Feed aggregator

A 7-year-old boy was murdered and his 4-year-old cousin was critically wounded Monday afternoon in a horrific stabbing in Beit Shemesh, after a neighbor allegedly entered the property and attacked the children during a family birthday celebration.

The two children were in the yard of a home on Emek HaZeitim Street, where the birthday party was taking place. According to details emerging from the initial investigation, a 15-year-old relative who was watching the children witnessed the attack. The father of one of the children subsequently arrived and found the two youngsters wounded near the swimming pool in the yard.

Magen David Adom and United Hatzalah emergency personnel rushed to the scene and provided initial medical treatment. The 7-year-old was listed in critical condition and transported to Hadassah Ein Kerem Medical Center in Yerushalayim while undergoing resuscitation efforts. His 4-year-old cousin was also evacuated to the hospital in serious condition.

Despite continued attempts to save the older child, doctors at the hospital were ultimately forced to pronounce the 7-year-old dead.

United Hatzalah EMTs Yaakov Jungreis, Moshe Siroka and Eliya Asulin, who were among the first responders at the scene, said earlier: “We were told at the scene that they were injured as a result of violence. With the assistance of additional EMTs, we provided initial medical treatment at the scene to two victims whose conditions were defined as critical and serious, and they were then evacuated to the hospital for further medical treatment.”

Members of United Hatzalah’s Psychotrauma and Crisis Response Unit were also dispatched to the scene to provide emotional assistance to relatives and witnesses following the traumatic attack.

Police arrested a neighborhood resident in his 20s shortly after the stabbing on suspicion of attacking the two children. The suspect’s father was questioned at the scene as investigators worked to determine what may have led to the deadly assault.

Authorities are examining several possible motives. Investigators are looking into whether the suspect may have been suffering from an unstable mental state, as well as whether an earlier dispute between the suspect’s family and the children’s family may have played a role. Police stressed that these remain investigative possibilities and that no motive has yet been established.

According to the preliminary investigation, the suspect arrived at the home where the children were gathered and, at some point, allegedly attacked them with a knife. Investigators are collecting testimony from family members and eyewitnesses, including the 15-year-old relative who was present when the attack occurred.

The emergency unfolded shortly after 4:40 p.m., when Magen David Adom’s 101 dispatch center received a report of two injured children on Emek HaZeitim Street. Initial reports from the scene were incomplete and included conflicting information about the children’s ages. The full circumstances and severity of the attack became clear only later.

Police are continuing to investigate the circumstances surrounding the murder and the stabbing.

{Matzav.com}

President Trump issued a stark warning to Oman on Monday, threatening devastating US military action if the American ally interferes in the escalating confrontation with Iran over control of the Strait of Hormuz.

“If Oman gets in the way, we’ll bomb the [garbage] out of them,” Trump said bluntly in an interview with Fox News correspondent Trey Yingst, delivering the warning as a tentative ceasefire between the United States and Iran nears its expiration.

Trump’s comments come as the future of the Strait of Hormuz remains at the center of negotiations involving Iran and Oman. Tehran said last week that discussions with Muscat were underway over a potential arrangement to reopen the critical shipping passage, which has repeatedly become a flashpoint since the war began.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei announced Monday that Iran and Oman had reached an “understanding” while negotiators work to finalize the details of a broader agreement.

“This is a highly complex issue, and for the first time a mechanism is to be established that both safeguards the sovereignty and sovereign rights of the two coastal states (Iran and Oman) and ensures the safe passage of commercial vessels through this waterway,” he added.

A major sticking point remains Iran’s insistence that reopening the Strait of Hormuz be accompanied by the establishment of a new toll system, a demand opposed by the United States.

Oman, despite being a US ally, indicated in late June that it was receptive to an arrangement under which “voluntary” fees could be collected from vessels traveling through the strategic waterway. The proposal was described as being modeled on systems operating in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore.

Omani Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi has defended the proposed charges, arguing that the money is needed to ensure safe navigation through the strait.

The dispute is not the first time Oman’s position on shipping fees has drawn an extraordinary warning from Trump. In May, after Muscat repeatedly expressed willingness to participate in collecting fees in the Strait of Hormuz, Trump threatened to “blow up” the allied country if it did not “behave.”

The Strait of Hormuz has become one of Iran’s most powerful pressure points during the conflict. Nearly one-fifth of the world’s seaborne oil passes through the narrow waterway, allowing disruptions there to reverberate rapidly through global energy markets and push gasoline prices higher as the November midterm elections draw closer.

Trump escalated his rhetoric over the strategic passage even further on Friday. Speaking at a Long Island rally for Republican candidates, the president said that once the war is over, he intends to declare the Strait of Hormuz “a territory of the United States.”

Shas MK Moshe Abutbul is pushing back against growing criticism within the Chareidi community over the draft crisis, arguing that Chareidi lawmakers did take significant action over the past four years but repeatedly encountered obstacles from Israel’s judicial system.

Speaking in an interview as Israel moves closer to elections, Abutbul acknowledged that Shas and United Torah Judaism face difficult questions from Chareidi voters over what they accomplished to protect the status of bnei yeshivos.

Abutbul said he recently participated in panels with bnei Torah and baalei batim, where he encountered people demanding answers about the actions of their elected representatives.

“There are very pointed questions there,” Abutbul said, adding that once the sequence of events is explained, the picture becomes considerably more complicated. “The public is very, very thirsty for answers.”

According to Abutbul, much of what Chareidi representatives actually did over the past several years was never adequately communicated to the public.

One of the central questions facing Shas and UTJ as elections approach is what they accomplished during the past four years toward resolving the status of bnei yeshivos. Abutbul argued that the war dramatically altered the political and public environment in which the issue was being addressed.

“During a war, it is not exactly the time when you can talk about an exemption from military service or anything else, when an Israeli mother is sending several sons to the battlefield,” he said.

Abutbul said the government’s effort to overhaul the judicial system was also intended, in part, to create a legal framework that could withstand a future High Court challenge to legislation governing the status of bnei yeshivos.

He maintained that the fundamental obstacle is not necessarily a lack of political votes in the Knesset, but the judiciary’s ability to overturn or obstruct legislation passed by elected lawmakers.

As an example, Abutbul pointed to legislation concerning arrests that was advanced by Shas chairman Aryeh Deri. He said that despite securing sufficient political support for the measure, it ultimately encountered a legal barrier.

“This is not only a political problem; it is a fundamental legal problem that must be addressed at its root,” Abutbul said.

Without fundamental change, he argued, legislative achievements can ultimately prove meaningless.

“It is like a person who comes and fills a bag with something, but at the bottom you have a very large hole,” he said.

Abutbul therefore identified the judicial system as one of the central issues Chareidi parties must address in the coming election and the next government.

“We must change and reshape the face of the High Court, so that it will be a body that does not interfere in things that are legislated,” he said.

Asked why changes that were not completed during the outgoing government should be expected to succeed during the next term, Abutbul said the war made far-reaching reforms considerably more difficult and argued that voters now understand what is at stake.

“Everyone knows that 90 percent of this issue is fundamentally addressing the judicial system,” he said.

Abutbul added that steps have already been taken in areas involving the powers of legal advisers, the Police Internal Investigations Department and other components of the legal system.

During the second part of the interview, Abutbul turned from politics to the olam haTorah, describing a major Torah project he has initiated involving the study of Shas.

