitan area’s Red Line light rail network and is situated beneath Jabotinsky Road in Bnei Brak. The station serves passengers traveling between the Bnei Brak area and destinations including Petach Tikvah, Ramat Gan, Tel Aviv, and Bat Yam.

The underground facility also forms part of the region’s network of transportation stations designated for use as protected spaces during emergencies, adding to its importance as a public infrastructure site.

Authorities have not disclosed whether additional suspects are being sought or whether any specific terrorist organization is suspected of involvement.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s right-wing bloc has lost ground in a new Israeli election poll, slipping to a narrow 61-seat majority in the 120-member Knesset after previously reaching 64 seats. At the same time, a competing survey presents a dramatically different political picture, placing former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot’s party ahead of Likud as Israel’s largest political faction.

The contrasting results, released by Channels 12 and 14, underscore the uncertainty surrounding Israel’s political landscape, with the two surveys differing sharply over the relative strength of Netanyahu and his principal challengers.

According to the Channel 14 poll conducted on October 12, Likud remains the country’s largest party with 29 seats, although that represents a loss of two mandates compared with the network’s previous survey. Eisenkot’s Yashar! party follows with 20 seats, having dropped three seats, while former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s Beyachad party falls by one seat to seven.

The results represent a setback for Netanyahu’s political alliance, which had enjoyed stronger numbers in earlier Channel 14 polling. The right-wing bloc now stands at 61 seats, down two from the previous survey and three below the 64-seat level recorded in earlier measurements.

The same poll gives the left-wing and opposition bloc 46 seats, while Arab parties collectively receive 13 seats.

Among the parties traditionally aligned with Netanyahu, Shas holds steady at 10 seats, while United Torah Judaism rises to eight. Otzma Yehudit, led by Itamar Ben-Gvir, receives seven seats, as does Religious Zionism.

The Zehut party also reaches seven seats, gaining one mandate compared with the previous poll.

Elsewhere in the Channel 14 results, the Democrats, headed by Yair Golan, climb by one seat to 10, while the Joint List strengthens to eight.

Avigdor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu receives five seats, as does Ra’am.

The Reservists and Economic Party secures four seats, crossing the electoral threshold for the first time in the latest series of Channel 14 surveys.

Several smaller parties remain below the minimum vote share required to enter the Knesset. Amcha Yisrael receives 2.9%, Noam LeYisrael registers 0.9%, and both Hatzibur Hachareidi and Blue and White receive 0.6%. The Achi–Returning to Our Roots party trails with 0.1%.

While Channel 14 continues to show Likud firmly ahead of its competitors, Channel 12’s findings offer a substantially different assessment.

In that survey, Eisenkot’s Yashar! party emerges as the largest faction with 23 seats, ahead of Netanyahu’s Likud, which receives just 20.

Bennett’s Beyachad party takes third place with 13 seats, putting him considerably ahead of his standing in the Channel 14 poll.

Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu and Golan’s Democrats each receive nine seats.

The Joint List, Shas, and Otzma Yehudit are projected to win eight seats apiece, while United Torah Judaism receives seven and Religious Zionism six.

Ra’am is allocated five seats, and the Reservists and Economic Party receives four, enough to enter the Knesset.

The Channel 12 survey also identifies several parties that would fail to clear the electoral threshold. Amcha Yisrael receives 1.8%, Blue and White gets 0.9%, and Noam LeYisrael stands at 0.5%.

The surveys also reveal sharply different assessments of Netanyahu’s personal standing with voters.

In Channel 14’s preferred-prime-minister question, Netanyahu gains one percentage point to reach 53%, while Eisenkot falls five points to 29%. Bennett receives 11%, and Lieberman rises to 7%.

When respondents are asked to choose directly between Netanyahu and Eisenkot, the prime minister maintains a narrower advantage, leading 52% to 48%.

Channel 12, however, reports a different trend in its leadership comparisons, with Eisenkot widening his advantage over Netanyahu in a direct matchup and Bennett also polling ahead of the prime minister on suitability to lead the government.

The divergence extends beyond the two television networks. An aggregation of eight recent Israeli election polls places Netanyahu’s bloc at an average of approximately 54 seats, with individual surveys ranging from 49 to 61. Only one of those eight polls gives the Netanyahu bloc the 61 seats necessary for a Knesset majority.

{Matzav.com}

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has reportedly rejected an Israeli proposal for military cooperation against the Houthi rebels in Yemen, thwarting an effort by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to establish a joint front against the Iranian-backed terrorist group and use the partnership as a stepping stone toward diplomatic normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia.

According to a diplomatic source cited by Haaretz, Netanyahu has been seeking to advance Israeli military involvement in the conflict through American mediation, hoping that cooperation against a shared regional threat could create an opening for a broader agreement with Riyadh.

The Saudi crown prince, however, reportedly ruled out the initiative, making clear that overt military coordination with Israel would be politically unacceptable within the kingdom. The source indicated that bin Salman was particularly concerned about the negative reaction such cooperation would provoke among the Saudi public.

