Feed aggregator

The United States and Israel have developed extensive plans for a new military offensive against Iran that could begin shortly after the November 3 midterm elections, with American and Israeli forces preparing for a concentrated assault on Iranian nuclear installations, energy facilities and weapons infrastructure, according to a report published Wednesday by The New York Times.

The proposed operation would involve several days of intensive attacks intended to inflict substantial damage on Iran’s military and economic capabilities, potentially forcing Tehran to accept American demands concerning its nuclear program and the Strait of Hormuz.

Although military preparations are advancing, President Donald Trump has not approved another offensive, and officials cautioned that the administration has yet to decide whether to resume large-scale combat operations.

According to American officials and others familiar with the discussions, military commanders are examining plans for a short but powerful campaign that would strike critical Iranian facilities, including nuclear sites, oil and energy infrastructure, missile production centers and drone installations.

American and Israeli forces have reportedly stepped up preparations for such an operation, including conducting aerial exercises over Iraq to practice flight patterns and other maneuvers that could be required during attacks on Iranian territory.

The possibility of renewed strikes was also discussed during a previously undisclosed meeting in Israel earlier this week between U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

Hegseth acknowledged Tuesday that the meeting had taken place but declined to provide details about the discussions.

The reported preparations come after nearly eight months of confrontation with Iran, during which American and Israeli military operations have severely damaged Iranian facilities but have not produced a comprehensive agreement resolving the dispute over Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

Some American officials believe another devastating round of strikes, particularly against Iran’s energy sector, could create sufficient economic pressure to force Iranian leaders to make concessions they have so far refused to consider.

One proposal being examined by military planners calls for a three-day offensive against strategically important targets, with the goal of rapidly increasing pressure on Iran without becoming involved in another prolonged military campaign.

The Pentagon has continued assembling additional forces throughout the Middle East, with the current buildup expected to be completed during the first part of November.

The planned deployment reportedly includes three aircraft carriers, thousands of Marines, fighter jets and American Special Operations personnel, providing Washington with the resources necessary to conduct extensive military operations if Trump authorizes them.

The timing of a possible offensive is also being influenced by operational considerations.

American military planners generally favor nighttime attacks to take advantage of darkness, and the longer nights in Iran during November could provide additional opportunities for air operations.

While an attack before the end of October has not been completely ruled out, the period immediately following the American midterm elections is receiving particular attention.

Trump publicly stated earlier this month that the United States would not launch new attacks against Iran before November 3.

According to The New York Times, the president has also turned down several proposals for renewed large-scale military action during the year, despite continuing to authorize preparations for possible future operations.

The latest account follows a separate report published Wednesday by the Financial Times indicating that Netanyahu had sought to launch a major Israeli offensive against Iran earlier this month.

According to that report, Netanyahu instructed the IDF to prepare for strikes during the weekend of October 10, but the operation was abandoned after Trump opposed moving forward.

The reported disagreement illustrates the continuing discussions between Washington and Yerushalayim over how aggressively to confront Iran and when additional military action might be necessary.

Among the potential targets being examined by American and Israeli planners is Pickaxe Mountain, a heavily fortified underground installation associated with Iran’s nuclear program.

The facility presents significant difficulties for military operations because of its location deep beneath mountainous terrain, making it far more challenging to destroy than conventional aboveground nuclear infrastructure.

Trump recently discussed the possibility of using the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb, widely known as the Mother of All Bombs, against the site.

The approximately 22,000-pound weapon is among the largest conventional bombs in the American arsenal and is designed to produce an enormous explosion over a broad area.

According to officials familiar with the president’s discussions, Trump has expressed particular interest in the weapon, including its widely recognized nickname.

However, military weapons specialists have questioned whether the bomb would be capable of destroying a nuclear installation buried beneath substantial layers of rock.

Unlike specialized bunker-busting weapons designed to penetrate hardened underground targets before exploding, the MOAB is intended to detonate above the surface and produce a powerful blast across a wide area.

Experts therefore believe that its effectiveness against a facility protected by granite and located deep underground would be limited.

Despite the preparations for another military campaign, Washington has continued pursuing a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, with American negotiators seeking concessions from Tehran on its nuclear activities and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

The strategic waterway, through which a substantial portion of the world’s oil supplies normally passes, has become a central issue in the confrontation between the United States and Iran.

American officials have reportedly sought to use the threat of renewed military action as leverage in negotiations, calculating that the prospect of further destruction to Iran’s energy infrastructure could encourage its leadership to compromise.

Iranian representatives, however, have resisted demands involving their nuclear program and have sought to postpone substantive negotiations on that issue.

The diplomatic impasse has left American officials divided over whether another military offensive would produce concessions that previous operations have failed to secure.

Some administration officials believe additional attacks could inflict enough economic damage to force Tehran to reconsider its position, while others question whether more bombing would lead to a meaningful diplomatic breakthrough.

The military preparations also follow months of American efforts to strengthen its position in the region. Two U.S. aircraft carrier strike groups are already operating in the Middle East, with a third being deployed to reinforce the American military presence.

The expanded deployment is intended to provide the president with additional offensive and defensive capabilities while also preparing for possible Iranian retaliation against American forces, Israel or other countries in the region.

Iran has warned that renewed attacks could trigger a broader military response, raising concerns about further disruptions to international shipping and energy supplies.

The possibility of another offensive has also been discussed at the highest levels of the Trump administration. Earlier this month, Vice President JD Vance and senior national security officials reviewed military options during meetings at Camp David.

According to previous reports, the Pentagon has presented Trump with several proposals for major strikes against Iran or Iranian-backed Houthi forces in Yemen during recent months. The president rejected those earlier proposals, although American forces have conducted more limited retaliatory operations.

The latest planning comes amid concerns in Israel that Iran has been attempting to rebuild elements of its nuclear program damaged during earlier American and Israeli attacks.

Israeli officials have reportedly presented Washington with updated intelligence concerning Iranian nuclear activities and potential targets for another operation.

The prospect of renewed military action has become particularly sensitive because both countries are approaching elections, with Israelis scheduled to vote on October 27 and Americans heading to the polls on November 3.

Trump has publicly maintained that he will not authorize another major offensive against Iran before the American elections, citing ongoing negotiations that he has characterized as productive.

The White House has also disputed some reports concerning the president’s private discussions with Netanyahu about possible military action, emphasizing that no final decision has been made.

Asked Wednesday about the latest reports of preparations for renewed strikes, a White House official declined to discuss the administration’s military planning, saying it does not comment on operations “that may or may not exist.”

The official reiterated that Trump continues to consider every available option to ensure that Iran does not obtain nuclear weapons.

For now, American and Israeli forces are continuing their preparations while the president weighs whether additional military pressure is necessary to secure an agreement with Tehran.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump declared Wednesday that the war against Iran is nearing its conclusion, asserting that American military operations have devastated Tehran’s nuclear program and left the Islamic Republic severely weakened. However, the president made clear that additional strikes remain an option as Washington seeks to ensure that Iran will never acquire nuclear weapons.

Speaking at a campaign rally in South Carolina ahead of the November 3 midterm elections, Trump said the United States had achieved extraordinary military successes against Iran and predicted that the conflict would conclude “very soon,” although he indicated that his administration was determined to secure lasting results before bringing the fighting to an end.

Trump on Iran War: We could leave now, but we want to make sure it lasts for a long time. pic.twitter.com/DE75CcbhZ8

— Acyn (@Acyn) October 21, 2026

Trump traced his administration’s confrontation with Iran back to his decision to withdraw from the nuclear agreement negotiated during Barack Obama’s presidency, arguing that the arrangement had allowed Tehran to move closer to developing nuclear weapons.

He characterized the agreement as “a road to a nuclear weapon for Iran. I terminated it. That was a road to a nuclear weapon.”

The president then pointed to two major American military campaigns, Operation Midnight Hammer and Operation Epic Fury, which he credited with inflicting enormous damage on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and broader military capabilities.

“We obliterated Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity with Operation Midnight Hammer, a beautiful operation, and Operation Epic Fury. And we defeated them militarily, financially, and otherwise,” Trump declared.

“And now we’re ensuring that, and as you know, Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. Should have been done years ago,” the President added.

Trump warned that the consequences of allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons would have been catastrophic, arguing that Tehran’s leadership posed a danger that previous administrations had failed to confront adequately.

He said that if Iran had developed such weapons, “we would be a tinderbox. Our lives would be very different, because they (the Iranians -ed.) are nuts. [But] they don’t play games with me.”

Despite his assessment that the United States has already achieved overwhelming military superiority, Trump indicated that Washington was unwilling to end its operations prematurely if doing so could allow Iran to rebuild its capabilities.

The war, he stated, will “end very soon. We could leave now, but we want to make sure it lasts for a long time. Now, if you look at that, it’s amazing what we did. Our military is unbelievable.”

Trump’s remarks at the South Carolina rally followed statements earlier Wednesday outside the White House, where he defended the decision to launch military operations against Iran and described the campaign as one of the most significant achievements of his presidency.

“I think it’s one of the greatest things we’ve done. We’ve stopped Iran from having a nuclear weapon. It’s one of the best things that we’ve done,” Trump said.

The president maintained that earlier administrations had avoided the difficult decisions necessary to confront Iran’s nuclear ambitions. He claimed that without his intervention, Tehran would already have acquired and used nuclear weapons.

“It took a lot of courage to do it because no other president was willing to do it. And if we didn’t do it, Iran would right now have already used massive nuclear weapons.”

The president’s latest comments come amid indications that the White House is weighing whether another round of military action will be required before the United States considers its objectives in Iran fully achieved.

During remarks in the Oval Office on Tuesday, Trump suggested that the administration was approaching a decisive moment and had multiple options available for bringing the confrontation to an end.

“We just have to make a final decision. Which way do we want to win? Do we want to win the nice way or the not nice way?” he said.

The president’s statements coincided with new reports that American and Israeli military commanders have prepared detailed operational plans for another major assault on Iran, potentially beginning after the November 3 elections.

According to The New York Times, military planners from both countries have intensified preparations for a possible short but powerful campaign against Iranian targets. The proposed operation could involve strikes on nuclear facilities, energy infrastructure, missile production capabilities and drone arsenals.

American and Israeli aircraft have reportedly conducted exercises over Iraq to rehearse long-range attack maneuvers, while U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth traveled to Israel this week for discussions with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu concerning possible additional military action.

Among the locations reportedly under consideration is Pickaxe Mountain, a deeply buried Iranian nuclear facility that presents particular challenges for military planners because of its underground construction.

The preparations have also included proposals for an intensive three-day bombing campaign intended to damage Iran’s military capabilities and increase pressure on Tehran to accept American demands.