The project is intended to compile, alongside each masechta, relevant sugyos appearing elsewhere throughout the Talmud, allowing a person learning a particular subject to easily access related discussions found in other masechtos.

According to Abutbul, approximately 200 avreichim have worked on the undertaking and have already identified nearly 8,000 references and connections between different sugyos throughout Shas.

The plan calls for approximately 100 to 150 supplementary pages to accompany each masechta. The existing text of the Gemara will remain unchanged, while the additional material will present parallel and related sugyos from elsewhere in Shas.

Abutbul said the Otzar HaChochma project has assisted in making the material available to the public, enabling lomdim to review the work, submit comments and suggest additions as the project moves toward completion.

He added that the initiative has received endorsements from leading gedolei Torah, including the Moetzet Chachmei HaTorah.

Abutbul concluded by saying that despite the political and legal battles facing the Chareidi community, he believes its most fundamental response remains strengthening Torah learning.

“Our remedy against all these blows, truly, truly, is, with Hashem’s help, to learn Torah, to add Torah, to add batei medrash, to add batei knesses.”

{Matzav.com}

Plans for the historic bar mitzvah of the oldest grandson of the Rachmastrivka Rebbe have undergone a last-minute change, with the originally scheduled venue at the large Karlin-Stolin Bais Medrash in Givat Ze’ev canceled following pressure from extremist elements.

The major simcha is scheduled to take place on Sunday, 11 Elul, during the week of Parshas Ki Savo. The bar mitzvah boy is the oldest grandson of the Rachmastrivka Rebbe and a son of the Rebbe’s son-in-law, Rav Shmuel Abba Twersky.

The occasion is particularly significant for Rachmastrivka, as it will mark the first bar mitzvah among the Rebbe’s descendants. The Rebbe has two daughters, who are married to Rav Shmuel Abba Twersky and Rav Dovid Yitzchok Yaakov Biderman, and this will be the first time that one of his grandchildren reaches the age of bar mitzvah.

With thousands of chassidim and admirers expected to arrive from across Eretz Yisroel and abroad, Rachmastrivka askanim had been searching for a large venue capable of accommodating the anticipated crowds.

After considerable effort, arrangements were finalized to hold the simcha in the expansive main bais medrash of Karlin-Stolin in Givat Ze’ev.

The decision generated considerable attention in the chassidishe community, particularly because of opposition from extremist groups to holding the event at the Givat Ze’ev location. In the past, the Toldos Avrohom Yitzchok Rebbe held two weddings for his descendants at the same venue despite significant pressure from those elements.

Now, however, the pressure has apparently succeeded. Organizers were forced to cancel plans to use the Karlin-Stolin complex and are working urgently to secure an alternative location ahead of the major event.

According to current plans, the historic bar mitzvah will likely be held in a massive tent to be erected near the Slonim Bais Medrash in Yerushalayim.

{Matzav.com}

Veteran Likud activist Chilik Attias pushed back against efforts to make the Chareidi draft controversy a central election issue, while also sharply criticizing divisions on the political right and expressing opposition to reserved slots on the Likud slate ahead of the party’s upcoming primaries.

Speaking with Avi Mimran on Kol Chai’s main news program ahead of the Likud primaries, Attias discussed the internal battles within the party, defections from the right-wing bloc, the draft issue, judicial reform and the balance between party activists and Likud members in determining the party’s electoral slate.

Attias began by criticizing the media’s focus on rumors and internal political battles surrounding the primaries.

“We are currently a party holding primaries, democratic primaries, a celebration of democracy, something that truly does not exist in any other party,” he said.

Asked about reports surrounding Nir Barkat, Attias said that “anything is possible,” but argued that attention should be focused primarily on the democratic process itself rather than the political confrontations surrounding it.

Attias was particularly critical of figures who have left Likud or are reportedly considering doing so, including Yuli Edelstein and Gilad Erdan, comparing their moves to Gideon Sa’ar’s earlier departure from the party.

“They are making a mistake. Instead of seeing what happened to Gideon Sa’ar, they are now making the same mistake,” Attias said.

He argued that even serious ideological disagreements should be fought from within Likud rather than by abandoning the party.

“They could have fought within Likud for the things they believe they are right about,” he said.

Turning to Erdan, Attias added: “He was with us all along… and today he is doing exactly the same thing. For what? To weaken the right-wing camp?”

The conversation also turned to the Chareidi draft issue and political efforts to capitalize on opposition to the Chareidi community. Attias dismissed the strategy outright.

“It’s nonsense, this Chareidi issue,” he said.

“The Chareidim need to sit down and see — those who are not enlisting should enlist. Those who learn Torah and are capable of learning should do so in an organized manner,” Attias said.

He predicted that even political figures currently positioning themselves against the Chareidi parties will ultimately seek their support when coalition-building begins.

“Even Eisenkot will come to the Chareidim and offer everything,” Attias said.

On the judicial system, Attias struck a more cautious tone than some other figures on the Israeli right, saying he does not favor the terminology that has dominated the debate in recent years.

“The word ‘reform,’ in my opinion, is a somewhat harsh word,” he said, suggesting instead that the discussion focus on “corrections” and “changes regarding the judiciary.”

Nevertheless, Attias said significant changes are necessary, including to Israel’s judicial seniority system.

“It cannot be that seniority transfers a kingdom from one person to another,” he said.

At the same time, he cautioned against attempting to overhaul the system all at once.

“It needs to be done carefully, intelligently, with agreements, gradually… You cannot turn everything upside down in one day,” Attias said.

Attias reserved some of his strongest criticism for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s use of reserved slots on the Likud electoral slate. He said the original understanding was that the impact of those slots would be offset by opening district positions to sitting ministers and Knesset members.

“What happened in practice? They didn’t get the districts… and they also got the reserved slots. They both ate the stinking fish and were thrown out of the city,” Attias said.

He argued that the number of reserved positions should have been reduced or that the original agreement should have been honored.

When Mimran raised the argument that Netanyahu needs new political “stars” to strengthen Likud’s candidate list, Attias defended the right of registered party members to determine who represents them.

Referring in part to reports involving Likud MK Tally Gotliv, Attias said: “Either you trust the party members, 160,000 party members, or create an appointments committee.”

If Likud is going to hold genuine primaries, he argued, its members should be permitted to make their choices without excessive interference from outside political or media forces.

Attias concluded by expressing hope for a strong turnout in the primaries and fewer backroom arrangements among candidates and party power brokers.

“I just hope that tomorrow, with Hashem’s help, a very large number of party members will actually come out, and they will make the decision about whom to choose,” he said.

“I hope that this time there will be no deals, and there will be nothing under the table and all kinds of things, and that they will truly vote for the best Knesset members.”

National Security Minister and Otzma Yehudit chairman Itamar Ben Gvir says his party will not join forces with newly established Chareidi political parties ahead of the elections, insisting that his party has succeeded by running independently and has no reason to change course.

Speaking in an interview with Kikar HaShabbat, Ben Gvir specifically addressed the new Achi party associated with Rav Abergel and the HaTzibbur HaChareidi party headed by Leitner of Beit Shemesh, making clear that Otzma Yehudit intends to maintain its own independent slate.