The reported rejection comes amid a sharp escalation in Houthi attacks against Saudi Arabia, including deadly missile strikes targeting the kingdom’s capital and its international airport.

In recent days, the Houthis have intensified their operations against strategic Saudi facilities, repeatedly striking King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh.

A particularly devastating ballistic missile attack on Saturday reportedly killed 12 people and wounded 309 others. Another strike on Monday claimed one additional life and left 11 people injured.

The latest violence follows developments in Yemen in early September, when Houthi forces reportedly captured the strategically important city of Mokha and gained control of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, a critical maritime passage connecting the Red Sea to the Gulf of Aden.

Yemeni government forces subsequently pushed the rebels back with the assistance of Saudi airstrikes, according to the report.

Following the deadly attack at Riyadh’s airport, Netanyahu issued an unusually public message of sympathy to Saudi Arabia, a country with which Israel does not maintain formal diplomatic relations.

“I strongly condemn the horrific terrorist attack at the airport in Riyadh,” Netanyahu wrote on X.

The prime minister also expressed hope for closer regional cooperation, declaring that “Israel looks forward to a strong Middle East — standing united against threats and building a future of security and cooperation.”

The public statement appeared consistent with Netanyahu’s broader effort to emphasize the security interests shared by Israel and Saudi Arabia, particularly their opposition to Iranian-backed armed groups operating throughout the region.

President Donald Trump has supported efforts to bring Saudi Arabia into the Abraham Accords, the diplomatic framework that established formal relations between Israel and several Arab countries.

The initiative also received backing from the late Senator Lindsey Graham, who had advocated closer ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia during the final weeks of his life.

The latest Houthi attacks have also caused widespread disruption to international aviation. Saudi authorities have extended the closure of King Khalid International Airport until October 17, forcing airlines to cancel or divert flights and leaving thousands of passengers facing travel disruptions.

The deadliest strike killed Saudi citizens and foreign nationals, including an American, while hundreds of injured passengers and airport personnel required medical treatment. Saudi officials have launched an investigation into how the kingdom’s air defense systems failed to prevent the attack.

The Saudi-led coalition has promised a forceful response to the Houthis, while President Trump has indicated that Washington is considering joining Saudi military operations against the terrorist group. No decision on direct American participation has been publicly announced.

The fighting has also renewed concern over the security of the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, one of the world’s most strategically important shipping passages. Houthi operations around the waterway have threatened commercial shipping and complicated efforts by Saudi-backed Yemeni forces to regain control of territory along the Red Sea coast.

Despite the growing military threat, Riyadh has continued to insist that any formal diplomatic breakthrough with Israel must be tied to meaningful progress toward establishing a Palestinian state.

That longstanding Saudi condition remains a major obstacle to Netanyahu’s hopes of expanding the Abraham Accords, even as Israel and Saudi Arabia confront overlapping security threats from Iran and its regional proxies.

For now, the Saudi crown prince’s reported refusal leaves Netanyahu’s proposed military partnership without Riyadh’s approval, while the kingdom continues its campaign against the Houthis without openly coordinating with Israel.

A federal investigation involving Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) has reportedly been given the unusual nickname “World War 11,” an apparent jab at the Minnesota congresswoman over a widely circulated verbal mistake in which she referred to World War II as “World War Eleven.”

The reported name emerged Monday amid news that federal agents had searched Omar’s Washington, D.C., residence as part of an investigation whose precise scope has not been publicly disclosed. Agents from Homeland Security Investigations, a division of the Department of Homeland Security, reportedly conducted the search under the authority of a federal warrant.

“Today in the Washington, DC, area, Homeland Security Investigations executed a judicially authorized search warrant secured by the Department of Justice,” a Department of Justice (DOJ) official told Fox News Digital. “This enforcement action is part of an ongoing federal investigation.”

According to the Washington Post, investigators have been referring to the inquiry as “World War 11,” recalling a January 2025 press conference at which Omar criticized President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement policies and drew comparisons to the federal government’s detention of Japanese Americans during World War II.

During those remarks, Omar appeared to misread the Roman numerals II as the number eleven, producing a mistake that quickly circulated online and became a source of ridicule among her political critics.

The episode subsequently attracted attention from Trump himself. At a White House Correspondents’ Association dinner in July, the president reportedly revived the controversy while making a joke about Omar’s personal history, referring to her brother as “husband #1.”

The remark alluded to longstanding allegations, repeatedly raised by Omar’s political opponents, that she had entered into a marriage with a relative as part of an immigration-related scheme. Omar has denied allegations of wrongdoing, and the claims have not been established in court.

Questions about Omar’s immigration and marital history have circulated for years, with conservative legal activists pressing congressional authorities to investigate.

In July 2019, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton publicly urged the House Ethics Committee to examine allegations concerning Omar’s personal history and financial dealings.

Fitton’s complaint raised accusations involving immigration and marriage fraud, false statements under oath, federal and state tax violations, and alleged irregularities involving student loans.

