Feed aggregator

Rav Shmuel Betzalel, rosh yeshiva of Porat Yosef and a member of Shas’ Moetzet Chachmei HaTorah, has emphatically rejected allegations that Shas chairman Aryeh Deri dictates decisions to the party’s rabbinic leadership, revealing details of the extensive deliberations surrounding the proposed draft law and insisting that the Gedolei HaTorah independently determine the movement’s positions.

In a rare and wide-ranging interview with Avi Mimran on Radio Kol Chai’s main evening news program ahead of Tuesday’s Knesset elections, Rav Betzalel addressed the controversy surrounding the drafting of bnei yeshivos, the future of the Sephardic Torah world, criticism of Shas from within the chareidi community, and the growing influence of Israel’s judiciary.

“Never did Rav Aryeh Deri give an instruction or direct us in any way,” Rav Betzalel declared. “There were exhausting negotiations here. We discussed every clause for hours and hours.”

The rosh yeshiva, who has been closely involved with Shas since its establishment, described the discussions that took place in his home concerning the proposed legislation regulating the status of bnei yeshivos.

“I was the head of the committee dealing with the draft law,” he revealed. “Attias sat here, Rav Attias, and Azulai, who was on the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee.”

He was referring to former minister Ariel Attias and Knesset member Yinon Azulai, both of whom participated in the discussions.

“There were exhausting negotiations here over whether we would accept the law. We discussed every clause for hours and hours, what this provision or that provision could lead to,” Rav Betzalel said.

He stressed that the Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah carefully examines the implications of proposed legislation before reaching its conclusions, and that the decisions are not simply presented to the rabbonim by political representatives for approval.

According to Rav Betzalel, the same principle applies to major political decisions, including whether Shas should join a governing coalition. Such matters, he explained, are determined by the Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah rather than by any individual politician.

The rosh yeshiva made clear that he personally examines the issues under consideration and does not hesitate to engage in lengthy discussions over matters affecting the future of the Torah world.

During the interview, Rav Betzalel also reflected on the early years of Shas and his personal involvement in the movement’s establishment.

He recalled the longstanding relationship he maintained with Maran Chacham Shalom Cohen zt”l and described the circumstances that led to the creation of a political movement specifically representing the Sephardic Torah community.

For many years, he explained, Sephardic families and institutions suffered from inadequate representation, insufficient resources, and a shortage of educational opportunities.

The establishment of Shas was intended to address those deficiencies and provide the Sephardic community with the means to develop its own network of yeshivos, Talmudei Torah, and other Torah institutions.

Rav Betzalel recalled an early meeting at Yeshivas Porat Yosef attended by Rav Yitzchak Peretz, one of the original leaders of Shas, and spoke about Chacham Shalom Cohen’s involvement in the discussions that shaped the movement’s direction.

“I think there is no movement and no party, even among the chareidi parties that we accompany, support, and love, like Shas, which is a living movement,” he said.

He pointed to the tremendous expansion of the Sephardic olam haTorah as evidence of the movement’s accomplishments over the decades.

According to Rav Betzalel, the number of talmidim attending Sephardic yeshivos ketanos today exceeds the combined number attending Litvishe and Chassidishe yeshivos ketanos.

He also noted that Shas continues to establish new Talmudei Torah, including in communities where the number of prospective talmidim is relatively small.

For Rav Betzalel, these developments demonstrate that the movement’s mission extends far beyond political representation and is fundamentally connected to the growth and preservation of Sephardic Torah education.

Turning to the contentious issue of military conscription, Rav Betzalel sharply criticized the sanctions imposed on bnei yeshivos and warned that certain elements in Israeli society are seeking to undermine the very existence of the Torah world.

He emphasized, however, that a distinction must be made between bochurim who are genuinely sitting and learning in yeshiva and young men who are not engaged in Torah study.

When Mimran asked about the status of those who are not learning, Rav Betzalel clarified that Shas has never maintained that every chareidi young man must be exempt from military service regardless of his circumstances.

“Shas never said, at least I certainly did not, and the Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah never said, that it is forbidden to enlist in the army,” he explained.

He stressed that the immediate responsibility of the rabbinic leadership is to protect those bochurim who devote themselves to learning Torah.

“We are obligated to establish a law for the bochurim who are sitting and learning. Those who are not learning will arrange their status according to the law,” Rav Betzalel stated.

At the same time, he expressed serious reservations about the military’s treatment of religious soldiers who seek to maintain their religious observance.

The rosh yeshiva recounted an incident that had been brought to his attention involving the observance of Shabbos by religious soldiers, citing it as an example of his concerns about whether the army adequately accommodates the religious needs of its personnel.

The details of that particular incident were presented as an account relayed to Rav Betzalel and were not independently verified during the interview.

Another subject addressed during the conversation was the position of certain Sephardic chareidi groups that oppose participation in Knesset elections, citing the practices of earlier Gedolei Torah, including Rav Ben Tzion Abba Shaul zt”l and Rav Yehuda Tzadkah zt”l.

Rav Betzalel challenged the suggestion that the personal voting practices of those Gedolim should be interpreted as opposition to Shas or its activities.

He explained that some rabbonim had refrained from voting because that had been the practice of their own rabbeim, but this did not necessarily mean they opposed the establishment of Shas or the movement’s efforts on behalf of the Sephardic community.

“They said that their rabbeim did not go to vote, so personally they did not go,” Rav Betzalel explained.

He criticized those who portray these Gedolim as having been categorically opposed to electoral participation, arguing that such presentations fail to accurately reflect their historical positions.

In the final portion of the interview, Rav Betzalel discussed the balance of power between the Knesset and Israel’s judicial system.

He expressed concern that, over the years, authority has increasingly shifted toward unelected legal officials, limiting the ability of elected representatives to implement the policies for which they were chosen.

Rav Betzalel voiced hope that the next government would be able to advance legislation addressing this imbalance and removing sanctions imposed on the olam hayeshivos.

{Matzav.com}

Gadi Eisenkot, chairman of Israel’s Yashar party, declared Sunday evening that if he becomes prime minister, every student in Israel will be required to study the state’s core secular curriculum within four years, and educational institutions that refuse to comply will lose government funding.

Speaking before thousands of supporters at his party’s election rally, Eisenkot outlined a series of commitments involving education, military service, government spending, national security, and the future of Hamas in Gaza.

“Within four years, all Israeli students will study core subjects and be part of the state education system. Those who do not will not receive funding,” Eisenkot declared.

The announcement follows the publication of his party’s education platform over the weekend, which includes proposals to reduce government funding for chareidi schools that do not meet the party’s curriculum requirements.

Under Eisenkot’s proposal, schools would be required to incorporate the state’s core curriculum, commonly referred to in Israel as limudei libah, or face the loss of public financial support.

The policy would have significant implications for chareidi educational institutions, many of which maintain independent curricula centered on Torah learning and do not teach the full range of secular subjects required in the state education system.

Eisenkot also presented a timetable for the measures he intends to introduce if he forms Israel’s next government.

He pledged that on his first day in office, he would establish a state commission of inquiry, and that within one week, his government would create a national cabinet dedicated to combating crime.

During that same first week, he said, legislation would begin on a universal national service law, which would address the obligations of Israeli citizens to serve.

Within his first month, Eisenkot promised to enact legislation granting priority to communities located along Israel’s borders and other confrontation zones.

He further pledged that within one year, government ministries would operate according to a policy giving preference in benefits and entitlements to citizens who serve and work.

The proposals reflect Eisenkot’s broader campaign platform, which places particular emphasis on military service obligations, changes to government funding priorities, and reforms affecting the chareidi education system.

Turning to national security, Eisenkot repeated his commitment to eliminate Hamas’s control over the Gaza Strip within 18 months of assuming office.

“Within eighteen months of my taking office, the Hamas terrorist organization will no longer control Gaza. There is no person more committed to dismantling Hamas than I am,” he told the gathering.

Eisenkot also directed part of his address toward supporters of Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu’s Likud party, urging them to reconsider their political allegiance in Tuesday’s election.

“I know how difficult it is to choose differently, but this time, it is not you who are choosing a different path; it is Likud that has strayed from the path,” he said.

The Yashar chairman argued that his party must emerge from the election with a substantial lead over Likud if Netanyahu is to be replaced.

“Netanyahu wants a tie. Only that way can he claim that he needs to remain in office. On Tuesday, Netanyahu must go home,” Eisenkot declared.

He maintained that unless Yashar wins significantly more seats than Likud, the election will not produce the political change his party is seeking.

Eisenkot also cautioned supporters against assuming that a change in government is inevitable.

“Anyone who thinks that change is guaranteed is mistaken and misleading others,” he warned.

