Feed aggregator

America’s nine largest federally regulated banks maintained policies that restricted financial services based on customers’ political views, religious beliefs or involvement in lawful industries, according to a major federal investigation released Wednesday that uncovered widespread concerns about politically motivated discrimination in the banking system.

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency found that all nine institutions had policies in place at various points between 2020 and September 2025 that could prevent individuals, organizations and businesses from obtaining banking services for reasons unrelated to their financial qualifications.

The findings, released as part of an investigation ordered by President Donald Trump, detail instances in which financial institutions closed accounts, rejected credit applications or restricted business relationships involving conservative organizations, religious nonprofits and companies operating in politically controversial industries.

The investigation examined the practices of JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bank, Capital One, PNC, TD Bank and BMO Bank.

Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould sharply criticized the findings, arguing that major financial institutions had improperly used their control over banking services to exclude customers whose beliefs or activities were considered objectionable.

“Today’s report provides irrefutable evidence that the nation’s largest banks have denied, debanked and discriminated against customers and lawful businesses,” Gould said in a statement accompanying the report.

The investigation was conducted under an executive order issued by Trump directing federal regulators to examine whether financial institutions had denied banking services to Americans because of their political affiliations, religious convictions or participation in lawful commercial activities.

Federal investigators reviewed nearly 100,000 complaints and approximately 420,000 pages of internal banking records, providing regulators with an extensive collection of information about how financial institutions evaluated customers and determined which businesses they would serve.

Among the most striking examples involved WePay, a payment-processing company previously owned by JPMorgan Chase, which terminated accounts belonging to merchants selling merchandise supporting Trump and the Make America Great Again movement.

According to the findings, WePay’s screening procedures identified politically associated terms, including “MAGA,” “Make America Great,” and “America First,” as potential grounds for additional scrutiny or account restrictions.

The processor also closed accounts connected to conservative religious organizations, including an organization that had been designated an extremist group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Another case involved PNC, where internal communications reportedly showed employees objecting to the political views of a media company’s owners while the bank was considering a request for credit.

The company was ultimately denied a line of credit after employees raised concerns about the owners’ publicly expressed conservative positions.

One PNC employee wrote that the business owners held views “very contrary to PNC’s beliefs/values.”

The report also described allegations involving Wells Fargo, which reportedly pressured a payment-processing company to discontinue its relationship with a religious nonprofit because of the organization’s position on same-sex marriage.

Wells Fargo additionally declined lending opportunities involving firearms-related businesses amid concerns about possible pressure from the Biden administration.

Other institutions imposed restrictions affecting entire categories of otherwise lawful businesses.

Bank of America limited relationships with companies involved in operating private prisons, while various banks maintained restrictions affecting the oil and gas industry, coal companies, firearms businesses and digital-asset firms.

The investigation indicated that political and ideological considerations sometimes became intertwined with financial institutions’ assessments of reputational and regulatory risk, raising questions about whether customers were being evaluated on legitimate banking criteria or on the acceptability of their views and activities.

Although conservative and religious organizations featured prominently in the report, investigators also identified examples involving organizations associated with liberal political causes.

Capital One, for example, declined to provide services to an abortion-rights organization as well as a gun-rights advocacy group, reportedly because of concerns that maintaining those relationships could be interpreted as endorsing the organizations’ positions.

The findings suggest that the issue extended beyond any single political movement, with banks at times avoiding customers whose activities or beliefs were considered controversial.

The OCC acknowledged that its investigation could not establish the complete number of customers affected by discriminatory banking practices or calculate the total financial losses suffered by individuals and businesses denied access to services.

The regulator also distinguished between legitimate financial risk assessments and decisions influenced by subjective judgments about a customer’s reputation, political associations or lawful activities.

JPMorgan Chase responded to the findings by acknowledging problems with WePay’s previous screening practices. The bank said those procedures did not meet its standards and had been corrected before the payment-processing operation was discontinued.

All nine banks informed regulators that they had modified their policies following increased scrutiny of their account restrictions and customer-screening procedures.

Nevertheless, Gould warned that voluntary changes might not be sufficient to prevent similar practices from recurring.

“Notwithstanding certain efforts by the largest banks to rein in these practices, I am not confident that they will be enough,” Gould said, indicating that the OCC would examine further changes to its regulatory and supervisory framework.

The agency has already taken steps to remove broad reputational-risk considerations from certain bank examinations, revise how potentially improper account closures are evaluated during regulatory reviews, and improve the handling of customer complaints.

A separate federal investigation is also being launched by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to determine whether banks violated consumer financial protection laws through their account-closure and lending practices.

Acting CFPB Director Mark Paoletta condemned the conduct described in the report, saying that financial institutions should not be permitted to penalize Americans for their personal convictions.

“It is appalling that these banks targeted American consumers for their political, social, or religious beliefs,” Paoletta said.

The findings could lead to additional regulatory action as the Trump administration seeks to establish stricter protections against politically or religiously motivated banking restrictions.

Gould emphasized that financial institutions must make decisions based on legitimate banking considerations rather than ideological preferences.

“Fair access to financial services is not a mantra — it is a mandate,” he said.

The IDF announced Wednesday that its 99th Division has concluded a four-month military operation in northern Gaza, during which Israeli forces eliminated more than 100 terrorists, destroyed approximately eight kilometers of underground tunnels and dismantled numerous Hamas military installations.

According to the military, the operation dealt a significant blow to Hamas’s remaining infrastructure in the area, with troops targeting both active terrorist positions and facilities that could be used to rebuild the organization’s fighting capabilities.

Among those eliminated were Hamas terrorists who participated in the October 7, 2023, massacre, individuals involved in holding Israeli hostages captive in Gaza, and terrorists who attempted to plant explosive devices intended to kill or injure IDF soldiers.

The division conducted its operations east of the Yellow Line, concentrating on identifying and destroying terrorist infrastructure above and below ground while preventing Hamas from reestablishing operational positions in the region.

Throughout the four-month deployment, soldiers uncovered and dismantled a network of underground passages extending approximately eight kilometers, or nearly five miles. The tunnels formed part of the infrastructure used by terrorist operatives to move through the area, conceal their activities and prepare attacks against Israeli forces.

The IDF said troops also located and destroyed a Hamas observation and command center that had been used to monitor military activity and coordinate terrorist operations.

Additional structures identified during the operation included buildings used by Hamas operatives to organize attacks and prepare assaults against IDF soldiers stationed in northern Gaza.

The military said its forces encountered terrorists attempting to threaten Israeli positions, including operatives involved in preparing explosive devices for use against troops operating in the area.

The operation formed part of the IDF’s continuing effort to prevent Hamas from restoring the military capabilities it developed before the October 7 attacks, particularly its extensive tunnel system and network of fortified positions.

Israeli military officials have repeatedly identified the destruction of Hamas’s underground infrastructure as a central objective, given the terrorist organization’s reliance on tunnels for movement, concealment, weapons storage and attacks against Israeli forces.

With the 99th Division having completed its assignment, responsibility for continued IDF operations in the sector will pass to the 162nd Division, which will maintain the military’s activities against remaining terrorist threats in northern Gaza.

Colombia officially opened its embassy in Yerushalayim on Wednesday, becoming the tenth country to establish a diplomatic mission in Israel’s capital and marking a dramatic turnaround in relations between the two nations following a two-year diplomatic break.

The opening represents a significant achievement for Israel’s diplomatic efforts, coming just months after Colombia restored relations with the Jewish state following the election of President Abelardo de la Espriella, who had pledged during his campaign to move the country’s embassy to Yerushalayim.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar and Colombian Foreign Minister Omar Bula Escobar participated in the inauguration ceremony, during which the embassy’s official sign was unveiled and Sa’ar affixed a mezuzah to the entrance of the building.

Sa’ar hailed the development as another major step in Israel’s efforts to secure international recognition of Yerushalayim as its capital, noting that the number of foreign embassies in the city has doubled during his tenure.

“This is the tenth embassy to open in Jerusalem. When I took office less than two years ago, there were only five. This is an important milestone and a major diplomatic achievement,” Sa’ar said.

The foreign minister praised Colombia’s new president for following through on a commitment he had made before winning the election.

“Colombia’s President, Abelardo de la Espriella, told me long before his election: ‘If I am elected President, I will immediately move Colombia’s embassy to Jerusalem.’ He made a promise, and he kept it.”

Sa’ar emphasized that the decision carries significance beyond the formal recognition of Israel’s seat of government, describing it as an acknowledgment of the Jewish people’s longstanding connection to their capital.

“Opening an embassy in Jerusalem is not only recognition of the simple political fact that Jerusalem is Israel’s capital. It is also recognition of a historical truth that no honest person can deny,” Sa’ar added.

Colombian Foreign Minister Bula described the inauguration as an important step toward repairing the relationship between the countries, saying that the previous diplomatic rupture should never have occurred.

“Today, we are taking a concrete step towards restoring diplomatic relations between our countries, relations that should never have been broken. Israel is a strategic partner. It always has been, and from now on, it will be an even stronger one,” he said.

The ceremony follows a sharp reversal in Colombia’s foreign policy since the departure of President Gustavo Petro, whose administration severed diplomatic relations with Israel in May 2024 in protest of the war against Hamas in Gaza.

Under Petro, Colombia withdrew its ambassador, shut down its embassy in Tel Aviv and suspended several areas of cooperation with Israel. The measures brought a halt to a longstanding relationship that had included substantial economic, security and technological partnerships.

Diplomatic relations were formally restored in August 2026 under President de la Espriella, setting the stage for Wednesday’s embassy opening and a broader effort to rebuild ties between the two governments.

The renewed relationship also received an economic boost on Tuesday, when Israel and Colombia reinstated their free trade agreement, reversing another decision made during Petro’s presidency.

Colombia’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement welcoming the embassy’s inauguration and highlighting the president’s fulfillment of his election pledge. Officials said the new diplomatic mission would serve as a center for expanding cooperation in trade, security, investment, agriculture, scientific research and technology.

The embassy will also provide consular services to Colombian citizens living in or visiting Israel.

Ambassador Tania Gilinski will lead the diplomatic mission and oversee efforts to translate the restored relationship into practical agreements, commercial partnerships and new opportunities for cooperation.

Bula’s visit to Israel, which began October 13 and is scheduled to continue through October 16, includes discussions with senior government officials as well as meetings with representatives of Israel’s technology and innovation industries.

The Colombian foreign minister is also scheduled to meet with families of Colombian citizens murdered in the Hamas terrorist attacks of October 7, 2023, along with survivors of the massacre.

His itinerary includes a meeting with Elkana Bohbot, an Israeli citizen who also holds Colombian citizenship and was held hostage by Hamas in Gaza.

Israeli and Colombian officials are now working to broaden their cooperation in several strategic fields, including defense technology, cybersecurity, artificial intelligence, agricultural development and water management.

Colombia is additionally seeking to expand its commercial presence in Israel, with particular interest in increasing exports of coffee, flowers, agricultural commodities, chemicals and other products.

Four bochurim from the Chevron Yeshiva were released Wednesday after being stopped by police on Highway 1 near Shaar Hagai, despite the reported arrival of military police who had been summoned to take them into custody over their military service status.

The incident occurred as the four bochurim were traveling toward Yerushalayim, setting off a tense confrontation that threatened to trigger widespread demonstrations by opponents of the government’s ongoing arrests of bnei yeshivos.

According to Hebrew media reports, police stopped the vehicle carrying the bochurim and began checking their identities. The officers reportedly discovered that the four were listed as wanted by military authorities because of their failure to report for military service.

Military police were subsequently called to the location to take custody of the bochurim.

Word of the developing situation quickly spread through telephone hotlines used by chareidi activists to publicize arrests and organize demonstrations against the military draft.

The reports prompted concern among police that large numbers of protesters could descend on the area, potentially disrupting traffic along Highway 1, one of Israel’s busiest transportation routes.