In describing the allegations, Fitton wrote:

“Documented-based reporting by Steinberg, et al. has developed the following information: Rep. Ilhan Abdullahi Omar, a citizen of the United States, married her biological brother, Ahmed Nur Said Elmi, a citizen of the United Kingdom, in 2009, presumably as part of an immigration fraud scheme,” Fitton wrote.

Those assertions were allegations advanced by Judicial Watch, rather than judicial findings. The publicly reported details of Monday’s search do not establish whether investigators are examining any of the same accusations.

Omar, meanwhile, responded to the federal operation by charging that the Trump administration was pursuing her for political reasons.

“I’m ok. Make no mistake: this is an attempt to target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement,” Omar said. “For ten years, Trump has targeted me with baseless lies and smear campaigns. This is just the latest escalation in his campaign of political intimidation. I will not be silenced.”

The federal action comes amid a separate history of scrutiny involving Omar’s finances. According to reporting published earlier this year, the Justice Department began examining financial questions concerning the congresswoman during President Joe Biden’s administration, following public attention to the reported multimillion-dollar valuation of assets associated with her household.

The existence of that earlier financial inquiry does not establish that it is connected to the immigration-related investigation behind Monday’s search.

More recent reporting indicates that investigators are examining immigration documents completed by Omar’s late father when the family entered the United States from Somalia. The congresswoman arrived in America as a child and became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 2000.

Border czar Tom Homan has said the investigation predates Monday’s search, while Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin previously acknowledged federal scrutiny of possible immigration irregularities. Authorities have not announced criminal charges against Omar.

The search has also provoked objections from congressional Democrats because it occurred approximately three weeks before the November 3 midterm elections, when Omar is seeking another term representing Minnesota’s heavily Democratic Fifth Congressional District.

President Trump, asked about the operation, said the decision belonged to federal law enforcement authorities and denied personally directing the search.

{Matzav.com}

Kamala Harris is reportedly taking significant steps toward another presidential campaign in 2028, meeting with wealthy Democratic contributors, recruiting political advisers, and making appearances in key electoral battlegrounds, even as some of her previous financial supporters express serious doubts about her chances of winning.

The former vice president, who lost the 2024 presidential election to President Donald Trump, has privately maintained that she has not reached a final decision about seeking the Democratic nomination again. Nevertheless, her recent political activities suggest that she is positioning herself to enter the race if she ultimately chooses to do so.

According to a Wall Street Journal report based on conversations with individuals familiar with Harris’s discussions, the former Democratic nominee has been maintaining relationships with influential donors and assembling a political operation capable of supporting another national campaign.

Harris has also been careful to link any decision about her own political future to the outcome of the November 2026 midterm elections, arguing that Democrats must first concentrate on the immediate battle for control of Congress.

During an appearance at an NAACP gathering in Michigan last month, she addressed speculation about another presidential run while emphasizing the importance of the upcoming elections.

“I have not decided if I’m going to run again,” Harris said, drawing an extended standing ovation from the audience. “I do sincerely believe ‘28 won’t matter if we don’t get through ‘26.”

Her public activities have included appearances at approximately six private fundraising events in California intended to support Democratic candidates ahead of the midterms.

Harris has also participated in a Democratic National Committee voter-mobilization effort, speaking to more than 2,000 volunteers and encouraging them to canvass neighborhoods across roughly a dozen states.

At the same time, she has been putting together a circle of experienced political aides. Among those working with her are chief of staff Candace Bond, who previously served as U.S. ambassador to Trinidad and Tobago, and communications director Eduardo Negrón.

Financial disclosures also indicate that Harris has continued to maintain a substantial fundraising network since her defeat in 2024.

Federal Election Commission records show that the Harris Victory Fund collected more than $10.3 million during the first nine months of 2025. Approximately $8.5 million of that amount came from donations of less than $200, indicating continued financial participation by smaller contributors.

Despite those signs of political activity, Harris faces skepticism from individuals who previously supported her presidential ambitions.

Some Democratic donors have reportedly told her directly that another attempt to capture the White House would face formidable obstacles, particularly given her defeat in the last election.

Reservations have also emerged within her immediate family. Her husband, Doug Emhoff, has privately expressed a preference that she not undertake another presidential campaign, according to the Wall Street Journal.

People familiar with Emhoff’s thinking nevertheless believe he would support Harris if she ultimately decided to seek the nomination.

The reluctance extends to some of the major Democratic contributors who helped finance her 2024 campaign.

In May, the Los Angeles Times contacted more than two dozen prominent donors to the largest super PAC supporting Harris during the previous presidential election. Many had contributed at least $1 million, but the newspaper found limited enthusiasm for another Harris candidacy.

One major contributor was particularly explicit about the prospect of supporting her again.

“I think it is too early to pick a favorite in the 2028 race, but Kamala Harris will not be my candidate,” the donor said.

Harris nonetheless remains a prominent figure in Democratic presidential speculation. She has led numerous hypothetical surveys of the party’s potential 2028 primary field and continues to enjoy substantial backing among Black Democratic voters.

Another frequently mentioned contender, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, has suggested that Harris’s decision could influence his own plans.