Despite the advanced planning, Trump has not authorized a new offensive. Reports indicate that he has rejected several proposals for renewed large-scale military operations in recent months, even as the Pentagon has continued developing options at his direction.

Earlier in October, Trump publicly stated that the United States would not resume attacks against Iran before the November 3 midterm elections, citing ongoing diplomatic discussions with Tehran.

The president has nevertheless continued to warn that military action remains available if negotiations fail to produce an acceptable agreement.

The possibility of renewed fighting has also generated discussions between Washington and Yerushalayim over the timing and scope of any additional strikes.

A separate Financial Times report indicated that Netanyahu had sought to launch another offensive against Iran earlier this month, but Trump opposed restarting major combat operations before the American elections.

According to that account, Israeli military preparations had advanced sufficiently for strikes to be carried out around October 10, with proposed targets including Iranian nuclear installations, government facilities and energy infrastructure.

The planned operation was reportedly more extensive than the American and Israeli attacks carried out earlier this year, but ultimately did not receive the necessary American approval.

The latest military preparations come as diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict remain stalled over Iran’s nuclear activities, its stockpile of enriched uranium and disagreements involving the Strait of Hormuz.

Tehran has resisted American demands concerning its nuclear program, while Washington continues to insist that any settlement must permanently prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

The conflict began on February 28 with major American and Israeli strikes against Iranian targets, followed by Iranian missile and drone attacks across the region and disruptions to commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

Although major military operations have subsided from their initial intensity, tensions remain elevated, with American forces maintaining a substantial presence in the Middle East.

The United States has continued strengthening its regional military capabilities, including deploying additional aircraft carrier forces as Washington evaluates the possibility of another confrontation.

Asked Wednesday about reports of preparations for renewed attacks, a White House official declined to confirm the existence of specific operational plans, saying the administration does not discuss military operations “that may or may not exist.”

The official reiterated that Trump intends to preserve every available option to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Trump’s latest remarks therefore leave open two possibilities: a negotiated conclusion to the conflict in the near future or another round of military operations intended to compel Tehran to accept Washington’s terms.

For now, the president maintains that American military action has already accomplished its central objective of crippling Iran’s nuclear capabilities, while making clear that he is prepared to use additional force if necessary.

{Matzav.com}

New York Governor Kathy Hochul visited Boro Park on Wednesday, making stops at Boro Park Hatzolah and meeting with local yeshiva administrators and community representatives as she continues an extensive series of visits to Orthodox Jewish communities ahead of next month’s gubernatorial election.

The governor began her visit at Boro Park Hatzolah, where she toured the organization’s ambulances and emergency dispatch room, receiving a firsthand look at the operations of one of the community’s most important volunteer emergency medical services.

The visit provided an opportunity to highlight the work of Hatzolah volunteers, who respond to medical emergencies throughout the neighborhood and provide critical assistance to residents around the clock.

Hochul was shown the ambulances used by Hatzolah members and visited the dispatch center, which coordinates emergency calls and directs volunteer responders to incidents throughout the area.

Following her stop at Hatzolah, the governor met with yeshiva administrators, joined by Assemblyman Simcha Eichenstein and State Senator Sam Sutton, two elected officials representing significant portions of Brooklyn’s Orthodox Jewish community.

The meeting came at a particularly important time for New York’s yeshivos, with state funding, educational independence, school security and financial assistance for parents continuing to be major concerns for administrators and families.

Hochul has made outreach to the state’s Orthodox Jewish communities a visible part of her activities in recent weeks, including visits to yeshivos and meetings with rabbonim, school officials and communal leaders.

Earlier this month, the governor visited Bnos Malka Academy, an Orthodox girls’ school in Forest Hills, Queens, where she discussed education funding, security assistance and resources available to nonpublic schools.

That visit included discussions about New York’s participation in a new federal scholarship tax credit program, which is expected to begin in 2027 and could provide additional financial assistance to families paying private school tuition.

The governor’s decision to participate in the program has been welcomed by Jewish education advocates, who have long sought additional avenues of financial relief for parents carrying the substantial expense of yeshiva tuition.

Hochul’s Boro Park appearance also followed a major tour of chassidishe communities in the Hudson Valley on Monday, when she traveled to Kiryas Yoel, Monsey and New Square.

During that trip, she visited schools, met with rabbonim and community leaders, and was welcomed by large gatherings of students and residents.

Among her stops was a visit with the Satmar Rebbe in Kiryas Yoel, followed by meetings with representatives of Viznitz institutions in Monsey and a visit with the Skverer Rebbe in New Square.

The governor’s latest appearance in Boro Park brought her outreach directly to one of the largest Orthodox Jewish neighborhoods in New York City.

Eichenstein, who represents Boro Park and surrounding neighborhoods in the State Assembly, has worked closely with Hochul on legislation affecting the frum community, including measures addressing religious accommodations and neighborhood concerns.

Earlier this year, Hochul signed legislation sponsored by Eichenstein and Sutton addressing sanitation enforcement on Friday afternoons, an issue that had created difficulties for Shabbos-observant residents.

The legislation established a mechanism allowing participating neighborhoods to permit earlier Friday garbage placement without subjecting residents to fines for failing to comply with regulations that conflicted with Shabbos observance.

The governor’s visit comes less than two weeks before the November 3 election, in which she is seeking another term as New York’s chief executive.

{Matzav.com}

The Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to overturn a federal judge’s order blocking construction of a major border security project in West Texas, arguing that the ruling is undermining national security, delaying efforts to combat illegal immigration and drug trafficking, and costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars each day.

In an emergency application filed October 21, the Justice Department urged the justices to lift an injunction that halted work across approximately 500 miles of the Big Bend region, a remote stretch of the U.S.-Mexico border that includes Big Bend National Park and surrounding private and state-owned land.

The administration is seeking permission to immediately resume construction while litigation challenging the project continues. It has also asked the Supreme Court to take up the case and reverse the lower court’s decision.

The legal confrontation follows an October 2 ruling by U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone in El Paso, who determined that the Department of Homeland Security had likely exceeded its legal authority by waiving dozens of federal environmental and other regulations to accelerate construction.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer sharply criticized the injunction in the administration’s emergency filing, describing the ruling as an unjustified interference with the federal government’s responsibility to secure the southern border.

“This case involves a baseless injunction that halts a major portion of the construction of the border wall,” Sauer wrote.

The administration maintains that Congress explicitly authorized the Department of Homeland Security to bypass certain legal requirements when necessary to expedite the construction of border barriers and related infrastructure.

At the center of the dispute is a federal law dating to 1996, later expanded through the REAL ID Act of 2005, that permits the homeland security secretary to waive legal requirements for certain border construction projects.

Former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and her successor, Markwayne Mullin, issued waivers between February and July, determining that the Big Bend region qualified as an area requiring additional infrastructure to prevent illegal entry.

Environmental organizations, local residents and other opponents challenged those determinations, arguing that the administration was improperly applying emergency construction powers to an area with historically low levels of illegal border crossings.

Judge Cardone agreed that the plaintiffs had demonstrated a likelihood of succeeding in their legal challenge.

“The Court finds that Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their major questions doctrine claim that the Big Bend Waivers were issued in excess of the Secretary’s authority,” Cardone wrote.

The judge ordered construction suspended throughout the affected region while the lawsuit proceeds, preventing the government from relying on the disputed waivers to continue work.

The Trump administration contends that the injunction threatens a critical component of its nationwide border security strategy.

According to the Justice Department, the Big Bend sector covers nearly one-quarter of the approximately 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border and contains a gap of more than 300 miles in existing border defenses.

Federal officials argue that leaving such a large stretch without sufficient barriers would encourage illegal immigrants, human smugglers and drug traffickers to redirect their activities into the region as security measures are strengthened elsewhere.

Sauer warned that the gap could “act as a dangerous magnet for cartels and other bad actors to exploit.”

The government further argued that halting the project would create substantial financial and operational consequences.

According to federal court filings, the construction suspension is costing the government approximately $462,800 per day, while withdrawing equipment and personnel from the affected sites and later redeploying them could result in additional expenses of approximately $7 million.

Before construction was halted, crews had already completed roughly three-quarters of a mile of border barriers and established temporary field offices, supply yards, water delivery systems and concrete production facilities.

The administration said the interruption was creating unnecessary delays to a project it considers essential for border enforcement.

In its filing, the Justice Department argued that the injunction was causing “irreversible delays, costs, and operational harms from halting already-begun construction.”

The government also cited apprehension and drug seizure figures to support its position that the Big Bend region requires additional security infrastructure.

According to administration figures, more than 89,000 people were apprehended attempting to cross illegally in the Big Bend sector between 2021 and 2025.

Opponents dispute the administration’s characterization of the region, pointing out that Big Bend has consistently recorded among the lowest numbers of illegal border crossings along the southern boundary.

They argue that the area’s rugged terrain and natural geographic barriers already discourage unauthorized crossings and that additional surveillance technology could provide security without extensive construction.

The project has generated opposition from environmental organizations, ranchers, local business owners and elected officials from both political parties.

Among the plaintiffs are the Center for Biological Diversity, a local river guide and an organization working to preserve a historic church in Ruidosa, Texas.

They contend that construction could damage wildlife habitats, disrupt tourism, interfere with access to the Rio Grande and threaten historically significant properties.

The controversy intensified in August after construction crews began clearing land in Big Bend National Park, prompting protests and additional legal challenges.

Big Bend National Park encompasses more than 800,000 acres of protected wilderness and is known for its mountains, desert landscapes, canyons and diverse wildlife.

Opponents maintain that extensive construction could permanently alter portions of the region.

“We’re deeply disappointed that the Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court for a green light to bulldoze one of America’s wildest, most extraordinary landscapes,” said Zeynep Graves, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity.

“Once Big Bend’s canyons, cultural treasures and wild ecosystems are destroyed, they’ll be lost forever. We’re confident the law is on our side and that only Congress can authorize something as consequential as walling off the entire U.S.-Mexico border. We won’t stop fighting for Big Bend until it’s protected forever.”

The administration has indicated that the project does not involve erecting a continuous 30-foot steel wall through Big Bend National Park itself.

Instead, the planned infrastructure includes patrol roads, surveillance cameras, sensors and vehicle barriers, while some privately owned areas outside the park could receive taller steel border fencing.

The dispute has also drawn attention because Texas Governor Greg Abbott previously said he had received assurances from Homeland Security Secretary Mullin that a wall or fence would not be built inside Big Bend National Park.

In August, Abbott said Mullin had assured him that there would be “no construction of any type of barrier at Big Bend National Park.”

The federal government has since maintained that its broader border security plans remain necessary, although the precise construction arrangements within protected areas have been subject to review.