“Yishai, as of now — and not only as of now, I see this consistently — for four years Otzma Yehudit has run alone, and the results are good, the results are impressive, and I think you don’t replace a winning horse,” Ben Gvir explained. “I respect everyone, I truly respect everyone, but ultimately, Otzma Yehudit is a brand. Otzma Yehudit is something that appeals to all of Klal Yisroel. People feel how much I care.”

At the same time, Ben Gvir stressed that he has no intention of deliberately undermining the established Chareidi parties or attempting to pull away their core voters.

“I certainly don’t want to poke a finger in the eye of the Chareidi parties — let that be clear!” Ben Gvir said. “But I am saying explicitly: Whoever is not voting for the Chareidi parties should vote for me.”

Ben Gvir said he believes there is currently significant dissatisfaction among portions of the Chareidi community with its traditional political parties and urged those voters to support Otzma Yehudit rather than cast ballots for smaller parties that may not cross the electoral threshold.

“There is currently a certain amount of disappointment in various parts of the Chareidi community,” Ben Gvir said. “Those who aren’t going to vote for Chareidi parties should come to me. They shouldn’t go and waste votes.”

However, Ben Gvir emphasized that he is not calling on loyal supporters of the established Chareidi parties to abandon them, despite disagreements he has had with their leadership.

“On the other hand,” Ben Gvir said, “whoever votes for the Chareidi parties should vote for the Chareidi parties. There are sometimes disagreements, including with Aryeh, certainly with Gafni, and with various others. But ultimately, whoever votes for the Chareidi parties should vote for them. Whoever doesn’t — should come to Otzma Yehudit.”

The Tel Aviv District Court on Sunday upheld an arbitration ruling in the decades-long battle over control of Ponevezh Yeshiva, ordering the faction led by Rav Shmuel Markowitz to vacate the yeshiva’s property by the end of September.

Judge Yehudit Shevach, deputy president of the District Court, rejected a petition filed by the Mesores HaTorah organization, Rav Markowitz and Rebbetzin Tzipora Markowitz seeking to overturn the arbitration decision issued by retired judge David Cheshin. The Markowitz faction says it now intends to appeal the ruling to Israel’s Supreme Court, a move that could potentially delay the eviction if the court agrees to intervene.

The 19-page ruling requires Rav Markowitz’s talmidim to leave the Ponevezh campus by September 30, 2026, corresponding to 19 Tishrei, during Chol Hamoed Sukkos.

Cheshin had originally ordered the faction to leave by July 30. However, Shevach noted that the deadline had already passed and that the parties were now “at the threshold of the Yamim Noraim,” leading her to extend the deadline. She expressed hope that the evacuation would be “carried out without further escalation.”

Beyond requiring the faction to leave the campus, the arbitration ruling upheld by the court prohibits the Markowitz group from using the yeshiva’s trademarks, including the name “Ponevezh Yeshiva” and its logo.

Rav Markowitz is also barred from presenting himself under the title “Rosh Yeshivas Ponevezh.” His faction was further ordered to pay NIS 75,000 in legal expenses to Ponevezh Yeshiva and its president, Rav Eliezer Kahaneman.

In her ruling, Shevach issued unusually harsh criticism of the conduct surrounding the dispute over the years, rejecting the Markowitz faction’s argument that the historic “2000 ruling” granted Rav Markowitz permanent and irrevocable rights as part of the yeshiva’s spiritual leadership.

According to Shevach, whatever rights had originally been granted were forfeited after Rav Markowitz “undermined the ruling and its purpose, through a chain of actions that continued consistently over the course of years.”

She relied on Cheshin’s factual findings that what amounted to a “yeshiva within a yeshiva” had been established on the campus, dividing the talmidim into competing camps.

The judge was particularly severe in describing the violence and vandalism that have accompanied the bitter dispute.

She characterized the campus as a “battlefield characterized by the use of physical force, riots, violence, vandalism,” and described incidents there as “despicable and disgraceful acts of violence and vandalism… amounting to a chillul Hashem.”

Addressing the claim that Rav Markowitz possessed an eternal right to his position, Shevach wrote that the argument should “blush” when compared with what she described as the long history of actions undertaken by Rav Markowitz, or by others acting in his name or with his authorization.

She added, in particularly pointed language, that those actions were conducted “as is the practice, with apologies, of the last of the criminals.”

The battle over Ponevezh Yeshiva stretches back to the 1990s and intensified significantly toward the end of that decade as Rav Elazar Menachem Man Shach’s health declined. The dispute ultimately developed into one of the most bitter and enduring conflicts in the yeshiva world, dividing communities and families and drawing repeated attempts at intervention by leading gedolim over the ensuing decades.

Approximately four years ago, retired judge David Cheshin was appointed as arbitrator in the dispute. His eventual decision ordered Rav Markowitz’s faction to leave the yeshiva campus and imposed financial penalties.

With the District Court now affirming Cheshin’s ruling, the lengthy legal battle has moved significantly closer to a conclusion.

Toward the end of her decision, Shevach wrote that reconciliation between the rival camps on the Ponevezh campus is not presently realistic and warned that allowing the conflict to continue could, chalilah, bring destruction upon the institution.

She said the outcome “reflects the painful reality, which requires separation through the removal of the rebellious camp.”

Rav Markowitz’s faction, however, says the legal fight is not over and intends to seek relief from the Supreme Court.

In its earlier petition to overturn the arbitration decision, the faction argued that Cheshin had dramatically exceeded his authority by effectively nullifying the historic “2000 ruling,” which it maintains established Rav Markowitz’s status as a permanent and unconditional rosh yeshiva.

Attorneys representing the petitioners argued that the arbitrator invented an implied condition to conclude that Rav Markowitz’s rights had retroactively expired in 2007.

“A determination born out of nothing,” the petition stated. “The arbitrator turned the bowl on its head; he created a new legal reality that retroactively negates 20 years of rights and communal reliance.”

The District Court rejected those arguments and upheld the arbitration ruling in full.

The remaining question is whether the Supreme Court will agree to hear the planned appeal and potentially intervene, or whether Shevach’s ruling will remain intact and Rav Markowitz’s faction will be required to leave the Ponevezh campus by the end of September.

{Matzav.com}

The Department of Homeland Security is reportedly investigating a U.K.-based nonprofit tied to a longtime ally of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani over questions surrounding its financial activities, including whether donor money may have reached a U.S.-sanctioned Palestinian organization.

According to the New York Post, federal authorities are examining an organization known as PFF, which reportedly controls roughly $100 million dedicated to supporting anti-Israel initiatives. Investigators are reportedly looking into whether funds connected to the organization were provided to Al-Haq, a Palestinian organization sanctioned by the United States.

“A new fund set up by Arabs across the US, UK, and Australia has been built to take on Israel,” one source familiar with the operation told the Post.

The Post reported that Bassema Yousef, a New York-born Democratic donor who now resides in London, has emerged as a central figure in the organization’s fundraising operation. One source described Yousef as the “lynchpin” of PFF’s fundraising. She has also been identified as a longtime ally of Mamdani.

Yousef has repeatedly posted sharply anti-Israel messages on social media, including accusations that Israel is committing “war crimes with U.S. tax dollars.”

According to sources cited by the Post, Yousef created PFF with financial backing from two wealthy businessmen: Basil Qunibi, an investment executive based in Austin, Texas, and Yasser Shahin, a Palestinian-Australian motorsports magnate.