Despite the arrival of military police, the four bochurim were ultimately permitted to leave without being transferred into military custody.

The circumstances surrounding the decision remain unclear, although the Hebrew report attributed the release to concerns about the possibility of major protests.

Israeli police have not publicly confirmed that fear of demonstrations was the reason the bochurim were released.

The incident comes amid continuing tensions between the government and the chareidi community over the enforcement of military service requirements for yeshiva students.

In recent months, military police have intensified efforts to locate and arrest bochurim who have failed to comply with draft-related orders.

The arrests have triggered repeated demonstrations in Yerushalayim, Bnei Brak and other chareidi communities, with protesters blocking major highways and gathering outside military facilities.

The Chevron Yeshiva, one of Eretz Yisroel’s most prominent Litvishe yeshivos, has thousands of talmidim and alumni and occupies a central place in the Torah world.

The detention of four of its bochurim therefore carried the potential to generate an especially strong reaction among yeshiva students and supporters.

According to the reports, the incident ended without any of the four bochurim being arrested or transferred to military custody. They were allowed to continue toward Yerushalayim.

The release comes amid increasing pressure on Israeli authorities to enforce military service requirements against yeshiva students classified as draft evaders.

Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara has called for renewed enforcement measures, including proactive arrests of individuals wanted by military authorities.

Those demands have intensified concerns throughout the yeshiva world that bochurim could be detained during routine encounters with police, including traffic stops and identity checks.

Wednesday’s incident illustrates how quickly such encounters can develop into potential flashpoints. Although military police reportedly arrived to take custody of the four students, the attempted transfer was abandoned after news of the situation spread through chareidi protest networks.

The accounts published by Emess and JDN attribute the decision to concerns about demonstrations, but neither establishes that police formally acknowledged that explanation.

No arrests were reported, and the four Chevron Yeshiva bochurim continued on their way.

A prominent hotel in Dublin has come under fire after allegedly canceling reservations for 70 rooms booked for participants in an international conference devoted to combating antisemitism, with Jewish community leaders claiming the hotel withdrew the accommodations after discovering the purpose of the gathering.

The incident involved the Herbert Park Hotel in Dublin’s Ballsbridge neighborhood, where rooms had reportedly been reserved for delegates attending a major European conference bringing together officials responsible for addressing antisemitism.

According to Maurice Cohen, chairman of the Jewish Representative Council of Ireland, the hotel initially accepted the group reservation but subsequently reversed its decision after learning that the guests would be participating in an antisemitism conference.

Cohen disclosed the incident during a reception hosted at Ireland’s Department of Foreign Affairs, where participants and dignitaries had gathered in connection with the international meeting.

The gathering brought together special envoys and coordinators responsible for combating antisemitism from European Union member states, along with other officials involved in addressing threats against Jewish communities.

Cohen said the hotel had also inquired whether the conference had any connection to the Israel Defense Forces, a question he regarded as particularly troubling given that the gathering was a civilian diplomatic event devoted to confronting antisemitism.

The reported cancellation forced organizers to make alternative arrangements for the visiting delegates.

The circumstances have prompted criticism from Jewish community representatives, who questioned why a hotel would withdraw accommodations for an event dedicated to fighting hatred and discrimination.

The conference was the 15th meeting of the Special Envoys and Coordinators Combating Antisemitism, a gathering involving officials from across Europe who work on government responses to antisemitic incidents, Jewish communal security and related policy issues.

Such meetings provide a forum for officials to exchange information, discuss emerging threats and coordinate efforts to protect Jewish communities.

The Dublin gathering took place against a backdrop of growing concern over antisemitism in Ireland and elsewhere in Europe, particularly following the October 7, 2023, Hamas massacre in Israel and the subsequent war.

Jewish organizations have reported heightened hostility toward Jewish institutions and individuals, including incidents involving harassment, intimidation and antisemitic rhetoric.

Ireland has also experienced significant political tensions surrounding Israel, with government officials taking strongly critical positions toward Israeli military operations and the broader conflict.

Cohen’s account of the hotel incident has therefore attracted particular attention because it involves a gathering specifically organized to address antisemitism.

According to the Jewish community leader, the hotel’s questions about possible IDF involvement suggested that its decision may have been influenced by concerns unrelated to the actual purpose of the conference.

However, the hotel has not publicly confirmed that the reservation was canceled because the event concerned antisemitism, and the precise reason for its decision remains disputed.

When approached by reporters Tuesday evening, a hotel manager declined to comment on the allegations.

Additional details have now emerged about the circumstances surrounding the cancellation, including correspondence between the hotel and conference organizers.

According to former Irish Justice Minister Alan Shatter, the hotel confirmed the reservation in April, and organizers met with management on May 7 to discuss conference arrangements.

Following that meeting, management informed the organizers by email on May 8 that the hotel would no longer host the event.

“Further to our meeting and after careful consideration, I’m afraid higher management had decided that we won’t be able to host the event at the hotel on this occasion,” the email stated.

The message did not explain the reason for the decision.

When organizers asked whether their previously confirmed reservation for 70 rooms remained valid, the hotel said the rooms had been released because credit-card information had not been supplied.

Shatter disputed that explanation, saying the hotel had not raised the issue during earlier correspondence or the meeting.

“This was a retrospective excuse for canceling the bookings, basically,” he said.

The organizers ultimately secured alternative accommodations and a separate venue, allowing the conference to proceed as scheduled.

Shatter said the organizers initially avoided publicizing the incident because they feared that a controversy could interfere with the conference itself.

Ireland’s Chief Rabbi, Rav Yoni Wieder, expressed disappointment over the allegations while acknowledging that the hotel’s motivation had not been established.

“If things happened as reported, then it’s a downright disgrace,” he said.

Rav Wieder noted that the Herbert Park Hotel had previously accommodated Jewish visitors, including guests who received kosher meals from a catering company under his supervision.

He said he wanted to know who made the decision to cancel the reservation and why, adding that the possibility of concern over protests or controversy would not justify excluding the delegates.

The European Jewish Congress also condemned the reported incident, describing it as “deeply disturbing” and calling on the hotel to explain its decision.

The organization said the cancellation, together with questions about supposed Israeli military involvement, reflected the very prejudice and suspicion that the conference was intended to confront.

The conference proceeded in Dublin as part of Ireland’s presidency of the Council of the European Union, bringing together government representatives and Jewish communal leaders for discussions about antisemitism and the protection of Jewish communities.

During the gathering, participants met with Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin and visited the European offices of TikTok and Meta to discuss online antisemitism.

Cohen also drew attention to the experiences of Ireland’s small Jewish community, which numbers approximately 2,200 people.

According to figures he presented, 143 antisemitic incidents were recorded between July 2025 and January 2026.

The Herbert Park Hotel has declined to comment publicly on the allegations. Its management has not provided an explanation establishing why the conference booking and room reservations were withdrawn.

Serious questions are being raised about the safety procedures surrounding a yeshiva outing in northern Israel that ended in tragedy Monday, when Elazar Yair Vilensky z”l was killed and numerous other talmidim were injured in an explosion believed to have been caused by unexploded Hezbollah ordnance.

New reporting has focused on whether the route taken by the students underwent the necessary safety inspections before the outing, and whether the absence of a municipal school security officer contributed to gaps in oversight.

The outing, organized for students of Yeshivas Maalot, took place near Kibbutz Neot Mordechai in the Upper Galilee, an area that has faced extensive rocket and missile attacks during the fighting with Hezbollah.

According to the preliminary findings reported by Israeli authorities, the explosion was apparently caused by unexploded cluster munition left behind during the conflict. Investigators are examining how the students reached the location and what caused the device to detonate.

The latest revelations have added a new dimension to the investigation, shifting attention from the explosion itself to the decisions made before the group entered the area.

According to a report aired by Channel 12, the municipality of Maalot-Tarshiha had been operating without a school security officer after the previous official, Eldad Vaknin, resigned earlier this month.

Vaknin had reportedly raised concerns about failures to follow required school security procedures before leaving his position.

The report raised questions about whether the absence of a designated official responsible for overseeing school security affected the approval and supervision of the outing.

It remains unclear whether the vacancy had any direct connection to the tragedy, and investigators have not established that the presence of a municipal security officer would have prevented the explosion.

The Education Ministry has maintained that the outing received official authorization, but emphasized that the approved route did not include the location where the explosion occurred.

That distinction has become central to the investigation, as authorities seek to determine whether the students deviated from their approved route and, if so, under what circumstances.

The ministry has also said that its safety instructions explicitly prohibit students from touching suspicious objects or unexploded munitions.

However, students who participated in the outing reportedly said they had not received specific warnings about the danger of unexploded ordnance in the area.

Investigators are now examining what instructions were provided to the group before the trip and whether the students and accompanying staff were adequately informed about the hazards remaining from the war.

Another issue concerns the condition of the area where the explosion occurred.

The Jewish National Fund reportedly stated that entry into the location had been prohibited because of wartime damage and related dangers.

Nevertheless, no physical barrier had been installed to prevent people from entering.

The absence of such a barrier has raised questions about whether warning signs and access restrictions were sufficient to protect visitors, particularly school groups unfamiliar with the terrain.

Reports also indicate that no preliminary safety inspection of the actual route taken by the students had been carried out, although the precise circumstances remain under investigation.

The municipality of Maalot-Tarshiha has rejected attempts to connect the resignation of its former school security officer to the explosion before the facts have been established.

Municipal officials have cautioned against drawing conclusions about responsibility while investigators are still examining the incident.

According to the preliminary investigation, one of the students found what is believed to have been a Hezbollah cluster submunition during a stop along the route and placed it inside a bag. The group reportedly continued walking for approximately two hours before the device exploded while the students had stopped to daven.

The explosion killed Vilensky, a ninth-grade student, and injured 24 other students and staff members. Several of the injured suffered serious wounds, requiring emergency evacuation by helicopters and ambulances to hospitals across northern Israel.

The tragedy has prompted conflicting accounts from the Education Ministry and the Jewish National Fund concerning responsibility for approving access to the area.

Education officials maintain that the authorized itinerary did not include the location where the explosion occurred. The Jewish National Fund has said the area was closed to visitors because of wartime hazards and that it had not participated in approving the outing.

A warning sign prohibited entry, but the location was not physically blocked off.

Meanwhile, former municipal school security officer Eldad Vaknin has publicly alleged that he resigned after encountering serious failures to observe security regulations. He specifically accused municipal leadership of permitting unauthorized workers to enter areas occupied by students without proper supervision.

Vaknin said he had raised concerns about security procedures before the tragedy and had faced pressure rather than receiving support.

Those allegations concern broader school security practices and have not been established as contributing factors in the explosion.

The latest reporting has intensified scrutiny of the municipality, the Education Ministry and the procedures used to approve school outings in areas affected by the fighting with Hezbollah.

Police are investigating the circumstances of the explosion, including the students’ movements, the approval process and whether required precautions were followed before the group entered the area.

The findings will be particularly important for schools planning outings in northern Israel, where unexploded rockets, missiles and cluster munitions remain a serious danger long after the original attacks.

The investigation has yet to determine who was responsible for the apparent failures in oversight or whether the tragedy could have been prevented.

[COMMUNICATED]

Three kedoshei elyon had one common concept when it came to learning Torah – they were the Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh (Rabbi Chaim ibn Attar 1696-1743) when he came to Eretz Yisroel; the Ramchal (Rabbi Moshe Chaim Luzzatto 1707-1746) when he lived in Padua, Italy;  and Hagaon, Harav Chaim Volozhiner, (1749-1821) the famous talmid of the Gaon of Vilna.

They each had a yeshiva with ‘around-the-clock’ Torah learning, 24-hours a day, so that there would be no minute when the sound of Torah learning would not be heard in this world. The 24-hour period would be divided into shifts, and as one ended the next would begin.