The administration’s push to resume work is part of President Trump’s broader effort to strengthen physical barriers and surveillance capabilities along the southern border.

Congressional Republicans allocated approximately $46 billion to the Department of Homeland Security last year for border infrastructure, including steel barriers, vehicle obstacles, patrol roads and advanced surveillance systems.

The Big Bend project alone has been estimated at approximately $1.7 billion.

The Supreme Court application places the dispute before the justices at a time when the administration is seeking to accelerate border security construction and limit legal obstacles to its immigration enforcement agenda.

The case also raises a broader constitutional question concerning how much authority Congress may delegate to executive branch officials to suspend existing federal laws in the name of border security.

The administration argues that lawmakers deliberately provided the homeland security secretary with broad powers to expedite construction, while the plaintiffs contend that those powers cannot be exercised without regard to the statutory limits established by Congress.

The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the emergency application. Until the justices intervene or the injunction is otherwise lifted, the construction restrictions imposed by Judge Cardone remain in effect.

{Matzav.com}

New York City has completed a massive expansion of its red-light camera program, installing automated enforcement cameras at 600 intersections throughout the five boroughs, quadrupling the number of locations where motorists can be ticketed for running red lights and reaching the maximum permitted under New York State law.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani and New York City Department of Transportation Commissioner Mike Flynn announced the completion of the expansion on Wednesday, October 21, marking the largest deployment of red-light cameras in the city’s history.

The new network covers intersections in Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, the Bronx and Staten Island, with cameras automatically photographing vehicles that enter intersections after traffic signals have turned red.

Motorists caught by the cameras face a $50 fine, with violations mailed directly to the registered owners of the vehicles. Unlike traditional moving violations issued by police officers, red-light camera tickets do not result in points against a driver’s license.

The expansion follows legislation signed by Governor Kathy Hochul in 2024 that increased the number of intersections eligible for red-light camera enforcement from 150 to 600. The city subsequently began an aggressive installation campaign, activating cameras at additional intersections throughout 2026.

City officials say the expanded enforcement network is intended to address dangerous driving behavior and reduce collisions involving motorists who disregard traffic signals.

According to the Department of Transportation, running red lights was a contributing factor in 22 percent of fatal crashes at New York City intersections between 2023 and 2025.

Transportation officials maintain that the camera program has produced significant improvements at intersections where the devices have been installed. Data collected by the city indicates that red-light violations have declined by more than 80 percent at camera-equipped intersections.

The city also reports that injuries resulting from rear-end collisions have fallen by nearly 60 percent at those locations, while injuries from T-bone crashes have declined by approximately 70 percent since camera installation.

Mayor Mamdani praised the completion of the expansion, arguing that automated enforcement has demonstrated its effectiveness in discouraging dangerous driving.

“Safer streets aren’t a guessing game — we know the tools proven to keep New Yorkers safe. Red light cameras help us get home safely by holding dangerous drivers accountable and preventing crashes before they happen,” Mamdani said.

“With all 600 intersections up and running, we are stopping dangerous behavior before tragedy can strike and making our streets safer for everyone who walks, bikes, drives or takes the bus.”

Flynn said the administration views the additional cameras as an important component of its broader campaign to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries.

“Red light cameras save lives and have proven to change driver behavior. This expansion will help reduce the unacceptable, selfish and dangerous rise in red light running we’ve seen on our streets since the pandemic,” Flynn said.

“We’re proud to have delivered on our commitment to complete this expansion this year, in tandem with the Mamdani administration’s Vision Zero commitments to life-saving street redesigns and safety programs that will usher in a new era of safer streets across the five boroughs.”

The cameras are being installed at locations selected by transportation officials based on several factors, including previous crashes, the frequency of red-light violations and intersections with histories of serious collisions.

Particular attention has been given to locations where vehicles have struck other automobiles from the side, commonly referred to as T-bone collisions, which can result in severe injuries.

The city says its enforcement data also indicates that the overwhelming majority of motorists who receive red-light camera tickets are not repeat offenders.

During 2025, approximately 95 percent of vehicles cited for running red lights received no more than one or two violations throughout the year. Fewer than 0.7 percent of vehicles received five or more tickets.

The data also shows that a substantial portion of the tickets are being issued to motorists who do not reside in New York City.

Approximately 39 percent of red-light camera violations involve vehicles registered outside the five boroughs, meaning drivers traveling into the city from surrounding communities, including New Jersey, Long Island and other parts of New York State, are also significantly affected by the expanded enforcement.

Under the city’s automated enforcement system, cameras capture photographic evidence of vehicles passing through intersections after the traffic signals turn red. The registered owner subsequently receives a Notice of Liability, generally within 30 days of the alleged violation.

The $50 penalty applies regardless of whether the registered owner was personally driving the vehicle at the time. Recipients can review photographic or video evidence of the alleged violation and have the right to challenge tickets through the city’s established adjudication procedures.

The program differs from New York City’s speed camera system, which monitors vehicles exceeding posted speed limits. Red-light cameras specifically target motorists who enter intersections against red traffic signals.

Although the city has now reached the 600-intersection limit authorized by state lawmakers, transportation safety advocates are already pushing for another expansion.

Ben Furnas, executive director of Transportation Alternatives, has called attention to the thousands of intersections throughout New York City that remain without automated red-light enforcement.

More than 10,000 intersections with traffic signals still lack red-light cameras, and advocates are hoping state lawmakers will consider legislation allowing the city to expand the program further during the 2027 legislative session.

Supporters of the cameras argue that automated enforcement provides a consistent deterrent against dangerous driving and reduces the need for police officers to be stationed at busy intersections.

The expansion also forms part of the city’s Vision Zero initiative, which seeks to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries through a combination of street redesigns, traffic enforcement and other safety measures.

With the installation of cameras at all 600 authorized intersections now completed, motorists traveling throughout New York City face a substantially larger network of automated traffic enforcement than existed at the beginning of the year.

Dozens of Israeli Air Force fighter jets and aerial refueling aircraft carried out an unusual long-range mission this week, flying over Syria and Iraq and approaching the Iranian border before returning to Israel, according to a report Wednesday evening by Israel’s Channel 12 News.

Although Israel notified the United States of the operation beforehand and described it as a military exercise intended to deter Iran, American sources reportedly suspect that Israeli officials had an additional objective: provoking an Iranian response that could provide justification for an Israeli military strike.

The operation reportedly took place overnight Monday into Tuesday, involving dozens of Israeli aircraft flying eastward through Syrian and Iraqi airspace toward Iran.

The formation included both fighter jets and refueling planes, suggesting an operation designed to demonstrate the Israeli Air Force’s ability to conduct missions at considerable distances from Israeli territory.

According to the report, the aircraft approached the Iranian border but did not enter Iranian airspace. They subsequently reversed course and returned to Israel.

Israeli officials had informed their American counterparts of the planned mission before the aircraft departed, presenting the flight as a deterrence exercise intended to send a warning to Tehran.

However, American officials familiar with the operation reportedly came away with a different assessment of Israel’s possible intentions.

According to the sources cited by Channel 12, Washington suspected that Israel was hoping its unusually provocative aerial maneuver would prompt an Iranian military reaction.

Such a response, American officials reportedly believed, could have given Israel grounds to launch an attack against Iranian targets.

The suggestion that Israel sought to draw Iran into a confrontation was based on the interpretation of American sources rather than any official Israeli acknowledgment of such a strategy.

No Israeli government or military official was quoted in the report confirming that provoking an Iranian response was among the mission’s objectives.

The reported operation comes amid continuing tensions between Israel and Iran, with both countries closely monitoring the possibility of renewed military confrontation.

The presence of aerial refueling aircraft alongside the fighter jets was particularly significant, given the extensive distances involved in potential Israeli operations against targets inside Iran.

The route through Syria and Iraq also underscored the Israeli Air Force’s ability to project military power far beyond Israel’s borders.

While Israeli officials characterized the flight as a demonstration of deterrence, the reported American suspicions point to differing assessments in Yerushalayim and Washington regarding the risks and objectives of such operations.

The report did not indicate that Iranian forces responded militarily to the flight or that any Israeli attack followed the mission.

The aircraft ultimately returned to Israel after approaching the Iranian border, concluding an operation that, according to the American sources, may have been intended to test Tehran’s willingness to respond.

{Matzav.com}

Israel’s Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara is urging the Supreme Court to consider imposing additional financial sanctions on individuals who have failed to comply with military service requirements, including the possible elimination of municipal property tax discounts, public transportation benefits, subsidized after-school programs, and government housing assistance.

The request, submitted Wednesday just six days before Israel’s Knesset elections, comes as the attorney general accuses the government of failing to adequately enforce military enlistment requirements, despite approximately 110,000 individuals currently being classified as draft avoiders or subject to final military reporting orders.

According to official figures included in the submission, as of September 8, 2026, a total of 110,330 individuals were either formally designated as draft avoiders or classified under what is known as Order 12, a status involving individuals who have received final military orders but have not fulfilled their reporting obligations.

The IDF estimates that approximately 81 percent of those individuals belong to the chareidi community, while the remaining 19 percent come from the general population, including cases that have accumulated over several decades.

The figures encompass two distinct legal categories and do not mean that all 110,330 individuals are yeshiva bochurim or have been formally declared draft avoiders.

In her submission, Baharav-Miara sharply criticized the government’s enforcement efforts, arguing that authorities have failed to use the full range of measures available to compel compliance with military service requirements.

“It cannot be said that the state, across all its branches, is doing everything within its power to combat this phenomenon. Far from it,” the submission stated.

The attorney general pointed to a Supreme Court ruling issued in November 2025 that required the government to formulate a civilian and economic enforcement policy within 45 days. More than ten months later, she noted, the required policy had still not been finalized.

The latest filing asks the court to consider issuing additional binding instructions that would allow government agencies to condition various financial benefits on an individual’s military status, without necessarily requiring new legislation.

Among the measures being considered is the elimination of municipal property tax discounts for individuals who have failed to resolve their military obligations. Similar restrictions could apply to reduced public transportation fares.

According to professional officials at Israel’s Finance Ministry, both measures could potentially be implemented through existing administrative authority, without requiring the Knesset to pass new legislation.

Another proposal involves withdrawing government subsidies for several after-school and vacation programs, including Nitzanim, Nitzanim During Vacations, and the Great Summer School program.

The submission notes that the financial value of the Nitzanim subsidy alone can exceed an average of 1,000 shekels per month per household.

Government legal officials have requested preparations to make eligibility for these subsidies conditional on military status beginning January 1, 2027.

The proposed restrictions could therefore have significant financial consequences for families whose children participate in subsidized educational programs.

Additional measures under consideration include limitations on government-supported housing loans, rental assistance, and other financial benefits.