During a September interview with CNN, Newsom indicated that he would not enter the presidential contest if Harris decided to run, arguing that a primary featuring two major candidates from California would be a “gift from God for everybody else.”

Newsom’s remarks highlighted the potential complications facing Democrats as several nationally recognized figures consider competing for the nomination.

Harris’s possible return to presidential politics would follow an unusual 2024 election cycle in which she became the Democratic nominee after President Joe Biden withdrew from the race, without having to compete in a traditional open presidential primary.

She subsequently lost both the national popular vote and the Electoral College to Trump, a defeat that has fueled debate within Democratic circles about whether she should receive another opportunity to lead the party’s presidential ticket.

Harris first publicly raised the possibility of another campaign earlier this year. Speaking at the Rev. Al Sharpton’s National Action Network convention in April, she said she “might” seek the presidency again.

Additional reporting indicates that Harris’s challenge extends beyond donor skepticism. Some Democratic strategists and former supporters believe the party would be better served by a new generation of candidates, while others warn that pushing Harris aside could alienate Black women, a particularly important Democratic voting constituency.

The former vice president has also remained politically visible through appearances promoting her memoir, 107 Days, which recounts the compressed 2024 campaign that began after Biden abandoned his reelection effort. Her decision not to pursue the California governorship in 2026 has further encouraged speculation that she is preserving the option of another national campaign.

Meanwhile, other potential Democratic contenders, including Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, are attracting attention as party officials and financial backers begin looking toward the next presidential election.

{Matzav.com}

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has launched a sharp attack on rival autonomous vehicle company Waymo, accusing its driverless taxis of repeatedly running over pets while claiming that Tesla has developed technology capable of detecting even difficult-to-see animals on the road.

Speaking during a Tesla Owners of Silicon Valley livestream on Saturday, Musk discussed the company’s preparations to introduce robotaxi services in additional American cities and highlighted what he described as important safety improvements to Tesla’s autonomous driving technology.

“Maybe what a lot of people don’t know is that Waymos are like pet destroyers,” Musk said. “Maybe Waymo has made some improvements on that front, but they do run over a lot of pets, and we don’t want to run over the pets.”

Musk said one particularly challenging situation for autonomous vehicles involves spotting small animals whose coloring closely resembles the road surface. He cited the example of gray kittens on gray pavement, especially after dark or in conditions where visibility is poor.

“So that we actually did solve that, by the way,” he said, explaining that Tesla’s approach involves developing a software improvement, evaluating its performance, and subsequently deploying it to vehicles.

The Tesla chief did not disclose when the animal-detection improvement would become available, nor did he release testing results establishing how effectively the system identifies pets or prevents collisions.

Musk’s criticism comes nearly a year after a widely publicized incident in San Francisco in which a Waymo driverless taxi struck and killed a neighborhood cat named KitKat.

The animal, a familiar presence at Randa’s Market, was killed in October 2025, prompting anger among local residents and renewed scrutiny of the ability of autonomous vehicles to recognize and respond to animals near moving traffic.

The market’s owner said the cat had been struck by a Waymo vehicle. Waymo subsequently explained that the animal had moved beneath the vehicle as it began driving away after stopping to collect passengers.

The company expressed condolences to the cat’s owner and members of the neighborhood, and announced plans to make a charitable contribution to an animal welfare organization in KitKat’s memory.

The incident became a prominent example in the broader debate over the safety of driverless vehicles, particularly their ability to react to unpredictable movements by animals, pedestrians, and other road users.

Federal crash records indicate that both Waymo and Tesla have experienced collisions involving animals during autonomous vehicle operations.

According to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration data cited in published reporting, Waymo disclosed at least nine animal-related crashes between July 2025 and July 2026. Six of those incidents were categorized by the company as involving domestic animals.

Tesla also reported an animal collision during the same period involving a robotaxi operating with human supervision.

However, the reported figures do not establish which company’s technology is safer around animals. Waymo operates a substantially larger autonomous taxi fleet, while Tesla’s robotaxi operations during the period were more limited and concentrated primarily in Austin, Texas.

Federal regulators have also warned that variations in reporting practices, operating environments, fleet sizes, and vehicle deployment make direct comparisons between autonomous vehicle companies difficult.

The differing scale of the two companies’ operations is particularly relevant because a larger fleet traveling more miles would generally have more opportunities for collisions, even if its rate of accidents per mile were lower.

Musk’s comments therefore represent a criticism of Waymo’s performance rather than independently verified evidence that Tesla’s vehicles are better at avoiding animals.

The exchange comes as competition intensifies between the two companies for a leading position in the emerging robotaxi market.

Waymo, which is owned by Google’s parent company Alphabet, has expanded its commercial driverless taxi operations into multiple American cities. Tesla, meanwhile, is pursuing a broader rollout of its own autonomous transportation service while continuing to refine the technology and operating procedures required for expansion.

During Saturday’s discussion, Musk said Tesla was taking precautions to identify intersections and roadway configurations that could pose unusual risks before introducing robotaxis into new markets.

“Before we go to a new city, we want to make sure that there’s not some intersection that’s problematic or risky,” he said. “We want to be particularly careful with railroad crossings.”

