Feed aggregator

The Satmar Rebbe delivered a forceful address to nearly 1,700 Satmar yeshiva bochurim from across the United States, warning them to “stay away from Zionist propaganda” and “distance yourselves from the impurity of Zionism,” while also issuing stern instructions regarding technology, driving, attendance at celebrations, and adherence to the longstanding traditions of the Satmar chassidus.

The address, delivered at a major gathering marking the beginning of the winter zeman, focused on the responsibilities of a chassidishe yeshiva bochur and the importance of maintaining the standards established by the Divrei Yoel, Rav Yoel Teitelbaum zt”l, founder of the Satmar yeshiva network.

The Rebbe began with an extensive Torah discourse, drawing upon the weekly parshiyos and sugyos in Maseches Kesubos, which the bochurim are currently studying in yeshiva.

He subsequently turned to practical guidance, urging the assembled talmidim to conduct themselves at all times in a manner befitting genuine chassidishe bnei Torah, both within the walls of the yeshiva and whenever they are outside its environment.

Among the practices he emphasized was daily immersion in a mikvah, along with establishing regular periods for studying sifrei chassidus and mussar. He also reminded the bochurim of the importance of reviewing the weekly parsha with Shnayim Mikra V’Echad Targum.

The Rebbe devoted particular attention to the responsibility of helping others, encouraging the bochurim to participate in raising money for tzedakah and to assist fellow talmidim who may be experiencing difficulties.

He stressed that helping another person must extend beyond financial contributions. Whenever a bochur becomes aware that a friend requires assistance, whether physically, financially, or otherwise, he should respond immediately and make every effort to provide the necessary support.

The Rebbe also discussed the proper observance of Shabbos, stressing the importance of conducting all three Shabbos seudos in accordance with halacha and the accepted traditions of the chassidus.

He placed special emphasis on seudah shlishis, encouraging the bochurim to gather together and sing the traditional zemiros with genuine longing and spiritual feeling, preserving the atmosphere that has long characterized Satmar’s approach to Shabbos.

Turning to the rules governing yeshiva life, the Rebbe demanded strict adherence to the established takanos, including maintaining the required learning schedules, arriving punctually for sedorim, and observing all regulations concerning conduct outside the bais medrash.

He specifically highlighted several longstanding restrictions instituted by the Divrei Yoel, including the prohibition against yeshiva bochurim driving automobiles.

The Rebbe instructed the talmidim to refrain entirely from driving and to observe the yeshiva’s other longstanding regulations, including restrictions on attending weddings and engagement celebrations outside the accepted framework.

Another major focus of the address was the danger posed by modern technology. The Rebbe warned the bochurim to maintain complete distance from technological devices and their harmful influences, emphasizing that the yeshiva’s strict regulations in this area must be followed carefully.

The Rebbe also addressed changes in the music and dancing commonly found at contemporary weddings and other celebrations.

He expressed concern over newer styles of entertainment that have become increasingly widespread and urged the bochurim to preserve the traditional manner of conducting chassidishe simchos, featuring established chassidishe niggunim and dignified, refined dancing.

Toward the conclusion of his address, the Rebbe turned to Zionism, delivering particularly sharp remarks about the obligation of Satmar bochurim to remain faithful to the movement’s longstanding ideological position.

The Rebbe warned the talmidim to “distance yourselves from the impurity of Zionism,” stressing that they must avoid all forms of Zionist ideological influence.

He also instructed the bochurim to “stay away from Zionist propaganda,” cautioning them against being drawn into Zionist publicity, news coverage, and other material that could undermine their commitment to the principles established by the Divrei Yoel.

The Rebbe emphasized that Satmar’s opposition to Zionism is an integral part of the mesorah transmitted through the chassidus and urged the bochurim to preserve that outlook without allowing outside influences to weaken their convictions.

The remarks reflected the longstanding position of Satmar, whose founding Rebbe, the Divrei Yoel, was a prominent opponent of political Zionism and established ideological principles that continue to guide the chassidus.

Throughout his address, the Rebbe emphasized the importance of remaining firmly attached to the traditions of previous generations, both in the daily conduct of a yeshiva bochur and in broader matters of hashkafah.

{Matzav.com}

An Israeli couple vacationing in Vienna, Austria, were forced to flee their Airbnb apartment after an unidentified man repeatedly pounded on their door while shouting anti-Israel insults and allegedly waiting outside with objects that appeared to be weapons. The couple said local police failed to provide adequate protection, leaving them to rely on fellow Israelis to escape to safety.

Chen and Hadar Barty, residents of Ashkelon, had rented an apartment through Airbnb in what they believed was a safe neighborhood near a local shul. Their vacation turned into a frightening ordeal over the weekend when a stranger appeared outside their apartment at approximately 6 p.m. and began violently banging on the door.

According to the couple, Chen called out to ask who was outside, prompting the man to angrily shout, “Zionists, Zionist occupiers,” while striking the door with increasing force.

Terrified by the confrontation, the couple remained inside the apartment, unsure whether the stranger intended to force his way in. When the banging eventually stopped and they heard what sounded like footsteps descending the staircase, they hoped the man had finally left.

However, when they looked through a window, they discovered that the suspect was still outside the building, apparently waiting for them. They also noticed that he was holding unidentified objects, raising further concerns about what might happen if they attempted to leave.

The couple immediately contacted Vienna police, who dispatched officers to investigate. By the time the officers arrived, however, the suspect had disappeared. According to the couple, the responding officers instructed them to call again if the individual returned.

The relief was short-lived. Soon afterward, the man allegedly returned to the building, leaving Chen and Hadar once again fearing for their safety.

Hadar said their second attempt to obtain police assistance was met with impatience and anger rather than the urgent response they had expected.

“The police officers were angry that we called, they didn’t help us,” Hadar told Israel’s Channel 12 News. “I can’t put into words what we experienced.”

With the suspect apparently determined to continue harassing them and the police response providing little reassurance, the couple decided they could no longer remain in the apartment.

Desperate for assistance, they posted a message in an online group for Israelis residing in Vienna, describing their situation and asking whether anyone could help them reach a safer location.

Their appeal was answered by an Israeli couple living in the city, who immediately volunteered to assist. The local residents traveled to the apartment, helped Chen and Hadar leave the building safely, and escorted them to a hotel elsewhere in Vienna.

The volunteers remained with the shaken couple until they had calmed down and felt secure in their new accommodations.

Although they had escaped the immediate threat, the couple’s difficulties continued when they contacted the owner of the Airbnb apartment to request reimbursement for the unused portion of their reservation.

Hadar explained that they had been forced to abandon the property because of a frightening security incident and asked that the remaining nights be refunded.

According to the couple, the apartment owner refused, arguing that the payment had already been collected through Airbnb and that she was unable to return the money.

The refusal left the Bartys facing an additional financial loss after an incident that had already ruined their vacation and forced them to arrange alternative accommodations.

For Hadar, the experience was particularly unsettling because she and her husband live in Ashkelon, a southern Israeli city whose residents have endured years of security threats and rocket attacks.

“We are residents of Ashkelon, and suddenly we come here and experience an incredible sense of déjà vu,” Hadar said, describing the shock of encountering such fear while traveling abroad.

Reflecting on the possibility that the stranger could have confronted them directly or managed to enter the apartment, she added, “It could easily have ended in disaster.”

{Matzav.com}

An extensive search operation was conducted Sunday in northern Yerushalayim for Yehuda Sperka, a 23-year-old man who has been missing for more than two months, amid growing fears for his life. Police and volunteer search teams are appealing to the public for any information that could help locate him.

Volunteers from the Israel Dog Unit (IDU), known in Hebrew as Yachal, carried out a concentrated search in wooded areas of northern Yerushalayim at the request of the Israel Police’s Lev Habira station. The operation involved specially trained scent-tracking dogs and teams of volunteers who combed through dense vegetation and difficult terrain in an effort to uncover any clues regarding Sperka’s whereabouts.

Sperka disappeared more than two months ago, and authorities have expressed serious concern for his safety. Despite previous efforts to locate him, his whereabouts remain unknown, prompting the renewed search operation.

According to an earlier police announcement, Sperka was last seen in the vicinity of Shaarei Chessed Street in Yerushalayim. Investigators have also been examining the possibility that he traveled to northern Israel, particularly the areas surrounding Teveria and Har Meron.

During Sunday’s operation, volunteers systematically searched the designated area in northern Yerushalayim, spreading out in coordinated formations to cover the wooded terrain as thoroughly as possible. The specially trained dogs were deployed to assist in identifying potential traces of the missing man.

Authorities have released a physical description of Sperka in the hope that members of the public may recognize him or recall seeing someone matching his appearance.

Sperka is approximately 1.70 meters tall, or 5 feet 7 inches, with an average build, dark hair, and green eyes. When last seen, he was wearing a white shirt, dark pants, and a black yarmulke.

Police and the Israel Dog Unit are urging anyone who may have encountered Sperka, seen him traveling, or possesses information that could help establish his movements to contact authorities immediately.

Anyone with relevant information is asked to call the Lev Habira police station at 02-5381550 or the Israel Police emergency hotline at 100.

The search remains ongoing, with authorities emphasizing that even a seemingly minor detail could prove important in helping locate the missing young man.