British corporate records confirm Shahin’s involvement in supporting PFF, according to the report. The IRS has also confirmed that the organization maintains a nonprofit entity registered in Delaware.

People described as having direct knowledge of PFF’s activities told the Post that the organization’s leadership provides funding for anti-Israel messaging and works to defend pro-Palestinian activists.

“PFF is a strategic foundation that is large, well-funded, and institutional in quality,” the foundation says on its website. “We partner with organisations that we believe have an ability to consistently deliver results that align with our strategic objectives.”

The organization has also publicly rejected suggestions that its work supports violence.

“PFF and its partners are unequivocally committed to justice, peace, inclusion and non-violence,” the nonprofit said.

DHS did not immediately provide Fox News Digital with a response regarding the report and declined to discuss the matter when contacted by the Post.

“HSI does not comment on the existence or status of specific investigations, nor on investigative methods, intelligence sources, or potential enforcement actions,” a DHS spokesperson told The Post, referring to the Homeland Security Investigations unit.

The Post emphasized that the existence of the reported federal investigation does not itself establish that PFF, Yousef, Mamdani or anyone else connected to the organization engaged in criminal wrongdoing.

California’s push for a new billionaire wealth tax is intensifying concerns about the state’s ongoing loss of taxpayers and income, with new IRS figures showing thousands of residents taking billions of dollars elsewhere and billionaire investor Mark Cuban warning that the proposed levy could accelerate the exodus.

Cuban entered the debate Saturday with a warning that the measure could have consequences extending far beyond where wealthy individuals choose to live. He argued that investors could steer their money elsewhere and pressure startup companies to leave California as well.

His comments came during a contentious public exchange with Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna, who has defended the proposed tax. Cuban pushed back strongly against Khanna and said he could direct future investments away from California if voters approve the measure.

The political fight is unfolding as the latest IRS data compiled from federal tax returns indicates that California is already experiencing substantial losses of taxpayers to other states.

Los Angeles County posted the largest net taxpayer loss in the country, with 17,496 more tax filers moving to other states than arriving from them. Those departing taxpayers represented nearly $1.9 billion in income leaving the county.

Several other major California counties recorded significant losses as well. Orange County had a net decline of 11,618 tax filers, while San Diego County lost 9,401. Riverside County recorded a net loss of 8,968 filers, and San Bernardino County lost 8,462.

Such migration can have broader financial consequences for state and local governments because departing residents take taxable income with them, potentially affecting revenues used to support schools, law enforcement, infrastructure and other government services.

The taxpayer migration has become a central backdrop to the growing battle over California’s proposed billionaire tax and whether imposing additional taxes on the state’s wealthiest residents could encourage even more capital to move elsewhere.

The ballot measure, which is supported by the Service Employees International Union, would establish a one-time 5% wealth tax on California residents whose net worth exceeds $1 billion.

California voters are set to decide the proposal in November. Under the initiative, the tax would apply retroactively to people who were California residents as of Jan. 1, 2026.

Backers of the measure contend that it could raise billions of dollars that could be directed toward healthcare and education. Opponents argue that the proposal risks encouraging billionaires, businesses and investment capital to abandon California for states with lower tax burdens.

Cuban has argued that the potential ramifications extend beyond whether individual billionaires relocate. He said the tax could affect his own decisions about where to invest and where the companies receiving those investments should operate.

“If this passes, and it doesn’t directly impact me at all, I won’t be a Cali resident, but you can bet if I’m investing in a multi billion dollar startup, I’m asking them to move from California first,” Cuban wrote.

Cuban then delivered an even more pointed warning to entrepreneurs considering whether to remain in the state.

“IMO, if this passes, only idiot startup founders stay in Cali.”

{Matzav.com}

NYPD officers shot and killed a 54-year-old man on Manhattan’s Lower East Side on Sunday after police said he advanced toward officers with a large butcher knife despite repeated commands to drop the weapon.

The confrontation unfolded shortly after 4 p.m. inside an apartment building at 126 Ludlow Street, where police had been dispatched following several 911 calls reporting that an assault was underway.

After entering the building, responding officers discovered blood on the floor and followed a trail leading up a staircase, NYPD Assistant Chief Melissa Eger said during a news conference Sunday evening.

As the officers made their way upstairs, they encountered 54-year-old Wei Chan descending the staircase while carrying what authorities described as a large butcher knife.

“Officers repeated multiple commands for the male to show his hands in an effort for him to drop the weapon,” Eger said. “As officers issued repeated commands, the male continued to advance towards the officers armed with the large butcher knife.”

Police said the officers then discharged their weapons, striking Chan. Emergency personnel transported him to a nearby hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

Authorities said Chan had no known record of criminal activity with the NYPD, although police had previously documented mental health-related interactions involving him.

“He has no known criminal history with our department. However, he does have a documented mental health history with the department,” Eger said.

Police also discovered Chan’s 75-year-old father, Cheung Chan, inside the building with a laceration to his head. Investigators believe Wei Chan attacked and injured his father before officers arrived at the scene.

Cheung Chan was transported to a hospital for treatment and is expected to survive his injuries.

The NYPD officers who responded to the incident were also brought to a hospital for evaluation following the deadly confrontation.

“Their actions are a reminder of how officers run towards danger and not away from it,” Eger said.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani said Sunday that officials had briefed him on the shooting and confirmed that the NYPD would conduct an internal investigation into the officers’ use of deadly force.

“As with every incident in which NYPD officers discharge their weapons, there will be an internal investigation, and body-worn camera footage of the incident will be released,” Mamdani wrote on X.

Police said the investigation into the shooting and the events that preceded the officers’ arrival remains ongoing.

A federal appeals court has reinstated key portions of a Texas election law requiring identification information on mail-in ballot applications and ballots, overturning a lower court decision that had blocked the provisions in March.

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals restored several requirements contained in Senate Bill 1, the Election Protection and Integrity Act of 2021, which made sweeping changes to the state’s election procedures.

Among other provisions, the law revised certain voting registration requirements, imposed identification requirements for voting by mail, required individuals assisting voters to sign an oath affirming that they did not coerce the voter, and established new election fraud offenses.

State Sen. Bryan Hughes, a Republican from Mineola who authored the legislation, has maintained that the changes are intended to make voting more accessible while strengthening safeguards against fraud.

“These are common sense reforms, and we’re going to stand by them,” Hughes said to Nexstar following the federal appeals court opinion.

The legislation prompted multiple lawsuits from voting rights organizations, which argued, among other claims, that provisions of the law violated Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Texans who vote by mail are predominantly people age 65 and older or those who qualify because of a disability.

After SB 1 took effect, a Brennan Center for Justice study found that approximately one in seven Texans who sought mail-in ballots had their applications rejected. Many of those rejections occurred because voters either omitted an identification number or provided one that did not correspond with the identification information contained in the state’s voter registration records.

For instance, a voter who initially registered using a Social Security number but subsequently placed a Texas identification number on a mail ballot application could encounter a mismatch under the new system.

The 5th Circuit rejected concerns that the initial level of rejected applications and ballots demonstrated an ongoing problem, pointing to evidence that rejection rates fell sharply as election officials and voters became accustomed to the requirements.