In another attack on Netanyahu, Eisenkot alleged that the prime minister “will not hesitate to use any lie or any extreme measure in order to remain in power.”

{Matzav.com}

Does the mitzvah of kibbud av va’eim obligate a son to vote for the political candidate his father supports? Rav Avrohom Yosef addressed the question during his “Shamor V’Zachor” program on Radio Kol Chai, explaining that a father’s political preference does not create a halachic obligation for his son to vote for that candidate.

The question arose when a listener related that his father had instructed him to vote specifically for Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu. He wanted to know whether honoring his father required him to follow that instruction at the ballot box.

Rav Yosef explained that voting for the chareidi parties already constitutes support for Netanyahu and his political camp, but stressed that an election is not necessarily about personal allegiance to any particular political leader.

He emphasized that the proper approach is to follow the guidance of the Gedolei HaTorah while recognizing that the outcome of an election ultimately rests in the hands of the Ribono Shel Olam.

Rav Yosef described voting as an act of hishtadlus, explaining that every Jewish man and woman has a responsibility to make the appropriate effort by participating in the election.

At the same time, he said, a person must remember that political leaders are merely human beings and that the ultimate authority over who governs rests with Hashem.

Citing the posuk, “Lev melech v’sarim b’yad Hashem,” Rav Yosef explained that the hearts of kings and rulers are in the hands of Hashem, and it is He Who determines who will ultimately lead Klal Yisroel.

He urged listeners to daven that Hashem guide those who assume positions of leadership, regardless of whether they come from the political right or left, and that their decisions be motivated by concern for Klal Yisroel rather than personal interests.

Rav Yosef also cautioned against developing an excessive attachment to any political figure, recalling a particularly sharp expression his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef zt”l, had used regarding Netanyahu approximately twenty years ago.

At the time, Rav Ovadia referred to Netanyahu as an “eizah iveres,” a blind goat.

Rav Avrohom Yosef invoked the remark to illustrate that political leaders should never become objects of unquestioning admiration or devotion.

Nevertheless, Rav Yosef acknowledged that Netanyahu has demonstrated loyalty toward his political partners in recent years, particularly during the most recent period.

He said that Netanyahu had proven himself through his integrity and faithfulness to the political understandings he had reached with his coalition partners.

However, Rav Yosef stressed that past conduct does not guarantee future behavior, and that one must never place complete trust in any human being.

It was in that context that he returned to the original question concerning kibbud av va’eim, explaining that a father’s request that his son support a particular politician does not transform that political choice into a religious obligation arising from the mitzvah of honoring parents.

Rav Yosef also addressed the increasingly heated election campaign, including attempts by political figures and activists on both the right and left to pressure voters through dramatic declarations and pledges.

He dismissed the significance of such declarations and urged the public to remain focused on the instructions of the Gedolei HaTorah and the morei hador.

Rather than becoming swept up in political arguments concerning prisons, police enforcement, or the drafting of chareidim into the military, Rav Yosef said the Torah community must remain focused on its fundamental priorities.

“Our portion is not with them. Our portion is with the Torah, and the Torah, and the Torah, for the education of the children of Israel,” Rav Yosef concluded.

{Matzav.com}

Families may be throwing away hundreds of dollars every month without realizing it, simply because of poor grocery shopping habits, inadequate meal planning, and food that sits forgotten in the refrigerator until it spoils.

Israeli financial commentator Hillel Kessler says that the average family discards nearly one-quarter of the food it purchases, potentially wasting thousands of dollars over the course of a year.

Speaking during his regular “Osim Seder BaKis” financial advice segment on Radio Kol Chai, Kessler explained that relatively small changes in shopping and food storage habits can produce substantial savings without requiring families to reduce the amount or quality of food they consume.

“If your monthly grocery bill is 2,500 shekels, approximately 600 shekels of that amount goes directly into the garbage every month,” Kessler said.

“That isn’t just food going bad. Those are banknotes that we are simply throwing away with our own hands.”

Kessler outlined three practical steps that he said could help families reduce unnecessary food waste and keep more money in their pockets.

His first recommendation is to prepare a weekly meal plan before heading to the supermarket, including the meals that will be served on Shabbos.

Rather than wandering through grocery aisles and deciding what to purchase based on whatever looks appealing, families should determine in advance what they intend to cook each day.

For example, Monday’s menu might include meatballs, while Tuesday could feature a dairy meal. Once the menu is established, shoppers can identify exactly which ingredients are needed and avoid buying items that are unlikely to be used.

“When you know exactly what is being cooked each day, you know exactly which ingredients you are missing and which ingredients will simply remain in the refrigerator and end their lives in the garbage,” Kessler explained.

The second recommendation is to shop with a prepared grocery list and avoid entering the supermarket while hungry.

Kessler noted that grocery chains employ a variety of marketing techniques, including background music, enticing aromas, and special promotions, to encourage customers to purchase products they had not originally intended to buy.

He urged shoppers to treat their grocery lists as firm guidelines rather than casual suggestions.

“The list you wrote at home after planning your menu is not a recommendation. It is the law,” he said.

Kessler explained that sticking to a list does not mean refusing to purchase something genuinely necessary simply because it was accidentally omitted. Nor does it mean ignoring a worthwhile discount on a product the family regularly uses.

However, he warned against buying unnecessary products merely because they are being advertised at a reduced price.

“Sales on things you don’t need are simply a spending trap,” he cautioned.

His third recommendation focuses on something that takes only a few minutes but can prevent considerable waste: checking the refrigerator before the weekly grocery trip.

Kessler advised families to spend approximately two minutes examining what is already in the refrigerator, paying particular attention to vegetables, cheeses, and other products approaching their expiration dates.

Items that need to be used soon should be moved to the front of the refrigerator, where family members are more likely to notice them.

He also encouraged families to find creative ways to use ingredients that may no longer look their freshest but are still suitable for consumption.

“You can make soup, a kugel, or an excellent shakshuka for supper from vegetables that are a little tired,” he explained.

After returning from the supermarket, newly purchased products should be placed behind older ones so that the food already in the refrigerator gets used first.

This approach, commonly known as the “first in, first out” method, helps prevent food from being forgotten at the back of refrigerator shelves until it expires.

Kessler emphasized that reducing grocery expenses does not require families to deprive themselves of necessities or compromise their standard of living.

Rather, the objective is to eliminate waste by making better decisions about what to purchase, how much to purchase, and how to store food once it is brought home.

“Saving money on grocery shopping is not about deprivation or stinginess. It is simply proper management,” Kessler said.

“Planning a weekly menu, shopping strictly according to a list, and managing the refrigerator properly will leave hundreds of shekels in your pocket every single month.”

For a family spending 2,500 shekels monthly on groceries, the estimated waste of 600 shekels represents approximately 7,200 shekels over the course of a year.

{Matzav.com}

The U.S. Department of Transportation has imposed a combined $425,000 in penalties on Air France and KLM after determining that the European airlines operated more than 130 flights over Iraq at altitudes below the minimum permitted under American aviation safety regulations.

The violations, which occurred between 2022 and 2025, involved flights operating under codeshare agreements with Delta Air Lines, making them subject to U.S. restrictions despite being operated by foreign carriers.

The penalties were announced Friday, October 23, following an investigation by the Department of Transportation’s aviation consumer protection authorities.

According to the findings, Dutch carrier KLM operated more than 100 flights below the permitted altitude, while Air France conducted more than 30 such flights during the period under investigation.

The issue was not that the aircraft entered Iraqi airspace, but that they descended below the minimum altitude established by American aviation authorities for flights operating in the region.

U.S. regulations require covered aircraft flying through the Baghdad Flight Information Region to remain at or above 32,000 feet, approximately 9.75 kilometers, because of security concerns associated with the region.

The altitude restriction is intended to reduce the danger posed to civilian aircraft by ground-based weapons and other potential threats in an area that has experienced years of military conflict and instability.

Flying below that threshold without authorization constitutes a violation of the applicable safety requirements.

Under the settlement, KLM received the larger penalty of $320,000, while Air France was assessed a $105,000 fine.

Of the combined $425,000, the airlines must pay $265,000 within 60 days. The remaining $160,000 will become payable only if the carriers commit additional violations during the following year.

Both companies were also directed to refrain from similar violations in the future.

In their responses to the investigation, the airlines maintained that their pilots had been following instructions issued by local air traffic controllers.

According to the carriers, Iraqi air traffic control personnel directed aircraft to descend because of congestion in the airspace, and refusing those instructions could have created additional safety risks.

The airlines argued that their crews were placed in a difficult operational position, forced to choose between complying with local air traffic control directions and maintaining the altitude required by American regulations.

The Department of Transportation rejected that explanation.