{Matzav.com}

Rav Shalom Ber Sorotzkin delivered an impassioned address at a major gathering of Gedolei Yisroel in Bnei Brak on Motzoei Shabbos, declaring that the ongoing campaign against the Torah community must become a powerful public affirmation of unwavering loyalty to Torah. At the same time, he urged roshei yeshiva to strengthen the confidence and pride of their talmidim, emphasizing that despite the unprecedented pressures facing lomdei Torah, the Torah world is experiencing extraordinary growth in both numbers and the caliber of its talmidei chachomim.

The gathering, convened to address the challenges confronting Torah observance in Eretz Yisroel, brought together dozens of leading roshei yeshiva from across the country. Among the senior Gedolim who addressed the assembly were Rav Dov Landau, Rav Meir Tzvi Bergman, Rav Boruch Dov Povarsky, and Rav Moshe Hillel Hirsch, alongside members of the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah and other prominent Torah leaders.

Throughout the gathering, the Gedolim stressed the responsibility of the Torah community to act in defense of Torah and to make a public kiddush Hashem through active participation in the campaign being undertaken under their direction.

Speaking on behalf of yeshiva bochurim and kollel yungeleit, Rav Sorotzkin addressed the ongoing measures against bnei yeshiva and the broader Torah community. He called upon the roshei yeshiva to ensure that their talmidim recognize the remarkable accomplishments of the Torah world during this difficult period and appreciate the privilege of belonging to a generation witnessing such extraordinary Torah growth.

Rav Sorotzkin began his remarks with humility, acknowledging the presence of the Gedolei Hador and explaining that he was speaking from the depths of his heart rather than attempting to deliver a formal address.

He explained that previous communal campaigns had centered on demonstrating loyalty to Hashem, His Torah, and His mitzvos. The present struggle, however, carries an additional significance: It is an opportunity for the Torah community to proclaim publicly that its entire existence is bound to the Torah.

Invoking the familiar declaration, “We have nothing remaining but this Torah,” Rav Sorotzkin said that the current campaign must communicate the inseparable connection between Klal Yisroel, the Torah, and the Ribbono Shel Olam.

He cited the teaching that “The Holy One, blessed be He, the Torah, and Yisroel are one,” explaining that the obligation of the moment is to make a kiddush Hashem by declaring that Torah remains the foundation of Jewish life.

Turning to the Rambam in Hilchos Yesodei HaTorah, chapter five, Rav Sorotzkin discussed the halachos of kiddush Hashem and the distinction between sanctifying Hashem’s name privately and doing so publicly in the presence of ten Jews.

He noted that the Rambam describes a person who gives his life rather than transgressing when halacha requires such sacrifice as having sanctified Hashem’s name. When this occurs in the presence of ten Jews, the act constitutes a public kiddush Hashem. Conversely, one who violates the obligation under those circumstances commits a chillul Hashem, with the public nature of the act adding to its severity.

Rav Sorotzkin applied this distinction to the upcoming elections, explaining that the electoral process provides an exceptionally public opportunity for the Torah community to express its allegiance to Torah.

He argued that when bnei Torah participate in the elections in accordance with the direction of the Gedolei Yisroel, their collective declaration can constitute an extraordinary public kiddush Hashem, visible to the entire country.

The responsibility, he said, is to ensure that the message reaches beyond the immediate circles of the yeshivos and kollelim, demonstrating to the broader public that the Torah community stands united in its commitment to Torah and its mesorah.

Rav Sorotzkin then turned to what he described as a second crucial point: the remarkable success of the Torah world precisely during a period marked by persecution and hostility toward those who devote their lives to learning.

He acknowledged the seriousness of the current challenges, characterizing the situation as one of religious persecution. Nevertheless, he said that the extraordinary siyata diShmaya evident throughout the Torah world must not be overlooked.

According to Rav Sorotzkin, the expansion of yeshivos and kollelim has reached levels rarely seen before, with growing numbers of individuals dedicating themselves to Torah study. Equally significant, he said, is the emergence of outstanding talmidei chachomim whose depth and accomplishments reflect an exceptional level of Torah scholarship.

He suggested that the very difficulties confronting the Torah community may be contributing to this spiritual growth, as the challenges strengthen the determination of bnei Torah and deepen their connection to learning.

Rather than focusing exclusively on the threats facing the yeshivos, Rav Sorotzkin urged the community to recognize the tremendous chessed Hashem reflected in the flourishing of Torah institutions and the development of a new generation of accomplished talmidei chachomim.

To illustrate the spiritual significance of enduring hardship before receiving the Torah, Rav Sorotzkin cited a Medrash in Mishlei concerning Yisro’s departure before Matan Torah.

The Medrash applies the posuk, “The heart knows the bitterness of its soul, and a stranger does not share in its joy,” to explain why Yisro was sent away before Klal Yisroel received the Torah at Har Sinai.

As Rav Sorotzkin explained, the Medrash teaches that while the Jewish people had endured the terrible suffering of slavery in Mitzrayim, laboring with mortar and bricks, Yisro had remained at home in relative comfort. Although Yisro subsequently abandoned his familiar surroundings and traveled into the wilderness to join Klal Yisroel, he had not shared their earlier suffering.

Consequently, the Medrash describes him as an outsider with respect to the particular joy of Matan Torah experienced by those who had endured the bondage of Mitzrayim.

Rav Sorotzkin explained that this teaching carries a profound message for the present generation. The Torah community is experiencing its own period of hardship, which he compared to the mortar and bricks endured by the Jewish people in Mitzrayim.

Yet it is precisely through these challenges, he said, that bnei Torah are experiencing an extraordinary measure of siyata diShmaya, allowing them to reach new heights in learning and spiritual accomplishment.

Speaking as someone closely involved with talmidim and the daily life of the yeshiva world, Rav Sorotzkin emphasized that roshei yeshiva have a special responsibility to raise the spirits of their talmidim and instill in them a sense of pride in their identity as bnei Torah.

He urged the roshei yeshiva to remind their students that they are privileged to participate in a period of remarkable Torah growth and that their perseverance amid adversity is helping produce an exceptional generation of talmidei chachomim.

Rav Sorotzkin expressed the hope that the Torah world would continue to experience the fulfillment of the posuk concerning Klal Yisroel in Mitzrayim, “But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and spread.”

He then addressed the central role of emunas chachomim in Jewish life, stressing that the relationship between Klal Yisroel and its Torah leaders is fundamental to the foundations of emunah.

Rav Sorotzkin raised a question concerning the Rambam’s thirteen principles of faith: Why is belief in the words and authority of the Chachomim not listed separately among the thirteen ikkarim?

He explained that emunas chachomim is so fundamental that it cannot be treated as an independent addition to the principles of faith. Rather, without emunas chachomim, the entire foundation of emunah is lacking.

He referenced the discussion of this subject in the introduction to Chayei Olam, emphasizing that genuine acceptance of the principles of Jewish belief necessarily includes trust in the Chachomim who transmit and preserve the mesorah.

To further illustrate the influence of Gedolei Yisroel, Rav Sorotzkin cited Rashi’s commentary at the beginning of Parshas Noach, concerning the Torah’s description of Noach as a righteous and perfect man in his generation.

Rashi brings the opinion that the posuk praises Noach, teaching that had he lived among righteous people, he would have become even greater.

Rav Sorotzkin pointed out that Rashi does not say that Noach would have learned additional Torah from those tzaddikim or received specific teachings from them. Rather, the very fact of living in the company of righteous people would have elevated his own level of righteousness.

From this, he explained, one can appreciate the profound influence of the Gedolei Hador upon the entire generation.

Their impact extends far beyond the Torah they teach and the guidance they provide. Their very presence among Klal Yisroel elevates the spiritual standing of the community, influencing every Yid and every ben Torah, wherever he may be.

Rav Sorotzkin emphasized that every yeshiva bochur and avreich should recognize the extraordinary privilege of living in a generation guided by such Gedolei Torah, whose influence strengthens and elevates the entire Torah world.

He concluded with a heartfelt appeal for the community to unite in publicly proclaiming its unwavering commitment to Torah and to inspire others to join in that declaration.

Rav Sorotzkin expressed the hope that Klal Yisroel would merit to proclaim together that it has nothing remaining but the Torah and would experience the conviction expressed in the words, “For Hashem is with us.”

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump issued a forceful warning to France on Sunday, blaming mass immigration for the violent unrest engulfing the country and urging French authorities to immediately tighten border controls as widespread rioting, arson, and looting have left entire neighborhoods devastated, historic buildings in ruins, and thousands of people under arrest.

In a statement posted on Truth Social, Trump said France was suffering the consequences of allowing large numbers of immigrants into the country without adequately addressing questions of integration and security.

“France is burning! The immigration of people from an entirely different world, people with hatred in their hearts, has shattered that once great country. Close your Borders and take control, before it is too late!” Trump wrote.

The president’s remarks followed a weekend of extraordinary violence across France, where demonstrations over rising living costs, deteriorating public services, and problems in the education system deteriorated into widespread clashes with police and attacks on businesses and government buildings.

French authorities reported more than 2,000 arrests following Saturday’s disturbances, with hundreds of police officers and emergency personnel injured. The unrest affected Paris, Marseille, Lyon, Bordeaux, Lille, Limoges, and several other cities, leaving authorities confronting one of the country’s most serious episodes of civil disorder in years.