Musk explained that certain intersections can be confusing even for experienced human motorists, particularly when they are unfamiliar with local traffic patterns or encounter unusual road designs.

Tesla’s strategy, he indicated, is to identify those potentially troublesome locations in advance and ensure that its autonomous vehicles can handle them safely. Where necessary, the company may initially direct robotaxis away from particular intersections until it is satisfied with their performance.

The safety debate has taken on added significance as Tesla faces fresh federal scrutiny of its own robotaxi operations. On Monday, reports emerged that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration was reviewing allegations that Tesla autonomous vehicles had exceeded speed limits in active school zones. The preliminary review concerns approximately 1,000 vehicles and has not established that a safety defect exists.

Waymo has also faced regulatory investigations and criticism over its vehicles’ behavior around school buses, construction areas, and other challenging road conditions.

{Matzav.com}

Buying Jewish & Pas Palter

In the fourth installment of the Let’s Talk Kashrus Q&A series featuring Rav Shmuel Fuerst, Dayan of Agudas Yisroel of Illinois, R’ Yitzchok Hisiger presents a new set of practical shailos about supporting Jewish-owned businesses. How far should a person go to patronize a Yid when a non-Jewish store offers lower prices or greater convenience? Rav Fuerst discusses the balance between supporting fellow Yidden and the realities of price, convenience, and pas palter, including when it is permissible to purchase non-Jewish baked goods. The discussion concludes with a fascinating shailah about working as a salesman for a company that sells non-kosher products.

WATCH:

View it in its entirety at: https://www.kashrusawareness.com/post/l-t-k-q-a-mind-your-own-business

Listen wherever you get your podcasts!

https://open.spotify.com/show/6Rj5rIndHc886Fblqh8U49 

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/lets-talk-kashrus/id1631553497 

https://24six.app/app/podcast/collection/985

https://mytat.me/o112

https://www.kosher.com/shows/lets-talk-kashrus-73

CLICK HERE to watch more episodes of Let’s Talk Kashrus

______

We invite your questions, comments, or feedback. If there’s a specific kashrus topic you’d like to bring to public attention, feel free to contact us by email: info@kashrusawareness.com

Message or call: 678-8-Kosher

You can also visit our website  www.kashrusawareness.com for a growing list of resources, timely conversations, and to watch episodes of the Let’s Talk Kashrus audio-visual series.

Join a Let’s Talk Kashrus WhatsApp Group for educational content and kashrus updates

Click here to Join a LTK WhatsApp Group

Transcription

R’ Yitzchok Hisiger: Hello, everyone, and welcome back to Let’s Talk Kashrus, presented by the Kashrus Awareness Project in conjunction with the Chicago Rabbinical Council. Today, I am joined by Rav Shmuel Fuerst, dayan of Agudas Yisroel of Illinois. Thank you, Rav Fuerst, for being here. So, we have more shailos that came in, and I’d like to present them to the rav. 

Today’s topic is the chiyuv of buying from a Yid. We know there’s a a mitzvah vehechzakta of buying from Yidden, supporting Yidden, patronizing frum businesses, and the question is where convenience plays a role in supporting a frum Yid. Sometimes, it’s more convenient to buy from a anon-Jewish proprietor. So, how far does a person have to go before it’s considered a tircha when buying from a Yid? 

R’ Shmuel Fuerst: First of all, in Shulchan Aruch, it’s not mentioned a word. 

It’s not mentioned. It’s only a Sifri that it’s mentioned in parshas Behar, that a person should try to to solicit to go to buy from a from a Jewish from a Jewish person, Jewish owner. The question is, and another thing is, how far does it go? Since it’s not mentioned in Shulchan Aruch, there’s a Teshuvos Rema. There are other poskim that discuss this, and they say like this: this is the consensus. 

I mean, it’s a big machlokes, but ledina, we hold like the Teshuvos Rema, that if it’s a davar mu’at, then you if it’s a davar mu’at, then you as long as still the one, you should patronize a Yid and not a goy. 

R’ Yitzchok Hisiger: Meaning davar mu’at meaning? 

R’ Shmuel Fuerst: So so what’s a davar mu’at is hard to say. Depends on each person. I asked this once Reb Reb Elyashivand and Reb Yisroel Yaakov Fisher, they both said It depends on each person what a davar mu’at is. 

A thousand dollars could be a lot of money for some people. Someone else, a thousand dollars is a lot of money. Sometimes, the difference of price could be a hundred thousand dollars going to two people. Depends on what whatyou’re looking to buy. 

So so davar mu’at depends on the person. So, if it’s a davarmu’at, then you should patronize the Yid. It’s not a davar mu’ator not. Sometimes, you go shopping for Shabbos you go shopping in let’s say in Walmart, you go shopping, sometimes you buy a whole cart full of things, and it’s a lot cheaper in Walmart than you go buy by a Yiddishe store on 13th Avenue. 

It’s a lot cheaper. So, sometimes it accumulates and it adds to a lot of money. But if it doesn’t add to a lot of money, it’s only davar mu’at, then lechatchilah, you should buy by a Yid. You should patronize a Yid. 