Federal officials determined that the airlines should have taken steps to avoid repeated violations once they became aware that local controllers were regularly directing aircraft below the American minimum altitude.

According to the department, the carriers could have planned alternative routes that avoided the affected airspace or removed Delta Air Lines’ flight code from services that could not reliably comply with the restrictions.

Because the flights were marketed under Delta’s code, they remained subject to the applicable American safety rules.

The codeshare arrangements allowed passengers to purchase tickets bearing Delta flight numbers even though the aircraft were operated by Air France or KLM.

Such agreements are common among international airlines, enabling carriers to market one another’s flights and provide passengers with connecting services across their respective networks.

However, the arrangements can also subject foreign-operated flights to regulatory requirements associated with the American airline whose code appears on the service.

{Matzav.com}

Dear Matzav Inbox,

I have a question that has been bothering me more and more as Election Day approaches. Have we reached the point where the only consideration in frum politics is, “What can we get from the politicians for our communities?”

Is that really the beginning and end of the conversation? How much government funding can we secure? How many grants can our mosdos receive? How many programs can be expanded, how many favors can be obtained, and how many elected officials can be persuaded to return our phone calls?

What about the politicians themselves? Does it matter what they believe? What they say when they are not standing at our dinners or posing for photographs with our rabbonim? What their positions are on morality, on the family, on the issues that are changing the character of this country, or on Eretz Yisroel? Are those matters simply irrelevant once someone promises us another allocation of public money?

Surely there must be a difference between maintaining a working relationship with an elected official and publicly embracing that official as though his or her entire record deserves our admiration.

That distinction seems to get lost far too often. A politician can take positions that many in our community consider deeply objectionable, yet the moment a check is delivered or a grant is announced, the photographs appear, the speeches begin, and the praise flows. Suddenly, questions about values become inconvenient. We are told to be practical. We are told that this is how politics works. We are told that we must look after our own.

Fine. Let us be practical. But since when did practicality require us to abandon discernment?

And why is it that the public is so often presented with only one side of the ledger? We hear exactly how much money a politician helped obtain. We hear about the permits, services, and programs. But do we hear, with equal clarity, what that politician believes about the moral questions that shape the society in which our children are growing up? Do we hear where that politician stands when Israel is under attack or when Jews face hostility? Shouldn’t those questions at least be part of an honest communal discussion?

We spend enormous effort teaching our children that Torah values are not negotiable. We tell them that a Yid must stand for something, even when doing so is inconvenient. We teach them to resist the temptation to measure everything in dollars and cents. Then election season arrives, and the message they sometimes see is that the most important qualification for public office is the ability to produce funding for our institutions.

What are they supposed to learn from that? That principles belong in the classroom, while politics operates by an entirely different set of rules? That moral convictions are important until a politician offers us something we want? That the question is never what a candidate stands for, but only what we stand to gain?

A public endorsement carries a message far beyond one vote. It tells the world something about what we are willing to overlook, what we choose to emphasize, and what we consider important enough to defend.

What happens to our credibility when we speak passionately about moral issues throughout the year, only to appear indifferent to those same issues when the politician on the other side of the table can deliver a benefit? People notice these contradictions. Our children notice them. The broader public notices them. Most troubling of all, we should notice them ourselves.

We should be able to ask hard questions without being dismissed as naïve. We should be able to examine a politician’s record without being told that doing so threatens communal interests. We should be able to distinguish between what benefits our institutions today and what kind of society we are helping shape for tomorrow.

If our entire political philosophy can be reduced to “What can you give us?” then perhaps the most uncomfortable question is not what the politicians have become. It is what we have allowed ourselves to become.

Surely our principles are worth more than that.

Shmuel Hoffman

To submit a letter to appear on Matzav.com, email MatzavInbox@gmail.com

DON’T MISS OUT! Join the Matzav Status by CLICKING HERE. Join the Matzav WhatsApp Groups by CLICKING HERE.

The opinions expressed in letters on Matzav.com do not necessarily reflect the stance of the Matzav Media Network.

The growing population of working and modern chareidim in Israel can no longer be dismissed as a small group on the fringes of the community, and established chareidi institutions must recognize their needs and provide them with proper representation, according to chareidi activist Eliakim Stark.

In an interview with Yishai Cohen on Kikar HaShabbat, Stark addressed the establishment of the new “HaTzibbur HaChareidi” (The Chareidi Public) political party by his close friend, Motti Leitner, acknowledging that the movement represents genuine concerns within the chareidi community while arguing that meaningful change should be pursued from within the existing establishment rather than through a separate political party.

Stark began by disclosing his close personal relationship with Leitner and revealing that the two had discussed the proposed party extensively before its establishment.

“First of all, Motti is a very good friend of mine. We have spoken for countless hours, including about the new party. We discussed this and the need of the younger chareidi public, which wants people to pay attention to it and make changes in various areas. Motti is a friend,” Stark said.

Despite their friendship and his acknowledgment of the concerns motivating Leitner’s political initiative, Stark maintained that they disagree fundamentally about the most effective way to bring about change.

“My position then was the same as my position today: The greatest change can be achieved from within the system, from within the establishment,” he explained.

Asked whether he views himself as an alternative to Leitner’s party, Stark said the issue extends far beyond one political movement. He described a substantial transformation within the chareidi population, particularly among working chareidim and those commonly described as modern chareidim.

According to Stark, individuals who were once treated as outsiders have become a large and increasingly established segment of the community, one that expects its needs to be addressed without having to abandon its chareidi identity.

“Motti Leitner and the public he represents certainly have legitimate grievances, naturally,” Stark said. “There was a time when people were labeled ‘modern chareidim’ and pushed to the fringes. That manifested itself in their leaving the chareidi community institutionally, even though they remained observant of Torah and mitzvos.”

Stark said that the situation has changed dramatically as the population in question has continued to grow.

“Today, those fringes have become very large. They are no longer fringes! The public is saying, ‘Listen, I want to live this way. I want a shul that suits me, in my spirit, and I am here to stay.’”

To illustrate his argument, Stark recounted a recent meeting he held with members of the Kedushas Levi community in Bnei Brak, where most of those attending were supporters of Leitner.

During the gathering, Stark presented an analogy intended to demonstrate why established chareidi leadership must recognize the changing reality.

“I told them: Listen, you have a shul with 400 mispallelim, and you see three bochurim standing outside and chatting during davening. What do you do? You approach them and reprimand them. But when you go outside and see 60 bochurim talking, you understand that this is a phenomenon!”

At that point, Stark explained, the response must change because the issue can no longer be treated as an isolated problem involving a handful of individuals.

“Either you solve it at its root, or you open a separate minyan for them, or you create activities for them. That is the difference between isolated individuals and a phenomenon,” he said.

Stark argued that the same principle applies to the working and modern chareidi population. What may once have been regarded as a relatively small group with distinct preferences has grown into a significant constituency requiring institutions, services, communal frameworks, and representation suited to its needs.

He warned that established chareidi leadership cannot simply assume that these individuals will eventually return to existing communal structures or disappear from the public conversation.

“If you ignore them or think they will be pushed to the sidelines, that is not going to happen,” Stark said.

“They need to be taken care of and provided with everything. And I am their representative!”

{Matzav.com}

Maran Rav Dov Landau, rosh yeshiva of Slabodka, issued a sharp warning against newly established chareidi political parties at a major United Torah Judaism election gathering in Bnei Brak, accusing them of damaging the Torah world and misleading voters with false claims about their commitment to bnei yeshivos.

His remarks were directed at the newly formed HaTzibbur HaChareidi party, headed by Motti Leitner, as well as other smaller chareidi parties seeking support in Tuesday’s Knesset elections.

The address followed the publication of a letter in Rav Landau’s name on Motzoei Shabbos expressing opposition to the new parties. Speaking at the election gathering, Rav Landau reiterated his position in particularly forceful language.

“I call out with a pained heart to those who have gone astray and established various parties that do not have the approval of the chachomim. Please, you are harming the Torah world,” Rav Landau declared.

He accused the parties of presenting misleading arguments to justify their participation in the election, warning that their campaigns could cost the established chareidi parties valuable votes.

“All their claims are lies, because you are doing nothing but causing votes to be lost, and it is forbidden to support parties that are nothing but falsehood. The falsehood is clear to everyone,” he said.

Rav Landau continued with another unequivocal warning against supporting the new political movements.

“It is forbidden to support these parties, which are nothing but falsehood and damage. The claims of those parties that they are concerned about bnei yeshivos are lies,” he stated.

In the latter portion of his address, Rav Landau turned directly to Israel’s governing authorities, explaining that the Torah community’s political involvement is intended to protect the ability of bnei Torah to continue learning.