The demonstrations drew enormous crowds, with France’s Interior Ministry estimating approximately 550,000 participants nationwide, while labor unions placed attendance as high as 800,000. Although many demonstrators marched peacefully, groups of masked rioters broke away from the protests, smashing storefronts, setting vehicles ablaze, and attacking public buildings.

Among the most dramatic incidents was the destruction of the historic city hall in Limoges, a landmark building dating to 1883. Rioters set the structure on fire, and footage circulating online showed flames consuming the building before its tower collapsed. The destruction prompted outrage among French officials and became one of the defining images of the weekend’s violence.

In Paris, entire commercial streets were left littered with broken glass, burned bicycles, damaged vehicles, and debris. Stores selling clothing, electronics, cosmetics, and other merchandise were ransacked, with some businesses reporting extensive losses.

French business representatives estimated that approximately 1,500 businesses had sustained damage, with the financial cost expected to reach hundreds of millions of euros. Some merchants described groups of masked individuals arriving with equipment to disable security cameras before breaking into shops and removing merchandise.

The unrest began with demonstrations by students demanding additional teachers and improvements in school conditions, particularly in poorer areas. Those protests expanded into a broader movement involving labor unions, students, and citizens protesting inflation, fuel costs, declining public services, and the government’s economic policies.

Trump, however, focused his response on immigration, arguing that France’s problems reflected a deeper failure of national policy rather than simply public dissatisfaction with economic conditions.

Vice President JD Vance echoed the president’s criticism, accusing Western political leaders of encouraging immigration without sufficiently considering whether newcomers could integrate into their host societies.

“Western liberals imported the third world into France and other countries in the name of diversity and compassion. They ignored fundamental questions of assimilation and compatibility,” Vance wrote on X.

“They were told it would lead to this and they didn’t listen,” he added.

Vance also expressed concern over the destruction of France’s historic landmarks and warned that Americans should view the violence as a cautionary example in the debate over immigration policy.

“I pray that France, a beautiful country of amazing people, will stop this madness before more of its landmarks burn,” he wrote.

“And I hope Americans are paying attention. This is the future congressional Democrats seek for your country.”

The immigration issue has become a central political flashpoint in France, with right-wing politicians arguing that years of permissive immigration policies have contributed to social fragmentation and insecurity. However, French authorities have primarily attributed the latest violence to radical far-left activists and criminal groups exploiting otherwise peaceful demonstrations, rather than identifying immigration as the cause of the unrest.

French President Emmanuel Macron condemned the rioting Sunday, saying the destruction and attacks on police could not be justified by legitimate public grievances.

Macron acknowledged the anger over economic conditions and public services but insisted that those responsible for violence and destruction would face consequences.

The French government has faced mounting criticism over its response, with opposition figures demanding tougher security measures and some calling for emergency powers to restore order. Authorities have deployed additional police forces while working to assess the extensive damage and prevent further disturbances.

The violence has also intensified political tensions ahead of France’s 2027 presidential election, in which Macron is constitutionally barred from seeking a third consecutive term. Immigration, public safety, and the country’s economic difficulties are already major issues in the contest to succeed him.

A Yerushalayim avreich in his 30s has admitted to Israeli police that he helped a known criminal leave the country despite being under house arrest, using a scheme that allegedly allowed individuals barred from traveling abroad to bypass passport control at Ben Gurion Airport. The suspect also acknowledged that this was not the first time he had facilitated such an unauthorized departure.

The details of the investigation were revealed Sunday evening by Li Ayish, head of the crime desk at i24NEWS, during the network’s main news broadcast. The avreich was arrested in recent days by officers from the Modiin Illit police station after authorities investigated how a criminal subject to house arrest had managed to leave Israel.

Ayish had reported the previous week that the criminal succeeded in traveling overseas despite restrictions that should have prevented him from leaving the country. The latest disclosures provide an account of how the suspect allegedly assisted him in evading those restrictions.

During questioning, investigators asked the avreich to explain his involvement in arranging the departure. According to the account he provided, the arrangement began when he received a telephone call from someone who was prohibited from leaving Israel but wanted to travel to Uman.

“A person called me and said he had a travel ban and wanted to get to Uman because he had never been there,” the avreich told investigators.

He reportedly agreed to assist the individual and purchased an airline ticket for him through an online travel booking website. On the scheduled departure date, the two arrived together at Ben Gurion Airport.

The suspect then described to police how the traveler allegedly passed through the airport’s automated border-control system while the avreich himself remained in Israel.

“At the place where you have to put down a passport, I put down my passport and look at the camera, and he passes through the gate that opens,” he explained.

According to the reported confession, the arrangement enabled the other individual to continue toward his flight while the avreich did not leave the country.

The suspect’s statements raised serious questions about the security procedures at Israel’s main international airport, particularly how a person subject to an official travel restriction could allegedly pass through border control using another individual’s identification.

Investigators also learned that the incident was apparently part of a broader pattern. During his interrogation, the avreich acknowledged that he had previously used the same method to help others leave Israel, indicating that the case under investigation was not an isolated occurrence.

Police sought to extend the suspect’s detention while continuing their investigation. However, despite his reported admissions, the court rejected the request to keep him in custody and ordered his release under restrictive conditions.

The judge directed that the avreich remain under house arrest for eight days as the investigation continues.

{Matzav.com}

Israelis planning to renew their passports or obtain new ones can save substantial amounts of money by waiting until November 1, when the Population and Immigration Authority’s discounted winter rates take effect. Under the reduced fee schedule, an adult passport will cost just NIS 185 instead of the regular NIS 315, while a child’s passport will cost NIS 110.

The seasonal discount, which runs through February 28, 2027, could mean savings of hundreds of shekels for families preparing for overseas travel next summer. To qualify, applicants must pay their passport fees online through the Population and Immigration Authority’s website during the designated winter period.

For adults, the NIS 185 winter fee applies to both first-time passport applications and renewals. That represents a savings of NIS 105 compared with the NIS 290 online summer rate and NIS 130 compared with the standard NIS 315 fee.

The reduced rate for minors will be NIS 110, down from the summer online price of NIS 145 and the regular fee of NIS 165. Families renewing passports for several children could therefore see considerable savings by taking advantage of the winter pricing.

For example, a family consisting of two parents and five children would pay NIS 920 under the discounted winter schedule, compared with NIS 1,455 at the regular rates, a savings of NIS 535.

Importantly, applicants do not need to visit a government office immediately after making their payments. Anyone who pays the discounted fee by February 28, 2027, will have until April 30, 2027, to complete the actual passport application process.

This arrangement allows families to secure the lower price during the winter while scheduling their appointments for a later date, provided they complete the process before the April deadline.

Additional discounts will remain available for eligible soldiers, reservists, and national service volunteers. Those entitled to reduced fees will receive the appropriate discount based on their updated eligibility status, with the precise amount displayed when they complete their online payment.

The Population and Immigration Authority also reminded applicants that obtaining a passport requires an appointment in advance through the Govisit scheduling system. Applicants cannot simply arrive at a government office without first arranging a visit.

At certain Population Authority branches, appointments can be booked directly for self-service passport stations, potentially reducing waiting times and making the application process more convenient.

The reduced winter fees will be available beginning November 1, giving Israeli families several months to take advantage of the savings before the regular pricing returns.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli law enforcement authorities are considering opening a criminal investigation against Rav Dov Lior, one of the most prominent rabbonim in the Religious Zionist community, following a halachic ruling in which he permitted Jews to harvest olives from Palestinian-owned groves. The possibility of investigating a senior rov over a Torah ruling has generated controversy, particularly as legal officials themselves acknowledge that the allegations of incitement are far from clear-cut.

According to a report by Israel’s Channel 13 News, the potential investigation follows a police complaint submitted by the organization Rabbis for Human Rights, which accuses Rav Lior of incitement to racism, encouraging violence, and soliciting the theft of property.

The complaint carries the signatures of 170 male and female religious leaders affiliated with the initiative, who maintain that the ruling could encourage Jews to enter Palestinian-owned agricultural properties and remove produce without the owners’ permission.

The controversy began after Rav Lior issued his halachic position at the start of the annual olive-harvesting season, addressing the permissibility of Jews collecting olives from groves belonging to Palestinians.

However, even within Israel’s legal establishment, officials have reportedly acknowledged that the grounds for criminal prosecution are uncertain. According to the report, the allegation of racial incitement is not straightforward, and the ruling itself does not contain an explicit call for violence.

Despite those legal reservations, authorities have not ruled out summoning Rav Lior for questioning, and the matter remains under consideration.

One senior law enforcement official expressed support for pursuing an investigation, characterizing the halachic ruling as an encouragement to take property unlawfully.

“This is a call for theft; the rabbi should be investigated,” the official said.

The complaint was initiated by Rabbis for Human Rights, an organization that advocates for human rights and Palestinian property rights while presenting its activities as grounded in Jewish religious principles.

Anton Goodman, the organization’s acting executive director, defended the decision to file a police complaint against a fellow religious leader, arguing that the organization considered the matter serious enough to warrant intervention by law enforcement.