R’ Yitzchok Hisiger: So, if it’s only a small If the difference in price is only a small amount, you should definitely go to a Yid. And you’re And the rav is saying that as far as what is considered a small or big amount depends on the person. But how about where the price is the same, but it’s a question of tircha? 

R’ Shmuel Fuerst: Depends what the tircha is. Is it two minutes? Is it a half hour? Depends what the tircha is. 

If it’s down the block, and so on. And also, the other poskimsay, if it’s only a small thing you’re buying, let’s say you want to buy a Pepsi, you want to buy a Coke, you want to buy something, and there’s 7-Eleven down the block, and you go to Jewish store, it’s two blocks away, you just want to buy a small thing, then zicher you can buy even by the goy then also. It’s only when you go buy a lot of stuff, you go shopping for Shabbos, you go shopping for the whole family, and so on, then it accumulates a lot of money. If it’s really a small amount and it’s a one-time thing, then, for sure, you can go to the goy. 

That’s how some of the poskim say. 

R’ Yitzchok Hisiger: Right. This question of buying from Yidden versus goyim is definitely very prevalent nowadays because it’s become so common for people to buy items online from from non-Jewish vendors. It’s a lot more convenient, yeah. 

is a lot more convenient, and for some people, they’re buying, except for their basic groceries, they’re literally buying everything that they need from online. So is that is that Can one buy Can one just buy all their items from from an online vendor if that’s more convenient? 

R’ Shmuel Fuerst: Yeah, sure. That’s called a tircha. That’s considered a tircha. 

If you can buy it online and it’s all shipped to you, and then you have to go out and spend a half hour, an hour out there shopping, considered a tircha. 

R’ Yitzchok Hisiger: Right. One more question that comes up when buying from from Jewish stores versus non-Jewish stores is benogeia pas palter. There are many items of pas palter category that either are much cheaper when you buy it from from ShopRite or Walmart or stores like that, from non-Jewish companies, and they may be cheaper, they may be Taste better. 

taste better, they may have items that don’t exist in a bishulYisroel form. 

R’ Shmuel Fuerst: And also, it could be different hours. A Jewish store is open from 9:00 to 5:00 or 9:00 to 6:00, and they’re open 24 24 hours a day. 

R’ Yitzchok Hisiger: 24 hours a day, right, right, right. 

It’s convenient. So, what guidance could the rav give as far as pas palter? 

R’ Shmuel Fuerst: Pas palter, if it if the goyishe food tastes better, and tastes better and it’s cheaper and so on, then Shulchan Aruch says clearly then it’s okay. You’re allowed to buy pas palter. Not just Stella D’oro cookies. 

Right, no. Any type of cookie, right, yeah. But if they’re a lot cheaper, then You’re allowed you’re allowed to buy Stella D’oro if it tastes better. A lot of times, like people say it tastes better, and it’s fresher. 

Sometimes you buy in a Yiddishe store, it could be sitting out there for for a couple of days, and this one every day they have a large overturn. 

R’ Yitzchok Hisiger: Is there a makom l’hachmir that people should not, or?

R’ Shmuel Fuerst: It’s a nice thing to be it’s a nice thing to be machmir, but b’din it’s mutar. It’s a nice thing to be machmir. It’s also you should support, vehechzakta bo. 

You should give if everyone goes on Amazon, they Won’t have parnassah. Won’t have parnassa , vehechzakta bo. You should buy you should buy from Jewish business. Right. 

R’ Yitzchok Hisiger: One final question in this category of ofpatronizing non-Jewish companies or businesses: can one be a salesman for a non-Jewish company? 

R’ Shmuel Fuerst: In other words, the shaileh is like this. There’s issur sechar devarim assurim. You’re not allowed to do business with with treif stuff. So to own treif stuff and to sell it, that’s assur. 

It’s clear in Shulchan Aruch, according to rov poskim, it’s issurd’Oraisa, except in the noda beyehuda who holds it is d’Rabbanan, according to all poskim also it’s issur d’Oraisa. To do sechar devarim assurim, on things which are assurd’Oraisa. So the question is, can you be a can you be a salesman? In other words, you don’t own the you don’t own the food, but you’re selling the food and so on. So the DarkeiTeshuvah brings down a machlokes Beis Shlomo and the ShoelU’meishiv, if it’s mutar or assur. 

Beis Shlomo assers and the Shoel U’meishiv is meikel. I asked this Reb Moshe many years ago, cuz it was nogeia a shaileh I had, and Reb Moshe says, “Men zol zein somech an di meikilim.” That’s how he answered me. So he’s meikel. As long as you don’t own it, you could do sechora with it and so on. 

The issur sechora is when you own it; if you don’t own it, there’s no issur sechora.

R’ Yitzchok Hisiger: Okay. Thank you so much.

NATO’s highest-ranking military commander delivered a forceful warning to Russia on Monday, declaring that the 32-member alliance is prepared to dismantle an enemy’s military capabilities and strike the entire network supporting its forces if any NATO country comes under attack.