“I turn to the governing authorities: We have no desire for power, and we have no intention of harming the government. Our only desire is to learn Torah. We are not connected to this party or that party. We will support only those who will give us the ability to learn and allow the holy yeshivos to continue,” he declared.

{Matzav.com}

Vice President JD Vance has established an early lead in the race for the 2028 Republican presidential nomination, while Democrats remain deeply divided over who should lead their party into the next presidential election, according to a new New York Times/Siena University survey.

The poll found that Vance commands the support of 33% of Republican primary voters, placing him ahead of Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who received 23%. On the Democratic side, however, no potential candidate managed to attract even 15% support, and a striking 45% of Democratic primary voters were unable to identify a preferred nominee.

The findings, released as the country prepares for the November 3 midterm elections, reveal a significant difference between the two parties. Republicans are already beginning to consolidate around potential successors to President Donald Trump, while Democrats have yet to develop a clear consensus about their political leadership or the direction their party should take.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris, who lost the 2024 presidential election to Trump, emerged as the leading Democratic prospect, but with the backing of only 12% of Democratic primary voters.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom placed second with 9%, followed by former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg at 7% and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York at 6%.

Sen. Jon Ossoff of Georgia received 4%, while Sen. Mark Kelly of Arizona attracted 3%. Every other Democrat mentioned by respondents received 2% support or less.

The unusually scattered results reflect the absence of a dominant figure within the Democratic Party following its defeat in the 2024 presidential election.

Unlike surveys that present voters with a predetermined selection of candidates, the Times/Siena poll asked respondents to name their preferred nominee without providing any suggested choices. That approach produced more than 20 different Democratic names, illustrating how unsettled the party’s presidential field remains.

Among those mentioned were Barack Obama and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, neither of whom is eligible to seek the presidency. Obama is constitutionally barred from another term after serving twice as president, while Mamdani, who was born outside the United States, does not meet the Constitution’s natural-born-citizen requirement.

Even some Democrats who attracted measurable support have indicated that they are not interested in entering the 2028 contest.

Ossoff, who is currently campaigning for another Senate term, said during a debate last week that he intends to complete the full six years if reelected and has “zero interest in running for president.”

The survey also found substantial disagreements among Democratic voters over how the party should position itself politically after the 2024 election.

Nearly half of Democrats, 48%, said the party should adopt a more moderate approach and move closer to the political center. Another 27% preferred a shift further to the left, while 21% believed Democrats should maintain their current ideological direction.

The preference for moderation was even more pronounced among independent voters, with 72% saying Democrats should move toward the center. Only 11% of independents favored a more liberal direction.

Those findings suggest that Democrats face a challenge extending beyond the selection of their next presidential nominee. The party must also determine whether its future lies in appealing to more moderate voters or continuing to embrace the progressive positions championed by its left wing.

The Republican picture was considerably different, with Vance and Rubio together accounting for a majority of the preferences expressed by GOP primary voters.

Vance’s 33% support gives him a 10-point advantage over Rubio, who has previously indicated that he would defer to the vice president rather than challenge him for the Republican nomination.

President Trump himself was named by 8% of Republican respondents, despite being constitutionally ineligible to seek a third presidential term under the 22nd Amendment.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who challenged Trump for the Republican nomination in 2024, attracted just 3% support.

Another 26% of Republican primary voters did not identify a preferred candidate, considerably fewer than the 45% of Democrats who were unable to name a favorite.

The results suggest that Vance enters the early discussion about the 2028 Republican nomination with a substantial advantage, although Rubio remains a potentially significant figure should he decide to seek the presidency.

The survey also examined whether Republicans want their party to continue following Trump’s political agenda after his presidency ends.

A clear majority of Republican respondents, 63%, said they favor maintaining Trump’s policies, compared with 34% who would prefer the party to adopt a different direction.

Support for continuing Trump’s approach was particularly strong among older Republicans, while younger GOP voters were less firmly committed to preserving his political program.

Independent voters expressed a sharply different preference. More than 80% said they would like the Republican Party to move away from Trump’s approach, suggesting that the policies popular among the GOP base could present challenges in attracting voters outside the party.

The poll’s findings point to a potential dilemma for Republicans as they begin contemplating the post-Trump era. Although most Republican primary voters favor continuing his agenda, the broader electorate appears considerably less enthusiastic about that direction.

The presidential findings were drawn from a larger national survey conducted shortly before the November 3 congressional elections.

In the broader Times/Siena polling, Democrats held a substantial advantage among voters asked which party they would support for Congress. Among likely voters, Democrats led Republicans by approximately 11 percentage points in House races, 52% to 41%.

The survey also found that Trump’s job approval rating stood at 36% among likely voters, while 59% disapproved of his performance. Concerns about the economy, inflation, gasoline prices, and the war with Iran contributed to the negative assessments.

Those results suggest that Republicans face immediate electoral difficulties even as Vance emerges as an early favorite to succeed Trump as the party’s presidential nominee.

For Democrats, the situation is almost the reverse. Although the party currently enjoys a significant advantage in congressional voting preferences, its supporters have yet to agree on who should carry its banner in the next presidential election.

The Times/Siena survey was conducted from October 12 through October 19, with researchers interviewing 3,494 registered voters nationwide by telephone in English and Spanish.

The full survey carries a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 1.9 percentage points.

The presidential preference questions were answered by smaller groups consisting of 1,170 self-identified Democratic primary voters and 850 Republican primary voters. Because those samples were smaller, their margins of error are greater than that of the overall survey.

{Matzav.com}

After days of negotiations and disagreements among the Chassidic courts represented on the Israeli Agudas Yisroel Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah, an agreement has reportedly been reached to publish the council’s election declaration on Monday, just one day before Israel’s Knesset elections.

The kol korei will appear in the newspapers Hamodia and Hamevaser without the signatures of the Rebbes, in accordance with a request from Ger. However, the original wording will remain unchanged, including its strongly worded warning concerning those who do not vote for United Torah Judaism.

The agreement brings to a close a dispute that had delayed publication of the declaration during the final days of the election campaign.

The controversy began when the original text, which had been prepared for publication Thursday evening, was halted at the last moment following objections from the Gerer Rebbe.

The declaration states that voters must support only United Torah Judaism, whose ballot symbol is the Hebrew letter gimmel. It further warns that anyone who does not vote gimmel indirectly becomes a participant in a chillul Hashem and bears an extremely serious sin.

The Gerer Rebbe reportedly objected to the implications of that language, pointing out that it could be understood to mean that someone who votes for Shas is committing a sin.

He questioned how such a sweeping determination could be made, particularly regarding voters who support another established chareidi party.

Following his objections, discussions began over a revised version that would preserve the council’s endorsement of United Torah Judaism while removing the more severe language.

Under the proposed compromise wording, United Torah Judaism would be identified as the only party that the Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah was calling upon the public to support.

The revised declaration would also have warned against voting for parties that do not enjoy the approval of the chachomim, but it would have omitted the assertion that anyone who fails to vote gimmel becomes a participant in a chillul Hashem.

Throughout Friday and Motzoei Shabbos, Agudas Yisroel Moetzes secretary Yaakov Walzer worked to resolve the disagreement, transmitting different versions of the declaration between the various Rebbes’ courts.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir questioned Israel Police Commissioner Danny Levy on Sunday about possible efforts to interfere with Tuesday’s Knesset elections, despite a ruling by Central Elections Committee Chairman Justice Noam Sohlberg that neither politician has the authority to direct police operations involving election integrity.

According to a report by Kan 11, the controversial meeting included discussions about potential attempts to disrupt voting, road blockades, and the police response to demonstrations. The discussions took place after Netanyahu had assured election authorities that the meeting would focus on security threats rather than political interference in the electoral process.

During the meeting, Ben-Gvir asked Levy whether police had received information about groups he described as “anarchist groups” planning to interfere with Tuesday’s voting.

Levy responded that police were investigating all information brought to their attention.

Netanyahu then sought details about how law enforcement would respond to attempts to prevent voters from reaching polling stations. The commissioner reportedly assured him that road blockades would be dealt with “with a heavy hand.”

The discussion followed a decision by Justice Sohlberg rejecting a petition seeking to prevent the meeting from taking place.

Although Sohlberg permitted the meeting to proceed, he explicitly stated that the prime minister and national security minister were not authorized to issue instructions to the police concerning election integrity or the administration of voting.

In reaching his decision, Sohlberg relied in part on Netanyahu’s explanation that the meeting was intended to address security preparations.

Earlier, Likud officials had maintained that the gathering was necessary because of security concerns and was unrelated to the management of the election.

Netanyahu himself informed the Central Elections Committee that the meeting would deal with intelligence warnings concerning possible terrorist efforts to interfere with the voting process.

Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara had opposed the meeting before it took place, arguing that political leaders should not become involved in the operational management of elections.

Gadi Eisenkot, chairman of the Yashar party, also criticized the gathering, accusing Netanyahu of attempting to interfere in the electoral process.

Meanwhile, Israel Police are preparing an extensive nationwide security operation involving approximately 22,000 officers, amid concerns about demonstrations, blocked highways, disturbances at polling stations, and possible unrest following the announcement of election results.

According to Channel 12, a senior police official disclosed that authorities had received warnings about planned demonstrations by chareidi protesters intended to interfere with voting, obstruct major roads, and make it difficult for citizens to reach polling locations.

Police are preparing to maintain a presence at nearly every polling station across the country.

Authorities have classified voting locations according to their assessed risk of disturbances or confrontations, with particular attention being given to potential flashpoints in chareidi and Arab communities.

Specialized Yasam police units will also be available for deployment if serious disturbances develop.

Another issue raised during Netanyahu’s meeting with the police commissioner reportedly concerned an organization known as “The Gideons.”

According to the senior police official, the group includes far-left activists who have publicly discussed physically protecting the Knesset and blocking Netanyahu at his residence.

Netanyahu reportedly asked police to devote particular attention to the group and any activities that could threaten public order.

The concerns extend beyond the voting itself.

Police officials are reportedly particularly worried about the possibility of widespread unrest after the election results become known, especially if the outcome produces intense political confrontation.

One scenario examined by law enforcement involves demonstrators attempting to storm the Knesset.

However, police officials emphasized that they have not received concrete intelligence indicating that such an attempt is actually being planned.

A senior police official told Channel 12 that the period following the election could prove considerably more volatile than Election Day itself.

“What happens after the elections should concern us more than the elections themselves. The results could bring people into the streets,” the official said.

Despite those concerns, police currently expect Tuesday’s voting to proceed with relatively limited disturbances.

Authorities are nevertheless preparing for a range of possible security emergencies, including terrorist attacks and missile fire.

According to the senior official, police have received several warnings about potential terrorist activity over the past week and a half, although there is presently no specific intelligence indicating an attack planned for Election Day.

The heightened security preparations come amid an intensely contested election campaign, with political tensions running high and authorities seeking to ensure that voters can reach polling stations without intimidation or interference.

The meeting between Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir, and Levy has added another layer of controversy to the final days of the campaign, raising questions about the boundaries between legitimate government security coordination and political involvement in election-related policing.

While Netanyahu and Likud insist that the discussions were necessary to address genuine threats, critics maintain that election security must remain under independent police command, free from political direction.

With approximately 22,000 officers preparing for deployment and security officials monitoring potential disturbances both before and after the vote, Israel is entering Election Day under unusually extensive police precautions.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump delivered a blistering attack on Democratic Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed on Sunday, declaring that Jewish Americans who vote for him should be ashamed of themselves and accusing the candidate of harboring deep hostility toward Israel and the Jewish people.

Speaking at a campaign rally ahead of the November 3 midterm elections, Trump expressed outrage that El-Sayed, who has repeatedly criticized Israel and questioned the United States’ relationship with the Jewish state, could receive support from Jewish voters.

“Any Jewish person that supports this guy should be ashamed of themselves,” Trump declared. “You should never speak to them again.”

TRUMP: Any Jewish person that supports El-Sayed should be ashamed of themselves. I'm polling at 99% in Israel and I cannot how anybody who's Jewish can even think about voting for this guy pic.twitter.com/bJkLWVGFt8

— Acyn (@Acyn) October 25, 2026

The president continued by questioning how Jewish voters could consider backing the Democratic nominee despite his record of controversial statements about Israel.

“I cannot understand how anybody who’s Jewish can even think about voting for this guy,” he continued, adding, “And he’ll get some.”

El-Sayed, a physician and former Detroit health director, is running against Republican Mike Rogers in one of the closely watched Senate contests of the election cycle. The race has attracted national attention as Republicans and Democrats battle for control of Congress.

The Democratic candidate emerged victorious from his party’s August primary, narrowly defeating Rep. Haley Stevens, who had been regarded as a strong supporter of Israel. His nomination immediately intensified scrutiny of his positions on Israel, antisemitism, and American foreign policy in the Middle East.

Throughout the campaign, El-Sayed has been a vocal critic of Israel’s military operations and has advocated major changes to Washington’s longstanding security relationship with the Jewish state.

During an appearance on MS NOW, he characterized Israeli military actions as “bloodthirsty” and accused the Israeli government of committing genocide.

In another interview, this time with journalist Jim Acosta, El-Sayed acknowledged that Hamas had committed war crimes but continued to level serious accusations against Israel’s leadership.

He has also opposed unconditional American military assistance to Israel and has faced criticism for declining to provide an unequivocal answer when asked whether Israel has a right to exist.

During one campaign interview, he described Israel’s leadership as “as evil as Hamas.”

Those statements have become central to Republican criticism of his candidacy, with Trump and other party figures arguing that his positions reflect hostility toward America’s closest Middle Eastern ally.

The confrontation took place at a Republican campaign event in Port Huron, Michigan, where Trump appeared alongside Rogers and Republican gubernatorial candidate John James. Much of the president’s address focused on El-Sayed, whom he portrayed as a dangerous choice for the Senate.

At the beginning of his remarks, Trump accused the Democratic nominee of having extremist associations, repeating allegations that El-Sayed has denied.

“I’m here to keep a jihadist, Muslim Brotherhood member from becoming a United States senator,” Trump told the crowd.

The president also invoked the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, drawing a comparison between the current political contest and the passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 93 who fought back against the hijackers.

“Twenty-five years later, Michigan needs to stand up and fight, just like Todd did, to stop a jihadist from walking into the Capitol,” Trump said, referring to Todd Beamer, a Michigan native who helped lead the resistance aboard the hijacked aircraft.

Trump further asserted that El-Sayed’s alleged associations should disqualify him from serving in Congress.

“Anyone with that record of support for jihadists would be screened and unable to get a seat on an airplane. They certainly should not give him a seat in the United States Senate,” he said.

El-Sayed has rejected accusations that he belongs to the Muslim Brotherhood or supports terrorism. There is no established evidence that he is a member of the organization. The Republican allegations have drawn heavily on statements attributed to his half-sister concerning their mother’s purported involvement with the group in Egypt decades ago.

The Democratic candidate has condemned the accusations as attacks on his Muslim faith and has argued that Republicans are attempting to portray him as un-American rather than debate his policy positions.

Another major controversy surrounding El-Sayed involves his reaction to the March 12 attack on Temple Israel in West Bloomfield Township, outside Detroit.

Authorities said an armed attacker drove a vehicle containing gasoline and fireworks into the synagogue complex while approximately 140 people, many of them children, were inside. Security personnel confronted the attacker, preventing a potentially catastrophic loss of life. The FBI subsequently described the incident as an act of terrorism inspired by Hezbollah.

El-Sayed condemned the attack and antisemitism, but his subsequent explanation of the circumstances surrounding the violence provoked outrage among Jewish community members.

Discussing the incident, he said that “violence is a cycle” and that “hurt people hurt people.”

Critics accused him of appearing to rationalize the attack by discussing the attacker’s family losses in Lebanon and connecting the incident to the wider conflict in the Middle East.

El-Sayed later apologized to members of the Michigan Democratic Jewish Caucus in August, acknowledging that his attempt to provide broader context had caused pain and that his remarks should have ended with an unequivocal condemnation.

The candidate has maintained that he never intended to excuse the attack and has repeatedly stated that antisemitic violence is unacceptable.

His position on Israel has nevertheless remained a central issue in the Senate campaign.

In an interview last week with ABC News, El-Sayed argued that the United States should reconsider treating Israel as an ally, accusing the Israeli government of drawing Washington into military conflicts while receiving American assistance.

“An ally that takes your money to push you into wars you shouldn’t be fighting is not an ally,” he said during an interview with ABC News.

The statement generated additional criticism from Republicans and pro-Israel voters, particularly given the continuing tensions involving Iran and Israel’s security.

El-Sayed has maintained that his criticism is directed at the Israeli government and its policies rather than Jews or Judaism. He has rejected accusations of antisemitism, arguing that opposition to Israeli military operations should not be equated with hostility toward Jewish Americans.

The divisions over his candidacy have also surfaced within Michigan’s Jewish Democratic community. While some prominent Jewish Democrats have endorsed El-Sayed, others have expressed serious reservations about his rhetoric and positions on Israel.

Republican Mike Rogers has sought to capitalize on those concerns, making outreach to Jewish voters a significant component of his campaign.

During a recent debate, Rogers accused El-Sayed of concealing the extent of his political positions and suggested that even some Democrats were uncomfortable supporting him.