However, the proposals have not yet been implemented across the board. Some would require decisions by the relevant government ministers and ministries, while others could depend on further instructions from the Supreme Court.

The attorney general’s submission also provided figures illustrating the gap between the number of individuals who have not complied with military reporting requirements and the number actually arrested or prosecuted.

During September, authorities arrested 212 individuals classified as draft avoiders or military deserters. According to IDF estimates, approximately 163 of those arrested were chareidim.

Of 360 indictments filed against individuals accused of evading military service, only 49 involved members of the chareidi community, according to estimates provided by military prosecutors.

The filing also revealed that a joint enforcement operation planned by the IDF and Israel Police for October had been postponed for a second time because of disagreements over personnel allocations.

Military officials maintained that a police request for several hundred additional soldiers to assist with the operation was impractical. Police officials, however, presented a different account regarding the purpose of the requested reinforcements.

The dispute has complicated efforts to conduct coordinated arrests, adding to the attorney general’s criticism that the government has failed to fully utilize its enforcement capabilities.

Meanwhile, the IDF reported an increase in chareidi enlistment, with the number of chareidim joining the military rising from 2,811 in the previous recruitment year to 4,298 during the 2025 recruitment year.

Despite the increase, the state’s submission maintained that the current rate of enlistment remains far below the military’s manpower requirements.

The attorney general’s latest intervention comes amid growing tensions over the arrests of yeshiva bochurim, with demonstrations erupting in several locations across Eretz Yisroel in recent days.

In Kfar Saba, protesters gathered outside a police station after Elchonon Damati, a talmid at Yeshivas Torah B’Tifartah in Elad, was arrested when he appeared at the station in connection with a traffic incident. A routine check revealed that he was classified as a military draft avoider, and he was transferred to military custody.

In another incident in Yerushalayim, military police reportedly contacted a yeshiva bochur and informed him that a delivery was waiting outside his building. When he came downstairs, officers arrested him.

The arrests have prompted criticism from chareidi political leaders, who have accused authorities of intensifying enforcement measures immediately before the elections.

The attorney general’s submission emphasized that any restrictions on financial benefits must be applied equally to all individuals who have failed to resolve their military service obligations, regardless of whether they belong to the chareidi community.

It also clarified that the proposed measures are not intended to affect populations that are not subject to military conscription.

The state is now asking the Supreme Court to consider additional intervention, including operative orders requiring the withdrawal of financial benefits and the establishment of an early deadline for another update on the enforcement activities of the IDF and Israel Police.

{Matzav.com}

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, has been ordered to pay $25 billion in penalties after a New Mexico judge ruled that the social media giant repeatedly deceived consumers about its handling of personal information in connection with the Cambridge Analytica data scandal, delivering another major legal blow to Mark Zuckerberg’s technology empire.

The sweeping judgment, issued Wednesday, October 21, follows a September jury verdict finding that Meta violated New Mexico consumer protection laws tens of millions of times through misleading representations about the privacy and security of Facebook users’ personal information.

The lawsuit, filed by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez in 2021, centered on revelations that Cambridge Analytica, a British political consulting company involved in President Donald Trump’s 2016 election campaign, obtained information belonging to as many as 87 million Facebook users without their knowledge or permission.

The information was gathered through a third-party Facebook application and subsequently used to develop detailed profiles of American voters. The controversy erupted publicly in 2018, raising serious questions about Facebook’s privacy protections and the extent to which outside companies could access information about its users.

On September 25, jurors determined that Meta had committed more than 43 million violations of the state’s consumer protection statutes. Each violation was potentially subject to a penalty of $5,000, leaving the court to determine the appropriate financial punishment.

New Mexico District Judge Francis Mathew ultimately imposed a $25 billion penalty, substantially below the maximum of approximately $219 billion permitted under state law. State prosecutors had urged the court to assess between $35 billion and $40 billion in penalties.

In his 20-page decision, Mathew said the company’s misconduct involved fundamental aspects of its relationship with users and extended over a prolonged period.

“Facebook’s wrongdoing — over the course of years and systematically broadcast to the public — goes to the heart of Facebook’s core business practices,” Matthew wrote in a 20-page filing explaining his decision.

The jury’s findings were based in part on statements issued by Facebook and its senior executives concerning the Cambridge Analytica incident and the company’s broader privacy practices. Of the 29 statements examined during the proceedings, jurors concluded that 26 were misleading.

The ruling represents one of the largest financial penalties ever imposed on a technology company in a state consumer protection case, although Meta has made clear that it intends to challenge the judgment.

Vincent Joralemon, a senior fellow at the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology, said the underlying evidence against Meta could make overturning the liability findings difficult, even if an appellate court ultimately reduces the financial penalty.

“The fact pattern is pretty damning for Meta, and I dont see much to dispute there,” Joralemon told The Post.

“The actual damages might get reduced on appeal, but the district court judge did a pretty good job trying to make these as reasonable as possible (and already reduced by something like 90% of the maximum allowable under New Mexico law).”

Meta had argued before the ruling that any penalty should be limited to $3.45 billion. The company warned that imposing a substantially larger financial punishment could discourage businesses from operating in New Mexico and create damaging economic consequences.

Following Wednesday’s decision, Meta Chief Legal Officer C.J. Mahoney reiterated the company’s opposition to the judgment and confirmed that an appeal would be pursued.

“At its core, this lawsuit seeks to impose a tax on speech to enforce new rules for what people can say online,” he said in a statement.

“Meta will continue to build a safe and free platform to connect millions of Americans, grow small businesses, and help the country maintain its competitive edge.”

The Cambridge Analytica case adds to a mounting series of costly legal challenges confronting Meta over its treatment of users, protection of minors, privacy safeguards and the alleged harmful effects of its social media platforms.

New Mexico has emerged as a particularly aggressive state in pursuing litigation against the company. In March, a jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million in civil penalties after finding that it misrepresented the safety of its platforms for children and failed to adequately protect young users from online predators.

That case resulted in further financial consequences in August, when a judge imposed an additional $567 million in penalties related to the same allegations.

Meta also reached an $18 billion settlement in August with a coalition of 48 state attorneys general who accused the company of contributing to social media addiction and mental health problems among teenagers.

Under the terms of that agreement, Meta allocated $459 million toward penalties sought by certain states in connection with the Cambridge Analytica controversy.

The company continues to face thousands of additional lawsuits nationwide involving online safety, privacy, social media addiction and other aspects of its business operations.

The New Mexico ruling drew praise from Fairplay, an organization advocating stronger protections for children and families online, which described the $25 billion judgment as a “landmark penalty.”

Fairplay Executive Director Josh Golin said the case illustrated the seriousness of Meta’s alleged disregard for consumer privacy and the need for meaningful financial consequences.

“Everyone, regardless of their political beliefs, should be horrified by Meta’s reckless disregard of privacy law and its brazen lies about its practices,” Fairplay executive director Josh Golin said in a statement.

“Every internal document we’ve seen from Meta demonstrates that the company only cares about its bottom line, so we congratulate New Mexico for hitting the company where it hurts.”

The judgment also carries an additional financial consequence: the court ordered interest to accrue at an annual rate of 15% until the penalty is paid in full. That provision could substantially increase Meta’s liability if the judgment survives its planned appeal.

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez welcomed the ruling as a major victory for consumers, saying it demonstrated that even the world’s largest technology corporations must answer for violations of state law.

“This is a historic day for New Mexico and for consumers across the country,” Torrez said. “For too long, powerful technology companies have operated as though their size and influence put them beyond the reach of the law. A New Mexico jury found nearly 44 million violations of our consumer protection statute, and this penalty order demonstrates that those violations carry real consequences. We took on one of the largest companies in the world because New Mexicans deserve honesty, accountability, and the protection of their personal information. Today’s result makes clear that no corporation is too powerful to be held accountable.”

The attorney general emphasized that New Mexico had chosen to pursue its claims independently rather than resolve them through a broader multistate settlement, allowing the allegations to be presented to a jury and resulting in a finding of 43,899,725 violations of state law.

“This case has always been about more than one company or one scandal,” Torrez said. “It is about whether corporations can mislead consumers about what happens to their personal information without facing meaningful consequences. New Mexico stood its ground, took this case to trial, and secured a verdict establishing millions of violations of our law. This outcome reinforces a fundamental principle, companies that do business in our state must follow our laws and respect the rights of our people.”

The court has not yet resolved whether Meta must also make changes to its business practices. Judge Mathew reserved that question for additional legal arguments, leaving open the possibility of further court-ordered restrictions beyond the financial penalty.

The judgment remains subject to appeal, meaning the ultimate amount Meta will be required to pay, and when New Mexico might receive the money, have yet to be determined.

Federal authorities have dismantled an alleged multimillion-dollar marriage fraud operation in Massachusetts, charging six people in a scheme that prosecutors say arranged hundreds of sham marriages between illegal immigrants and American citizens, charging as much as $40,000 per wedding to help foreign nationals fraudulently obtain green cards and eventual U.S. citizenship.

At the center of the operation was Jennifer Gonzalez, 43, of Fall River, Massachusetts, whom federal prosecutors identified as the mastermind of a sophisticated business that allegedly operated for more than a decade, generating over $6 million while exploiting the American immigration system.

Gonzalez and four other defendants were arrested Wednesday morning, October 21, following a federal investigation that uncovered an elaborate network of fake weddings, fabricated marital relationships, fraudulent immigration applications and alleged abuse of government assistance programs.

Authorities say Gonzalez arranged approximately 18 to 20 fraudulent marriages annually, collecting between $38,000 and $40,000 from each immigrant seeking legal status in the United States.

The other defendants were identified as Erica Daniels, 29, of Fall River; Cherice Alejandro, 39, of Fall River; Amara Pugh, 31, of Fall River; Jessica Tavares, 31, of Attleboro; and Jaylin Hill, 26, of Fall River.

Hill is already serving a state prison sentence for a firearms offense, while the remaining five defendants were taken into federal custody Wednesday.

All six face federal charges involving conspiracy to harbor illegal aliens, harboring illegal aliens, conspiracy to commit marriage fraud and marriage fraud.

According to investigators, Gonzalez recruited American citizens willing to enter into marriages with immigrants who paid substantial sums to obtain immigration benefits. The American participants would remain legally married to their assigned partners for several years, eventually divorcing and becoming available for another fraudulent marriage.

Prosecutors allege that Gonzalez provided extensive instructions on how to convince immigration authorities that the relationships were genuine.

Participants were directed to establish joint bank accounts, purchase life insurance policies and take photographs together at weddings and social gatherings. These materials would then be submitted to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services as evidence of legitimate marriages.