“The number of mail-in application or mail-in ballot rejections caused by missing or mismatched identification numbers dropped from 11 or 12 percent to 2.7 percent in just eight months. And officials testified that the numbers will ‘continue to decline’ because Texas’s identification database will ‘continue to get more robust,’ and voters will ‘get more used to’ the new procedures,” the federal appeals opinion reads.

Hughes similarly argued that the rejection rate has continued declining as Texans have become more familiar with how the identification system operates.

“We believe that rate continues to come down as people learn about the process and become more familiar with it,” Hughes said.

The Texas Secretary of State’s Office advises mail-in voters to provide both their Texas identification number and the last four digits of their Social Security number on their application and ballot. As long as one of those numbers matches the information contained in the state’s records, the ballot can be accepted.

Looking ahead to the Texas Legislature’s 2027 session, Hughes said he does not anticipate pursuing “major wholesale” changes to the state’s election system. He said, however, that lawmakers are likely to continue examining possible measures aimed at strengthening election security.

Sen. Bill Cassidy on Sunday accused Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of failing to honor assurances made during his confirmation process that the childhood vaccination schedule would not be altered, pointing to President Donald Trump’s new executive order reducing the number of recommended vaccines.

Appearing on ABC News’s “This Week,” the Louisiana Republican discussed commitments he said Kennedy and the White House made to secure his support for Kennedy’s confirmation as HHS secretary last year. Cassidy, a physician, indicated that maintaining the existing childhood vaccination schedule was one of those commitments.

“As I’ve mentioned multiple times in the past, there are guarantees that were given to me and guarantees that were supposedly going to be enforced by the White House,” Cassidy told host Martha Raddatz, adding that keeping the childhood vaccine schedule was “among those” pledges.

Cassidy suggested that Kennedy could argue that the latest changes were ordered by Trump rather than by the HHS secretary himself, but said that distinction did not change his broader concern.

“So, people can draw their own conclusions, but it’s pretty evident that … was the White House and the RFK pledge,” added the Louisiana Republican, who is also a physician. “RFK may say, technically, this is the president, not him, and technically, he’s right. But the point is, the American people have been poorly served.”

Trump signed an executive order on Monday seeking to reduce the number of vaccines recommended for children to 11.

The new guidance also calls for separating the combined measles, mumps and rubella vaccine into three individual shots. Under the previous recommendations, children received two doses of the combined MMR vaccine, with the first administered between 12 and 15 months and the second between ages 4 and 6.

Trump’s action came months after a federal judge blocked an earlier attempt to scale back the childhood immunization schedule. Those changes had been advanced by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, known as ACIP.

Kennedy had moved aggressively to reshape the influential vaccine advisory panel after taking control of HHS, replacing all 17 of its sitting members with a new group of appointees.

The reconstituted committee subsequently voted to change several longstanding childhood vaccination recommendations. Among the changes was a decision to delay the recommended age for children to receive the MMR vaccine together with the chickenpox vaccine.

U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, a Biden appointee, later invalidated the votes taken by ACIP after Kennedy replaced the committee’s membership, effectively blocking those recommendations from taking effect.

Despite the sweeping changes Kennedy has pursued at HHS and Trump’s latest executive order, Cassidy said Sunday that he does not regret casting the pivotal vote that helped confirm Kennedy as health secretary.

Cassidy, who chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, said that when Kennedy’s nomination was being considered, he also heard from Americans who strongly supported Kennedy, including because of his promise to target ultra-processed foods.

“The point is that when you’re making the decision process, you’re taking in everything at once, and you just make the best decision that presents at … the time,” Cassidy told Raddatz.

{Matzav.com}

Iran’s parliament speaker declared Sunday that Tehran has defeated the United States and Israel both militarily and politically, escalating a war of words after President Donald Trump announced plans for the United States to take control of the Strait of Hormuz.

Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of Iran’s parliament and Tehran’s chief diplomatic representative, argued that the US and Israel had entered the conflict with a series of clearly defined goals but had failed to accomplish any of them.

“I say with complete conviction that we won this war, both militarily and politically,” Ghalibaf stated. “The United States and Israel attacked us with nine specific objectives, but they failed to achieve any of them.”

Ghalibaf said his declaration of victory was not intended to suggest that Iran had physically destroyed the US military. Rather, he maintained that victory should be measured by whether Washington and Israel succeeded in accomplishing the objectives they had set for the conflict.

“The United States and Israel failed to achieve any of their nine stated objectives, and that was their greatest defeat,” Ghalibaf claimed.

Ghalibaf, who has served as Iran’s leading representative in diplomatic contacts with Washington, also portrayed a memorandum of understanding reached between Iran and the United States as a significant diplomatic achievement for Tehran, calling it “a document of pride and of our victory on the diplomatic front.”

The Iranian official conceded that the country’s population has yet to fully appreciate what he described as the scale of Tehran’s success, saying Iranians should take pride in what he called a “glorious victory.”

Ghalibaf’s comments came after Trump delivered a dramatically different assessment of the conflict during a rally on Long Island on Friday, where he said Iran was being badly defeated and announced that he intends to place the strategically critical Strait of Hormuz under American control.

“After we finish defeating Iran, which is being very badly defeated, pretty soon, I will be declaring the Hormuz Strait a territory of the United States,” Trump told the crowd.

Trump also described Iran’s leadership structure as having been devastated during the conflict, saying the destruction has made it increasingly difficult for Washington to find anyone with whom it can negotiate.

Iran has “no leadership. Their leadership is gone. Their second tier is gone. The third tier is half gone. That’s one of my problems, that there is nobody to negotiate with. It’s a problem. It’s the only country in the world where nobody wants to be president.”

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi responded to Trump’s declaration by insisting that Tehran alone determines passage through the Strait of Hormuz. He said Iran would continue its naval blockade until the United States recognizes what he called its “strategic defeat”.

Gharibabadi directly challenged Trump in a social media post, declaring that the strategic waterway belongs to Iran and will remain under Iranian control.

“Once and for all, accept the reality: up to this point, you have suffered strategic and heavy defeats; the Strait of Hormuz has been Iranian, is Iranian, and will remain Iranian.”

He went on to insist that only Tehran has the authority to determine whether the strait remains open or closed and said the blockade would continue as long as Washington refuses to acknowledge defeat.

“This strait will only be closed and opened under Iran’s command, and as long as you do not accept the reality of defeat and cease your fanciful delusions, Iran will continue to enforce the blockade.”

Another senior Iranian official took aim at Trump on Shabbos, invoking a recent security measure in which the president was transported between aircraft inside a catering vehicle amid security concerns.

Ebrahim Azizi, chairman of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security Commission, mocked Trump while warning him to focus on his own safety rather than threatening to take control of the Strait of Hormuz.

“The US President ought to worry about his own security rather than his endless bluffing regarding the Strait of Hormuz; before he ends up hiding in a food truck,” Azizi wrote on social media.

LISTEN:

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

LISTEN:

Hamas called on the U.S.-led Board of Peace on Sunday to pressure Israel into carrying out what the terror group says are its obligations under President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan, issuing the demand following high-level talks in Egypt with White House envoy Jared Kushner.

In a public statement released after the discussions, Hamas said it had urged the countries mediating the agreement and the Board of Peace to “compel the occupation to implement all its obligations under the first phase, end all violations, halt killings and incursions, [and] approve the roadmap for the second phase” of the Washington-brokered ceasefire framework.