Torah-24

A “Torah-24” Center has been opened in Yerushalayim and the Nasi is Maran Sar Hatorah, Harav Chaim Kanievsky, zt”l.

• The first “Torah-24” center is in Yerushalayim

• 11 Kollelim with 163 avreichim will be learning at “Torah-24” every day

• Nigleh, Nistar, Chumash and Halacha – All under ONE ROOF

• Talmud Bavli / Yerushalmi – Kabbalah & Zohar – Rambam, Shulchan Aruch & Poskim, Zeraim – Taharos 

• The following SIX kollelim – Kollel Hashkomas Haboker, Kollel Yerushalmi, Kollel Bavli, Kollel Choshen Mishpat/Even Haezer, Kollel Erev Shabbos, Kollel Kabbalah B’Chatzos (Tikun Chatzot, Etz Chaim, Zohar, Tehillim) – are fully operational

• 24 hour תורה learning cycle – 6:00 am to 6:00 am – is divided into different shifts

• Each kollel shift has its own program, Rosh Kollel and avreichim

• Detailed monthly and annual tests – written and oral – for all avreichim 

• Already there are 77 avreichim metzuyonim, and a large number of candidates are vying for the remaining slots in the kollelim. All the avreichim are required to take rigorous monthly tests.

In the words of Gedolei Torah:

“Torah-24 תורה” – where the voice of Torah is not absent from within the walls of the kollelim, not even for a minute…

“The idea … of day and night shifts of non-stop kollelim… the full range of subjects of the Torah… the derech of the Ramchal, the Ohr Hachaim Hakodosh and Hagaon Reb Chaim of Volozhin.”

– Nasi Maran Sar Hatorah, Hagaon Harav Chaim Kanievsky, zt”l

“All who donate to and support “Torah-24 תורה” will merit all the brochos of the Torah, including those for refuos, yeshuos, parnossa tova and nachas from all their descendants, Amen”

– Maran Rosh Yeshivas Ponevez, Hagaon Harav Gershon Edelstein, zt”l

At “Torah-24 תורה”, exceptional avreichim do not pause for a moment while studying all the areas of the holy Torah, with a shift of remarkable scholars studying the holy Zohar and the recitation of Tikun Chatzos at midnight. 

All who donate and support this holy endeavor of “Torah-24 תורה” should see brocha and success … children and grandchildren immersed in Torah and mitzvos… fulfillment of all the hopes of their hearts for good and with brocha. 

– Maran Hagaon Harav Moishe Sternbuch, shlit”a 

I join the esteemed Rabbanim and Gaonim, shlit”a, in endorsing the illustrious “Kollel Kabbalah b’Chatzos” designated for outstanding talmidei chachomim, masters of Torah and yiras Shomayim, who spend their nights in Beis Hashem, engaging deeply in the concealed dimensions of Torah during this auspicious time of Divine Favor…

I hereby call upon my generous brethren to support this endeavor with significant sums, for through this they will attain the great merit of the hidden Torah studied at night. May you all be blessed by Hashem with many blessings in accordance with the greatness of the endeavor that you are supporting!

– Maran Hagaon Hamekubal, Harav Yaakov Meir Shechter, shlit”a

“Support ‘Torah-24 תורה’ where the sound of Torah – nigleh and nistar – all hours of the day and night; and be blessed from shamayim that the Torah should never cease from your mouth; children bnei Torah; abundant parnassa and good health”

– Maran Hagaon Harav Shimon Badani, zt”l
Rosh Kollel Torah V’Chaim, Member Moetzet Chachmei Hatorah

“Torah-24 תורה” – groups of talmidei chachomim geonim in different shifts, delve in the subjects of Torah learning without interruption – Bavli, Yerushalmi, Dalet Chelkei Shulchan Aruch, Rambam, Kabbala, Midrash, Tana”ch and more.  “Torah-24 תורה” is in actuality a wonderful continuation of the heichalei hakodesh and battei midrash of our holy Rabbonim – the Ramchal, the Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh and the Nefesh Hachaim, zy”o. Who would not want to be part of this historical and amazing project “Torah-24 תורה”, and the greatness of its holy impact in both the supernal and lower realms?  “My brocha to all who support “Torah-24 תורה” – You should merit great abundance in both the spiritual and the material – supernal light, peace of mind, tranquility of the soul and bodily health. Only goodness and kindness should pursue you all the days of your lives, and you should dwell securely for your length of days.

– Maran Hamashpia Hagadol, ‘Reb Meilech’ Biderman, shlit”a

“Your kesher with ‘Torah-24 תורה’ will be a true ובהם נהגה יומם ולילה – and we will delve in them by day and by night”

– Maran Hagaon Harav Shraga Steinman, shlit”a – Orchos Torah

 

“Talmidei Chachomim of ‘Torah-24 תורה’ delve into all sectors of Torah – Bavli and Yerushalmi, Dalet Chelkei Shulchan Aruch, Rambam, Kabbalah – Nistar”

– Maran Hagaon Harav Shimon Gallai, shlit”a – Bnei Brak

 

Kollel Kabbalah b’Chatzos” is a precious link in the golden chain of the glorious Torah empire “Torah-24”… bringing tremendous delight to the Ribbono shel Olam. Fortunate are all those who take part in this great and holy endeavor.

– Maran HaMekubal Rav Abish Zehnwirth, shlit”a

 

For more “Torah-24” information click on: www.torah-24.com or call 718-766-5022

Rav Avraham Salim, rosh yeshiva of Yeshivas Maor HaTorah and a member of the Moetzet Chachmei HaTorah of Shas, has sent a personal letter of chizuk to a yeshiva bochur imprisoned by the Israeli military over the ongoing draft controversy, assuring him that the Torah world stands with him and davening for his swift release.

The letter was addressed to Eliyahu Dabada, a talmid of Yeshivas Orchos Meir in Yerushalayim, who is being held at Military Prison 10 in connection with his military service status.

In the letter, dated Tuesday, October 13, Rav Salim expresses his deep pain over the bochur’s imprisonment and offers words of encouragement intended to strengthen him during his ordeal.

Rav Salim invokes the words of Dovid Hamelech in Tehillim, “Gam ki eilech b’gei tzalmaves lo ira ra ki Atah imadi” — Even when I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for You are with me.

The rosh yeshiva uses the posuk to remind the imprisoned bochur that the Ribbono Shel Olam remains with a Yid even in the most difficult circumstances, including when he is confined behind prison walls.

He praises the bochur for his dedication to Torah learning and encourages him to remain steadfast despite the difficulties of his imprisonment.

Rav Salim also conveys that the bochur is not facing his ordeal alone, emphasizing the support and concern of the wider Torah community.

The letter concludes with heartfelt brachos that the bochur merit a speedy release and be able to return to his yeshiva and continue his learning in peace.

In his letter, Rav Salim sharply criticizes the government’s treatment of yeshiva students, writing that he was deeply distressed to learn that Dabada had been imprisoned because he was a bochur whose life is devoted to Torah study. He expresses the hope that those responsible for the arrests will do teshuvah.

One of the letter’s central messages is that the Shechinah accompanies the bochur even inside the military prison. Rav Salim tells him that being detained because of his dedication to Torah is a source of spiritual distinction and urges him to remain strong in emunah, Torah and yiras Shomayim.

The letter has also received the support of Rav Yehuda Cohen, rosh yeshiva of Yeshivas Yekirei Yerushalayim and a member of the Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah, who added his signature and a personal message of encouragement.

Rav Cohen writes about the spiritual significance of Torah learning within prison walls, encouraging Dabada to continue learning with diligence and joy even during his confinement. He offers a bracha that the bochur should soon emerge from darkness into light and continue growing in Torah and yiras Shomayim.

Dabada was arrested early Tuesday morning at his parents’ home in Be’er Sheva, according to Hebrew media reports. Military police reportedly arrived at approximately 4 a.m. and took him into custody over his failure to report for military service.

He was initially brought to a military facility in southern Israel before being transferred to Military Prison 10, where he was sentenced to 20 days of detention.

Following his arrest, the bochur’s family contacted the Am Kadosh organization, which arranged legal assistance.

The arrest also prompted a gathering outside the military prison Tuesday evening, organized by Yeshivas Orchos Meir under the leadership of its rosh yeshiva, Rav Meir Vaknin.

Talmidim, rabbonim and alumni assembled outside the prison for tefillos and divrei chizuk, expressing solidarity with their imprisoned fellow talmid and calling for his release.

During the gathering, the yeshiva’s rabbonim encouraged the bochurim to strengthen their commitment to Torah learning despite the continuing arrests.

Former Shin Bet director Ronen Bar has filed a 3 million shekel defamation lawsuit against Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, alleging that he repeatedly warned the government about the growing Hamas threat and recommended targeted assassinations of senior terrorist leaders in the months preceding the October 7, 2023, massacre, but that his proposals were never carried out.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday, presents a detailed account of security discussions stretching back nearly a year before the Hamas attack. Bar maintains that he advocated a more aggressive policy toward Hamas, including operations against its senior leadership, while Netanyahu repeatedly emphasized the importance of avoiding a broader confrontation in Gaza.

Among the most significant allegations is Bar’s account of a security meeting held on October 1, 2023, just six days before the massacre. According to the former intelligence chief, Netanyahu authorized preparations for targeted strikes against Hamas commanders during that meeting, but no subsequent discussion was convened to advance the plans toward implementation.

Bar’s lawsuit follows public statements by Netanyahu assigning him substantial responsibility for the intelligence and security failures that allowed Hamas terrorists to invade southern Israel on October 7. The former Shin Bet director argues that the prime minister’s accusations misrepresent his conduct before the attack and damage his reputation.

The court filing also raises questions about Netanyahu’s approach to targeted assassinations, including an allegation that the prime minister expressed concern that expanding such operations could expose him personally to retaliatory attacks.

The claims are Bar’s account of events and have not been established as judicial findings. Netanyahu disputes Bar’s characterization of the security failures and maintains that the former intelligence chief failed to alert him during the critical hours before the Hamas invasion.

Early Warnings About Yahya Sinwar

According to the lawsuit, Bar had already recommended eliminating Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar well before Netanyahu returned to the prime minister’s office in late 2022.

During a November 7, 2022, meeting between the two men, Bar reportedly informed Netanyahu that the Shin Bet had developed an operational plan to assassinate Sinwar, who was then Hamas’s leader in the Gaza Strip.

Bar says he had recommended carrying out the operation earlier that year, but the proposal was never advanced.

The former Shin Bet director argued that Sinwar had developed a strategy of directing terrorist attacks in Yehudah and Shomron from Gaza while avoiding significant Israeli retaliation against Hamas inside the Strip.

According to Bar, the absence of a substantial military response allowed Hamas to operate with an increasing sense of immunity. He believed Israel needed to abandon that approach and impose a direct price on the organization’s leadership to restore deterrence.

On January 8, 2023, following another terrorist operation directed from Gaza into Yehudah and Shomron, Bar says he again recommended action against Hamas. That proposal, too, was not implemented, according to his lawsuit.

By April, Bar’s warnings had broadened beyond individual terrorist operations to encompass the overall deterioration of Israel’s security environment.

At an April 19 assessment, he warned that terrorist organizations were increasingly interpreting Israel’s internal political divisions and weakened deterrence as an opportunity to intensify attacks.

He recommended striking terrorist operatives who were directing attacks from Gaza, arguing that they had come to believe they could operate without facing serious consequences.

Netanyahu Allegedly Feared Personal Retaliation

A further confrontation over targeted assassinations allegedly occurred on May 21, 2023, following Israel’s military campaign against Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

During a meeting with Netanyahu, Bar reviewed the lessons of that operation and proposed significantly expanding Israel’s use of targeted killings, including beyond Islamic Jihad and into other terrorist organizations and operational arenas.