The operation allegedly required three to four months of preparation before immigration paperwork could be submitted, allowing sufficient time to create documentation supporting the fictitious relationships.

Customers were also required to sign contracts outlining their financial obligations, although prosecutors say the documents were deliberately written to conceal the true purpose of the transactions.

During the investigation, federal agents secretly recorded Gonzalez arranging one of the fraudulent marriages, including an encounter in which she accepted a $3,000 cash down payment and directed the preparation of a contract disguised as a personal loan.

According to the criminal complaint, Gonzalez explained that the contract avoided explicitly mentioning the supposed spouse because doing so would be “incriminating.”

Investigators also discovered that customers frequently paid approximately $500 per month to their assigned American spouses, or individuals connected to them, to maintain the appearance of a legitimate marriage while their immigration applications were pending.

In some instances, the American participants allegedly entered into multiple sham marriages over the years, allowing the organization to repeatedly profit from the same individuals.

Federal prosecutors say Gonzalez used the proceeds from her operation to purchase businesses, land and other real estate in the Dominican Republic.

In a secretly recorded conversation with a cooperating witness, Gonzalez reportedly described her investments overseas.

“Every time I have a spare dollar I just invest in new property in my country. That’s what I really do. I like to buy land. Like, I have a lot of land in my country,” she said.

Investigators also uncovered allegations that Gonzalez and other participants fraudulently collected government assistance while earning substantial amounts through the illegal marriage operation.

Gonzalez allegedly received more than $120,000 in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, commonly known as food stamps, while operating the lucrative business and investing in Dominican real estate.

Prosecutors say several defendants falsely claimed on Massachusetts public assistance applications that they had never been married, even as they were submitting federal immigration documents identifying themselves as spouses of foreign nationals.

The investigation has also raised allegations of housing assistance and unemployment benefit fraud.

One particularly striking aspect of the case involves statements Gonzalez allegedly made about Massachusetts and the protection she believed immigrants could receive under the state’s policies.

In conversations secretly recorded by investigators, Gonzalez described Massachusetts as a favorable location for illegal immigrants because of the state’s political environment and access to government services.

“…I believe that you you can okay, because this state is a sanctuary, like Trump doesn’t like this state because the government from here, the state defends us very much,” Gonzalez allegedly said.

“Massachusetts is the best place for you to be. That is a fact.”

She added, “You get health insurance. Um, you get a lot of help as an immigrant here.”

Gonzalez also reportedly acknowledged that President Donald Trump’s return to the White House had complicated her business because of increased immigration enforcement.

In one recording, she discussed how immigration procedures had become more difficult under the Trump administration.

“…we’re in a new government, things are a little bit more difficult….” she said.

Federal prosecutors said Gonzalez had indicated that she stopped arranging new weddings toward the end of 2024 as she anticipated stricter immigration enforcement under the incoming administration.

U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts Leah Foley condemned the alleged operation during a Wednesday news conference in Boston, saying the defendants had turned America’s immigration system into a profit-making enterprise.

“What an affront the alleged conduct revealed here today must be to those who play by the rules,” Foley said. “To see a for-profit business whose sole purpose is helping people cheat and skip the line by simply paying for it must be so offensive and disheartening to those who follow our country’s laws.”

Foley also criticized Gonzalez for allegedly enriching herself through fraudulent immigration arrangements while transferring her profits overseas.

“Ms. Gonzalez got rich off selling the American Dream all the while investing her money in another country,” Foley said.

The federal prosecutor said the government intends to pursue the investigation further, including examining assets allegedly purchased in the Dominican Republic with proceeds from the operation.

“My hope is that today the charged defendants and others like them realize that the American dream is not for sale,” Foley said. “It is earned. And when you try to pilfer it for profit, we will hold you accountable.”

Shawn Saucier, Northeast Regional Chief of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, warned that fraudulent marriages undermine the integrity of the immigration system and create additional obstacles for individuals attempting to obtain lawful immigration status.

“This case sends a clear message. Marriage is not a loophole, it is not a shortcut, and it is not a tool for gaming U.S. immigration laws. Marriage fraud is not victimless,” Saucier said.

Authorities said the investigation remains active, and additional charges could be brought against individuals who obtained immigration benefits through the alleged operation.

The immigrants who participated in the marriages have not been charged in the case announced Wednesday, although prosecutors indicated that investigators are examining the immigration applications connected to the scheme.

Gonzalez made an initial appearance in federal court Wednesday, with a detention hearing scheduled for Friday. Her attorney declined to comment on the allegations.

The charges carry substantial potential prison sentences. Harboring illegal immigrants and conspiracy to do so each carry penalties of up to 10 years in federal prison, while marriage fraud and conspiracy to commit marriage fraud each carry maximum sentences of five years. The offenses also carry possible fines of up to $250,000 per count.

The case follows another major federal marriage fraud prosecution announced in New York in August, when 11 individuals were charged in connection with an alleged scheme involving approximately 1,000 fraudulent marriages arranged to help Chinese nationals obtain American green cards.

Federal investigators say the Massachusetts case remains open as authorities work to identify additional participants, review potentially fraudulent immigration approvals and trace the millions of dollars allegedly generated by Gonzalez’s operation.

Conservative radio host and prominent Netanyahu ally Mark Levin has unleashed a blistering attack on Israeli political candidate Ofer Winter, accusing him of sabotaging the right-wing bloc by refusing to withdraw from next week’s Knesset elections despite mounting concerns that his party will fail to win enough votes to enter parliament.

Levin, a longtime supporter and personal friend of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, took aim at Winter, chairman of the Amcha Yisrael party, in a series of posts on X Wednesday, suggesting that his continued candidacy could hand an electoral advantage to the Israeli left.

The American commentator reacted to a social media post accusing Winter of turning his back on the other parties in Israel’s right-wing camp.

“This saboteur Winter looks like a plant by the left wing. Or he’s the biggest dumb\*\*\* of all time,” Levin wrote.

Levin subsequently shared another post comparing Winter’s political conduct to that of a terrorist who recently attempted to hijack a FlyDubai flight bound for Tel Aviv. The comparison portrayed Winter as someone prepared to destroy the right-wing bloc in pursuit of his own political ambitions.

“Yep. Kamikaze candidates,” Levin commented.

The controversy centers on fears among Netanyahu and his political allies that Winter’s party could attract a substantial number of right-wing voters without crossing the electoral threshold required to enter the Knesset. Under Israel’s electoral system, votes cast for parties that fail to reach the threshold do not translate into parliamentary seats, potentially affecting the balance between competing political blocs.

Winter has repeatedly rejected demands that he abandon the race, insisting that his movement represents voters dissatisfied with the established political parties and that he intends to remain a candidate.

The pressure on Winter intensified after Blue and White chairman Benny Gantz announced that he was withdrawing his party from the election. Gantz’s decision prompted several prominent members of the governing coalition to call on smaller right-wing parties to make similar moves.

Religious Zionist Party chairman Bezalel Smotrich, Communications Minister Shlomo Karhi, and Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar were among those who urged Winter and other candidates whose parties were polling below the electoral threshold to withdraw rather than risk losing votes.

Efforts to persuade Winter also extended to figures with personal influence over the former senior IDF officer.

On Tuesday, Netanyahu and Smotrich met with Rav Eli Sadan, founder of the Bnei David pre-military academy and a former rebbi of Winter, in what was widely viewed as an attempt to secure his assistance in convincing Winter to leave the race.

The following day, Netanyahu publicly appealed to Winter after dozens of bereaved families who lost relatives in the recent war issued an open letter warning that votes for Amcha Yisrael could undermine the right-wing bloc’s prospects.

“Ofer Winter, listen to the bereaved families, show responsibility and withdraw, for the sake of right-wing victory!” Netanyahu declared.

Smotrich subsequently attempted to resolve the dispute by offering Winter a senior position in a future government.

Under the proposal, Winter would receive a ministerial appointment within the Defense Ministry from the positions allocated to the Religious Zionist Party if it participated in the next coalition.

The proposed responsibilities would include overseeing initiatives to encourage voluntary emigration from Gaza, as well as programs aimed at increasing chareidi military enlistment and integrating chareidim into the workforce.

Winter rejected the offer outright, making clear that he had no intention of trading his candidacy for a government appointment.

“Friends, you’ve got it all wrong. We didn’t come here for a job, as you’ve become accustomed to doing. We came to bring change. We came to lead the way,” Winter declared.

The Amcha Yisrael chairman also challenged assumptions that his party would automatically support Netanyahu in forming the next government, saying that any coalition agreement would have to address his movement’s principal demands.

Among those demands are legislation establishing formal recognition for the status of military servicemen, policies intended to secure a decisive defeat of Israel’s enemies, and measures promoting voluntary emigration from Gaza.

“We are part of the right-wing camp,” Winter emphasized. “There will be no blank check here. I said yes, and I said but. If they give, they’ll receive. If they don’t give, they won’t receive.”

Despite those conditions, Winter ruled out participating in the formation of a government with left-wing politician Yair Golan.

He also dismissed warnings that Amcha Yisrael would fail to clear the electoral threshold, arguing that existing polls do not adequately reflect the number of voters who remain undecided.

“Don’t believe the scare tactics. Don’t believe the fake news and the blatant lies,” Winter said, maintaining that hundreds of thousands of undecided Israelis could ultimately cast their ballots for his party.

Winter’s refusal has also drawn attention to his earlier endorsement of Netanyahu for prime minister. In a Wednesday interview with Channel 12, Winter acknowledged that he had reconsidered whether announcing that support so early in the campaign had been the right decision, although he maintained that he would stand by his commitment.

Yoseph Haddad, who holds the second position on Amcha Yisrael’s Knesset slate, subsequently reaffirmed that the party would recommend Netanyahu for prime minister despite the public attacks against Winter.

“We in the People of Israel Party are people of our word. From the very beginning, party leader Ofer Winter said we would recommend Netanyahu for prime minister,” Haddad stated.

“That is what we will do, even as Netanyahu himself and others in the coalition walk all over us and act against us, and even after we are subjected to a campaign of smears, spin, and character assassination,” he added.

Winter, meanwhile, reiterated his determination to continue campaigning, declaring in a video statement, “I did not surrender in the past. I am not surrendering today. And I will not surrender in the future when it comes to the values and principles for which we entered this fight.”

{Matzav.com}

Israel’s Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara is seeking to expand financial penalties against chareidi men who have not regularized their military draft status, calling on the Supreme Court to consider stripping them of municipal property tax discounts and reduced public transportation fares.

In a filing submitted Wednesday to the High Court of Justice, the Attorney General’s office argued that the government has failed to fully utilize the enforcement measures available to it against individuals classified as draft avoiders. The submission urges the court to consider additional economic restrictions alongside the arrests and military proceedings already being pursued.