“I am sorry that I have to file a police complaint against a rabbi in Israel, but reality requires us to stand alongside the Torah,” Goodman said.

He further criticized the substance of Rav Lior’s ruling, maintaining that taking agricultural produce from land owned by others violates both Israeli law and the religious values his organization seeks to uphold.

“Entering other people’s land and taking their crops in violation of the law is not what God wants from us in this land,” Goodman added.

The case raises questions about the circumstances under which a halachic ruling can become the subject of a criminal investigation, particularly when the legal authorities examining the matter have not identified an explicit instruction to commit violence.

At this stage, no formal criminal investigation has been announced, and officials are continuing to assess whether the complaint provides sufficient legal grounds to proceed against Rav Lior.

{Matzav.com}

The frum community in Eretz Yisroel was plunged into mourning following the tragic petirah of Rav Michoel Eliezer Deutsch z”l, a 37-year-old resident of Modiin Illit who was killed in a devastating accident in Rishikesh, northern India. Rav Deutsch, a distinguished talmid chochom who devoted much of his life to intensive Torah learning and authored more than 20 Torah publications, leaves behind five young children who have now lost their father.

Rav Deutsch was born in Yerushalayim on 12 Nissan 5746 to his father, Rav Mordechai Dovid Deutsch, a respected avreich in the Sanhedria Murcheves neighborhood, and his mother, a member of the Weinberg family.

As a young boy, he attended Talmud Torah Knesses Yehuda, where his exceptional abilities and dedication distinguished him from his peers. He subsequently continued his studies at Yeshiva Keter Torah in Yerushalayim.

For yeshiva gedolah, he entered Yeshiva Meor Hatalmud in Rechovot, where he became recognized as one of the outstanding bochurim and later as one of the institution’s distinguished alumni. His attachment to the yeshiva remained strong long after his marriage. For many years, he would travel every Friday from his home in Kiryat Sefer to Rechovot, where he spent six consecutive hours immersed in learning.

Friends from his yeshiva years recalled that he never opened a newspaper throughout his time as a bochur. His attention was devoted entirely to Torah and halacha, and he displayed little interest in matters outside the walls of the bais medrash.

Following his marriage, Rav Deutsch settled in the Neos Hapisgah neighborhood of Modiin Illit, where he earned a reputation as an exceptional avreich whose days revolved around rigorous Torah study. Even a decade after his wedding, he maintained an extraordinary schedule, regularly learning with chavrusos for 14 hours each day, from morning until night.

His remarkable hasmadah was accompanied by an impressive body of written Torah scholarship. During his relatively short lifetime, Rav Deutsch published more than 20 kuntreisim under the titles “Orach Michoel” and “Iyunei Halacha.” Several of these works became known among Torah scholars and those engaged in serious halachic study.

Among the subjects he explored in his writings were techeiles, sunrise and the precise astronomical calculation of haneitz hachamah, the laws of teshuvah, and various areas of hilchos Shabbos. His publications reflected his dedication to careful halachic analysis and his interest in clarifying complex questions.

Those who knew Rav Deutsch described a man whose exceptional commitment to Torah was matched by his pleasant demeanor and warmth toward others. He greeted people with a smile and conducted himself with kindness and refinement.

His avodas Hashem was characterized by extraordinary care and attention. He davened slowly and deliberately, treating each word of tefillah with the concentration of someone counting precious coins. Throughout his life, he was meticulous in observing halacha, maintaining his standards until his final day. When reciting a bracha, he would remain in place until he had completed every word.

In recent years, financial pressures forced Rav Deutsch to seek a means of supporting his growing family outside the kollel. He established a substantial hair-importing business, which developed successfully and provided him with a livelihood.

Despite his business responsibilities, he remained deeply committed to the values that had guided his life. He was known for generously distributing significant portions of his earnings to tzedakah and helping others with the resources he had been blessed to acquire.

Rav Deutsch had recently traveled to Rishikesh, a city in northern India, where he was involved in the tragic accident that claimed his life. News of his sudden petirah spread among his family, friends, and acquaintances, bringing profound grief to those who had known him as a devoted husband and father, an accomplished talmid chochom, and a generous baal chessed.

He is survived by his wife and five children, who have been left without their father at an extraordinarily young age.

Arrangements for transporting his aron from India to Eretz Yisroel are being made, and details regarding the levayah and kevurah will be announced when available.

Yehi zichro boruch.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir accused Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Sunday of secretly assuring several European governments that Ben-Gvir and his Otzma Yehudit party would be excluded from Israel’s next government, triggering a public confrontation between the two coalition partners just nine days before the October 27 Knesset elections.

Speaking at a special press conference in Yerushalayim, Ben-Gvir claimed that information recently obtained by his office confirmed that Netanyahu’s representatives had conveyed explicit commitments to senior European officials that Otzma Yehudit would have no place in a future coalition.

The Likud party immediately rejected the accusation, calling it a politically motivated fabrication and insisting that Netanyahu intends to preserve the existing coalition partnership following the election.

“I say these things with deep sorrow,” Ben-Gvir told reporters. “For a long time, I heard such reports, but I prayed they were not true.”

Ben-Gvir said he had received what he described as verified and confirmed information indicating that the Prime Minister’s Office had made formal assurances to multiple European Union countries.

“The Prime Minister’s Office has committed to countries in the European Union — whether to foreign ministers or a higher rank — that Ben Gvir and Otzma Yehudit will not be in the next government,” he declared.

The minister said he was stunned by the information, particularly given his party’s longstanding role as a central partner in Netanyahu’s governing coalition.

“I was in shock. I didn’t understand where it came from,” he said.

Ben-Gvir did not identify the European countries allegedly involved, disclose the officials who received the assurances, or present documentary evidence supporting his accusation. The claims have not been independently substantiated.

Addressing Netanyahu directly, Ben-Gvir warned that attempts to win approval from political opponents or European governments by distancing himself from Otzma Yehudit would be misguided.

“Don’t count on legitimacy from the left,” he said. “Don’t count on the left that has been after you for decades. They will hate you forever.”

Ben-Gvir argued that Netanyahu’s political future depends on maintaining the support of his existing right-wing partners rather than seeking a broader coalition with opposition parties.

“Bibi needs a strong Ben-Gvir, not a strong Eisenkot,” he said, referring to former IDF chief of staff Gadi Eisenkot, whose party has been discussed as a possible participant in an alternative coalition arrangement.

The Otzma Yehudit chairman also accused Likud of attempting to weaken his party ahead of the election by reducing its representation in the Knesset. He claimed that efforts to push Otzma Yehudit down to approximately five seats could ultimately damage the entire right-wing bloc.

“If you hurt Otzma Yehudit, you could cause our voters to stay home,” Ben-Gvir warned, arguing that supporters of his party would not necessarily transfer their votes to Likud or another coalition partner.

The confrontation comes amid growing disagreements over the composition of a potential Netanyahu-led government. Last Thursday, Netanyahu indicated that both the Defense Ministry and National Security Ministry would remain under Likud control in a future administration, complicating Ben-Gvir’s ambitions for a senior security portfolio.

Otzma Yehudit officials have also expressed concern that Netanyahu could seek to replace their party with Eisenkot’s faction or other opposition figures in an effort to form a broader government.

Similar allegations surfaced last month, when Otzma Yehudit accused Netanyahu’s office of sending messages abroad suggesting that Ben-Gvir would not be included in the next coalition. Likud denied those claims at the time, maintaining that Netanyahu intended to build his next government around the parties already belonging to the national camp.

Responding to Sunday’s accusations, Likud issued another forceful denial.

“Ben Gvir is continuing with the false political spin,” the party said, accusing the minister of attacking his own political allies during a critical stage of the election campaign.

“The Prime Minister has made it clear that any government will include the core partners of the current coalition, and that any Zionist party will be invited to join—based on our foundational policy guidelines and the existing composition,” Likud declared.

The party described Otzma Yehudit as a core coalition partner and urged right-wing voters to focus on preventing an alternative government led by opposition figures, including Eisenkot, Yair Golan, Avigdor Lieberman, and Naftali Bennett, potentially with the support of Arab parties.

Despite his accusations, Ben-Gvir emphasized that he continues to support Netanyahu’s return as prime minister. He recalled having defended Netanyahu against challenges from within Likud and claimed that the prime minister had previously expressed greater confidence in him than in some members of his own party.

The dispute also unfolded on a day when President Donald Trump publicly endorsed Netanyahu’s reelection bid, an endorsement Ben-Gvir cited while arguing that the prime minister already has the international backing necessary to pursue his preferred right-wing policies.

“If you lead a genuine right-wing policy, then history will remember you positively,” Ben-Gvir told Netanyahu, urging him to maintain his alliance with Otzma Yehudit rather than pursue a coalition arrangement involving his political rivals.

{Matzav.com}

A court in Israel has ordered Dutch airline KLM to pay NIS 9,037 in compensation to two Shabbos-observant women who were prevented from boarding a flight from Montreal to Israel because of an error involving their baggage allowance. The Small Claims Court in Tzefas determined that the problem originated with the airline’s own records and rejected its attempt to place responsibility on the passengers.

The incident involved two women traveling from Montreal to Israel with a connection in Amsterdam. One of the passengers was in an advanced stage of pregnancy, while the other was accompanied by an infant. Their journey was disrupted when airline personnel informed them that their reservations permitted only one checked suitcase, although the women maintained that their tickets included two.