According to the lawsuit, Bar presented intelligence suggesting that Sinwar’s ideological outlook was becoming increasingly extreme and that Hamas was moving toward a more dangerous confrontation with Israel.

Bar argued that a precisely executed offensive operation at the beginning of a conflict could potentially shorten the fighting and reduce casualties by eliminating senior commanders before they could direct further attacks.

Netanyahu’s response, as described in the court filing, was to raise concerns about the possibility of personal retaliation against him if Israel broadened its assassination policy.

Bar’s allegation suggests that the discussion extended beyond the military consequences of targeting Hamas leaders to include the potential security risks facing the prime minister himself.

The lawsuit does not establish whether such concerns were the determining factor behind any particular operational decision.

An Unusual Warning Letter

The May discussion followed an earlier written warning that Bar says he delivered directly to Netanyahu on February 13, 2023.

In that letter, the Shin Bet chief reportedly warned that Israel was confronting a dangerous combination of declining deterrence, growing instability in the Palestinian arena, and deepening divisions within Israeli society.

Bar viewed the convergence of those developments as creating an increasingly favorable environment for Israel’s enemies.

According to the lawsuit, Netanyahu responded by emphasizing the Shin Bet’s responsibility for protecting elected officials, including the prime minister and members of his family.

The exchange is cited by Bar as part of his broader argument that the country’s security leadership had repeatedly been informed of the deteriorating situation long before October 7.

Warnings Intensified Before the Yomim Tovim

Bar maintains that the government’s approach toward Hamas remained largely unchanged throughout the summer of 2023, despite repeated assessments warning of a possible escalation.

On August 20, he presented a security assessment covering multiple fronts and warning of a heightened risk of confrontation during the approaching Tishrei Yomim Tovim.

The following day, Bar says he personally warned Netanyahu that terrorist activity directed from Gaza was becoming increasingly severe.

According to the lawsuit, Netanyahu acknowledged the need to address the Hamas command structure responsible for directing attacks from the Strip, but the proposed measures were not advanced.

At a September 12 security cabinet meeting, Bar delivered another assessment describing what he considered an unusually high number of attempted terrorist attacks against Israel.

He argued that Israel could no longer rely exclusively on defensive measures to intercept attacks and arrest operatives. Without offensive action against those organizing the terrorism, he warned, the underlying security situation would remain unchanged.

Netanyahu, according to Bar’s account, stressed the importance of getting through the approaching Yomim Tovim with as little security escalation as possible.

Nine days later, on September 21, the Shin Bet submitted a professional assessment to the prime minister outlining the possibility of a preemptive offensive operation.

The recommendation, however, called for implementing such an operation after the Yomim Tovim, reflecting the government’s stated preference to avoid provoking a confrontation during that period.

At another meeting on September 27, Netanyahu reportedly reiterated that he did not want a major escalation with Gaza and instructed security officials to use force in a measured manner.

The October 1 Meeting

The most consequential discussion described in Bar’s lawsuit took place on October 1, less than a week before Hamas launched its massive assault.

According to the filing, Bar told Netanyahu that terrorist activity being directed from Gaza had reached an exceptional level and warned that Israel could find itself drawn into a confrontation even before the Yomim Tovim concluded.

Bar recommended accelerating preparations for targeted operations against senior Hamas figures responsible for directing terrorist activity.

Netanyahu reportedly agreed that the preparations should move forward.

However, Bar claims that the prime minister’s authorization did not lead to a follow-up meeting or an operational decision to execute the proposed strikes.

The former Shin Bet director presents that failure to advance the plans as a central element of his argument that the government did not adequately respond to his repeated warnings.

Previous disclosures concerning pre-October 7 security discussions have indicated that the Shin Bet also sought to revive plans for a simultaneous operation against Sinwar and Mohammed Deif, Hamas’s senior military commander.

The proposed strategy reportedly envisioned eliminating the two leaders and subsequently striking additional members of the terrorist organization’s command structure.

At the same time, records released by Netanyahu’s office have included instructions to improve operational readiness for targeted assassinations, indicating that preparations for such operations were discussed at the political level.

The disagreement therefore extends beyond whether assassinations were ever proposed. It concerns the precise instructions issued by Netanyahu, whether the intelligence and operational preparations were sufficiently developed, and why no strike ultimately took place.

Authorization to prepare an assassination operation is also distinct from an order to carry it out. Such missions generally require current intelligence concerning the target’s location, operational readiness, and an assessment of the possibility that the strike could trigger a wider war.

Bar’s allegations do not, by themselves, establish that an executable assassination plan was rejected or that eliminating Hamas leaders before October 7 would necessarily have prevented the massacre.

What Happened During the Hours Before the Massacre?

The lawsuit also addresses the events of the night between October 6 and October 7, when Israeli intelligence agencies detected unusual Hamas activity but failed to recognize that a massive invasion was imminent.

Netanyahu has accused Bar of failing to contact him directly despite receiving indications that Hamas was preparing some form of attack.

The prime minister argues that the Shin Bet director had access to secure communications systems and could have reached him immediately through the security personnel assigned to protect him.

Bar rejects the accusation that he deliberately withheld information.

According to his filing, the Shin Bet distributed an intelligence warning at 3:03 a.m. identifying indications of possible offensive activity by Hamas.

Bar also maintains that instructions were issued to notify Netanyahu’s military secretary and that the relevant communications were documented in the Shin Bet’s operational records.

Additional reporting on the lawsuit indicates that Bar personally spoke with Netanyahu on a secure line on July 23, 2023, and delivered what he described as a strategic warning of possible war. He reportedly warned that Israel’s enemies viewed the country’s internal divisions as an opportunity to launch attacks and urged consideration of preemptive military action.

The lawsuit further disputes Netanyahu’s suggestion that the Shin Bet director had authority over all the emergency measures that might have reduced casualties on October 7.

Bar argues that his agency was not responsible for commanding IDF forces, determining the deployment of local emergency response teams, or deciding whether civilian gatherings such as the Nova music festival should be evacuated.

Those responsibilities, he maintains, belonged to other elements of Israel’s military and civilian security establishment.

Bar Acknowledges Shin Bet’s Failures

Despite his accusations against Netanyahu, Bar acknowledges that the Shin Bet failed to provide the intelligence necessary to anticipate the scale and timing of the October 7 assault.

He says he accepted personal responsibility for those failures and ultimately resigned as director of the agency in June 2025.

Bar maintains, however, that accepting responsibility for the intelligence failure does not justify accusations that he knowingly concealed information about an impending massacre.

His lawsuit challenges statements published by Netanyahu on September 28, in which the prime minister accused him of serious failures and misconduct connected to the events preceding the Hamas attack.

Bar is seeking 3 million shekels in compensation, along with legal expenses and a correction or retraction of the disputed statements.

He is also asking the court to require the disclosure of relevant documents and records from the prime minister’s office, potentially bringing previously confidential security discussions into the legal proceedings.

In his filing, Bar connects the dispute to his earlier allegations involving individuals associated with Netanyahu’s office and their reported connections to Qatar, as well as claims that the prime minister sought to involve the Shin Bet in monitoring political demonstrations.

Netanyahu has disputed allegations of improper conduct, and the claims raised by Bar remain contested.

Bar argues that a formal state commission of inquiry should examine the decisions and intelligence failures surrounding October 7. In the absence of such an inquiry, he says the legal proceedings may provide an opportunity to establish a fuller public record.

Netanyahu Fires Back

Netanyahu responded sharply to the lawsuit, rejecting Bar’s explanation for why he did not personally telephone the prime minister during the hours before the attack.

“Ronen Bar, who saw the warning signs on the night of October 7 and did not call me, now says he didn’t have my phone number. Ronen, are you serious?” Netanyahu said.

“You had my secure hotline number, and you could have called me immediately, as all the heads of the security establishment do. The Shin Bet security guards, your subordinates, who are with me 24/7, could have reached me within minutes. How many lives could we have saved if only you had called in time?”

The prime minister’s response places renewed emphasis on the critical hours before the attack, when Israeli security agencies detected suspicious developments in Gaza but did not issue a warning commensurate with the scale of the assault that followed.

Bar’s lawsuit, meanwhile, seeks to broaden the examination beyond those final hours to include the government’s security policy throughout 2023, its handling of repeated warnings, and the decisions that left Hamas’s senior leadership in place.

The dispute now places before the courts competing accounts of the warnings, operational recommendations, and communications that preceded October 7, with Bar seeking the release of documents that he argues will substantiate his version of events.

{Matzav.com}

A Singapore-flagged container ship has sunk in the Strait of Hormuz after being struck by an unidentified projectile, while a second vessel was damaged in another attack and a third ship was reported to be sinking, marking a dangerous escalation in Iran’s campaign against commercial shipping in one of the world’s most strategically important waterways.

The vessel, identified as the GFS Pride, was struck Tuesday, October 13, while traveling through the strait. The impact caused extensive damage and sparked a fire aboard the ship, which subsequently sank.

Singapore’s Maritime and Port Authority confirmed Wednesday that all 21 crew members were safely evacuated and that no injuries were reported.

The ship had a capacity of approximately 2,824 twenty-foot shipping containers and was managed by GFS Ship Management FZE, a company based in the United Arab Emirates.

The sinking comes amid a sharp increase in attacks on commercial vessels near the Strait of Hormuz, as Iran seeks to exert pressure on the United States and its regional allies during the continuing confrontation that began with American and Israeli strikes against Iran on February 28.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy claimed Wednesday that a container ship carrying more than 2,500 containers had struck a naval mine while attempting to navigate what Tehran described as an unauthorized and dangerous route through the strait.

According to the Iranian account, the vessel caught fire after striking the mine and eventually sank in waters south of the strategic passage.

Iranian authorities warned other ships and local fishermen to exercise caution because shipping containers from the sunken vessel were floating in the surrounding waters.

Maritime security sources, however, reported that the GFS Pride had been struck by a projectile. The precise cause of the sinking has not been independently established, and Iran’s claim that a naval mine was responsible remains unverified.

Pakistan’s hydrographic authorities issued a navigational warning Wednesday advising ships that a commercial vessel had sunk in the area and that floating containers posed a hazard to maritime traffic.

In a separate incident, Singaporean authorities confirmed that another container ship, the GFS Giselle, had been struck by an unidentified projectile Wednesday while passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

The second vessel sustained damage to its hull but remained operational and was able to reach a safe anchorage under its own power.

All 22 crew members aboard the GFS Giselle were reported safe, with no injuries.

Singapore’s Maritime and Port Authority condemned the attacks and expressed alarm over the growing danger to civilian shipping.

“MPA is deeply concerned about the continued attacks on commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz,” the authority said.

“Such attacks are unprovoked, unjustifiable, and a breach of international law.”

The agency emphasized that commercial shipping must be protected under international maritime law and that attacks endangering civilian crews cannot be justified.

The sinking of the GFS Pride represents the second confirmed loss of a commercial vessel since the war involving the United States and Iran began in February, according to data from the International Maritime Organization, a United Nations agency.

The Maltese-flagged container ship Safeen Prestige was struck by a projectile in March and subsequently sank north of the Strait of Hormuz.

Wednesday also brought reports that another commercial vessel, the Cape Dao, was sinking after an unsuccessful effort to salvage it.

The Antigua and Barbuda-flagged bulk carrier had been struck by a projectile on September 23 near the Strait of Hormuz.

British maritime security firm Vanguard reported that attempts to save the vessel had failed and that it was now believed to be sinking.

One crew member was reportedly killed in the original September attack.

The Cape Dao, a large bulk carrier with a deadweight capacity of approximately 170,000 tons, was managed by Peonies Shipmanagement FZE, also based in the United Arab Emirates.

The latest attacks come as Iran’s Revolutionary Guards adopt increasingly aggressive tactics aimed at disrupting shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

The narrow waterway connects the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and serves as a critical route for global energy supplies. Before the war, approximately one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas trade passed through the strait.