U.S. Air Force Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, who serves as NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe, outlined the alliance’s plans during an appearance at the Warsaw Security Forum in Poland. His remarks came as tensions between Moscow and Western governments continued to intensify over Russian military activity near NATO borders, suspected sabotage operations, and the ongoing war in Ukraine.

“Should the adversary choose to press the attack or commit his reserves, we will break the warfighting system engaged against us,” Grynkewich declared.

“This includes not just the attacking force itself, but anything and everything that supports, sustains, and controls that force,” he said during a discussion titled “Theory of Victory: How Do We Achieve Military Success Against Russia in Deterrence and Defence?”

The American general described NATO’s military doctrine as a three-stage approach centered on “blocking, blunting and breaking” an attacking force. He emphasized that the alliance’s defensive mission does not mean it would limit its response to simply repelling enemy troops from its territory.

“If someone is foolish enough to attack us, we will fight,” he said. “We will stop the attack and deny them the ability to achieve their objectives, whatever those might be. We will, in short, ensure any attack, against any ally, proves utterly futile.”

The unusually direct language reflected growing concern among European leaders about Russia’s activities along NATO’s eastern frontier. Western governments have reported repeated incidents involving drones entering allied airspace, suspected attacks on infrastructure, cyber operations, and other forms of hostile activity that they attribute to Moscow.

Grynkewich said the alliance had strengthened its coordination and military capabilities as members sought to prepare for potential threats.

“We stand here together in Poland today stronger than ever united in our common vision of a more balanced, more ready and more lethal alliance,” he said.

European security officials have increasingly accused Russia of pursuing a campaign of hybrid warfare designed to destabilize NATO countries without necessarily triggering a conventional military confrontation. The allegations include sabotage, deliberately set fires, cyberattacks, and military provocations near sensitive borders.

The concerns intensified in 2025 when several Russian drones crossed into Polish airspace during a major Russian attack against Ukraine. Polish fighter aircraft and allied military assets were mobilized in response, underscoring the possibility that the conflict in Ukraine could spill into NATO territory.

The alliance subsequently established Operation Eastern Sentry to bolster surveillance, air defenses, and military readiness across its eastern member states.

Romania has also reported incidents involving Russian drones entering its airspace, while Estonia has accused Russian military aircraft of unauthorized flights over its territory. The repeated episodes have increased pressure on NATO governments to demonstrate that their borders will be defended.

Grynkewich’s comments followed another weekend of Russian attacks against Ukrainian energy installations, even as diplomatic efforts continued to seek an end to the fighting.

President Donald Trump recently announced that he had reached an arrangement with Russian President Vladimir Putin to increase Russian diesel supplies to American and international markets. The reported understanding included relief from certain U.S. restrictions on Russian energy exports.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, however, accused Moscow of continuing its attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure despite diplomatic initiatives aimed at reducing hostilities. The continuing strikes have raised questions about whether the negotiations can produce a broader ceasefire.

The dispute has also been accompanied by increasingly explicit warnings from Russia concerning the heavily fortified Kaliningrad region, a Russian exclave situated on the Baltic Sea between Poland and Lithuania.

On September 30, Moscow warned that attempts by NATO to cut off or isolate Kaliningrad could provoke a military response involving nuclear weapons.

In a diplomatic communication obtained by Reuters, Russian officials accused the alliance of following a “dangerous and reckless course” that created “high risks of the outbreak of a direct armed conflict.”

The Russian warning indicated that Moscow could employ its full range of military capabilities, including nuclear weapons, to defend the territory. It also raised the possibility of attacks against military and political command centers inside NATO countries at the beginning of a confrontation.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte dismissed Moscow’s threats and maintained that the alliance was sufficiently powerful to deter Russian aggression.

“Putin knows that he can never win from NATO,” Rutte said during a September 30 appearance at the Euronews Defence and Space Summit.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, for his part, has repeatedly denied having plans to attack European countries and has maintained that Moscow seeks peaceful relations with neighboring states.

Although Grynkewich avoided explicitly naming Russia during his address in Warsaw, the context of his remarks left little doubt about the country at the center of NATO’s security concerns. The alliance’s 2022 Strategic Concept identifies Russia as the most serious and immediate threat to the security of its members.

“My theory of victory is simple: we will block the initial attack. If the attack persists, we will blunt it and prevent enemy advance,” Grynkewich explained.

“And if required, we will break the enemy’s forces and the operational warfighting system that is arrayed against us.”

The general said NATO was already working to translate that doctrine into operational capabilities through military exercises, increased readiness, and investments in advanced weapons systems and other defense technologies.

“If attacked, we are ready to fight tonight, but we are not complacent,” he said.

Under the strategy he described, NATO could target command-and-control networks, logistical infrastructure, supply operations, and other military assets supporting an enemy offensive, rather than restricting its response to the units directly participating in an attack.

The remarks also came amid continued debate over the United States’ commitment to European security and the financial burden of maintaining NATO’s military strength.

President Trump has repeatedly urged European governments to assume greater responsibility for their defense expenditures, arguing that American taxpayers should not be expected to shoulder a disproportionate share of the alliance’s costs.