“Think about this: there are so many Democrats who are coming out today and saying they can’t vote for Abdul El-Sayed because he’s too extreme,” Rogers said.

Rogers has also described El-Sayed as hostile toward Jewish interests, although the Democratic candidate has strongly disputed that characterization.

Trump has been making similar allegations since El-Sayed secured the Democratic nomination in August.

Shortly after the primary, the president launched a personal attack on the candidate, accusing him of dishonesty and hostility toward Jews.

“When I watch Abdul, he’s full of [garbage],” Trump said at the time, describing the Democratic nominee as a “man of hate” and accusing him of harboring hostility toward Jewish people.

Trump went further, insisting that El-Sayed’s public statements of tolerance did not reflect his true beliefs.

“This guy hates Jews. Somebody said, ‘Oh, that’s a little strong’. No, he hates Jews and he hates Israel…He’s a man of hate. And now he’s going around saying, ‘No, I love everybody.’ He doesn’t love everybody. Put him in office. You’re going to find out what he loves.”

The president also asserted that El-Sayed “doesn’t love Israel. He doesn’t love Jewish people. He hates them. He hates them with a passion that burns in his heart.”

Those accusations have become a recurring feature of Trump’s campaign appearances as Republicans attempt to defeat El-Sayed and win the Michigan Senate seat.

The race has attracted additional attention following an appearance Saturday by Barack Obama, who campaigned in Detroit for El-Sayed and other Democratic candidates. Obama criticized efforts to question El-Sayed’s American identity because of his religion.

Trump responded with his own campaign appearance the following day, using the Port Huron rally to deliver some of his strongest criticism of the Democratic nominee yet.

The president also praised Rogers, a former congressman and FBI agent, as a candidate who would represent Michigan’s interests in Washington.

“This guy, he’s like Central Casting. He’s what your state is all about. He really is. He’s a fantastic man. He’s going to be one of the great United States senators, Mike Rogers,” Trump said.

Rogers previously ran for the Senate in 2024, narrowly losing to Democrat Elissa Slotkin. He is now seeking another opportunity to represent Michigan, with Republicans viewing the open seat as an important opportunity in their effort to maintain control of the chamber.

For El-Sayed, the campaign has become a test of whether his progressive positions on Israel and American foreign policy can attract enough voters to overcome Republican attacks and concerns among some Jewish Democrats.

For Rogers, the strategy involves consolidating Republican support while persuading independents and traditionally Democratic voters that El-Sayed’s positions are too extreme.

With the election only days away, Michigan has become one of the country’s most closely contested Senate battlegrounds, and the outcome could have significant consequences for the balance of power in Washington.

Trump’s remarks Sunday made clear that he intends to keep El-Sayed’s record on Israel, his response to the synagogue attack, and his alleged extremist associations at the forefront of the campaign through Election Day.

{Matzav.com}

Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu sparked a political firestorm Sunday after sharing an AI-generated image depicting a nuclear explosion over Tel Aviv, accompanied by a warning that Iran’s nuclear ambitions pose an existential threat to Israel and that the country must take advantage of President Donald Trump’s remaining time in office to confront the danger.

The image, showing a massive mushroom cloud rising over Tel Aviv as buildings are engulfed in flames, was posted to Netanyahu’s social media account just two days before Tuesday’s Knesset elections.

Netanyahu shared the image alongside a lengthy statement written by Israeli political commentator Yuval Bloomberg, introducing it with the words, “Read the important words of Yuval Bloomberg.”

The statement warned that the Iranian nuclear threat dwarfs the political controversies dominating Israel’s election campaign and argued that the next prime minister must be capable of working closely with President Trump to prevent Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

“The State of Israel faces a real and tangible existential threat,” Bloomberg wrote in the statement shared by Netanyahu. “If the Iranians obtain nuclear weapons, nothing else will matter anymore. Everything pales into insignificance in the face of the existential threat posed by Iran and the Shiite axis.”

Bloomberg argued that Israel has a limited opportunity to deal decisively with Iran while Trump remains in the White House.

“We have another two years of Trump to finish the job in Iran, and there is no way of knowing what will come after that,” he wrote, warning that a future American administration might be less willing to cooperate with Israel.

The statement described the current period as a historic opportunity to address what Bloomberg characterized as the greatest threat facing Israel.

He argued that controversies involving Qatar, chareidi military conscription, Netanyahu aide Yonatan Urich, and other political disputes were distracting the public from the Iranian danger.

“If two atomic bombs were to fall on central Israel, who would care about all these meaningless controversies?” the statement asked.

Bloomberg warned that future generations would not forgive Israeli leaders if they failed to take advantage of the opportunity to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

He further argued that Israel requires a prime minister capable of maintaining a close relationship with Trump and withstanding international pressure.

In one of the statement’s most provocative passages, Bloomberg warned that voters who choose a leader incapable of confronting Iran could expose themselves and their families to the danger of a “second Holocaust.”

Netanyahu’s decision to circulate the message, together with the graphic depiction of a nuclear attack, immediately drew fierce criticism from opposition leaders.

Gadi Eisenkot, chairman of the Yashar party and one of Netanyahu’s principal election rivals, accused the prime minister of attempting to frighten voters.

“Netanyahu, you’re hysterical,” Eisenkot wrote on X.

“As in every election campaign, it’s the same method of lies and scare tactics. This time, threatening Israeli citizens with mass destruction,” he continued, accusing Netanyahu of failing to achieve the objectives of Israel’s military operations against Iran.

Eisenkot added, “You’ve failed. And in two days, the people of Israel will show you that at the ballot box.”

Yair Golan, chairman of the Democrats party, also sharply condemned the post.

“The prime minister of Israel has published an image of an atomic bomb over Tel Aviv,” Golan wrote. “I ask that he be kept away from social media. The man and those around him have lost it. The pressure is mounting.”

Golan said that Tuesday’s election would provide an opportunity to replace the current government.

Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett also criticized Netanyahu, accusing him of suggesting that Israel’s survival depends on his continued leadership.

“He tells us that if he loses, we will all die. This is a lie,” Bennett wrote.

“The State of Israel was born and grew strong long before him, and will continue long after him. The people of Israel are stronger than any politician,” Bennett added.

The controversy comes amid renewed questions about the status of Iran’s nuclear program following the American and Israeli military operations against Tehran in 2025 and 2026.

Netanyahu previously declared that those operations had inflicted devastating damage on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, describing the results as a major victory for Israel.

Opposition leaders seized on the apparent contrast between those earlier declarations and Sunday’s warning that Iran continues to pose an existential nuclear threat.

The social media post also reportedly raised concerns among American officials.

According to a Channel 12 report, White House officials feared that the dramatic image and accompanying rhetoric could lead Iranian leaders to misinterpret Israel’s intentions, potentially increasing the risk of military escalation.

The report suggested that Trump’s subsequent statement ruling out an American strike on Iran that day may have been intended, at least in part, to ease tensions.

LISTEN:

​​For more info, email bitachon4life@gmail.com.

LISTEN:

Two Israeli opposition figures outlined competing priorities for Gaza and Israel’s future relations with the Palestinians on Sunday, with former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot pledging to end Hamas rule in Gaza within 18 months of taking office, while Democratic Party MK Gilad Kariv called for the Palestinian Authority to assume a role in Gaza and for Israel to resume negotiations with the Palestinians.

Kariv, a member of the Democrats party, made his remarks during an event organized by Israel Shelanu, an organization representing immigrants from Russia.

Addressing the future of Gaza, Kariv argued that the territory should be politically connected to the Palestinian Authority and the West Bank.

“The future of Gaza includes a connection between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank,” Kariv declared.

He also called for renewed diplomatic engagement between Israel and the Palestinians, stating, “We need to renew negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.”

Kariv’s remarks reflect his party’s support for renewed diplomatic negotiations and a political arrangement involving the Palestinian Authority, which currently administers portions of the West Bank.

His proposal to involve the Palestinian Authority in Gaza comes amid continuing disagreements within Israel over who should govern the territory following the war against Hamas.

Meanwhile, Eisenkot, chairman of the Yashar! party and a former IDF chief of staff, presented his own commitments during a major election gathering held by his party.

Eisenkot promised that Hamas would no longer govern Gaza within 18 months of his assuming office, presenting the dismantling of the terrorist organization’s rule as a central objective of a government under his leadership.

“Within 18 months of my taking office, the Hamas terrorist organization will no longer rule Gaza,” Eisenkot declared. “There is no person more committed to dismantling Hamas than I am.”

The former military chief also outlined several steps he said his government would take immediately upon assuming power, including establishing a state commission of inquiry and advancing legislation concerning military service.