The statement followed reports earlier Sunday detailing Kushner’s meeting in Cairo with senior Hamas officials, where the White House adviser pushed the terror organization to begin translating its commitment to disarm into action.

The Cairo meeting represented Kushner’s first direct talks with Hamas leaders since the agreement aimed at ending the Gaza war was signed last October. The Trump administration and its Board of Peace are currently seeking to move Israel and Hamas from the initial stage of Trump’s 20-point Gaza framework into its second phase.

Kushner was joined at the meeting by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, an executive member of the Board of Peace, and Nickolay Mladenov, the Board’s high representative.

Hamas was represented by its political leader Khalil al-Hayya. Also participating in the discussions were Qatari diplomat Ali al-Thawadi, Egyptian intelligence chief Hassan Rashad and a senior Turkish official.

A source familiar with the negotiations said one of the central purposes of the Cairo talks was to move beyond Hamas’s stated promises regarding the demilitarization of Gaza and establish concrete steps that could be independently verified.

Kushner is expected to travel to Israel on Monday to meet with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. According to a source who spoke to Axios, those discussions will focus on the “corresponding steps” Israel would be expected to implement as the process advances.

Officials familiar with the diplomatic effort said the message being delivered to Israel now differs from previous rounds of negotiations. According to the White House approach, the existing framework is no longer up for renegotiation or revision; instead, the focus has shifted toward implementing commitments that have already been made.

One official familiar with the negotiations said the objective is to “translate the roadmap commitments into concrete and verifiable steps.”

The Trump administration is reportedly seeking measurable progress in several areas, including an end to Israeli military strikes in Gaza, an IDF withdrawal toward the Yellow Line, a major expansion of humanitarian aid entering the Gaza Strip, and progress toward establishing new governing institutions and beginning civilian reconstruction.

{Matzav.com}

[Video below.] House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said Sunday that Democratic Socialists who win their congressional races will be welcomed into the House Democratic caucus, even as he distanced himself from the agenda promoted by the Democratic Socialists of America.

During an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” host Kristen Welker pressed the New York Democrat on whether Democratic Socialists belong within the Democratic Party.

Welker asked, “Do Democratic Socialists belong in the Democratic Party?”

Jeffries responded by emphasizing several progressive positions that he does not support and argued that congressional Democrats are instead concentrating on economic concerns facing Americans.

“Well, what I can say is that I do not support defunding the police. I do not support open borders. I do not support abolishing the Senate. We’re focused on actually solving problems that hardworking American taxpayers want us to solve, which is to lower the high cost of living in a situation where life is far too expensive in this country. That’s the democratic agenda. That’s what House Democrats are fighting to achieve.”

Welker followed up, seeking a more direct answer about whether the Democratic Party’s political coalition is broad enough to include members who identify as Democratic Socialists.

“Do you think, though, that there is room in the Democratic Party, under the tent of the Democratic Party, for Democratic Socialists, is it big enough?”

Jeffries said that while he personally rejects the DSA’s platform, candidates who prevail in Democratic primaries and subsequently win their general elections will become members of the Democratic congressional coalition.

“Well, listen, I don’t support the DSA agenda, as has been articulated, by the DSA itself. Now you’re going to have individual members, who have been elected in Democratic primaries and if they are elected in the general in November, will be part of the House Democratic caucus. It’s going to be a broad caucus.”

{Matzav.com}

Sen. John Fetterman is warning that the Democratic Party is moving increasingly toward socialism after a new poll found that a majority of Democrats view socialism favorably while half hold a negative opinion of capitalism.

The Pennsylvania Democrat reacted to the findings in a post on X, declaring that his party is “becoming the party of socialism” and making clear that he remains firmly committed to free-market capitalism.

Fetterman shared a screenshot of a Mediaite report about a CBS News/YouGov survey showing that 58 percent of Democratic respondents held a positive view of socialism, compared with just 32 percent who viewed capitalism positively.

The divide was also evident among those expressing negative opinions. Among Democrats surveyed, only 18 percent said they viewed socialism negatively, while 50 percent reported having a negative view of capitalism.

“The Democratic Party is becoming the party of socialism,” Fetterman wrote, adding that 58 percent “view socialism positively” while 50 percent have a negative view of capitalism. “I’m a proud free market capitalist. This is lunacy.”

The CBS News/YouGov poll was conducted from August 12 through August 14 and included 2,287 adults across the United States.

The results among Americans overall were considerably different from those among Democrats. Across all respondents, 35 percent expressed a positive opinion of socialism, while 46 percent viewed capitalism positively. Meanwhile, 42 percent had an unfavorable view of socialism, compared with 33 percent who viewed capitalism negatively.

Fetterman’s criticism quickly drew a response from Sen. Mike Lee, a Utah Republican, who publicly invited his Democratic colleague to switch parties.

“John, please join us,” Lee wrote. “We’re not socialist. And we don’t bite.”

Fetterman has increasingly voiced concern about the ideological direction of the Democratic Party. In a recent interview with Fox News Digital, he described the party’s trajectory as “troubling” and said he “would never try to elevate” a communist.

“I would never try to elevate… a communist just because [Piker] has followers on some, on Twitch, whatever that is,” Fetterman told the outlet. “But overall, if you identify with a communist who praises Mao and Cuba and for these places, that should be foreign to any Democrat.”

{Matzav.com}

Hamas leaders told White House adviser Jared Kushner during a meeting in Egypt on Sunday that the terror group remains committed to giving up its weapons and demilitarizing Gaza, as the Trump administration presses ahead with the next stage of President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan, according to an Axios report.

Kushner spent approximately 90 minutes meeting directly with senior Hamas officials, pressing them to demonstrate that their stated willingness to disarm will translate into concrete action. He also warned them that Israel remains deeply distrustful of Hamas and is not convinced the terror group will actually surrender its weapons.

A source familiar with the discussions characterized the meeting as “very productive” and said Hamas officials asked Kushner to personally convey to President Trump that they continue to stand behind their commitment to disarm.

“We thanked them for the commitment, but we want to see real efforts and not just words,” the source told Axios. “It was important for Kushner to lock them into this commitment in person.”

The talks took place as the Trump administration and its Board of Peace work to advance Israel and Hamas into the next stage of Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza.

Kushner told the Hamas delegation that disarmament is not open to negotiation and stressed that Washington would need to see meaningful steps on the ground before it could push Israel to carry out corresponding measures of its own.

“Kushner stressed to Hamas leaders that the bar is high because the Israeli side doesn’t trust them to actually disarm,” the source said.

Under the plan, Hamas would be required to relinquish control of Gaza to a Palestinian technocratic government, give up its weapons and military infrastructure, and remain entirely outside the territory’s future governing structure.

According to the report, Hamas representatives told Kushner that they are willing to hand over governing authority and would refrain from interfering with the new technocratic government once it begins functioning.

Hamas officials also raised complaints about ongoing Israeli strikes and other Israeli military activity inside Gaza. Kushner responded by pointing out that Hamas itself had taken four months to agree to disarm, according to the source.

During the meeting, Kushner expressed appreciation to Hamas for cooperating in efforts to recover the bodies of deceased Israeli hostages. Hamas representatives, in turn, thanked the Trump administration and the Board of Peace for their work aimed at improving humanitarian conditions inside Gaza.