At NATO’s 2025 summit in The Hague, member countries agreed to work toward defense and security-related spending equivalent to 5% of gross domestic product by 2035. The commitment included at least 3.5% for core military requirements and an additional 1.5% for related security investments, including critical infrastructure protection.

Grynkewich sought to reassure European allies about Washington’s commitment, recalling Trump’s positive reception of the alliance during that gathering.

“I was in the room and I felt the love,” he said, referring to the summit.

“What I want to do is assure the one billion citizens of our alliance that we’ve got this. We know what we need to do. We know how we would do it,” the general added.

Grynkewich also addressed concerns about Russia’s suspected unconventional operations against European countries, indicating that he would be willing to discuss particular incidents publicly if the governments involved requested his involvement.

“If a nation wants me to, I’m happy to talk about it,” he said.

The general’s presentation was intended to demonstrate that NATO’s preparations extend beyond statements of solidarity and include concrete military planning for a possible confrontation.

He also stressed that a conflict with Russia was neither inevitable nor imminent, and that maintaining strong defenses and clear communication with potential adversaries remained essential to preventing one.

The Warsaw Security Forum, held October 12 and 13, brought together senior military commanders, political leaders, diplomats, and security specialists to discuss the war in Ukraine, European defense capabilities, and the increasingly strained relationship between NATO and Moscow.

{Matzav.com}

Federal agents searched the Washington, D.C., residence of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) on Monday as part of an ongoing federal investigation, according to Justice Department officials, with President Donald Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, confirming that authorities have been pursuing the matter for some time.

The search, conducted by agents from Homeland Security Investigations, was carried out under a warrant authorized by a judge. Federal officials have not publicly disclosed the allegations being investigated or whether Omar herself is suspected of any criminal wrongdoing.

“Today in the Washington, DC, area, Homeland Security Investigations executed a judicially authorized search warrant secured by the Department of Justice,” a Department of Justice (DOJ) official told Fox News Digital. “This enforcement action is part of an ongoing federal investigation.”

Reports of the investigation emerged Monday, with some accounts identifying the operation by the name “World War 11,” an apparent reference to an earlier verbal slip by Omar that attracted widespread attention. The significance of that reported designation, if any, has not been explained by federal authorities.

Homan, speaking to Fox News about the operation, indicated that the investigation had been underway well before Monday’s search became public. He said federal officials were aware that “this investigation was ongoing for a while.”

“There was a warrant executed this morning, so I’ll leave it at that,” Homan said. “The specifics of the investigation, I think I need to turn that over to [Attorney General] Todd Blanche or [DHS Secretary] Markwayne Mullin.”

The involvement of Homeland Security Investigations has prompted speculation that the inquiry could concern immigration-related matters, although officials have not confirmed its subject or scope. The agency also investigates a broad range of federal offenses, and its participation alone does not establish the nature of the allegations.

Omar responded to the search by accusing the Trump administration of using federal law enforcement to punish political opponents. The Minnesota Democrat, a frequent critic of the president and his immigration policies, portrayed the operation as another episode in what she described as a yearslong campaign against her.

“I’m ok. Make no mistake: this is an attempt to target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement,” Omar said. “For ten years, Trump has targeted me with baseless lies and smear campaigns. This is just the latest escalation in his campaign of political intimidation. I will not be silenced.”

Multiple reports have since provided additional information about the investigation, indicating that federal authorities are examining immigration documents prepared by Omar’s late father when she entered the United States as a child. Investigators are reportedly looking into possible false statements and immigration fraud, although no criminal charges against Omar have been announced.

Sources familiar with the investigation said Homeland Security Investigations is directing the inquiry, with assistance from the Justice Department. Attorney General Todd Blanche was reportedly aware of the search, and federal officials consulted the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section.

The investigation was not entirely unknown before Monday. Homan had publicly acknowledged an active criminal inquiry involving Omar in September, although he did not disclose its details at the time. Omar previously said she had not been contacted by federal investigators about such a probe.

President Trump, asked about the search, denied personally directing the operation.

“I think she’s a terrible person, but that’s really up to the DOJ,” Trump told reporters.

Omar’s office maintained that the congresswoman had “done nothing wrong” and accused federal authorities of an “outrageous abuse of power and an unprecedented escalation in the weaponization of federal law enforcement to target political enemies.”

The search also triggered condemnation from senior House Democrats, including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and other members of the party’s leadership, who questioned the administration’s decision to carry out the operation just weeks before the November congressional elections.

The timing has become a central point of controversy because Omar is seeking another term in Congress, with Election Day scheduled for November 3. Democratic officials argue that the search raises serious questions about political interference, while the administration maintains that federal law enforcement is pursuing an authorized criminal investigation.

Omar, who was born in Somalia and became a naturalized American citizen in 2000, has repeatedly rejected allegations of immigration-related wrongdoing. Federal authorities have not publicly presented evidence establishing that she committed fraud, and the execution of a search warrant does not itself constitute a criminal charge.

{Matzav.com}