The proposed measures would affect benefits currently available to eligible residents, including discounts on arnona, Israel’s municipal property tax, and reduced fares on buses and other public transportation.

Although neither restriction has yet been approved, the Attorney General is pressing for further examination of the proposals as part of a broader effort to increase financial pressure on those who have not resolved their status with the military authorities.

According to figures presented to the court, as of September 8, 2026, a total of 110,330 individuals across Israel had either been officially classified as draft avoiders or had reached the stage of receiving a military Order 12, a legal measure issued to individuals who have failed to comply with conscription requirements.

Military officials estimate that most of those included in that figure belong to the chareidi community.

The Attorney General’s submission contains sharp criticism of the government’s handling of draft enforcement, asserting that the authorities have fallen far short of exhausting their available powers.

“It cannot be said that the state, through all its branches, is doing everything in its power to combat this phenomenon. Far from it,” the filing states.

A central component of the proposed enforcement policy involves making additional government benefits conditional upon an individual’s compliance with military registration and draft requirements.

Under the approach being considered, men who have not properly arranged their military status could lose eligibility for financial assistance and discounts that would otherwise be available to them.

The Attorney General’s office contends that the government has still not established a comprehensive policy governing the withdrawal of such benefits, despite the passage of more than ten months since a court ruling requiring the development of an economic enforcement framework.

The filing specifically addresses the question of municipal property tax reductions, which can provide substantial financial relief to qualifying households.

According to the submission, government legal advisers previously requested that authority over the relevant regulations be transferred from the interior minister to the prime minister or another cabinet minister.

The proposed transfer was intended to allow officials to examine amendments that would make eligibility for arnona discounts dependent on a person’s compliance with military requirements.

That process, however, has not been completed.

The Attorney General is now asking the Supreme Court to consider issuing additional binding instructions concerning government benefits that could be withheld from individuals who have not settled their draft status.

The court filing also presents extensive figures concerning military summonses issued to chareidi men and the relatively small number who have ultimately entered military service.

During the 2024 and 2025 military recruitment years, the IDF sent 79,835 draft summonses to members of the chareidi population included in the figures under review.

As of September 8, only 11,283 of those summoned had appeared for the initial military recruitment procedures, while 4,026 had actually been inducted into the army.

The figures further indicate that 18,952 individuals had reached Order 12 status, while 48,278 had been formally classified as draft avoiders.

At the same time, the IDF’s own statistics show that chareidi enlistment has increased significantly over the past year.

During the recruitment year that ended in June 2026, a total of 4,298 chareidi men joined the military, compared with 2,811 the previous year, according to the army’s method of calculating chareidi enlistment.

Despite that increase, the Attorney General’s submission maintains that the recruitment figures remain insufficient and that the government must intensify both criminal enforcement and financial sanctions.

The document also confirms reports of a disagreement between the IDF and Israel Police over plans to conduct organized arrest operations targeting men who have not complied with military draft orders.

According to information presented during an October 14 discussion, a joint enforcement operation scheduled for October had been postponed for a second time.

The latest delay followed a police demand that the military provide several hundred additional soldiers before the operation could proceed.

IDF representatives argued that the requested deployment was impractical and inconsistent with the division of responsibilities between the army and police.

Police officials, however, maintained that the additional personnel were necessary to carry out the arrests themselves, rather than to maintain public order during possible demonstrations.

The disagreement has complicated efforts to conduct coordinated arrest operations at a time when the draft issue has become a major source of confrontation between the authorities and the chareidi community.

The filing also provides updated figures on criminal proceedings against individuals accused of failing to comply with military service obligations.

Between the beginning of 2026 and October 6, military prosecutors filed 419 indictments against individuals who had been classified as draft avoiders.

According to estimates provided by the military prosecution, 51 of those defendants were members of the chareidi community.

In addition to seeking broader financial restrictions, the Attorney General’s office has requested that the Supreme Court establish an early deadline for another government update concerning enforcement efforts.

That submission would focus specifically on measures taken by the IDF and Israel Police against draft avoiders and military deserters, including the implementation of arrest operations and other enforcement procedures.

The latest court filing represents a further effort by the Attorney General to increase pressure on the government to enforce military conscription requirements, with the proposed withdrawal of property tax and transportation discounts adding another potential financial consequence for chareidi men whose draft status remains unresolved.

{Matzav.com}

Millions of Amazon Prime customers across the United States could receive refunds of up to $200 as the online retail giant continues distributing payments under a massive $2.5 billion settlement with the Federal Trade Commission over allegations that customers were enrolled in Prime memberships without their consent and faced unnecessary obstacles when attempting to cancel their subscriptions.

The expanded refund program, which began issuing additional payments on October 1, 2026, significantly increases the number of consumers eligible for compensation. Under revised terms approved by a federal court, the maximum amount customers can receive has increased from $51 to $200, and eligible consumers will receive their money automatically without having to submit claims or complete paperwork.

The settlement stems from a federal lawsuit accusing Amazon of using deceptive enrollment practices that caused millions of shoppers to unknowingly sign up for its paid Prime membership service. Federal regulators also alleged that Amazon deliberately complicated the cancellation process, making it difficult for customers to end subscriptions they no longer wanted.

Under the original agreement reached in September 2025, Amazon was required to provide $1.5 billion in refunds to affected customers and pay an additional $1 billion civil penalty. The settlement ranks among the largest consumer protection recoveries ever obtained by the FTC.

According to federal officials, Amazon had already issued more than $845 million in consumer refund payments as of September 2026. The revised agreement is intended to ensure that additional customers receive compensation and that the remaining settlement funds are distributed more efficiently.

The latest changes could benefit millions of Prime subscribers who were previously excluded from receiving refunds because they had used too many of the membership’s benefits.

Under the original settlement terms, automatic refunds were generally limited to eligible customers who had used fewer than 10 Prime benefits during a 12-month period. The expanded program now includes qualifying consumers who used as many as 20 Prime benefits during a one-year period.

These benefits can include Prime shipping services, Prime Video, Prime Music and other features offered as part of the subscription.

To qualify, consumers must have been Amazon Prime customers in the United States who enrolled through one of the signup procedures challenged by federal regulators, or who unsuccessfully attempted to cancel their memberships through Amazon’s online cancellation system, between June 23, 2019, and June 23, 2025.

Customers must also have used no more than 20 Prime benefits during any 12-month period following their enrollment. Simply having an Amazon Prime membership does not automatically entitle someone to a refund.

Among the enrollment methods identified in the FTC’s case were Amazon’s Prime signup prompts during checkout, shipping selection screens, Prime Video enrollment procedures and other pages where customers were presented with membership offers.

One of the most significant changes is that customers no longer need to take any action to receive future payments under the settlement.

Amazon is distributing the money directly to eligible consumers through mailed checks or electronic payments using PayPal or Venmo. There is no requirement to register for the program, submit a new claim or respond to a notification before receiving a refund.

However, consumers who receive payments must act promptly. According to the FTC, payments expire 60 days after they are issued, meaning customers who fail to cash their checks or accept electronic transfers within that period could lose their refunds.

The possibility of receiving the full $200 depends on how the remaining settlement funds are distributed.

Under the revised agreement, customers who previously received refunds of up to $51 may qualify for additional payments of as much as $149, bringing their total compensation to $200.

Those supplemental payments are conditional. If the amount of money successfully accepted by consumers does not reach the required threshold by February 2027, Amazon will distribute additional refunds to qualifying customers who already accepted earlier payments.

The FTC expects all eligible consumers to receive their refunds by April 2027, including any supplemental payments required under the revised settlement.

Christopher Mufarrige, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, welcomed the expanded refund program, saying it would allow more consumers affected by Amazon’s practices to recover their money.

“The revised order will ensure more consumers who were harmed by Amazon’s deceptive enrollment and cancellation practices benefit from the FTC’s historic settlement,” Mufarrige said.

“This action underscores the FTC’s commitment to ensuring companies return money to consumers harmed by unlawful and deceptive business practices.”

The original lawsuit, filed in 2023, alleged that Amazon used confusing website designs and enrollment procedures that encouraged customers to subscribe to Prime without fully understanding that they were agreeing to recurring charges.

Federal regulators also accused the company of making the cancellation process unnecessarily complicated, requiring subscribers to navigate multiple screens and prompts before successfully terminating their memberships.

In addition to the financial penalties, the settlement requires Amazon to discontinue unlawful enrollment and cancellation practices and comply with restrictions intended to prevent similar conduct in the future.

With additional refunds now being distributed, federal officials are warning consumers to watch out for scammers attempting to exploit the settlement.

The FTC has emphasized that it is not personally contacting consumers to arrange Amazon refunds. Anyone claiming to represent the federal agency and requesting money or personal financial information in connection with a refund should be treated with suspicion.

Amazon will never require customers to pay a fee to receive settlement compensation, and no legitimate representative will demand payment in exchange for expedited processing or guaranteed eligibility.

Consumers who believe they qualify but have not received a payment can contact the settlement administrator at 1-888-999-8094 or by emailing admin\@SubscriptionMembershipSettlement.com. Additional information is available at SubscriptionMembershipSettlement.com.

Federal officials say consumers should also monitor their regular mail and electronic payment accounts for refunds, particularly those who were previously excluded from the program but may now qualify under the expanded eligibility rules.

The refunds are being issued to current and former Prime subscribers affected by the challenged practices, with payments continuing into 2027 as Amazon works to fulfill its obligations under the settlement.

Vice President JD Vance announced Wednesday that federal authorities have launched a sweeping crackdown on food stamp fraud, pursuing more than 40 defendants in cases involving nearly $42 million in suspected or established theft from government assistance programs.

The nationwide operation, conducted between September 1 and October 21, uncovered schemes involving approximately $45 million in intended losses across the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and other agricultural benefit programs, according to the Justice Department.

The enforcement campaign brought together the Justice Department’s National Fraud Enforcement Division, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the USDA Office of Inspector General, 13 federal prosecutors’ offices, and the Utah Attorney General’s Office.

The cases span multiple states and include allegations of stolen food stamp benefits, fraudulent electronic transactions, identity theft, money laundering, illegal exchanges of government assistance for cash and other prohibited items, and the misuse of agricultural relief funds.

Authorities announced a combination of new indictments, criminal complaints, guilty pleas, and prison sentences stemming from the investigations.

U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche condemned the schemes, saying they diverted public funds away from the Americans who rely on government food assistance.

“These schemes siphoned millions from taxpayers and robbed struggling Americans of the benefits they depend on, so fraudsters could use them for their own selfish purposes,” Blanche said.