After the discrepancy was discovered at the check-in counter, the passengers were instructed to arrange payment for the additional luggage at the boarding gate. However, their attempts to complete the payment were unsuccessful, and the gate closed before the matter could be resolved, leaving both women unable to board their scheduled flight.

Following the departure of the aircraft, KLM offered the stranded passengers alternative travel arrangements. The proposed itinerary, however, would have resulted in their arrival in Israel on Shabbos, making it unacceptable to the women because of their religious observance.

The passengers declined that option and were eventually accommodated on a different route the following day. In its ruling, the court made clear that their refusal to accept an itinerary conflicting with their Shabbos observance did not eliminate their entitlement to compensation for the airline’s mishandling of their reservations.

Senior Registrar Yosef Pinian, who presided over the case in the Tzefas Small Claims Court, found the women’s account of the incident credible. He also identified inconsistencies in the documentation submitted by KLM, supporting the conclusion that the baggage dispute had resulted from an error in the airline’s registration system rather than any failure by the passengers to comply with their ticket conditions.

The court awarded each woman NIS 3,580 in compensation, bringing the combined amount to NIS 7,160. The ruling also required KLM to reimburse NIS 677 for food and transportation expenses incurred because of the disruption, along with NIS 1,200 in legal costs.

The passengers had originally sought a total of NIS 20,839, but the court declined to grant their entire claim. Among the rejected requests was a demand for additional exemplary damages intended to penalize the airline beyond the compensation awarded for the incident.

The judge also dismissed a separate claim involving a missing suitcase, finding that the evidence presented did not establish that KLM was responsible for its disappearance.

The final judgment requires KLM to pay NIS 9,037, representing the compensation and expenses approved by the court.

{Matzav.com}

Katie Zacharia, whose brief stint as President Donald Trump’s White House press secretary ended after just five days, personally sought the Fox News appearances that reportedly contributed to her departure, according to newly disclosed text messages that challenge suggestions that senior administration officials deliberately arranged the interviews to undermine her.

The messages indicate that Zacharia actively pursued television exposure even as she faced criticism over her first appearance behind the White House briefing room podium. Her subsequent interviews with Sean Hannity and the hosts of “Fox & Friends” drew further scrutiny of her performance and questions surrounding her legal credentials, intensifying the controversy that preceded her exit on Friday.

In a Wednesday exchange with a White House official concerning television bookings that were eventually moved back one day, Zacharia expressed her desire to appear regularly on the network.

“I’d like to do news hits morning and evening,” she wrote.

The newly revealed communications provide a different perspective on the circumstances surrounding her departure. An earlier account suggested that the Fox appearances may have been deliberately arranged by White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, who reportedly had not approved Zacharia’s appointment before Trump selected her for the position.

One person quoted in that account described the interviews as a “sanctioned hit,” raising the possibility that Zacharia had been placed in difficult television situations to expose her weaknesses.

The text messages, however, indicate that Zacharia herself was seeking the interviews. They do not establish that Wiles played any role in arranging the appearances or orchestrating the press secretary’s departure.

The correspondence also suggests that Zacharia began pursuing additional television opportunities on Tuesday, the same day she conducted her first White House press briefing. That appearance lasted approximately 14 minutes and drew criticism over her visibly nervous delivery and abrupt conclusion.

One message from a producer working on Hannity’s program indicated that arrangements were already being discussed for Zacharia to appear following a presidential rally.

“Katie said she can join us from the rally tonight,” the producer wrote Tuesday.

Zacharia eventually appeared on Hannity’s prime-time program Thursday evening and returned to Fox News the following morning for an interview on “Fox & Friends.”

Both appearances proved difficult. She faced questions about her professional background, including her unsuccessful attempts to pass the California bar examination, and struggled at times to provide answers beyond prepared administration talking points.

During Thursday’s conversation, Hannity asked Zacharia about her widely criticized first press briefing. In explaining the circumstances, she emphasized how little time she had been given to prepare after assuming the position.

“Given the fact that I’d been on the job less than maybe eight hours and had a briefing book in the morning, I feel like I did my very best, Sean, to deliver for the American people that day,” she told Hannity.

Her explanation prompted the Fox News host to question whether she was suggesting that other White House personnel had failed to prepare her adequately.

“Am I hearing that you think the staff should have prepped you better?” Hannity asked.

By Friday, Trump had publicly acknowledged that Zacharia was not suited to the demanding position, telling her “you don’t need this” as her exceptionally short tenure came to an end.

A White House official subsequently confirmed that Zacharia would not continue working at the executive mansion, saying she “will not be working at the White House anymore.”

Another administration official said there was no clear information about what position, if any, Zacharia might assume next. Although there had been suggestions that she could move into another role within the administration, no specific assignment had been publicly identified.

Despite the abrupt end to her appointment, Zacharia continued expressing admiration for Trump. She shared a complimentary social media post about the president after leaving the position and reportedly had dinner with Vice President JD Vance on Friday evening.

Asked Saturday about her professional plans, Zacharia did not provide details about a possible new assignment.

Meanwhile, questions persisted about whether Wiles had any involvement in the interviews that preceded Zacharia’s departure. Reports noted that Wiles and Hannity maintain a friendly relationship and communicate regularly, fueling speculation about the circumstances surrounding the television appearances.

The White House rejected accusations that Wiles had worked behind the scenes to damage Zacharia, dismissing the allegations as “hit jobs” and “smear.”

Fox News also disputed suggestions that senior White House officials controlled the Hannity interview, saying the host makes his own decisions about guests and questions.

Kayleigh McEnany, who served as Trump’s White House press secretary during his first administration and now works as a Fox News commentator, offered a sympathetic assessment of the difficulties Zacharia faced after being thrust into one of Washington’s most demanding communications jobs.

“You want to give grace to anyone who takes on that role … How is she doing this 24 hours in? I had about two weeks to prepare and to get thoughts together and to talk to various cabinet administration officials,” McEnany said Saturday.

“That was pretty much doomed from the start to roll out to the press.”

The controversy also unfolded amid speculation about Wiles’ own standing in the administration. Trump sought to put those rumors to rest Friday, declaring there was “zero chance” that he would replace his chief of staff and insisting that she was “going to be here for a long time.”

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump defended his decision to suspend sanctions against Russia on Sunday, arguing that additional economic pressure on Moscow could derail negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. At the same time, Trump sharply criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky over continued attacks on Russian oil facilities, accusing him of undermining efforts to reach a peace agreement.

The president said his approach is intended to keep Russian President Vladimir Putin engaged in diplomatic discussions while also easing pressure on American fuel prices. The decision has drawn criticism from those who believe Moscow should face tougher penalties rather than receive sanctions relief while the war continues.

“My decision on Russia is a very simple one. I am in the process of negotiating Peace in the war between Russia and Ukraine, and don’t want to do anything that will drive, foolishly, Russia away from the bargaining table,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Trump maintained that his administration is making significant headway toward an agreement and suggested that other sensitive negotiations are also advancing.

“Great progress is being made, and that includes current hostage negotiations!” he added, without identifying the hostages or explaining which negotiations he was referencing.

The president also directed criticism at Zelensky, accusing the Ukrainian leader of resisting a settlement despite the administration’s diplomatic efforts. Trump claimed that Zelensky “doesn’t want to end this war, and probably never did.”

The remarks came as Ukraine continued its campaign against Russian energy infrastructure, including strikes reported in the Saint Petersburg area. The attacks have intensified the dispute over whether military pressure on Russia’s oil industry will help force Moscow into a settlement or complicate diplomatic efforts by escalating the conflict.

The sanctions decision follows an agreement announced earlier this month under which Russia would release large quantities of diesel into international markets. Trump said the arrangement would begin with more than 300,000 tons, followed by additional supplies in November and subsequent months, as his administration seeks to reduce fuel costs.

The administration has temporarily eased restrictions on Russian energy exports to facilitate those shipments. Supporters of the move argue that restoring diesel supplies could relieve pressure on international markets and provide an incentive for Putin to pursue negotiations. Critics contend that allowing additional Russian energy sales could provide Moscow with revenue while its military campaign in Ukraine continues.

The dispute has also widened the rift between Washington and Kyiv. Zelensky has objected to the sanctions relief, arguing that it weakens the economic pressure on Russia. Ukrainian officials maintain that strikes against Russian refineries are a legitimate response to Moscow’s continuing attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

Earlier this month, Trump announced what he described as an energy ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, but the arrangement failed to halt attacks on energy facilities. Zelensky indicated that Ukraine would suspend strikes against Russian refineries if Moscow stopped targeting Ukrainian energy infrastructure.

The latest escalation came Sunday, when Russia reported intercepting more than 1,000 Ukrainian drones during a large-scale assault that sparked fires at oil installations in the Saint Petersburg region. Russian forces also continued attacks on Ukraine’s energy network, leaving tens of thousands of people without electricity.

Trump’s handling of the conflict has drawn objections from lawmakers in both parties, particularly over the relaxation of sanctions targeting Russia’s energy sector. The administration maintains that the diesel agreement and its broader diplomatic strategy are designed to bring Putin back into serious negotiations and create an opportunity to end the war.