Iran has sought to restrict maritime traffic through the passage as part of its confrontation with Washington, while the United States has imposed a naval blockade on Iranian ports and expanded economic sanctions against Tehran.

Two senior Iranian officials told Reuters that Tehran was employing new tactics against commercial vessels in an effort to keep global oil prices elevated and influence the political climate in the United States ahead of the November midterm elections.

The strategy appears intended to increase the economic consequences of the conflict by threatening international trade and energy supplies.

Although attacks have frequently targeted oil tankers, recent incidents demonstrate that container ships and bulk carriers are also vulnerable.

The Revolutionary Guards have issued increasingly threatening statements toward vessels attempting to navigate the strait without complying with Iranian instructions.

Iranian military officials have also claimed to have deployed additional forces and more advanced weapons in the area, while warning American warships against approaching the passage.

U.S. Central Command has rejected Iranian claims of control over the Strait of Hormuz, maintaining that commercial traffic continues to move through the waterway despite Tehran’s threats.

American military officials have also disputed Iranian assertions about the effectiveness of its naval forces, while continuing operations intended to restrict Iranian maritime activity.

The renewed attacks have raised concerns among shipping companies, insurers and international maritime authorities about the safety of vessels attempting to transit the region.

The danger extends beyond the immediate threat of missiles, drones and naval mines. Damaged or sinking ships, floating containers and other debris can create additional hazards for vessels navigating the already congested waterway.

The attacks also threaten to increase shipping costs as companies confront higher insurance premiums, security expenses and the possibility of losing vessels and cargo.

With two Singapore-registered container ships struck in consecutive days and the Cape Dao reportedly sinking following an earlier attack, maritime authorities are warning that the risks to civilian crews and international commerce are continuing to intensify.

Tosher chassidim around the world have been asked to increase their tefillos for the refuah sheleimah of the Tosher Rebbe, who is scheduled to undergo a planned eye procedure today, Wednesday, at a specialized medical facility in the Fort Lauderdale area of Florida.

The procedure, described as relatively minor, is intended to improve the Rebbe’s eyesight following a period during which he experienced weakness and discomfort affecting his eyes.

The Rebbe, who has been spending recent weeks resting at his residence in Florida, is scheduled to undergo two separate treatments as part of the medical plan recommended by his physicians.

The first procedure is taking place today at a leading ophthalmology clinic near Fort Lauderdale. On Tuesday, the Rebbe visited the medical facility for a series of preliminary examinations and tests in preparation for the treatment.

According to reports, medical specialists who evaluated the Rebbe’s condition recommended a particular procedure that they believe, b’ezras Hashem, will improve his vision and enable him to continue his avodas hakodesh without the discomfort he has recently experienced.

Following the initial procedure, the Rebbe is expected to return to his residence in Fort Lauderdale, where he will remain for rest and recuperation while awaiting the second scheduled treatment.

Once both procedures have been completed and the recovery period has concluded, the Rebbe is expected to return to his home in Kiryas Tosh, Quebec, Canada, where the center of the Tosh chassidus is located.

According to sources, the Rebbe undergoes this type of eye treatment approximately once every 15 years. His father, the previous Tosher Rebbe, zt”l, also underwent similar treatments.

Israeli security officials are warning that the Lebanese army has made virtually no progress in dismantling Hezbollah’s military infrastructure, despite receiving intelligence and assistance from Israel, raising serious questions about whether Lebanon is capable of fulfilling its commitments to disarm the Iranian-backed terrorist organization.

The assessment, disclosed Wednesday by i24NEWS, comes as Israel and Lebanon prepare for another round of American-mediated military discussions later this month, with Israeli officials increasingly concerned that Hezbollah is using the current arrangements to rebuild its capabilities and replenish its weapons.

According to a senior Israeli security official, the Lebanese Armed Forces have failed to take meaningful action against Hezbollah positions and facilities, even when provided with information identifying terrorist infrastructure that should be dismantled.

The official described the situation as one in which Israel is attempting to facilitate the Lebanese military’s work, but the expected results are simply not materializing.

Israeli defense officials believe there are two possible explanations for the Lebanese army’s failure to act. Either its commanders are reluctant to confront Hezbollah because they fear the consequences, or elements within the military are cooperating with the terrorist organization.

Both possibilities are deeply troubling to Israel, which has insisted that any lasting security arrangement along its northern border must prevent Hezbollah from reestablishing the military infrastructure that previously enabled it to threaten Israeli communities.

The latest concerns center on the implementation of the security framework negotiated between Israel and Lebanon under American auspices. The agreement envisions the removal of Hezbollah and other armed organizations from designated areas, followed by the deployment of Lebanese government forces to assume responsibility for security.

Under the arrangement, the Lebanese army is supposed to dismantle weapons caches, tunnels, command centers and other military installations belonging to Hezbollah, while preventing terrorist operatives from returning to areas cleared of their presence.

The framework also establishes a phased process for Israeli military withdrawals, with each stage dependent on verification that Hezbollah’s infrastructure has been removed and that Lebanese forces are capable of maintaining control.

Israeli officials now say the Lebanese army has failed to demonstrate that it can carry out those responsibilities.

The lack of progress is particularly concerning because Israel has reportedly been providing intelligence intended to help Lebanese forces identify Hezbollah facilities and operational positions.

Despite that assistance, Israeli security officials say the Lebanese military has not asserted its authority over the terrorist organization.

At the same time, the IDF is monitoring Hezbollah’s efforts to restore its military capabilities, including attempts to replenish weapons and rebuild infrastructure damaged during Israeli operations.

Israeli officials acknowledge that the terrorist organization remains determined to reestablish its presence and operational strength, even as international diplomatic efforts seek to stabilize the border.

Nevertheless, some Israeli security officials believe the current situation offers an important advantage: the existing security arrangement preserves Israel’s ability to act independently against threats.

Under that understanding, the IDF can continue targeting Hezbollah infrastructure and operatives when necessary rather than relying exclusively on the Lebanese army to address emerging dangers.

Israeli officials view that operational freedom as essential so long as Hezbollah remains armed and Lebanese forces fail to fulfill their commitments.

The dispute is expected to feature prominently in the next round of military-level discussions scheduled for October 20 and 22 at the headquarters of U.S. Central Command in Tampa, Florida.

Those talks are intended to advance arrangements for verifying Hezbollah’s disarmament, expanding areas under Lebanese government control and coordinating further Israeli withdrawals.

However, significant disagreements remain between the two sides over how those commitments should be implemented.

Lebanese officials have accused Israel of failing to cooperate adequately with the proposed verification mechanism and have objected to Israeli demands for closer operational coordination with the Lebanese army.

According to Lebanese reporting, Israel is seeking a direct operational coordination mechanism to verify that designated areas have been cleared of Hezbollah’s military presence.

Lebanese officials have expressed reservations about that proposal, maintaining that verification should take place through an American-supported framework rather than direct Israeli oversight of Lebanese military operations.

Beirut has also continued pressing for additional Israeli withdrawals, arguing that the continued presence of Israeli troops on Lebanese territory undermines Lebanon’s sovereignty and complicates efforts to implement the agreement.

Israel, however, maintains that further withdrawals cannot be justified while Hezbollah retains military capabilities in areas that the Lebanese army is supposed to secure.

The disagreement has left the implementation process largely stalled, with each side accusing the other of failing to meet its obligations.

Another major development looming over the negotiations is the anticipated withdrawal of approximately 7,000 personnel from the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, known as UNIFIL, by the end of the year.

The departure of the international peacekeeping force would place even greater responsibility on the Lebanese army to maintain security in southern Lebanon and prevent Hezbollah from rebuilding its positions.

For years, Israel has accused UNIFIL of failing to prevent Hezbollah from establishing military infrastructure near the Israeli border, despite the international force’s mandate to support security in the area.

Israeli officials now fear that the Lebanese army could prove similarly ineffective, particularly if its commanders remain unwilling to confront Hezbollah directly.

Lebanese officials, for their part, have maintained that their military is carrying out its responsibilities and that Israeli operations and continued deployments are obstructing progress toward implementing the security agreement.

The conflicting assessments are expected to complicate the upcoming discussions in Florida, where American officials will seek to advance a verification system acceptable to both sides.

For Israel, the central question remains whether the Lebanese government can establish genuine control over territory long dominated by Hezbollah.

The IDF is continuing to monitor the terrorist organization’s attempts to rebuild its arsenal while maintaining that it will act against emerging threats, regardless of whether Lebanese forces take the steps required under the agreement.

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) is reportedly under investigation by federal authorities in both Washington, DC, and Minnesota over allegations involving possible immigration fraud and discrepancies in financial disclosures that previously placed her family’s net worth as high as $30 million.

The investigations, described by individuals familiar with the cases and an administration official, are examining separate questions surrounding the Minnesota congresswoman’s immigration history and the finances of Omar and her husband, political consultant Tim Mynett.

Jeanine Pirro, the US attorney for the District of Columbia, publicly acknowledged the existence of multiple inquiries during an appearance Tuesday on Fox News’ “America Reports,” stating that “there are several investigations going on” involving Omar.

According to individuals familiar with the investigations, federal prosecutors in Minnesota are overseeing the immigration-related inquiry, which reportedly includes questions about the accuracy of Omar’s reported date of birth. Meanwhile, Pirro’s office in Washington is examining financial matters involving Omar and Mynett, including the substantial valuations previously reported on congressional disclosure documents.

One individual familiar with the immigration investigation suggested that evidence of knowingly providing false information or concealing significant facts in immigration filings could potentially expose Omar to proceedings aimed at revoking her American citizenship.

Under federal law, criminal denaturalization cases are generally subject to a 10-year statute of limitations, while civil proceedings seeking to revoke citizenship obtained unlawfully are not governed by the same time restriction. Whether either avenue could apply to Omar would depend on the facts established by investigators and the legal basis of her citizenship.

The 44-year-old congresswoman has maintained that she obtained American citizenship in 2000 while still a minor, deriving that status through the naturalization of her father, Nur Omar Mohamed. That explanation has become a focus of renewed scrutiny because of conflicting birth-year information appearing in certain publicly available records.

Although Omar’s reported date of birth is October 4, 1982, some records reportedly identify October 4, 1981, as her birthday. If the earlier year were accurate, she would have been 18 rather than 17 when her father became a citizen, potentially raising questions about her eligibility for derivative citizenship under the circumstances she has described.

The discrepancy alone does not establish that Omar misrepresented her age or obtained citizenship improperly. Investigators would need to establish which records are accurate and whether any material false statements were knowingly submitted.

Questions surrounding Omar’s immigration history have surfaced previously, including allegations involving one of her brothers. During the 2018 congressional campaign, her campaign told the Associated Press that the family did not possess her birth certificate because of their displacement during Somalia’s prolonged civil war.

The current investigation intensified Monday when Homeland Security Investigations agents arrived at Omar’s Washington residence with a federal search warrant. Investigators searched the bungalow and were photographed departing with boxes believed to contain materials collected during the operation.

Pirro defended the search during her television appearance, emphasizing that federal agents had obtained judicial authorization before entering the congresswoman’s home.

“They got a warrant signed by a federal judge,” Pirro said.

“There’s no question that that judge would not have signed that warrant unless there was probable cause. And probably more than that, given the individual who was involved and given the fact that we’re in the nation’s capital — with judges in the nation’s capital,” she added.

The Justice Department confirmed that Monday’s operation was connected to an ongoing federal criminal investigation. One person familiar with the matter indicated that the inquiry had been underway for several years before the highly publicized search.

Federal investigators have also reportedly issued grand jury subpoenas to members of Omar’s family. Among those identified as having received a subpoena is her sister, Sahra Noor, according to reporting first published Tuesday by the New York Times.