According to figures released by the Trump administration, the latest investigations bring the total amount of SNAP-related fraud identified by Vance’s federal anti-fraud task force to approximately $641 million.

SNAP provides monthly assistance to qualifying low-income Americans for grocery purchases, with benefits distributed through electronic benefit transfer cards, commonly known as EBT cards.

The largest individual case disclosed Wednesday centers on two men accused of operating an elaborate food stamp fraud operation through authorized grocery establishments in Chicago.

Federal prosecutors allege that Jorag Yaseen and Rami Kanaan used stolen EBT account information to process thousands of fraudulent transactions, creating the appearance of legitimate grocery purchases even though no food was actually sold.

Investigators estimate that the Chicago operation resulted in approximately $29.7 million in losses.

Authorities further allege that some of the illegally obtained proceeds were used to purchase automobiles intended for personal use and shipment to destinations overseas.

Both defendants face federal charges that include wire fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and conspiracy to commit money laundering.

Another major investigation involves Mercedes New, a Georgia rapper and social media personality known professionally as Shawty Dred, who was indicted on October 7 in connection with an alleged multimillion-dollar theft of food assistance benefits.

New faces charges including food stamp fraud, mail fraud, access device fraud, and aggravated identity theft.

Investigators identified more than 500 Georgia EBT cards allegedly connected to New and calculated that the operation involved approximately $4.4 million in stolen benefits.

According to authorities, telephone numbers associated with New were used to contact Georgia’s automated SNAP system more than 9,000 times, obtaining access to information involving over 350 benefit accounts.

New was taken into custody in Las Vegas on October 13.

Federal investigators also uncovered schemes in which criminals used stolen food assistance benefits to obtain large quantities of infant formula, which were subsequently transported and resold for profit.

In Oregon, Ana Patricia Escalante received a 27-month federal prison sentence on September 9 after authorities determined that she directed a group responsible for collecting and moving merchandise purchased using stolen SNAP benefits.

Escalante was also ordered to repay $2.4 million in restitution.

Court records revealed that the criminal operation shipped more than 124,000 pounds of infant formula.

A total of 12 defendants have been sentenced in connection with that investigation, receiving prison terms totaling 157 months.

In Michigan, federal prosecutors pursued another identity theft operation involving the personal information of more than 650 individuals.

Kirk Deshaun Woodley admitted participating in a conspiracy that used stolen identifying information to submit fraudulent applications for SNAP benefits.

The operation, which involved approximately $1.1 million in intended losses, included co-conspirator Chantel LaShawn Peavy, who received an 18-month prison sentence Tuesday.

Woodley pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and aggravated identity theft.

Additional investigations in Michigan and Ohio focused on businesses accused of illegally converting SNAP benefits into cash, marijuana, and merchandise that cannot lawfully be purchased through the food assistance program.

In Pennsylvania, four individuals were indicted in a particularly disturbing case involving allegations that intellectually disabled women were exploited and deprived of control over their Social Security and SNAP benefits.

The charges in that prosecution include kidnapping, fraud, and transporting individuals for illicit sexual activity.

The nationwide operation also extended beyond food stamp fraud to agricultural assistance programs.

In Florida, farmer Mark Frisbie pleaded guilty on September 29 to falsifying federal crop insurance claims after admitting that he concealed millions of dollars in agricultural sales.

According to federal prosecutors, Frisbie failed to disclose more than $6 million in crop revenue, allowing him to collect approximately $1.75 million in insurance payments to which he was not entitled.

He also acknowledged improperly obtaining money from two federal programs intended to provide financial relief to farmers.

As part of his guilty plea, Frisbie agreed to pay approximately $1.51 million in restitution to the USDA’s Farm Service Agency.

Federal officials emphasized that the consequences of benefit fraud extend well beyond the financial losses suffered by the government.

Assistant Attorney General Colin McDonald, who leads the Justice Department’s National Fraud Enforcement Division, said criminals who steal SNAP benefits can leave struggling parents unable to purchase groceries for their children.

“The human cost of these fraud schemes is measured not in spreadsheets but in the panic of a mother whose card is declined and the hunger her children endure because someone hijacked their benefits,” McDonald said.

The administration also released broader enforcement figures showing that more than 1,000 retailers have been permanently disqualified from participating in SNAP.

Nearly 5,000 additional businesses have faced suspensions and administrative penalties totaling approximately $44 million for violations of program requirements.

Officials reported that federal enforcement efforts have resulted in the destruction of more than 2,200 illegal electronic point-of-sale devices used in fraudulent transactions.

Authorities have also disabled more than 2,000 compromised retailer authorization numbers, measures the administration estimates prevented more than $5 billion in potentially fraudulent transactions.

The latest enforcement announcement follows President Donald Trump’s introduction Tuesday of a new whistleblower rewards initiative intended to encourage individuals with information about government fraud to come forward.

Under the Justice Department program, individuals who provide qualifying information that results in criminal charges may receive discretionary financial awards ranging from $10,000 to $30,000.

Participants may also qualify for additional compensation through other existing government whistleblower programs, depending on the circumstances of their disclosures.

The initiative is part of the administration’s broader effort to identify fraudulent activity involving federal spending, recover taxpayer funds, and prosecute individuals and businesses accused of exploiting government assistance programs.

The Justice Department’s National Fraud Enforcement Division, established in April, has been coordinating prosecutions across federal agencies as part of President Trump’s Task Force to Eliminate Fraud, which is chaired by Vice President Vance.

Earlier this month, federal officials announced a separate nationwide tax fraud enforcement operation involving 76 defendants and more than $490 million in alleged or proven intended losses.

The October 21 food assistance crackdown represents another major enforcement action under that initiative, with prosecutors pursuing cases ranging from individual identity theft to multimillion-dollar schemes involving authorized SNAP retailers.

All defendants whose cases remain pending are presumed innocent unless and until their guilt is established in court.

{Matzav.com}

Former Obama White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel pushed back Tuesday against a Democratic Senate candidate’s declaration that Israel is not a friend of the United States, insisting that the Jewish state remains a vital American ally while warning that the relationship between the two countries is approaching a critical turning point.

Appearing on Newsmax’s “The Record With Greta Van Susteren,” Emanuel defended the longstanding American alliance with Israel but argued that significant changes are necessary to preserve it. He described the relationship as having reached a “tipping point” and called for a new diplomatic approach to Israel’s future in the Middle East.

Emanuel, who previously served as a Democratic congressman from Illinois, mayor of Chicago, and U.S. ambassador to Japan, was responding to comments by Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Michigan.

In an ABC News interview released Monday, El-Sayed asserted that Americans must recognize that Israel is not their friend, a statement that drew a direct rebuttal from Emanuel.

“They are an ally,” Emanuel said.

He emphasized that the American commitment to Israel has historically enjoyed bipartisan backing, noting that the relationship has been “affirmed by both Democrat and Republican presidents.”

Nevertheless, Emanuel argued that continued American support should be accompanied by a fundamental reassessment of the diplomatic arrangements that have defined the relationship for decades.

“The alliance has to change. The status quo is unsustainable.”

Although Emanuel defended Israel’s importance to American interests, he made clear that he remains deeply critical of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his governing coalition.

“I have fundamental disagreements with that government,” Emanuel said, while describing Israel as “an important long pole in the region for us.”

His comments come as Israelis prepare to vote in national elections on October 27, with Netanyahu seeking another term amid intense domestic political divisions and continuing debate over the country’s security and diplomatic policies.

Emanuel suggested that the outcome of Israel’s election could have significant implications for the future direction of relations with Washington, particularly as American political attitudes toward Israel continue to evolve.

As an alternative to the existing diplomatic framework, Emanuel pointed to proposals he presented during a July address at Tel Aviv University.

Rather than relying exclusively on the traditional two-state solution, which envisions an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel, Emanuel has advocated a broader regional arrangement involving 23 states.

Under his proposal, Israel and a future Palestinian state would be incorporated into a diplomatic framework involving 21 Arab countries, creating a regional structure intended to promote cooperation and reduce tensions.

Emanuel has also promoted the development of a major international trade corridor connecting India, the Middle East, and Europe, arguing that stronger economic integration could help Israel overcome its growing diplomatic isolation.

He said the initiative “gets Israel out of its pariah state.”

The former White House chief of staff maintained that he had warned Netanyahu about the dangers of his political approach as far back as 2009, when Emanuel was serving in the Obama administration.

According to Emanuel, he told Netanyahu that his policies would “lead to the perpetual isolation of Israel and the perpetual conflict for Israel.”

Emanuel also recalled a personal dispute from that period, claiming that Netanyahu subsequently “called me publicly a self-loathing Jew.”

That allegation was disputed at the time. In July 2009, a spokesman for Netanyahu denied a newspaper report claiming that the Israeli leader had referred to Emanuel as a self-hating Jew.

The discussion turned to the Gaza war when Van Susteren challenged Emanuel’s criticism of Netanyahu by pointing to Hamas’ October 7, 2023, massacre, which shattered the relative calm that had existed before the attack.

“What are they to do?” she asked, questioning how Israel could reasonably have been expected to respond to the terrorist organization’s assault.

Emanuel acknowledged Israel’s right to defend itself and placed responsibility on Hamas for choosing to build a terrorist infrastructure after Israel withdrew its soldiers and communities from Gaza in 2005.

Israel “has every right to self-defense,” he said.

Emanuel argued that Hamas had squandered the opportunity to develop Gaza’s civilian infrastructure, instead directing resources toward preparing for war against Israel.

“You decided tunnels,” he said, contrasting the terrorist organization’s priorities with the possibility of constructing “hospitals, schools, and enterprises.”

He also placed responsibility on Palestinian leaders for failing to advance the political aspirations of their own population.

The Palestinians’ “right to self-determination and sovereignty has been robbed by the Palestinian leadership,” Emanuel maintained.

At the same time, Emanuel accused Netanyahu’s government of pursuing policies that strengthened Hamas at the expense of the Palestinian Authority, including permitting funds from Qatar to enter Gaza.

He charged that Israeli officials should have recognized that Hamas was using its resources to expand its terrorist capabilities rather than improve conditions for civilians.

“Nobody thought they were building McDonald’s franchises,” Emanuel said.

“They were building tunnels, and they knew it,” he added.

Emanuel also questioned decisions made by Netanyahu’s government during negotiations for the release of the hostages abducted by Hamas on October 7.

He asserted that senior Israeli defense officials had acknowledged within the preceding three weeks that Israel “could have gotten all the hostages out way earlier.”

Van Susteren challenged that assessment, expressing skepticism about whether Hamas could have been relied upon to honor any agreement.

“I don’t trust Hamas at all,” she told Emanuel.

“Well, I don’t trust them either,” he responded.