Vice President JD Vance is leaving open the possibility that he will not seek the Republican presidential nomination in 2028, despite emerging as the overwhelming early favorite to succeed President Donald Trump. In a candid discussion about his political future, Vance acknowledged that his responsibilities as a father and his wife’s reservations about political life could ultimately influence his decision.

Speaking Saturday at a CBS News town hall in Flat Rock, Michigan, Vance told anchor Tony Dokoupil that a presidential campaign is far from certain, even as national polling places him well ahead of other potential Republican contenders.

“Of course there’s a chance,” Vance said when asked whether he might sit out the 2028 presidential election.

“We’ve got four little kids, my wife has never loved politics. She loves public service.”

The remarks offered a glimpse into the personal considerations confronting a vice president widely regarded as the leading candidate to inherit Trump’s political movement. While Vance has become one of the administration’s most prominent public figures, he indicated that his family’s circumstances remain an important factor in determining his next move.

Recent Republican primary polling underscores the strength of Vance’s position. According to the RealClearPolling national average, the vice president commands 39% support among potential Republican presidential candidates, giving him a 15-point advantage over Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who stands at 24%.

Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest son, occupies third place with 11% support, placing him well behind both Vance and Rubio in the early contest for Republican voters.

President Trump has previously identified Vance as his “most likely” successor, further fueling speculation that the vice president could become the party’s standard-bearer when Trump’s second term concludes. Nevertheless, Vance has resisted making any formal commitment to enter the race.

During the Michigan appearance, Vance suggested that his reluctance to address the question is partly a reflection of his approach to major personal decisions.

“The way that I think about life, big life decisions — my wife will tell you this: I’m a procrastinator. I hate thinking about it,” Vance said.

For now, Vance and his wife, Usha, have agreed to postpone a serious discussion about the 2028 election until after the November 3 midterm elections, when the immediate political demands facing the administration will have eased.

“Whenever it comes up, it’s always let’s figure it out after the midterms,” Vance said.

The family’s circumstances have also changed in recent months. The vice president and his wife welcomed their fourth child, Alec, in July, joining their three older children, Ewan, Vivek, and Mirabel. With four young children at home, another national campaign would carry substantial personal demands for the family.

Usha Vance has previously spoken openly about her relationship with politics, including the fact that her views do not always align neatly with those of her husband or a particular political party.

“Sometimes I have thoughts that fit very comfortably into one side or another,” she told NBC News in March. “Sometimes I have views that are way more idiosyncratic.”

She has also explained that her role in her husband’s political career is primarily that of a trusted confidante rather than a formal political strategist, offering him her perspective without serving as a campaign adviser.

Although questions about 2028 attracted considerable attention, much of Saturday’s town hall centered on the administration’s current challenges. Vance fielded questions concerning higher gasoline prices, federal immigration enforcement, and the war involving Iran, defending the White House’s approach while recognizing the financial pressures that continue to affect American households.

The vice president emphasized that his immediate political focus is the upcoming midterm election, with Republicans working to maintain their congressional majorities. His efforts include campaigning in Michigan on behalf of former Rep. Mike Rogers, who is seeking a Senate seat in one of the country’s closely watched races.

Vance indicated that he has little interest in allowing speculation about the next presidential election to distract from the administration’s present responsibilities or the approaching congressional contests.

“We’re really not” discussing 2028, Vance said of conversations with his wife.

“Anything could happen, man.”

{Matzav.com}

Rav Yitzchak Yosef, the former Sephardic chief rabbi of Israel, has issued a sharp halachic ruling declaring that it is forbidden to vote for National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit party because of Ben-Gvir’s repeated visits to Har Habayis and his encouragement of other Jews to ascend the site.

In a letter released ahead of Israel’s upcoming elections, Rav Yosef warned that entering Har Habayis can involve the severe issur of kareis, and he argued that supporting a political leader who encourages such conduct constitutes a serious halachic violation.

“Anyone who supports the party of someone who ascends the Temple Mount and encourages others to ascend is considered as though he himself [has committed a transgression punishable] by kareis.

“Therefore, according to Jewish law, it is forbidden to support the party,” he claimed.

The ruling represents another escalation in Rav Yosef’s ongoing confrontation with Ben-Gvir over the minister’s public visits to Har Habayis, which Rav Yosef and numerous other prominent poskim have strongly condemned.

The longstanding position of the Israeli Chief Rabbinate prohibits Jews from entering Har Habayis because of the severe halachic concerns surrounding entry into areas where the presence of a person who is tamei meis is forbidden. Since the precise boundaries of the prohibited areas are disputed and the required purification process involving the ashes of a parah adumah is unavailable today, leading poskim have ruled that Jews must refrain from entering the site altogether.

Ben-Gvir, however, has repeatedly visited Har Habayis and publicly encouraged Jewish visits, maintaining that Jews should be permitted to exercise religious rights at the site. His position has drawn fierce criticism from chareidi rabbonim, who regard such visits as a grave violation of halacha.

Rav Yosef’s latest letter follows previous public statements in which he warned voters against supporting politicians who disregard the rulings of leading poskim on the issue.

The latest ruling comes as Shas seeks to retain its traditional Sephardic voter base amid growing competition from Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit party, which has attracted support among some younger religious and traditional voters.

At an election gathering in Akko last month, Rav Yosef delivered a similar warning, urging the public to reject candidates who do not demonstrate proper yiras Shomayim or who act contrary to the rulings of leading rabbonim.

“I call on you: Do not be tempted to vote for unworthy people. Someone who does not fear Heaven and someone who ascends the Temple Mount – it is forbidden according to halacha to vote for him.”

Rav Yosef, who serves as the spiritual leader of Shas and is the son of the late Sephardic posek Rav Ovadia Yosef, also urged voters to support representatives who remain faithful to the guidance of the Moetzet Chachmei HaTorah.

“One must vote only for those who fear Heaven and follow the path of the Torah, like our representatives.”

The dispute intensified earlier this month when Rav Yosef accused Ben-Gvir of deliberately disregarding the rulings of the Gedolei Yisroel. During a public address, he recalled having warned against entering Har Habayis during his regular shiur at the Yazdim shul, only for Ben-Gvir to visit the site the following morning.

Rav Yosef viewed the timing as a deliberate demonstration of disrespect toward the rabbonim who have consistently prohibited such visits.

He also criticized politicians who attract young voters through forceful slogans and public appearances, questioning whether their conduct reflects genuine commitment to Torah values.

{Matzav.com}

Yisrael Beytenu chairman Avigdor Lieberman has outlined a plan to remove Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu from power immediately following Israel’s October 27 election, proposing to replace the Knesset speaker and rapidly enact legislation that would prevent individuals facing criminal indictments from serving as prime minister. Lieberman declared that the strategy could bring Netanyahu’s political career to an abrupt end, even if his Likud party emerges from the election with significant parliamentary support.

The former defense minister, who has become one of Netanyahu’s most outspoken political opponents, said his initiative would begin as soon as the newly elected 26th Knesset is sworn in. His proposal centers on using a parliamentary majority to change the Knesset’s leadership before advancing legislation specifically intended to prevent Netanyahu from forming another government.

“We must get rid of Bibi,” Lieberman declared, emphasizing that removing Netanyahu remains a central objective of his party’s post-election strategy.

Under the proposed arrangement, Lieberman and his allies would first seek to oust Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana, a senior Likud figure and Netanyahu ally. Installing a new speaker would allow the incoming parliamentary majority to control the legislative agenda and accelerate consideration of the measure commonly referred to as the “Defendant Law.”

“Immediately after the 26th Knesset is sworn in, we will work to replace Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana and elect a new speaker,” Lieberman said. Once a new speaker is in place, he intends to fast-track the legislation. “After that, we will pass the ‘Defendant Law’ through all three readings, and that will be the end of it.”

The proposed legislation would prohibit a person under criminal indictment from being tasked with forming a government or serving as prime minister. Although the measure would be written in general terms, its immediate political significance concerns Netanyahu, whose ongoing corruption trial has remained a major issue in Israeli politics.

Netanyahu has repeatedly denied wrongdoing in the criminal proceedings against him, and his political allies have characterized efforts to disqualify him through legislation as an attempt to overturn the will of voters rather than defeat him at the ballot box.

Lieberman’s proposal would require sufficient parliamentary support to replace the speaker and pass the legislation through the Knesset’s three required readings. Whether such a majority could be assembled remains uncertain, particularly given the divisions among parties opposed to Netanyahu.

The proposal has also raised the possibility of another Israeli election if the parties opposing Netanyahu succeed in passing the legislation but cannot agree on a governing coalition. Such a scenario could leave Netanyahu legally barred from seeking the premiership in a subsequent election, although the legislation’s validity would likely face a challenge before Israel’s Supreme Court.

Legal experts have questioned whether a law enacted specifically to prevent Netanyahu from returning to office could survive judicial review. The Supreme Court previously ruled that Netanyahu could continue serving as prime minister despite the criminal indictments against him, and a new law targeting his eligibility could face scrutiny over its potentially personal and retroactive application.

Lieberman’s latest announcement follows his declaration Thursday that Yisrael Beytenu would refuse to participate in any minority government, even temporarily. That position placed him at odds with opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot, who has explored the possibility of forming a government without a full parliamentary majority if the parties seeking to replace Netanyahu fail to secure 61 seats.