Separate from the immigration allegations, federal authorities are examining Omar’s congressional financial filings and the valuations associated with assets held by her family.

Omar has previously faced two reviews by the Office of Congressional Conduct concerning allegations that information was omitted from financial disclosure documents. Both matters were dismissed, and neither resulted in a finding of wrongdoing against her.

The latest financial questions center on disclosures that indicated Omar and her husband could have a combined net worth approaching $30 million, followed by a subsequent revision placing the figure at approximately $95,000. The congresswoman has attributed the dramatic difference to accounting discrepancies.

The existence of substantial changes in reported valuations does not, by itself, demonstrate that the original filings were intentionally falsified. Federal investigators would have to determine whether any inaccurate information was knowingly reported and whether it violated applicable disclosure laws.

Omar responded to the search of her residence by accusing President Donald Trump of using federal law enforcement to intimidate a political opponent, insisting that she “will not be silenced.”

“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,” she said.

A spokesperson for the congresswoman also rejected suggestions of criminal conduct.

“The Congresswoman has done nothing wrong,” the representative said.

Trump, who has repeatedly criticized Omar over her political positions and public statements, denied having directed the investigation or participating in decisions concerning the search.

“I have nothing to do with it,” the president said.

Nevertheless, Trump continued his criticism of the Minnesota Democrat, describing her Monday as a “totally crooked” politician.

“I think she’s a terrible person. Just a complainer. She comes from a country that is a non-country. And then she comes over here, and she complains about our Constitution,” the president said.

On Tuesday, Trump again turned his attention to Omar’s finances, posting on Truth Social about the striking reduction in her reported net worth from as much as $30 million to approximately $95,000 and questioning the accounting explanation offered for the change.

Additional reporting Wednesday revealed that the financial investigation involves two businesses associated with Mynett: eStCru LLC, a California winery, and Rose Lake Capital LLC, a Washington-based venture capital firm.

According to the original congressional filings, the winery’s reported value increased from between $15,000 and $50,000 in 2023 to between $1 million and $5 million in 2024. Rose Lake Capital showed an even greater increase, climbing from a reported value of between $1 and $1,000 to between $5 million and $25 million during the same period.

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer requested financial documents from both companies in February. Omar subsequently amended her disclosures in April, reporting combined assets valued between $18,004 and $95,000 after accounting for business liabilities.

In September, the Office of Congressional Conduct voted 5-1 to recommend dismissing allegations concerning the disclosures, finding insufficient grounds to conclude that Omar had violated federal law or House rules.

Mynett, meanwhile, expressed confidence in his wife’s position when approached Wednesday by Fox News Digital outside their Washington residence.

“My wife came here when she was 12 years old as a child war refugee,” he said. “No concerns.”

The investigations have also triggered criticism from Democratic leaders, who have questioned the timing of the search just weeks before the November midterm elections. Federal authorities have maintained that the operation was authorized by a judge, while critics argue that conducting such a highly visible search so close to an election raises concerns about political interference.

No criminal charges against Omar have been publicly announced in connection with either investigation.

A federal judge appointed by President Donald Trump has ordered the White House to continue allowing journalists from CNN, Politico and MS NOW to enter the presidential complex, ruling that the administration likely violated constitutional protections when it barred the three news organizations over their coverage of the president.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly issued a preliminary injunction Tuesday night, October 13, extending an earlier emergency order that had temporarily restored the reporters’ White House credentials. The latest ruling allows journalists from the three organizations to retain access while their lawsuit against the administration proceeds, potentially for months or longer.

Kelly, whom Trump appointed to the federal bench in 2017, concluded that the news organizations were likely to succeed in their claims that the administration violated their First Amendment rights and denied them due process under the Fifth Amendment.

The dispute began September 18, when Trump announced on Truth Social that CNN, MS NOW and Politico would no longer be permitted to operate inside the White House because of what he described as their consistently inaccurate and hostile reporting.

The president accused the outlets of spreading misinformation and declared that they “shouldn’t be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES when they’re covering the President of the United States.”

The following day, journalists from the three organizations who attempted to enter the White House were turned away by Secret Service personnel, and their press credentials were revoked.

The restrictions affected approximately 78 journalists who held permanent White House credentials, commonly known as hard passes, allowing them to enter the complex without obtaining daily authorization.

The three organizations filed a federal lawsuit September 21, arguing that the president had improperly retaliated against them because of their reporting and had revoked their credentials without providing advance notice or an opportunity to contest the decision.

On September 24, Kelly issued a temporary restraining order directing the administration to restore their credentials. That order was scheduled to expire Tuesday, prompting the news organizations to seek longer-lasting protection.

In his latest 26-page ruling, Kelly concluded that the White House had failed to establish an adequate legal basis for removing the journalists.

The judge emphasized that the president’s own public statements appeared to undermine the Justice Department’s argument that the restrictions were necessary to protect national security.

Government attorneys had maintained that the news organizations published material that threatened national security, including reporting involving American missile stockpiles and other sensitive government matters.

They also argued that access to the White House is a privilege rather than an absolute constitutional right and that the president has broad authority to determine which journalists may enter the complex.

The judge, however, found that the administration’s explanations were difficult to reconcile with Trump’s repeated public statements criticizing the outlets for unfavorable coverage.

“President Trump’s own comments suggest that he intended the revocation of Plaintiffs’ hard passes to alter their reporting on him, bolstering the case that his action here is sufficient to deter a reporter of ordinary firmness from reporting in the same way she had before,” Kelly wrote.

The judge also found that the White House had failed to provide the news organizations with sufficient warning before taking action against their credentials.

Although the administration subsequently sent letters explaining its objections to the outlets’ reporting, those communications came after the journalists had already been excluded from the White House.

Kelly determined that the lack of advance notice and a meaningful opportunity to respond likely violated constitutional due process requirements.

The ruling also addressed whether the administration had engaged in unconstitutional discrimination based on the viewpoints expressed by the three organizations.

Kelly found that the plaintiffs had demonstrated a likelihood of success on their First Amendment claims, concluding that the president’s statements suggested an effort to influence how the outlets covered his administration.

Nevertheless, the judge stressed that his decision should not be interpreted as a determination that the president’s criticism of the media was unjustified.

“Still,” Kelly wrote, “no one should interpret the Court’s decision to suggest that President Trump’s concerns about accuracy and fairness in the media’s reporting are unfounded, or that the government is powerless when its true aim is to protect national security when classified information is unlawfully disclosed.”

The distinction is significant because the court did not rule that journalists have an unrestricted right to enter the White House or that the administration cannot impose legitimate security requirements.

Rather, Kelly concluded that the government cannot revoke previously granted press credentials in a manner that likely violates constitutional protections.

The ruling represents another setback for the administration in its continuing legal disputes with major news organizations.

During an October 8 hearing, attorneys for the three outlets argued that Trump’s own remarks demonstrated that the restrictions were intended to pressure journalists into providing more favorable coverage.

“Here we have the unusual situation where the president himself has said he wants to chill speech. He wants to coerce better coverage,” attorney Theodore Boutrous told the court.

Justice Department attorney Michael Velchik defended the administration’s actions, arguing that the three organizations had engaged in conduct warranting the restrictions.

“CNN, MS NOW and Politico engaged in apparently indefensible conduct,” Velchik said.

Following Tuesday’s decision, Boutrous welcomed the injunction and accused the administration of attempting to punish journalists for reporting the president disliked.

“When the President issued his ‘ban on the free press,’ he blatantly and explicitly violated due process and the First Amendment,” Boutrous said.

He added that the administration’s actions had caused serious harm to the news organizations and the public.

“The harm this ban did to our clients, the First Amendment, and the public as a whole is profound,” he said.

The preliminary injunction does not necessarily resolve separate disputes concerning access to more restricted areas or activities, including the Oval Office and Air Force One.

Despite the earlier court order restoring their White House credentials, journalists from CNN and Politico have reportedly continued to face restrictions on certain presidential press-pool assignments, including flights aboard Air Force One.

The administration has maintained that participation in such assignments is distinct from ordinary access to the White House grounds.

Those questions could become the subject of further litigation as the case continues.

Trump previously indicated that the administration would appeal an unfavorable ruling, although no final judgment has yet been issued in the case.

Kelly’s injunction will remain in effect while the lawsuit proceeds unless it is modified or overturned by a higher court.

A 10-year-old boy was tragically niftar Wednesday afternoon after being critically injured by an explosion inside a burning garbage container on Rebbe of Nadvorna Street in Beitar Illit.

The child was standing near the container when an unidentified object apparently exploded amid the flames and struck him, causing devastating injuries throughout his body. Despite emergency resuscitation efforts and his evacuation to Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital, his death was subsequently confirmed.

Magen David Adom received the emergency call at 4:56 p.m., reporting a seriously injured child at the scene of a garbage fire. Paramedics and emergency medical technicians rushed to the location and found the boy unconscious, suffering from severe multisystem trauma.

Emergency responders immediately began lifesaving treatment, including CPR, as they worked to stabilize the child for urgent transportation to the hospital.

Moshe Fordsham, a United Hatzalah ambulance driver who happened to be traveling nearby when the explosion occurred, described hearing the blast and rushing to the child’s assistance.

“While driving in a United Hatzalah ambulance, I heard a powerful explosion. I got out of the ambulance and noticed a boy about 10 years old who was unconscious and suffering from severe injuries to his body. I performed resuscitation efforts, and afterward he was evacuated to Hadassah Ein Kerem Hospital in critical condition,” Fordsham said.

At the same time, firefighters and volunteers from the Yehuda Regional Fire Station responded to the burning refuse container and worked to extinguish the flames.

Firefighters at the scene confirmed that the explosion occurred while the contents of the container were burning, with the resulting blast causing the child’s catastrophic injuries.

Police officers joined the emergency crews and began investigating what had ignited the container and what object had exploded inside it.

According to an initial police statement, the precise circumstances surrounding the incident remain unclear.

“A garbage container (recycling bin) caught fire for a reason that is not yet known, and as a result, an unidentified object flew out of it and struck the body of a boy about 10 years old who was nearby. As a result, the child was seriously injured and was evacuated for further treatment at the hospital. Police forces are at the scene together with firefighters and have begun investigating the circumstances of the incident,” police said.

Investigators are working to determine the source of the explosion and identify the object that was propelled from the burning container.

The Justice Department has reportedly issued subpoenas to relatives of Rep. Ilhan Omar as federal investigators expand their examination of allegations involving the Minnesota Democrat’s immigration history, marking another significant development just one day after federal agents searched her Washington-area residence.

The subpoenas, reported Tuesday by The New York Times, represent the latest step in a longstanding inquiry that has drawn national attention because of Omar’s repeated clashes with President Donald Trump and the administration’s public accusations concerning her immigration background.

The investigation has also sparked a fierce political confrontation, with Omar and leading congressional Democrats accusing the administration of using federal law enforcement to intimidate one of the president’s most outspoken political adversaries.

Omar responded to Monday’s search with a statement on social media accusing Trump of pursuing a yearslong campaign against her.

“For ten years, Trump has targeted me with baseless lies and smear campaigns,” Omar wrote on social media Monday. “This is just the latest escalation in his campaign of political intimidation. I will not be silenced.”

Federal officials have confirmed that agents from Homeland Security Investigations executed a court-authorized search warrant at Omar’s home on Monday. Authorities have not disclosed the precise evidence being sought or provided a detailed public explanation of the investigation’s scope.

The newly reported subpoenas suggest that investigators are seeking additional information from individuals connected to Omar, although the identities of the relatives involved and the specific testimony or documents being requested have not been publicly established.

A grand jury subpoena can compel a recipient to provide records or appear for testimony as part of a criminal investigation. The issuance of such a subpoena does not necessarily mean the recipient is suspected of committing a crime.