“On the government’s first day, we will establish a state commission of inquiry,” Eisenkot said. “Within a week of its establishment, we will create a national cabinet to combat crime and begin legislating a universal service law.”

The proposed commission of inquiry would address demands for an official investigation into the failures surrounding the October 7 Hamas attack and the events that followed.

Eisenkot’s proposed universal service legislation would also place the military draft controversy at the center of his government’s agenda, at a time when the status of yeshiva students remains one of the most contentious issues in Israeli politics.

{Matzav.com}

Shas chairman Aryeh Deri has declared that his party will refuse to join Israel’s next governing coalition unless an agreement is reached to regulate the status of yeshiva students, making the military draft controversy a central condition for Shas’s participation in any future government.

The declaration comes ahead of Tuesday’s Knesset elections, as chareidi political leaders face mounting pressure over the failure to resolve the status of yeshiva bochurim amid the ongoing military recruitment controversy.

Deri’s position applies regardless of which political leader is tasked with forming the next government. According to his statement, Shas will insist on an acceptable arrangement concerning yeshiva students before agreeing to enter a coalition.

The ultimatum places the draft issue at the center of potential coalition negotiations following the election, when parties seeking to assemble a parliamentary majority may need the support of Shas and other chareidi factions.

In an interview with Kikar HaShabbat on October 14, Deri said the position was rooted in the instructions of the late Rav Ovadia Yosef zt”l.

“We are continuing in the path of Maran. Maran told us to do everything, absolutely everything, to regularize the status of yeshiva students, with the principle being that anyone who studies Torah should continue,” Deri said.

He emphasized that the demand had already been communicated publicly by both himself and Rav Yitzchak Yosef.

“We declared it. Maran the Rishon L’Tzion said it in his own voice, and I said it: There will be no government in Israel that Shas supports or participates in without regularizing the status of yeshiva students. How can we accept this sword hanging over them, with the arrests?”

Deri also sharply criticized the renewed arrests of yeshiva bochurim, alleging that the enforcement measures were being used for political purposes rather than to address the military’s manpower needs.

He accused the attorney general and opposition figures of seeking to inflame tensions surrounding the draft controversy, arguing that arrests would lead to demonstrations without producing additional soldiers.

“Everyone admits that not a single arrest brings a soldier. Nothing!” Deri declared, according to the interview.

He further accused the attorney general of acting maliciously and encouraging a confrontation that would provoke protests by the Peleg Yerushalmi.

“There’s no doubt that was the goal!” Deri said.

His criticism culminated in a pointed declaration: “We survived Pharaoh; we’ll survive this too.”

Deri’s position closely mirrors the ultimatum issued by United Torah Judaism chairman MK Yaakov Asher, who has likewise insisted that his party will neither enter nor support a government that fails to enact legislation regulating the status of yeshiva students.

Asher has stressed that coalition promises and future commitments will not be sufficient, insisting instead on actual legislative action.

The dispute has become one of the principal issues confronting Israel’s chareidi parties following the collapse of efforts to pass an acceptable draft law during the outgoing Knesset.

The absence of legislation has left thousands of yeshiva bochurim facing uncertainty over their military status, while enforcement proceedings and arrests have triggered widespread protests.

Deri has repeatedly maintained that the responsibility of Shas is to protect those who devote themselves to Torah learning and to secure a lasting legislative arrangement.

In a more recent interview with Kol Chai, published October 21, Deri went further, making clear that Shas would be prepared to face another election rather than establish a government without resolving the issue.

Asked directly whether the party would maintain its position even at the cost of another election, Deri responded: “Absolutely! We will not establish a government or swear in a government without this issue being resolved.”

He said Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was aware of the demand and argued that the legislation would require sufficient parliamentary support.

“The prime minister knows this, and he says it himself,” Deri said. “There’s nothing to do; it will take some time, but that’s why we need to make sure we have 61.”

Deri expressed confidence that parties currently hesitant about the legislation would ultimately have to confront the issue during coalition negotiations.

“Those who hesitated a little in the right-wing parties will understand that without this, there is no government,” he said.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump has renewed his endorsement of Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu ahead of Israel’s upcoming elections, calling on Israeli voters to return Netanyahu to office so the two leaders can complete their campaign against Iran and preserve what Trump described as their extraordinary military achievements.

In a message published Sunday on Truth Social, Trump again threw his support behind Netanyahu, reposting his endorsement from the previous week and emphasizing the close partnership between Washington and Yerushalayim. The president credited their cooperation with severely weakening Iran’s military capabilities, damaging its economy, and preventing the Islamic Republic from obtaining nuclear weapons.

“To the people of Israel, to those who haven’t seen it, I am attaching the Endorsement I gave one week ago to your Prime Minister, Bibi Netanyahu. As everyone is aware, including the enemy, Bibi and I have had a great relationship in winning together. I did the Venezuelan attack, one of the most successful Military Operations in History but, before that, we did Operation Midnight Hammer, stopping the World’s Number One State Sponsor of Terror from obtaining a Nuclear Weapon. Then we did Operation Epic Fury, and Iran now has No Navy, No Air Force, and both their Military and Economy are in shambles, including the fact that Iran’s Inflation is at 301%. The Naval Blockade has precluded them from getting Oil, and two levels of leadership, both Military and otherwise, are gone,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.

President Trump, my friend Donald – thank you for your extraordinary endorsement. Israel has never had a greater friend in the White House. Together we will never let Iran's regime get nuclear weapons. Thank you for your clarity, courage and unwavering support.@realDonaldTrump pic.twitter.com/GqaOVB74Dj

— Benjamin Netanyahu – בנימין נתניהו (@netanyahu) October 18, 2026

Trump’s message presented Netanyahu’s reelection as essential to maintaining the pressure on Tehran, arguing that the two countries must continue working together until the threat posed by Iran has been eliminated.

He urged Israelis to remember Netanyahu’s record when casting their ballots, portraying the prime minister as a wartime leader who had played a central role in confronting Israel’s enemies.

“When you go to the Polls please remember that Bibi has been an outstanding Warrior Prime Minister! Israel was called The Little Satan, with the United States being called The Big Satan, by some very evil people. There can no longer be the chant heard around the World of ‘Death to America, Death to Israel,’ and there won’t be. Vote for Bibi Netanyahu for Prime Minister, we have to finish the job that we started!”

The renewed endorsement follows Trump’s public declaration of support for Netanyahu one week earlier, when he argued that replacing the Israeli prime minister could jeopardize the military and diplomatic progress achieved against Iran.

In that earlier message, Trump praised Netanyahu as a vital American partner and described the Iranian regime’s longstanding threats against Israel and the United States as a danger that could no longer be tolerated.

“To the Great People of Israel: Bibi Netanyahu has been a Great Warrior Prime Minister, and an even greater Partner for Peace in combatting the Islamic Republic of Iran, with its 51 year old chant, ‘Death to Israel, Death to America! We will destroy the Little Satan and the Big Satan,'” Trump wrote. “What Country can survive when things such as this are allowed to be said, because eventually, they always end up being true?”

The president argued that American and Israeli military operations, combined with economic restrictions, had dramatically reduced Iran’s ability to threaten either country. Nevertheless, he warned that the campaign against Tehran was not necessarily over and that further measures could be taken if the Iranian leadership failed to change course.

“It would have been only a question of time until Iran would have put that ominous phrase into effect, but they have been systematically destroyed, both Militarily and Financially, and unless they change their ways, rapidly, we will soon finish the job.”

Trump also issued a pointed warning about the consequences of a Netanyahu defeat, suggesting that the United States could be left to confront Iran without the same level of Israeli cooperation.

“If Israel has the wrong Leader, which would be anyone other than Bibi, America will have to do this work ourselves, and I am not inclined to do so,” Trump warned.

The president’s decision to renew his endorsement comes at a critical moment for Netanyahu, with Israelis scheduled to vote on Tuesday, October 27. Recent election surveys have indicated that Netanyahu’s existing coalition may fall short of the 61 Knesset seats required to form a majority government, leaving the prime minister facing a difficult reelection battle.

The Jerusalem Post reported that Netanyahu and figures close to him had been seeking another public statement from Trump in the final days of the campaign. According to Axios, the two leaders spoke twice over three days, and Netanyahu suggested possible language for additional endorsements, including the possibility of Trump speaking directly with Israeli journalists.

The reports indicate that Netanyahu has placed considerable importance on securing Trump’s backing, apparently calculating that the American president’s popularity among Israeli voters could help strengthen his electoral position.

The endorsement is particularly notable because Trump had previously avoided taking sides in the Israeli election. Despite their longstanding relationship, the two leaders have experienced disagreements in recent months over the handling of Iran and other regional issues.