On Thursday, Lieberman stated that his party would not accept such an arrangement under any circumstances.

“Any minority government, not even for a transitional period,” he said.

Lieberman has instead called for a coalition composed entirely of what he describes as Zionist parties, explicitly excluding the Arab parties Ra’am and the Joint List, as well as the chareidi parties Shas and United Torah Judaism.

In a social media statement explaining his position, Lieberman wrote: “Over the past few days, I have been asked several times about a national unity government. Our position is clear and unequivocal: We will establish a coalition consisting exclusively of Zionist parties. Likud without Netanyahu could be a significant partner.”

His exclusion of the chareidi parties reflects his longstanding opposition to their influence over government policy, particularly on issues involving military enlistment, religious affairs and the relationship between religion and the state.

Lieberman has repeatedly accused Netanyahu of allowing chareidi coalition partners to dictate government decisions. He recently charged that Likud lawmakers had effectively become subordinate to Shas chairman Aryeh Deri and United Torah Judaism figure Yitzchok Goldknopf.

Despite ruling out cooperation with Netanyahu, Lieberman suggested that he would welcome Likud members into a future coalition if they were prepared to break with their party leader.

“I know several Likud MKs who understand the gravity of the moment and would be willing to provide the additional numbers needed and join a Zionist coalition,” he said.

Lieberman did not identify the lawmakers he believes might defect, and there has been no public indication that any Likud MKs have agreed to participate in his proposed arrangement.

The announcement comes amid growing disagreements among opposition leaders over how to replace Netanyahu. Eisenkot has advocated exploring alternative governing arrangements, while Lieberman and former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett have resisted proposals that would leave a new government dependent on outside parliamentary support.

Lieberman has also criticized Eisenkot personally, accusing him of pursuing an arrangement that could ultimately result in another government involving Netanyahu. The disagreements have complicated efforts to present a united opposition strategy before election day.

The political uncertainty has been heightened by opinion polls suggesting that neither Netanyahu’s existing coalition nor the opposition parties are guaranteed the 61 seats necessary to establish a stable government.

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump delivered an emphatic endorsement of Netanyahu on Sunday, praising his leadership and urging Israelis to return him to office. The endorsement provides Netanyahu with a significant political boost as Lieberman and other opposition leaders intensify their efforts to end his tenure.

{Matzav.com}

With Israel’s Knesset elections approaching on October 27, Chaim V’Chessed has been swamped with related questions. Do you need to receive a voter notification card in the mail? Can permanent residents vote? What if you recently made aliyah? And what identification do you need to bring to the polling station?

Chaim V’Chessed is pleased to share some important information to help clarify these questions.

The easiest way is to check your eligibility online, in English, at the following link:

Check Your Voter Eligibility and Find Your Polling Station

You can also call Degel HaTorah’s English language hotline for check your availability and for other voting assistance at 03-313-5280.

You should have received a postcard in the mail with information about your assigned polling station. If you didn’t receive one, don’t worry! Not receiving a postcard does not mean you are ineligible to vote. You can check your eligibility and find out where you are assigned to vote through the online service linked above or by calling the Degel HaTorah hotline listed above.

No. Permanent residents (toshvei keva), temporary residents (toshvei arai) are not Israeli citizens, and therefore cannot vote in Knesset elections, even if they hold a Teudat Zehut (Israeli identity card). The right to vote is reserved for eligible Israeli citizens who are registered in the voter registry.

Generally, Israeli citizens must be physically present in Israel to vote in Knesset elections. The only exceptions are diplomats who are stationed abroad.

Almost all Israeli citizens are eligible to vote, provided they meet the registration requirements. However, anyone who was not registered in the Pinkas HaBochrim (פנקס הבוחרים) by September 3, 2026, is not be eligible to vote in these elections. This means that someone who made aliyah after that date will not be able to vote.

You must bring an accepted form of identification to the polling station. The following documents can be used:

• Teudat Zehut (Israeli identity card): You may vote with your Teudat Zehut even if it has expired.
• Israeli passport: Must be valid.
• Israeli driver’s license: Must be valid and include your photograph.

Your voter notification postcard is not a substitute for an accepted identification document. Be sure to bring your original identification document.

Your assigned polling station is determined by your registered address with the Ministry of Interior (Misrad HaPnim).

If you have moved but have not updated your address with the Ministry of Interior, you will generally need to vote at the polling station assigned to your previous address.

The same applies if you updated your address after the voter registry (Pinkas HaBochrim) closed on September 3, 2026. In that case, your polling station will still be based on your previously registered address.

If you have moved, it is a good idea to check your assigned polling station in advance so you know exactly where to go on Election Day.

Bnei Mehagrim are Israeli citizens born or raised abroad to Israeli parents who emigrated from Israel and who generally reside outside Israel. Some Bnei Mehagrim who do not have an address registered in the Population Registry may encounter difficulties with voter registration and should check their eligibility.

As Election Day approaches, we hope this information will help clarify some of the most common questions. If you are unsure whether you are eligible, Chaim V’Chessed encourages you to check your status online rather than assume you cannot vote.

An Austrian Airlines flight traveling from Ben Gurion Airport to Vienna was forced to make an emergency landing in Sofia, Bulgaria, on Sunday after an anonymous bomb threat raised fears that an explosive device might be aboard the aircraft. The security alert prompted the flight crew to abandon its scheduled route and divert to the Bulgarian capital, where the circumstances surrounding the threat came under investigation.

The incident unfolded while the aircraft was en route from Tel Aviv to Austria. According to initial reports, concerns about a potentially suspicious object on board led to the activation of an aviation emergency code, triggering procedures intended to protect passengers and crew.

Rather than continue toward Vienna, the pilots redirected the aircraft to Sofia Airport, where the plane landed following the in-flight security alert.

Passengers were reportedly told that an “anonymous bomb threat against the aircraft” had been received, explaining the unexpected diversion and emergency precautions.

The precise nature of the threat remained unclear Sunday evening. Authorities had not established whether an actual suspicious device was present aboard the aircraft or whether the warning was a false alarm. There was also no confirmed information indicating that passengers had been exposed to an explosive device.

The incident prompted an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the warning, including what led to the emergency declaration and whether there was any credible danger to the aircraft.

Additional reporting indicated that Austrian authorities had received a telephone warning in Vienna concerning a suspicious item aboard the flight. The information was relayed to aviation officials, leading to the decision to divert the aircraft to Bulgaria rather than allow it to continue to its intended destination.

The aircraft was undergoing security inspections in Sofia following its arrival, as officials worked to determine whether the anonymous warning had any basis. No explosive device had been confirmed.

Among those aboard the flight was reportedly a delegation of young people traveling to participate in activities connected to the United Nations. Their journey was interrupted along with that of the other passengers.

The emergency came just days after a similar bomb scare involving a Delta Air Lines flight arriving in Israel from New York.

In that incident, which occurred Tuesday, October 13, an anonymous warning alleged that an explosive device had been placed aboard the American aircraft. The plane was directed to an isolated area of Ben Gurion Airport, away from the passenger terminals, as security personnel initiated emergency procedures.

All passengers were safely removed from the aircraft, allowing airport security teams to carry out an extensive inspection of the plane and its compartments.

The searches ultimately produced no evidence of an explosive device or other suspicious material, and airport authorities announced that the threat had been cleared.

“The aircraft was thoroughly searched by Ben Gurion Airport security personnel. The incident concluded with no unusual findings. Operations have returned to normal,” the authority said at the time.

The security concerns surrounding Delta flights continued later that same day, when another aircraft scheduled to depart New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport for Israel was delayed following a separate bomb warning.

That flight was prevented from departing while American security personnel conducted inspections and coordinated with Israeli authorities. Investigators reportedly examined whether the same individual might have been responsible for both warnings.

French President Emmanuel Macron expressed outrage Sunday evening over the extraordinary wave of rioting that has engulfed France, leaving more than 2,000 people under arrest, hundreds of security personnel injured, and numerous buildings and businesses damaged or destroyed. In a nationally televised address, Macron condemned the widespread arson, looting and attacks on police, promising criminal prosecutions and ordering an investigation into whether authorities had failed to anticipate the scale of the violence.

The French leader spoke after mass demonstrations against soaring living expenses and reductions in public services descended into some of the country’s worst street violence in years. Although hundreds of thousands of protesters participated peacefully, groups of rioters rampaged through Paris and other major cities, setting fires, ransacking stores and attacking government buildings.

“How can French people do this to France?” Macron asked, expressing disbelief at the scenes of destruction that had unfolded across the country.

“When we look at these images, we all ask ourselves what was going through their minds. Nothing justifies this, nothing explains it, and nothing can serve as an excuse for it. Tonight, we all feel anger and shame,” he said.

Macron declared that individuals responsible for the destruction would face legal consequences, emphasizing that the right to demonstrate cannot be used to justify violence against police officers, government institutions or private property. He warned that attempts to undermine the institutions of the French republic would be met with a firm response from the authorities.

The president also acknowledged mounting criticism of the government’s handling of the unrest, announcing a review of possible intelligence and operational failures that may have left security forces unprepared for the widespread disturbances.