The federal inquiry follows months of public statements by senior Trump administration officials concerning allegations about Omar’s immigration history and whether information provided during the immigration process was accurate.

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said last month that investigators were examining, among other questions, whether Omar had provided false information on immigration documents.

Mullin indicated that the investigation was continuing and suggested that additional developments could follow, declaring that “something’s going to happen,” according to The Associated Press.

Omar was born in Somalia and subsequently became a naturalized American citizen. She has consistently denied accusations of wrongdoing involving her immigration status and has rejected allegations that she obtained citizenship through fraudulent means.

The congresswoman has long been a prominent critic of Trump’s immigration policies and broader political agenda, frequently drawing sharp responses from the president and other administration officials.

Trump, speaking Monday after news of the federal search became public, denied any personal involvement in the operation.

He said he had “nothing to do” with the search while simultaneously describing Omar as “totally crooked, personally,” according to the AP.

The timing of the investigation has intensified the controversy surrounding the case. The search occurred approximately three weeks before the November 3 midterm elections, when Omar is seeking reelection to her Minneapolis-area congressional seat.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and other senior Democrats condemned the operation, accusing the administration of directing federal investigative resources against an elected official because of her political opposition to the president.

Rep. Jamie Raskin of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, similarly criticized the search, describing it as political harassment and questioning its consistency with longstanding Justice Department practices intended to prevent criminal investigations from improperly influencing elections.

Those departmental guidelines generally discourage overt investigative actions undertaken for electoral purposes. However, the execution of a search warrant approved by a federal judge does not, by itself, establish that investigators acted for political reasons.

Additional reporting has shed light on the specific questions federal authorities are pursuing. Investigators are reportedly examining immigration paperwork filed by Omar’s late father, Nur Omar Mohamed, including whether information about his background was accurately represented when the family entered the United States.

According to reports, the inquiry is also examining whether Omar’s date of birth was recorded correctly and whether her eligibility for citizenship through her father’s naturalization was properly established.

Omar has maintained that she became an American citizen at age 17 through her father’s citizenship. Federal investigators are reportedly reviewing records dating back decades to determine whether any false statements affected that process.

Among the relatives subpoenaed is Omar’s sister, Sahra Noor, according to reports citing people familiar with the investigation. At least one additional family member has also reportedly received a subpoena.

Separately, federal prosecutors in Washington are reportedly examining questions surrounding Omar’s financial disclosure statements, including changes in the reported value of assets associated with her household.

That financial inquiry is distinct from the investigation into her family’s immigration records. Omar has disputed suggestions of financial wrongdoing, and discrepancies in the reported figures have been attributed to accounting issues.

Vice President JD Vance has previously raised accusations concerning Omar’s immigration history, adding to the public pressure surrounding the congresswoman.

Despite the expanding federal scrutiny, authorities have not publicly disclosed evidence establishing that Omar committed immigration fraud or any other criminal offense.

No criminal charges have been announced against the congresswoman in connection with either investigation.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu issued a stark warning to Iran on Wednesday, declaring that any Iranian attack against Israel on Election Day would bring devastating consequences, while insisting that Israel must ultimately eliminate the Iranian threat altogether.

In a wide-ranging interview with Galei Israel radio, Netanyahu addressed the possibility that Tehran could attempt to exploit Israel’s upcoming elections to launch an attack. He stressed that Israel remains prepared for such a scenario and cautioned the Iranian leadership against miscalculating the country’s willingness to respond.

“If Iran makes this mistake, it will be the last mistake they ever make. Literally,” Netanyahu declared. “And I warn our enemies: Do not misjudge us. Whether they attack or not, we must eliminate this threat once and for all.”

The prime minister portrayed Israel’s recent military and security operations as having fundamentally changed the strategic situation in the region, arguing that the country had achieved substantial successes against its enemies.

“We have accomplished a great deal. We have brought about a historic transformation here,” Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu also addressed security developments in Yehuda and Shomron, including the controversy surrounding the possible return of displaced Palestinians to a refugee camp following proceedings before Israel’s Supreme Court.

The prime minister rejected the possibility of allowing those individuals to return, arguing that the area had served as a base for terrorist activity.

“No, we will not bring them back. These were not residents but collaborators with terrorism,” Netanyahu said.

He further asserted that Israeli counterterrorism operations had dramatically reduced terrorist activity throughout Yehuda and Shomron.

“Today, terrorism has dropped by 80% in Yehuda and Shomron,” Netanyahu claimed.

The interview then turned to Netanyahu’s longstanding confrontation with Israel’s legal establishment, with the prime minister launching a fierce attack against senior officials who oversaw the criminal investigations and prosecution against him.

Netanyahu called for criminal investigations into former Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit, former State Attorney Shai Nitzan, former Tel Aviv District Attorney Liat Ben-Ari and prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh, accusing them of serious misconduct in their handling of his cases.

He also demanded scrutiny of senior police investigators who participated in the investigations, arguing that the conduct of law enforcement officials warranted examination rather than continued acceptance of the allegations against him.

The prime minister revisited the phrase that became closely associated with his defense when the investigations first emerged, “There will be nothing because there was nothing,” maintaining that subsequent developments had vindicated his position.

“Remember when I said, ‘There will be nothing because there was nothing’? Well, it turns out there was nothing on my side. But there were many, many offenses on their side,” Netanyahu said.

He accused investigators and prosecutors of pursuing him for political reasons and claimed their actions had inflicted extraordinary personal and emotional harm on him and those close to him.

“This was a vicious political witch hunt that caused unimaginable suffering to me, my family and those around me,” Netanyahu charged.

Netanyahu also raised allegations about the procedures used to authorize the indictments against him, questioning whether the necessary legal reviews had been properly conducted before the charges were filed.

Among his accusations was the claim that investigators employed highly sophisticated surveillance technology during their work.

“They used the most advanced spyware in the world,” Netanyahu said.

The prime minister further alleged that Mandelblit had failed to properly review the evidence and documentation associated with the prosecution, and he questioned the former attorney general’s handling of the indictment process.

“He didn’t read the letter. He didn’t examine the evidence. So why did you do it?” Netanyahu asked.

Netanyahu argued that the consequences of the investigations extended far beyond his own legal difficulties, claiming that the cases had destabilized Israeli politics and contributed to the prolonged period in which the country repeatedly returned to the polls.

He maintained that the legal proceedings helped fuel the political turmoil that produced five national elections within several years, imposing enormous financial costs on the public.

“Today people understand that this is a political trial, and it led us to five election campaigns, spending billions on unnecessary elections and unnecessary investigations,” Netanyahu said.

The prime minister insisted that the allegations he was raising concerned the integrity of Israel’s democratic institutions and the proper exercise of power by prosecutors and investigators.

“This is not merely a personal injury to me. It is a danger to democracy. There is a need for clear reform, and we will carry it out,” he declared.

Netanyahu concluded by reiterating his demand for an investigation into Mandelblit, Nitzan, Ben-Ari, Tirosh and senior members of the police investigative teams, asserting that their conduct in connection with his criminal cases must be subjected to formal scrutiny.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani declared Tuesday that he has no intention of removing NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch, rejecting mounting demands from his own far-left political supporters to dismiss the city’s top police official following a controversial federal immigration enforcement shooting in the Bronx.

The mayor’s public defense of Tisch came as he appeared alongside the commissioner at a ceremony honoring fallen NYPD officers, presenting a united front despite growing tensions between City Hall and progressive activists who have been pressing Mamdani to take a more confrontational approach toward the Police Department.

“Jessica Tisch is the police commissioner. I have no plans to change that,” Mamdani told reporters during a press conference in Queens ahead of the memorial ceremony.

He went on to explain that his decision to retain Tisch was based on her previous efforts to address misconduct within the department’s leadership.

“The reason that I made the decision to have Jessica Tisch as the police commissioner was because of her record of uprooting corruption from the upper echelons of the NYPD,” the mayor said.

The remarks represented a clear rebuff to members of Mamdani’s socialist political base, who have intensified their demands for Tisch’s removal following a shooting involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in the Bronx last week.

Activists affiliated with the Democratic Socialists of America have called for the commissioner to be fired and for two specialized NYPD units to be disbanded, arguing that the city’s policing policies remain incompatible with the priorities Mamdani championed during his political rise.

The dispute has placed the mayor in an increasingly difficult political position, forcing him to balance the expectations of his activist supporters against the responsibilities of overseeing the nation’s largest municipal police force.

Tisch, meanwhile, has presided over a period of significant reductions in violent crime. NYPD figures released in July showed that New York City recorded its lowest number of murders during the first six months of any year since the department began maintaining comparable statistics.

The improving crime numbers have strengthened the commissioner’s standing among law enforcement supporters, even as progressive organizations continue to criticize the department’s practices.

Mamdani and Tisch appeared together Tuesday at the New York City Police Memorial in Lower Manhattan, where the names of 42 deceased officers were formally added to the memorial wall on Liberty Street.

Their appearance marked the first time the two had publicly participated in an event together since City Hall directed the NYPD on Monday to conduct a review of its policies governing the use of force.

That directive followed mounting criticism from anti-police activists and was accompanied by an announcement of additional funding for police oversight.

Critics of the mayor have suggested that the policy review was intended, at least in part, to ease tensions with his left-wing supporters without requiring him to dismiss Tisch or make more sweeping changes to the department’s leadership.

Despite the political controversy, Mamdani and Tisch displayed no outward signs of disagreement during Tuesday’s memorial gathering. Both delivered remarks honoring officers who had lost their lives in the line of duty.

The memorial, originally dedicated in 1997, serves as a permanent tribute to members of the NYPD who died while serving the city.

Of the 42 names added Tuesday, 41 belonged to officers and other first responders who died from illnesses connected to their service following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The ceremony also honored NYPD Detective Didarul Islam, a father who was murdered in July 2025 when a gunman opened fire inside a Midtown Manhattan office building.

Addressing the families of the fallen officers, Mamdani expressed appreciation for their sacrifices and acknowledged the personal losses they continue to endure.

“I thank you for loving these New Yorkers, for raising these New Yorkers, for tending to them as they tended to all of us,” the mayor told the assembled relatives.

“While we cannot fill the silence they left behind, we will refuse to let their memory fade,” he added.

Tisch, in turn, thanked the mayor for participating in the ceremony before speaking about the officers whose names were being added to the memorial.

“Here, we pause. We pause to remember the people who helped make all of that possible, and who lost their lives in service to others,” the commissioner said.

The dispute over Tisch’s future has been fueled in part by the October 8 shooting of Oscar Belgal during a federal immigration operation in the Marble Hill section of the Bronx. According to the NYPD’s preliminary account, federal agents approached Belgal while he was seated in a vehicle with a five-year-old child. At least one federal agent fired seven shots, striking Belgal near the neck.

Tisch subsequently stated that NYPD officers had no involvement in the federal operation before the shooting and arrived only after gunfire was reported. Officers provided medical assistance and transported Belgal to a hospital, where he was listed in stable condition.

Nevertheless, progressive activists have criticized the NYPD’s response to demonstrations following the incident, with some accusing officers of using excessive force against protesters.

The New York City chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America has demanded Tisch’s removal and called for the elimination of the NYPD’s Strategic Response Group, a specialized unit frequently deployed during large demonstrations.

Mamdani has previously supported proposals to dismantle that unit, but it remains operational, adding to frustration among activists who believe the mayor has failed to follow through on important campaign commitments.

On Monday, Mamdani announced a comprehensive review of the NYPD’s use-of-force policies, the first such department-wide examination in approximately a decade. The initiative includes increased funding for the department’s inspector general and procedural changes intended to prevent officers facing serious disciplinary allegations from avoiding proceedings by retiring before their cases are resolved.

The administration has also faced scrutiny over the handling of the 2024 police shooting of 19-year-old Win Rozario in Queens, another case that has prompted demands for greater accountability within the department.