In a telephone interview following his original endorsement, Trump explained that he had always intended to support Netanyahu but had deliberately waited before making his position public.

“I was always going to do that. I just didn’t want to do it too soon,” Trump said.

He also emphasized the importance of having a dependable Israeli leader.

“It is important that Israel has a person they can count on,” the president said.

Asked whether he could work with a different Israeli prime minister, Trump left the question open.

“Maybe I will, maybe I won’t. Who wants to take the chance?”

Following Trump’s initial endorsement, Netanyahu released a video thanking the president and emphasizing their shared determination to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

The prime minister also sought to connect the confrontation with Tehran to the economic concerns of Americans, arguing that allowing Iran to become a nuclear power would have severe consequences for global energy markets.

“Let me say to the American people,” he said, “if you’re worried about today’s gas prices, think of what will happen if Iran gets nuclear weapons – something that Donald Trump and I will never allow.”

Netanyahu went on to predict that the collapse of Iran’s current government would produce a substantial reduction in fuel prices.

When the Iranian regime “disappears,” Netanyahu continued, “gas prices will go down, and how – but only under Trump.”

The prime minister also praised Trump’s leadership and his role in strengthening the security of Israel and its allies.

“The world has been fortunate,” said Netanyahu, “America has been fortunate, America’s allies have been fortunate, Israel has been fortunate, and the Jewish people have been fortunate” to have a leader like Trump.

In a separate telephone conversation after the first endorsement, Netanyahu told Trump that their joint efforts against Iran remained unfinished and that they also had further work to accomplish in expanding the Abraham Accords.

“Donald, we have a job to finish [in Iran]…and we’ll finish it together. We’ll finish it, and no one else will do it,” Netanyahu said.

Trump responded by praising Netanyahu’s resilience and expressing confidence in his prospects.

“You’re a warrior. You’ve been treated unfairly by your country and probably some others also… But you’re a great warrior, and we will prove that.”

The president added, “I think you’re terrific. I was always going to do [the endorsement]. I think you’re going to have a tremendous victory, actually,” before telling Netanyahu, “You’re the man I want by my side, Bibi.”

Netanyahu’s political opponents have challenged the significance of Trump’s intervention, arguing that the decision about Israel’s next government belongs exclusively to Israeli voters.

Gadi Eisenkot, one of Netanyahu’s principal rivals, said he respects Trump and appreciates his contributions to Israel’s security but rejected the idea that an American presidential endorsement should determine the election.

“But the elections are a domestic Israeli issue. The only ones who will decide are the citizens of Israel, and I will stand firm on this,” Eisenkot said.

Other opposition figures have similarly argued that Israel’s leadership should be determined by the electorate rather than by expressions of support from foreign leaders.

{Matzav.com}

With Israel preparing for Tuesday’s Knesset elections, the Central Elections Committee has released figures revealing the enormous logistical operation required to accommodate more than 7.3 million eligible voters, including 450 million printed ballot slips, over 12,000 polling stations, approximately 100,000 election workers, and a budget of 690 million shekels.

The figures, published Sunday ahead of the October 27 election for the 26th Knesset, offer a glimpse into the extensive preparations taking place across the country as election officials finalize arrangements for voting, transportation, security, accessibility, and ballot counting.

According to the committee, 7,331,981 Israeli citizens are eligible to vote in the upcoming election.

To accommodate them, officials have established 12,018 polling stations throughout Israel, with approximately 18,000 ballot boxes prepared for use.

Among the polling stations, 6,209 have been designated as accessible to voters with disabilities, including 3,621 specially accessible polling stations equipped to accommodate individuals requiring additional assistance.

The election operation is being coordinated through 20 regional election committees, which oversee preparations and voting procedures in their respective areas.

Perhaps the most striking figure released by the committee concerns the number of ballot slips printed for the election.

Although fewer than 7.4 million people are eligible to vote, the Central Elections Committee has printed approximately 450 million ballot slips, an average of more than 61 slips for every eligible voter.

The enormous quantity reflects Israel’s voting system, in which each political party has its own printed ballot slip. Voters select the slip representing their chosen party and place it inside an envelope before depositing it into a ballot box.

Election officials have prepared approximately 11.5 million ballot slips for each participating party list, ensuring that polling stations have sufficient supplies throughout election day.

Producing the ballots alone required approximately 250 tons of paper.

The preparations also involve a substantial workforce that expands dramatically as election day approaches.

During periods between elections, the Central Elections Committee operates with approximately 40 permanent employees. As elections approach, that number increases to roughly 1,200.

On election day itself, approximately 100,000 workers will be involved in operating polling stations, supervising voting procedures, managing logistics, and assisting with the counting process.

To prepare personnel for their responsibilities, the committee has organized training programs for approximately 50,000 workers, using some 2,140 classrooms across the country.

Another major component of the preparations involves monitoring voting procedures and preventing irregularities.

Approximately 15,000 cameras have been allocated for election integrity inspectors, who are responsible for documenting relevant incidents and helping ensure that voting and ballot counting are conducted in accordance with election regulations.

The cameras form part of the committee’s broader supervision operation, which is intended to identify irregularities and maintain confidence in the electoral process.

Transportation arrangements are also being finalized to make it easier for voters to reach their designated polling stations.

The Central Elections Committee announced that 660 intercity public transportation routes will operate free of charge on election day.

In addition, all Israel Railways routes will be included in the free transportation arrangements.

The initiative is intended to assist voters who must travel between cities to reach their registered polling locations, including individuals who live, study, or work away from the addresses where they are registered to vote.

The committee’s preparations carry a substantial financial cost.

The approved budget for the 26th Knesset elections stands at approximately 690 million shekels, equivalent to roughly $222 million.

The funding covers the nationwide election operation, including personnel, printing, equipment, transportation, training, logistical support, and supervision.

Based on the number of eligible voters, the budget represents approximately 94 shekels for every person entitled to cast a ballot.

Even after the polling stations close and the votes are counted, the logistical operation will continue.

According to the Central Elections Committee, more than 400 tons of paper and cardboard are transferred for recycling following an election, including materials used for ballots, packaging, and other election-related purposes.

The preparations come as Israel enters the final days of an election campaign marked by intense political competition and disputes over the future composition of the Knesset.

Election officials have also been addressing changes to the ballot following the withdrawal of several political parties from the race.

The committee announced Sunday that ballot slips belonging to the Achi party, which withdrew from the election on Friday, will be removed from polling stations. The party’s name will also be marked as withdrawn on lists displayed to voters, and ballots cast for the party will be considered invalid.

Similar procedures were implemented following the withdrawal of Benny Gantz’s Blue and White party.

The Central Elections Committee said that its extensive preparations are designed to ensure that voting proceeds smoothly and that every eligible voter has an opportunity to participate.

“All of this is part of the preparations to ensure a proper, accessible, and supervised election process that enables the public to exercise its right to vote,” the committee said.

With just two days remaining until Israelis head to the polls, the figures illustrate the scale of the operation behind what, for each voter, amounts to selecting a single ballot slip and placing it into an envelope.

Behind that simple act stand hundreds of millions of printed ballots, thousands of polling stations, tens of thousands of workers, an extensive transportation network, and hundreds of millions of shekels in election expenditures.

{Matzav.com}

[Video below.] New York Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Blakeman surprised popular Jewish singer Shmueli Ungar during an appearance on the singer’s ShmueliCast podcast when he revealed that his Hebrew name is Baruch and that he belongs to an Orthodox shul.

The exchange, which featured a visibly enthusiastic reaction from Ungar, offered an unusual glimpse into Blakeman’s Jewish identity as he campaigns for governor of New York.

During the conversation, Blakeman told the hosts that they were welcome to address him by either his English or Hebrew name.

“You can call me Bruce or you can call me Baruch. My Hebrew name is Baruch,” Blakeman said.

Ungar appeared surprised by the revelation.

“You’re Jewish?” he asked.

“Yes! I belong to an Orthodox synagogue,” Blakeman responded.

The singer reacted with excitement, expressing surprise that the Republican candidate was Jewish.

“I didn’t know you’re Jewish, gevaldig! A yid, yiddishe kind,” Ungar exclaimed.

The conversation then turned to whether Blakeman could speak Yiddish, with Ungar’s co-host asking the gubernatorial candidate about his familiarity with the language.

“How about Yiddish?” the co-host asked.

“A bissel,” Blakeman replied, using the Yiddish expression meaning “a little.”

The lighthearted exchange highlighted a side of Blakeman that may be unfamiliar to some voters, particularly those who know him primarily through his political career and his role as Nassau County executive.

Blakeman, who is seeking to unseat Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul in the November 3 election, has made public safety, affordability, and opposition to certain Democratic policies central themes of his campaign.

WATCH:

{Matzav.com}