Police struggled to respond to simultaneous outbreaks of violence across numerous locations, with officers confronting rioters who attacked businesses, set vehicles ablaze and damaged public facilities. The scale and geographic spread of the disorder raised serious questions about whether law enforcement agencies had sufficient personnel and resources to maintain control.

Among the most devastating incidents was the destruction of the historic city hall in Limoges, where rioters stormed the 19th-century municipal building and set it on fire. Flames spread through the structure, destroying much of its interior and roof and causing its prominent clock tower to collapse.

The building, inaugurated in 1883, had survived both world wars before suffering catastrophic damage during Saturday’s disturbances. Local officials described the destruction as a devastating blow to the city’s architectural and cultural heritage.

Limoges Mayor Guillaume Guérin accused authorities of failing to provide sufficient police protection, saying officers had been overwhelmed while attempting to contain violent groups elsewhere in the city. He claimed that rioters threatened municipal employees and elected officials as they forced their way into the building.

The destruction extended well beyond Limoges. In Marseille, masked demonstrators broke into city hall and vandalized its interior, while rioters in Lyon set fire to the city’s tourism office. Bordeaux, Lille and other cities also experienced attacks on public buildings and commercial establishments.

Paris witnessed extensive clashes between police and violent demonstrators, particularly around Place de la République, where officers deployed tear gas and water cannons. Shops were broken into and looted, vehicles were burned, and streets were left covered with shattered glass and debris.

Business organizations reported that more than 1,500 shops and commercial establishments had been damaged or ransacked, with financial losses estimated in the tens of millions of euros. Retailers and local officials began assessing the destruction as cleanup operations continued Sunday.

French Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez reported that approximately 2,000 people had been arrested in connection with the violence, while around 600 police officers, gendarmes and firefighters had sustained injuries. The figures were described as preliminary, with additional arrests and updated casualty totals expected as authorities continued their investigations.

Later reports placed the number of arrests above 2,400, illustrating the extraordinary scale of the security operation undertaken in response to the disturbances.

The unrest also left demonstrators seriously injured. Among the reported incidents was a 17-year-old boy in Saint-Étienne who lost a hand after being struck by a crowd-control grenade, intensifying criticism of police tactics during the confrontations.

The demonstrations originally centered on growing public frustration over inflation, household expenses, government spending cuts and deteriorating public services. Students, teachers, workers and other groups joined the nationwide protests, which drew an estimated 550,000 participants according to government figures. Organizers maintained that attendance was closer to 800,000.

Much of the protest activity remained peaceful, but authorities accused organized extremist groups and opportunistic criminals of exploiting the gatherings to engage in violence and destruction.

Nuñez specifically blamed several thousand far-left activists for attacks on police and government buildings, saying criminal elements had joined them in looting commercial establishments.

Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu similarly condemned the violence, insisting that legitimate public grievances could not excuse attacks on public institutions or the destruction of private businesses. The government has also discussed measures that would require convicted vandals to contribute financially toward repairing the damage they caused.

Macron announced that regional government representatives and local authorities would receive expanded powers to prohibit certain gatherings when necessary to prevent further violence. The restrictions would be aimed at locations where officials believe additional disturbances are likely.

Despite his emphasis on law enforcement, the president also acknowledged the economic and social concerns underlying the demonstrations. He instructed the government to begin consultations with representatives of students, teachers, labor unions, employers and elected officials in an effort to identify practical responses to public dissatisfaction.

“We must sit around the table and build solutions together,” Macron said.

He did not announce specific economic concessions or new spending commitments, leaving open questions about how his government intends to address the grievances that brought such large crowds into the streets.

The political fallout has been immediate, with opposition parties offering sharply different assessments of the violence and the government’s responsibility.

Marine Le Pen and other right-wing political figures criticized the breakdown in public order and called for stronger measures to restore security. Some demanded that the government consider declaring a state of emergency, although Macron stopped short of taking that step.

On the left, Jean-Luc Mélenchon and his allies accused the government of mishandling the demonstrations and failing to distinguish adequately between peaceful protesters and violent groups. They also questioned whether insufficient police preparations contributed to the escalation.

The dispute has placed Lecornu’s government under intense pressure, with mayors in several major cities demanding additional resources and explanations for the apparent inability of security forces to protect public buildings and businesses.

Officials in Limoges have called for substantial government assistance to rebuild the destroyed city hall, while municipal authorities elsewhere are seeking support for damaged infrastructure and cleanup operations.

Lecornu has pledged that the Limoges city hall will be reconstructed, with the government working to restore municipal services and coordinate insurance compensation for the extensive losses.

The turmoil comes at a particularly sensitive moment for Macron, whose second presidential term is approaching its conclusion in 2027. With approximately six months remaining before France’s next presidential election, the violence has intensified an already bitter political debate over economic hardship, public security and the direction of the country.

Macron’s address sought to establish two priorities for the weeks ahead: prosecuting those responsible for the destruction while opening discussions with representatives of the peaceful protest movement. The immediate challenge facing his government is restoring public confidence after scenes of widespread disorder exposed serious weaknesses in France’s ability to contain coordinated outbreaks of violence.

Kaplan Medical Center in Rechovot is facing another serious controversy involving its cardiology department, with hospital administrators filing a complaint against department director Prof. Kobi George over suspicions that blood was collected from patients for medical research without obtaining their informed consent. The allegations come less than two months after revelations that doctors training in the same department allegedly received specialist qualifications despite failing to complete mandatory portions of their medical training.

The latest allegations have intensified scrutiny of the hospital’s cardiology division, which was already under investigation by Israel’s Health Ministry over irregularities in its residency program. George, who has remained in his position despite the earlier controversy, now faces additional questions concerning the collection and use of patient blood samples for research.

The earlier investigation began after reports surfaced that cardiology residents at Kaplan had been permitted for years to bypass the internal medicine component of their specialist training. The arrangement allegedly operated under George’s direction and supervision, raising serious concerns about whether physicians had received the clinical experience required before being certified as cardiology specialists.

Despite the seriousness of those findings, George continued serving as head of the department while the Health Ministry established an independent investigative panel to examine the circumstances surrounding the training irregularities.

The inquiry initially focused on the responsibilities of Kaplan’s senior management and the health insurance organizations involved in the residency process. Investigators subsequently broadened their examination to include Prof. Zion Hagay, chairman of Kaplan’s residency committee and president of the Israel Medical Association.

Officials connected to the residency program were called in for questioning, including the director of the hospital’s internal medicine department, who reportedly approved training documentation that investigators suspect did not accurately reflect the education the residents had received.

The newly reported allegations involving blood samples raise a separate set of concerns about patient rights and compliance with medical research regulations. According to the suspicions, blood specimens were obtained from patients for research purposes without their knowledge or the informed consent required under established medical ethics procedures.

In Israel, medical studies involving human participants generally require authorization from an institutional Helsinki Committee, which is responsible for reviewing research proposals and ensuring that appropriate ethical safeguards are in place. Such approval does not eliminate the requirement to obtain informed consent from individual participants when consent is legally required.

The distinction is particularly important in cases involving the collection of biological material, since patients must ordinarily be informed about the nature and purpose of research participation before agreeing to provide samples. The allegations against George have raised questions about whether those protections were properly observed in the research activities under examination.

Additional information indicates that the hospital’s response has gone beyond submitting a complaint. George has been suspended from his position as director of cardiology, and the matter has been referred to the Israel Police for investigation.

The complaint was reportedly filed last week after a member of the medical staff approached hospital administrators and requested that the circumstances surrounding the research be examined. Preliminary findings subsequently raised concerns that blood samples had been collected or used for laboratory research without the necessary patient authorization.

The police complaint, originally submitted in Rehovot, has reportedly been transferred to the Central District Police fraud investigation unit. The Health Ministry has also confirmed receiving information from hospital management concerning the allegations and the steps taken in response.

Authorities have not publicly established how many patients may have been affected, how long the suspected practices continued, or the precise circumstances under which the samples were collected. Those questions remain part of the investigation.

The hospital, which operates under Clalit Health Services, has emphasized that the cardiology department continues providing medical treatment despite the suspension of its director. Administrators said measures have been implemented to protect patients and ensure that necessary cardiac services remain available.

The separate residency controversy has also produced consequences for the department. Following the earlier disclosures, the Israel Medical Association reportedly withdrew Kaplan’s authorization to train cardiology residents while George remained part of the department’s medical staff.

The previous allegations centered on documentation indicating that residents had completed required rotations in internal medicine when, according to the reports, those rotations had not actually taken place. The discrepancies raised concerns that physicians had obtained specialist certification without fulfilling all the requirements of their training programs.

Investigators are examining how the records were approved, who was responsible for verifying the training, and whether hospital officials or supervising physicians were aware of the discrepancies.

The Health Ministry and Clalit have both initiated reviews of the residency affair, while the new allegations concerning patient blood samples have brought police investigators into the picture.

The hospital has also established a dedicated service for patients seeking information about the suspected research irregularities.

George has disputed the characterization of the allegations against him. In comments provided through his representatives, he maintained that the matter involved, at most, alleged improper conduct, rather than the more serious wrongdoing suggested by the accusations.

Both controversies remain under investigation, and no final findings establishing criminal wrongdoing have been announced.

{Matzav.com}