Despite the mounting criticism from his political allies, Mamdani’s decision to retain Tisch has received support beyond his progressive base. A recent Suffolk University poll found that 56% of surveyed voters supported his decision to keep the commissioner in her position.

Former Shin Bet director Ronen Bar has filed a NIS 3 million defamation lawsuit against Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, accusing him of knowingly spreading false allegations about Bar’s conduct before the October 7, 2023, Hamas massacre in an effort to shift responsibility for Israel’s devastating security failures.

The lawsuit, submitted Wednesday to the District Court, marks a dramatic escalation in the bitter confrontation between Netanyahu and his former domestic intelligence chief. It challenges a public statement issued by the prime minister that accused Bar of failing to alert the country’s political leadership, neglecting to warn security forces and failing to arrange the evacuation of the Nova music festival before Hamas terrorists invaded southern Israel.

Bar contends that Netanyahu deliberately constructed a misleading account of the hours preceding the attack to portray the former Shin Bet director as primarily responsible for the catastrophe while distancing himself from the decisions and policies that preceded it.

In the court filing, Bar acknowledges that the Shin Bet failed to provide an adequate warning before the massacre and accepts personal responsibility for the intelligence agency’s failures. However, he argues that his acknowledgment of those failures does not give Netanyahu the right to make allegations that Bar maintains are demonstrably false.

The lawsuit characterizes the prime minister’s accusations as a “blood libel” against an individual who devoted 35 years to protecting Israel’s security. Bar alleges that Netanyahu was aware of the actual sequence of events but nevertheless chose to circulate claims that would damage his reputation.

One of the central disputes concerns Netanyahu’s assertion that Bar participated in numerous telephone conversations during the night before the massacre with then-IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi and then-Military Intelligence Directorate chief Aharon Haliva, during which indications of an impending Hamas attack were supposedly discussed.

Bar categorically denies that those conversations occurred, maintaining that he did not speak with either Halevi or Haliva that night.

The former Shin Bet chief further argues that his agency did not ignore the intelligence signals emerging from Gaza. According to the lawsuit, Shin Bet personnel treated the information seriously, communicated their findings to the IDF and circulated a warning to the relevant security authorities at 3:03 a.m. on October 7.

Bar also disputes the allegation that Netanyahu’s office was left uninformed about the developments. He maintains that the prime minister’s Military Secretariat received information about the intelligence no later than 3:55 a.m. and was subsequently provided with a summary of Bar’s assessment of the situation.

Another contested issue involves the Nova music festival, where hundreds of people were murdered when Hamas terrorists attacked the gathering.

Netanyahu had accused Bar of failing to order the festival evacuated despite the warning signs that emerged during the night.

Bar responds that he was unaware the festival was taking place and argues that the Shin Bet does not possess responsibility for authorizing public events or directing their evacuation.

The lawsuit also addresses Netanyahu’s suggestion that the deployment of a Shin Bet Tequila counterterrorism unit near the Gaza border demonstrated that Bar understood a major attack was approaching but failed to warn the prime minister.

According to Bar, such teams are deployed dozens of times annually in response to intelligence indicating possible terrorist activity, and their deployment cannot reasonably be interpreted as proof that the agency anticipated an invasion on the scale of October 7.

He maintains that the Shin Bet, like the other branches of Israel’s security establishment, did not assess during the preceding night that Hamas was preparing to launch a full-scale assault.

Beyond the immediate intelligence failures, the lawsuit presents a series of allegations concerning Netanyahu’s broader approach to Hamas in the years leading up to the massacre.

Bar claims the prime minister favored a policy of “quiet at any cost” in Gaza, prioritizing the avoidance of military confrontations while allowing Hamas to remain in control of the territory.

According to the filing, Bar repeatedly cautioned Netanyahu about Hamas’s expanding military capabilities and recommended more aggressive Israeli action, including offensive operations and targeted killings of senior terrorist figures.

The former intelligence chief alleges that those recommendations were repeatedly rejected or left unimplemented.

Bar further claims that approximately two months before the October 7 massacre, he personally delivered an unusually serious warning to Netanyahu about the possibility of a coming war.

“I am conveying to you a strategic warning of war,” Bar reportedly told the prime minister, explaining that Israeli intelligence might not be able to identify the precise date or hour of an impending conflict.

The lawsuit also raises allegations concerning the transfer of Qatari money into Gaza during the years before the massacre.

Bar claims Netanyahu knew that funds entering the territory were reaching Hamas’s military wing but continued permitting the transfers despite objections from the Shin Bet.

One particularly striking allegation concerns a meeting in May 2023, when Bar says he urged Netanyahu to broaden Israel’s policy of targeted assassinations against terrorist leaders in order to restore Israeli deterrence.

According to the lawsuit, Netanyahu responded by expressing concern that terrorist organizations might retaliate against such operations by attempting to assassinate him personally.

Bar also describes disagreements over the Shin Bet’s role in formulating Israel’s broader strategy toward Hamas.

He alleges that when he submitted strategic recommendations to the prime minister, Netanyahu wrote on one document: “In a democracy, the Shin Bet is not responsible for shaping the State of Israel’s national strategy.”

On another document, Netanyahu reportedly added the handwritten comment: “This is not a directive from the head of the Shin Bet.”

Bar argues that the accusations against him were part of a broader effort to discredit him following his increasingly contentious relationship with Netanyahu, rather than an isolated disagreement over the events of October 7.

The lawsuit also references an affidavit Bar submitted during legal proceedings surrounding his dismissal as Shin Bet director. In that affidavit, Bar raised allegations concerning connections between individuals close to Netanyahu and Qatar, as well as purported attempts to involve the Shin Bet in monitoring or acting against political demonstrations.

Bar maintains that these earlier disputes provide important context for the prime minister’s subsequent public attacks on his credibility.

In addition to seeking NIS 3 million in damages, Bar is asking the court to require Netanyahu to issue a correction or retraction, pay interest and inflation adjustments on any damages awarded, and cover the legal costs of the proceedings.

He is also requesting disclosure of relevant documents in the prime minister’s possession or control, potentially placing additional internal government communications concerning the October 7 intelligence failures under judicial scrutiny.

Netanyahu responded sharply to the lawsuit, rejecting Bar’s account and returning to the central question of why the Shin Bet director did not personally telephone him during the critical hours before the Hamas invasion.

“Ronen Bar, who saw the warning signs on the night of October 7 and did not call me, now says he didn’t have my phone number.

“Ronen, are you serious? You had my secure hotline number, and you could have called me immediately, as all the heads of the security establishment do. The Shin Bet security guards, your subordinates, who are with me 24/7, could have reached me within minutes. How many lives could we have saved if only you had called in time?” Netanyahu asked.

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee is calling for a sweeping reassessment of airline security procedures following last month’s attempted hijacking of a flydubai passenger jet bound for Israel, warning that the incident could have resulted in a catastrophe comparable to the September 11 terrorist attacks had the aircraft been deliberately crashed into Ben Gurion Airport.

Speaking with New York Post columnist Miranda Devine on her “Pod Force One” podcast, Huckabee said airlines around the world should conduct far more extensive background investigations of pilots and flight attendants, including examinations of their social media activity, to identify potential security threats before they gain access to aircraft.

The ambassador’s remarks followed the extraordinary September incident in which flydubai co-pilot Hamam al-Hammami, an Omani national, allegedly attacked the aircraft’s captain with an axe and attempted to seize control of the plane while it was traveling toward Israel.

Huckabee said the incident raised serious questions about how the accused attacker was able to secure employment as a commercial airline pilot and whether warning signs had been overlooked during the hiring process.

“The question I think will be a tough one for everyone to answer: How did this guy get hired?” Huckabee asked.

The ambassador suggested that staffing pressures or inadequate background checks may have contributed to the situation, although he did not claim to know precisely what occurred during the airline’s hiring process.

“Now maybe they were just desperate for pilots, and they looked the other way at some of his background, or maybe they didn’t check. But the answer to your question: Does this change the security methods? Oh boy, does it ever!” Huckabee said.

According to reports about the incident, al-Hammami had allegedly spent months researching methods of carrying out an attack and had developed an interest in crashing a commercial passenger aircraft into a target in Israel.

Investigators have reportedly examined allegations that his intended destination was the passenger terminal at Ben Gurion Airport, where an intentional crash could have resulted in mass casualties.

Huckabee said the potential consequences of the attempted hijacking should prompt airlines everywhere to reconsider how they evaluate employees who hold sensitive positions aboard passenger aircraft.

“Not just for pilots flying into Israel, but I think every airline now is going to be looking at social media accounts. They’re going to be really wanting to know: Is there any red flag here?” he said.

The ambassador emphasized that enhanced screening should not be limited to cockpit personnel, arguing that flight attendants also occupy positions that could be exploited by someone intending to harm passengers.

“Flight attendants, same thing,” Huckabee continued, “because if you have a flight attendant, a flight attendant could wreak havoc. They have access to the cockpit.”

The attempted hijacking unfolded when al-Hammami allegedly assaulted captain Smit Machchhar inside the cockpit, leaving him injured as the aircraft began a dangerous descent.

Despite his injuries, Machchhar reportedly managed to open the cockpit door, allowing passengers to enter and overpower the co-pilot before he could complete his alleged plan.

Among those who intervened was Israeli passenger Yaniv Hayoun, a plumber with no formal flight training, who helped regain control of the aircraft during the emergency.

Huckabee said investigators were still working to establish all the details of the suspect’s intentions, but the available information pointed to an extraordinarily dangerous situation.

“This was just one of those amazing things,” Huckabee said. “And we don’t know absolutely confirmed, but he has told some of the investigators that his goal was to fly it into the terminal at Ben Gurion Airport.

“That would have been catastrophic.”

The ambassador said that if the alleged plot had succeeded, the resulting destruction could have resembled the attacks carried out against the United States on September 11, 2001.

“[I]t would have been such an incredible disaster had he been able to fly it into Ben Gurion, or for that matter, into downtown Tel Aviv or Jerusalem,” Huckabee said. “Wherever he put that airplane, it would have been horrible.”

The incident occurred aboard flydubai Flight FZ1073 on September 30, while the Boeing 737 MAX 8 was traveling from Dubai to Tel Aviv with 174 passengers, most of them Israeli citizens. The aircraft lost thousands of feet in altitude during the struggle before the passengers and crew succeeded in bringing the emergency under control.

Hayoun, who had no professional aviation experience, reportedly pulled back on the aircraft’s controls to help arrest its steep descent. A reserve pilot traveling aboard the flight subsequently took over, and the aircraft made an emergency landing in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia.

Huckabee praised Hayoun’s extraordinary actions, emphasizing that the Israeli passenger had been thrust into a life-or-death situation far removed from his ordinary work.

“He was the most gracious, humble — I think he’s overwhelmed by all this attention,” Huckabee said of Hayoun. “I mean, this is a guy, he’s a plumber. He’s used to going and fixing pipes, and suddenly he’s saving 174 lives.”

The ambassador also emphasized how narrowly the passengers had escaped disaster.

“They were probably 30 seconds from hitting the ground. That’s how close it was,” he said.

Subsequent investigations have raised troubling questions about the accused co-pilot’s employment history. According to American media reports citing intelligence and law enforcement officials, al-Hammami had previously been suspended from flying by Oman Air after extremist material was discovered in his possession while he was undergoing training in 2024.

The reports have intensified scrutiny of flydubai’s hiring and screening procedures. The airline has said it is cooperating with the official investigation, while authorities in the United Arab Emirates have been examining the suspect’s background and the preparations allegedly made before the attack.

Investigators have also reported that al-Hammami had previously flown the Dubai-to-Tel Aviv route, potentially allowing him to familiarize himself with the aircraft’s approach to Israel.

Flydubai temporarily suspended its Tel Aviv operations following the incident as authorities began examining the circumstances of the attempted hijacking.