Following the talks, Hamas announced that it had agreed to a road map for implementing the second phase of Trump’s plan. The group said that stage would include a permanent ceasefire, a complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, continued humanitarian assistance and the beginning of reconstruction. Notably, Hamas made no explicit reference to disarmament in its public statement.

The Board of Peace is seeking to have Hamas begin dismantling its weapons stockpiles and military infrastructure. If that process moves forward, Israel could then be asked to permit the deployment of an International Stabilization Force inside Gaza, allow reconstruction efforts to begin in the Rafah area and enter discussions over initial IDF troop withdrawals.

“There can be no ambiguity: Hamas must relinquish governing authority and all weapons and military infrastructure,” the source said. “And Gaza can never again be a source of terror for Israel.”

Kushner is expected to travel to Israel on Monday for talks with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu regarding the “corresponding steps” Israel would be expected to implement if Hamas begins carrying out its commitment to disarm.

Sunday’s talks marked Kushner’s first face-to-face meeting with Hamas leaders since the Gaza agreement was reached in October.

Kushner was joined at the meeting by Board of Peace High Representative Nickolay Mladenov, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and senior advisers Aryeh Lightstone and Liran Tancman.

The Hamas delegation included the terror group’s political leader Khalil al-Hayya. Egyptian intelligence chief Hassan Rashad, Qatari diplomat Ali al-Thawadi and a senior Turkish official also participated in the meeting, according to the report.

{Matzav.com}

National Security Minister and Otzma Yehudit chairman Itamar Ben Gvir sharply attacked the leaders of the chareidi parties in a wide-ranging interview with Kikar HaShabbat, accusing Aryeh Deri and Moshe Gafni of exploiting allegations of police violence against chareidi protesters for political gain.

Ben Gvir argued that the criticism is particularly hypocritical because Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara is seeking his removal in part over discussions he initiated concerning alleged discrimination and police mistreatment of chareidim.

The minister also laid out his position on the contentious issue of chareidi military service, saying that those who are genuinely learning Torah should remain in yeshiva, while those who are not learning should be encouraged to enlist — “with an embrace and not through coercion.”

Ben Gvir openly appealed to chareidi voters who are disappointed with their traditional parties to support Otzma Yehudit, while stressing that he is not seeking to undermine the established chareidi parties. He also said he has no plans to add several newly formed small chareidi factions to his electoral slate.

During the interview with Kikar HaShabbat’s Yishai Cohen, Ben Gvir also discussed the discovery of missing mother and daughter Mali and Liel Yahalomi in Argentina, the security situation in Lebanon, the Likud primaries, reports of efforts to oust Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, his decision to run separately from Bezalel Smotrich, and the controversy surrounding Israel Prison Service Commissioner Kobi Yaakobi.

The Yahalomi Case

Ben Gvir began by addressing the discovery of Mali and Liel Yahalomi in Argentina after an extensive search.

“First of all, wonderful work by the police, truly wonderful work by the police,” Ben Gvir said. “I spoke with the police commissioner on Thursday. He told me: ‘The direction is that this is not terrorism, and the direction is that this is not criminal.’ And still, we both agreed: Heaven forbid that the police take their foot off the gas, because who knows what could later emerge. And therefore they worked hard.”

Cohen noted that considerable uncertainty remains surrounding the case and that police officials themselves have indicated that information may still be concealed.

“I don’t know whether they are hiding things or not hiding things,” Ben Gvir responded. “What I can tell you is: Baruch Hashem, praise to the Creator of the world — it was not criminal, it was not nationalistically motivated, and that is the most important thing. That is the most important thing.”

Cohen then raised calls that emerged after Shabbos for the mother and daughter to potentially be charged for the enormous cost of the search operation.

“Since Motzoei Shabbos, quite a few people have been writing: Perhaps they should be required to pay the expenses of the police, of the state? After all, this incident cost the state millions. They knew that the entire world was searching for them, and they still played with the police, played with the entire country, which was turning itself upside down to locate them. Perhaps they should pay the expenses?”

“I don’t know whether I accept your description,” Ben Gvir replied. “But you know what? I’m proud that we are a country where we are not like New York or all sorts of places where people are left to die. If it turns out that they did this deliberately and maliciously and did something… I’m completely with you. But I’m proud to be in a country where we take care of our people. We take care of our citizens even when they are very, very far from here. You know, in New York, a person can die in the street and nobody will look at him.”

“We Should Bomb Beirut”

Turning to security, Cohen asked Ben Gvir whether Israel had become too restrained along its northern and southern fronts.

“You look at the northern border, the southern border, Gaza, Lebanon. It’s true that there are still targeted killings and there are attacks here and there, but it isn’t what it was two or three months ago.”

“You’re exactly right, exactly right,” Ben Gvir responded. “We can… and I hear warnings from the prime minister and from the chief of staff that there is a real danger to the lives of the soldiers — they shoot, they kill. It’s not enough.”

“I think the prime minister is wrong about this — and it has been reported, I’ve told him this more than once or twice,” Ben Gvir continued. “My red line is harming soldiers. And of course, I daven for their recovery. I have a son who is now going in and out, in and out of Lebanon with a reconnaissance unit, and I’m telling you: he and his friends deserve for us to bomb Beirut, for us to crush them.”

Ben Gvir Intervenes in the Likud Primaries

Cohen then turned to the Likud primaries, noting the unusual spectacle of a minister who leads a separate political party publicly weighing in on another party’s internal election.

“It was always like this,” Ben Gvir responded. “Why? I want the Likud list to be a right-wing list. I want to have partners on the Likud list. I’m not embarrassed about it. I published a list. I published a list of names — I want them to be the ones who are elected.”

“I’m calling on the Likud public — and by the way, when I come to Likud weddings, to Likud events, you have to see what happens, what love! I tell them: These are people who I think you should vote for. It’s the most legitimate thing in the world.”

Cohen noted that Ben Gvir had revealed earlier on 103FM that eight Likud MKs and ministers had approached him in recent days and asked him to reserve spots for them on the Otzma Yehudit slate.

“Yes,” Ben Gvir confirmed. “Baruch Hashem, they see that Otzma Yehudit is growing. Yishai, Likud is not a branch of Ben Gvir. Everything is fine. Likud is the ruling party, and with Hashem’s help, it will continue to be the ruling party. I have no aspiration in the coming election to replace the ruling party. I do have an aspiration in the coming election: first, to be as strong as possible, and truly to bring in as many good people as possible.”

“And yes, it’s no secret that people in Likud see Otzma growing and growing,” he continued. “A lot of people in Likud are also jealous of what we’re doing. Many times they’ve said to me: ‘Wow, you do this, and you do this here, and you do that there and you do this,’ and they want to be part of the success.”

Asked what those eight lawmakers were telling him privately, and whether they feared failing to secure realistic positions on the next Likud slate, Ben Gvir said that was not necessarily their only concern.

“I don’t know whether it’s only the fear of not getting a spot on the list,” he said. “By the way, you know, they could also reach places 20, 25, 30, which is… But it’s also about going to a brand that, Baruch Hashem, is very successful, praise to the Creator of the world.”

“As of now, the polls look good for us. My internal polls look even better. I’m not getting confused. I work more and more and more and more and more. I want more. I think ultimately they should compete in Likud. This contest is important. I believe they will succeed, and I wish them success.”

Attempts to Oust Netanyahu

Cohen then asked about reports that Likud figures had explored replacing Netanyahu after the October 7 massacre, potentially with Yuli Edelstein or Nir Barkat.

Ben Gvir said he personally encountered such efforts during a later period when he left the government.

“I actually remember from the period when I resigned from the government, and then figures in Likud came to me — I won’t give names, I won’t give names — and they came and said to me, ‘There’s an opportunity now, there’s an opportunity now! Let’s send Netanyahu home and establish a right-wing government, establish a right-wing government.’”

“First of all, I didn’t accept it,” Ben Gvir said. “Not only did I not accept it, I spoke with Prime Minister Netanyahu during one of our conversations and told him: ‘I can tell you, I wish they loved you in Likud the way I love and appreciate you.’”

“He said to me: ‘You love and appreciate me, but there are all sorts of other people in Likud who love me and appreciate me.’ I told him: ‘Prime Minister, not enough, not enough.’”

Why Ben Gvir Wants to Run Separately From Smotrich

With approximately two and a half months remaining until the election, Cohen asked whether Otzma Yehudit would run independently or reunite with Bezalel Smotrich.

“I think it’s right that we run as two separate heads,” Ben Gvir said. “I conducted a survey of thousands, an in-depth survey. And it turned out that if Bezalel joins me, there are people in the chareidi community who won’t vote; if Bezalel joins me, there are people in the periphery who won’t vote. By the way, Bezalel also has a constituency that is debating between him and Bennett and prefers that he run alone.”

Cohen raised the concern that Smotrich could fail to cross the electoral threshold, costing the right-wing bloc four seats.

“I actually don’t see that concern as of today,” Ben Gvir responded. “I see that with his full strength, he is stable, he crosses the threshold. I would hope and expect Feiglin and Winter to join him. But I say explicitly: Otzma Yehudit needs to run as one separate list.”

An Appeal to Disappointed Chareidi Voters

Cohen asked whether Ben Gvir might instead join forces with smaller chareidi parties, including Rabbi Abergel’s Achi party and a party calling itself “The Chareidi Public,” led by Leitner of Beit Shemesh.

“Yishai, right now — and not only right now, I see it all the time — for four years Otzma Yehudit has run alone, and the results are good, the results are beautiful,” Ben Gvir said. “I think you don’t replace a winning horse.”

“I respect everyone, I truly respect everyone, but ultimately Otzma Yehudit is a brand. Otzma Yehudit is something that appeals to all of Klal Yisroel. People feel how much I care.”

He stressed, however, that he was not attempting to deliberately weaken the established chareidi parties.

“I certainly don’t want to stick a finger in the eye of the chareidi parties — let that be clear!” Ben Gvir said. “But I do say explicitly: Anyone who is not voting for the chareidi parties should vote for me.”

“There is a certain disappointment today in various parts of the chareidi community. If they aren’t going to vote for chareidi parties, let them come to me. They shouldn’t go somewhere where their votes will be wasted.”

“And on the other hand, someone who votes for the chareidi parties should vote for the chareidi parties. Sometimes there are disagreements, with Aryeh too, certainly with Gafni, and with various others. But ultimately, whoever votes for the chareidi parties should vote for them; whoever doesn’t should come to Otzma Yehudit.”

Ben Gvir Fires Back at Deri and Gafni

Cohen confronted Ben Gvir with the fierce criticism he has faced in recent months from the leaders of the chareidi parties over alleged police violence against chareidi demonstrators.

“They say that you don’t intervene regarding police violence against chareidi protesters,” Cohen said. “Deri, Gafni, Goldknopf, Porush — all of them have issued very harsh statements against your conduct as national security minister.”

“You can attribute many things to the names you mentioned, but they’re not stupid,” Ben Gvir responded. “And they read exactly what the attorney general wrote when she said she wants to remove me. For what? Because I initiated discussions in my ministry about why chareidim are being beaten, why they are being discriminated against, and why the chareidi community is being harmed.”

“So I don’t think Aryeh Deri doesn’t know this — he knows it very well!” Ben Gvir said. “He wants to make a political play out of it.”

“And you know what? It angers me that he is making a political play against someone whom he told me — he told me this more than once or twice — ‘You always, always, always helped, and you were always, always, always there when we needed you.’”

“So how do you go and make a political play out of this?” Ben Gvir continued. “What, for the sake of another few thousand votes? Both Aryeh and Gafni know that the attorney general wants to fire me, among other things, because of this very issue. How are you not ashamed to talk?”

Ben Gvir Defends Prison Service Commissioner Kobi Yaakobi

The interview then turned to Israel Prison Service Commissioner Kobi Yaakobi, who has been summoned to a hearing ahead of a possible indictment.

“Of course, certainly! Certainly!” Ben Gvir exclaimed. “Because they’re persecuting him! What are they persecuting him for? Because he is implementing Ben Gvir’s policies!”

“I’m telling you, Yishai: If I’m not there, if Otzma Yehudit isn’t in this ministry, we’re going back to summer camps in the prisons.”

Asked whether he would call on Yaakobi to remain in his position, Ben Gvir answered emphatically.

“Of course! What kind of question is that? A person is presumed innocent until his guilt is proven. There is a presumption of innocence. When he is convicted by the Supreme Court by a panel of three judges, then we can consider what to do with him.”

“But in this situation, in a situation where they are persecuting him… I know why they’re persecuting him, I know why she is persecuting him. If he is convicted in the Supreme Court, that’s a different story. But if he isn’t convicted, and there’s only an indictment? What, are there not enough examples of indictments that were filed in order to persecute someone?”

“I told him my position several times, and I very much hope that he accepts it and that my position is heard: As long as there is no final conviction against you — final — again, I’m not arguing with a court. If there is a final conviction, that is a different event. If the Supreme Court determines, through a panel of judges, that this is the situation, that is something else. But as long as that does not happen, Kobi is innocent.”

“Whoever Learns Torah Should Learn Torah”

The interview concluded with the explosive issue of the draft law and the legal status of yeshiva bochurim.

“I’m exactly where I’ve been all these years,” Ben Gvir said. “I think serving in the army is a mitzvah. My son is now in a reconnaissance unit. Someone who isn’t learning should enlist.”

“But even them — not by force, not through populism, and not like those who tried to score political points at the expense of the chareidi community and to smear them and harm them and use violence. I’m absolutely not there.”

“With an embrace!” he continued. “Another embrace, and another embrace, and it works. I want to bring chareidim into the IDF, but I want chareidim who aren’t learning. Someone who isn’t learning…”

Cohen interrupted to clarify: “Meaning, you accept that someone who is learning — learns?”

“Yes!” Ben Gvir replied. “What the rabbanim say: Whoever learns Torah should learn Torah. Unfortunately, there are many who don’t learn Torah. Those are the people I want first. There are very many of them — let them come, I’ll embrace them.”

“And I succeeded this way!” Ben Gvir added. “You know, Lieberman talks about recruitment, Bennett talks about recruitment — they didn’t recruit a single chareidi! Not one chareidi did they recruit.”

“And I, through an embrace and by making sure that the chareidi Border Police unit would be mehadrin min hamehadrin in every respect… What did the fighters there tell me? ‘We never learned as much Torah before as we learn there.’”

{Matzav.com}