Emanuel nevertheless argued that criticism of Netanyahu’s handling of the hostage negotiations was not limited to political opponents outside Israel. He pointed to Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot, both of whom served in Israel’s emergency wartime leadership before resigning from the war cabinet in June 2024.

The two former military chiefs had publicly criticized Netanyahu’s management of the war and his failure to establish a clear political strategy for Gaza after the fighting.

Emanuel also cited comments made earlier this month by Maj. Gen. (res.) Nitzan Alon, who headed the IDF’s efforts to secure the release of the hostages.

On October 2, Alon said that Israel could have brought home all those abducted on October 7 approximately a year earlier, raising renewed questions about the timing and conduct of negotiations with Hamas.

Emanuel’s latest comments are consistent with a broader proposal he outlined at Tel Aviv University in July, when he warned that Israel risked becoming increasingly isolated unless it changed its diplomatic approach.

During that address, he called for ending the longstanding arrangement under which American taxpayers provide billions of dollars annually toward Israel’s defense budget. Instead, he proposed that Israel purchase American military equipment under arrangements similar to those governing other U.S. allies.

His proposed regional agreement would require Arab governments to take greater responsibility for Palestinian governance, recognize Israel’s historical connection to the land, end financial rewards for terrorism, and combat the teaching of hatred against Israel.

Emanuel simultaneously called on Israel to halt unilateral actions in Yehuda and Shomron that he believes undermine prospects for a negotiated settlement.

The former ambassador, who has been mentioned as a possible Democratic presidential candidate in 2028, has argued that American support for Israel is weakening, particularly among younger voters and within the Democratic Party.

His disagreement with El-Sayed reflects a widening debate among Democrats over whether the United States should maintain its traditional alliance with Israel, fundamentally restructure that relationship, or abandon it altogether.

While Emanuel remains sharply critical of Netanyahu and believes American policy toward Israel must change, he has rejected El-Sayed’s assertion that Israel should no longer be regarded as an American friend or ally.

{Matzav.com}

Israel will return to standard time this Motzoei Shabbos, October 24, with clocks moving back one hour early Sunday morning, October 25, marking the end of daylight saving time and the beginning of the winter schedule.

At precisely 2 a.m. Sunday, clocks throughout Eretz Yisroel will be adjusted backward to 1 a.m., effectively providing residents with an additional hour of sleep.

The annual adjustment will also bring noticeable changes to the daily schedule. While sunrise will occur earlier according to the clock, sunset will likewise arrive an hour earlier, meaning that darkness will begin falling sooner in the afternoon.

For those planning their schedules around zmanim, the change will mean earlier clock times for shkiah, Mincha, and Maariv, although the actual length of daylight will remain unaffected by the adjustment.

Israel’s transition to winter time is governed by the Time Determination Law, which was revised in 2013 to establish a consistent schedule for changing the clocks.

Under the legislation, daylight saving time concludes on the final Sunday in October each year, while the country returns to daylight saving time on the final Friday in March.

Accordingly, Israel will remain on standard time until Friday, March 26, 2027, when clocks will once again move forward by one hour.

Dr. Oleg Popov, who heads Time and Frequency Measurements at Israel’s Ministry of Economy and Industry, explained that the purpose of the seasonal adjustment extends beyond the welcome prospect of an additional hour of sleep.

The underlying objective, he said, is to coordinate the country’s daily activities more closely with the available hours of natural sunlight.

During the summer months, daylight saving time shifts an hour of daylight into the evening, allowing residents to benefit from longer periods of light after the regular workday.

As winter approaches and daylight hours shorten, however, returning to standard time allows more people to begin their mornings after sunrise rather than while it is still dark outside.

The Economy Ministry also highlighted the connection between changing daylight patterns and the body’s natural biological rhythms.

During winter, when the days become shorter and exposure to sunlight decreases, the body’s production of melatonin, a hormone involved in regulating sleep, can be affected.

These seasonal changes may cause some individuals to experience greater tiredness or sleepiness, particularly as the amount of available daylight diminishes.

Light exposure also plays a role in processes associated with serotonin, a chemical involved in mood regulation.

Consequently, reduced exposure to natural sunlight during the winter months can contribute to changes in mood and energy levels for some people.

Most modern smartphones, tablets, and computers will make the adjustment automatically, provided their time settings are configured to update according to Israel’s time zone.

Residents using traditional clocks, watches, or other devices without automatic time synchronization will need to move the time back manually by one hour.

The change will also affect the time difference between Israel and the United States. Since American daylight saving time will not end until Sunday, November 1, Israel will temporarily be six hours ahead of New York instead of the usual seven hours.

{Matzav.com}

Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett has ignited a controversy just six days before Israel’s Knesset elections after announcing that he would repeal the government’s judicial reform legislation upon returning to power, prompting critics to accuse him of abandoning positions he previously championed.

The declaration, published Wednesday on X, drew criticism from social media users who pointed to Bennett’s earlier political campaigns, during which he and former Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked advocated major changes to Israel’s judicial system.

Bennett’s announcement came as recent opinion polls indicated that he had been attracting support from moderate right-wing voters, making his latest position on judicial reform a subject of particular attention.

“We will repeal all the laws of the judicial coup immediately upon the establishment of the Knesset,” Bennett wrote, identifying four measures he intends to reverse.

The legislation he listed concerned the committee responsible for selecting judges, the authority of the attorney general, the Police Internal Investigations Department, and regulations governing the communications industry.

Bennett also outlined additional constitutional changes he intends to pursue.

“We will pass the Declaration of Independence as a Basic Law that will serve as the introductory chapter to Israel’s constitution, and we will enact a Basic Law on Legislation in order to establish Israel as a Jewish and democratic state,” he wrote.

His declaration was reposted by prominent anti-government protest leader Shikma Bressler, drawing further attention to Bennett’s position.

Critics quickly circulated reminders of Bennett’s previous campaign alongside Shaked under the New Right party, which prominently featured the slogan, “Shaked will defeat the Supreme Court; Bennett will defeat Hamas.”

The slogan reflected the party’s earlier emphasis on curbing the judiciary’s influence, an approach that critics contrasted with Bennett’s current promise to dismantle the judicial reform measures.

One commenter accused Bennett of sacrificing his principles for political advancement.

“You know better than anyone why judicial reform is necessary, but apparently you sold your values for honor,” the commenter wrote.

Another critic described the former prime minister as “a hypocritical opportunist with no values.”

The reaction also extended beyond social media critics. Democrats party chairman Yair Golan welcomed Bennett’s pledge to reverse the legislation but called on him to go further by ruling out participation in a future coalition with Netanyahu and Likud.

“I’m glad my colleague Bennett has joined our commitment to repeal the regime coup laws and strengthen democracy,” Golan wrote. He added that Bennett should commit to excluding Netanyahu and the parties in his current coalition from any future government.

Bennett has previously supported significant changes to the judiciary. In 2017, he advocated legislation limiting the Supreme Court’s ability to overturn Knesset laws, while his 2019 campaign with Shaked included proposals to increase elected officials’ influence over judicial appointments.

His latest statement did not explain what judicial appointment system he would propose in place of the current legislation. Bennett continues to support a Basic Law governing legislation, an initiative he also promoted in earlier years.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli Culture and Sports Minister Miki Zohar delivered a blistering condemnation Wednesday of the government’s treatment of chareidi yeshiva bochurim, comparing the imposition of personal sanctions against Torah learners to the persecution of Yidden during the Spanish Inquisition and the expulsion from Spain.

Zohar’s remarks came amid an uproar in the chareidi community following the detention of approximately 50 young Chabad chassidim at Ben Gurion Airport on Tuesday, as they returned to Eretz Yisroel after spending time in New York. The bochurim were stopped by authorities over allegations that they had failed to comply with military draft requirements.

Speaking in an interview with Kan Reshet Bet, Zohar made clear that he considers the targeting of individuals because of their commitment to Torah learning fundamentally unacceptable.

“I am always opposed to personally targeting members of the haredi community, because in my view, this is persecution of a Jewish community that studies Torah and believes its life depends on Torah study. I am against this,” Zohar declared.

The Likud minister went further, invoking one of the darkest chapters in Jewish history to describe his opposition to punitive measures directed at the chareidi community.

“I think this reminds me of the dark days of the Inquisition during the period of the expulsion of the Jews from Spain.”

His unusually forceful comparison came as the controversy over the arrest of yeshiva bochurim continued to intensify, with chareidi representatives protesting the detention of talmidim whose military status had not been resolved.

The incident at Ben Gurion Airport involved a large group of Chabad bochurim arriving from New York. Authorities detained approximately 50 of them for questioning and processing over their draft status, releasing some while transferring others to military officials.

Reports concerning the incident indicated that 42 of the young men were formally arrested, with 40 subsequently agreeing to enlist in the IDF. The development added another dimension to the controversy, as the arrests and their aftermath became the subject of intense discussion within the chareidi community.

The airport detentions renewed criticism of the government’s enforcement campaign against yeshiva bochurim, particularly the use of arrests and personal sanctions to compel compliance with military draft orders.

Chareidi representatives have repeatedly argued that such measures amount to an attack on the ability of bochurim to continue learning Torah, while government legal officials have insisted that existing conscription requirements must be enforced.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu also weighed in on the controversy Tuesday, publicly opposing the arrests during an interview with the chareidi radio station Kol Barama.

Netanyahu argued that the continued arrest of yeshiva bochurim was counterproductive to efforts to increase chareidi enlistment through dialogue and cooperation rather than coercion.

The prime minister emphasized the importance of preserving the Torah world, crediting Torah learning with sustaining the Jewish people throughout the generations.

At the same time, Netanyahu distinguished between bochurim who devote themselves to learning and those who are not studying, maintaining that the latter should fulfill their military obligations.

He expressed hope that legislation regulating the draft status of yeshiva students could be enacted before the formation of the next government or shortly after the new Knesset convenes.

Additional details released Wednesday revealed that 40 of the 42 Chabad bochurim arrested at the airport had been released after signing declarations expressing their willingness to enlist in the IDF.

According to military officials, the 40 received suspended prison sentences. The remaining two, whom the army said had failed to comply with draft requirements for more than 540 days, were transferred directly to military prison.

The bochurim had returned from a year of learning at Chabad’s world headquarters at 770 Eastern Parkway in Crown Heights, Brooklyn. Their detention immediately upon arrival in Eretz Yisroel prompted outrage among relatives and chareidi public figures.

Rav Meir Porush, a United Torah Judaism Knesset member, condemned the arrests and said he was working with military and defense officials to help resolve the detained bochurim’s status.

UTJ chairman MK Yaakov Asher also questioned the timing of the operation, warning that the arrests could create political turmoil immediately before the elections.

Zohar, meanwhile, elaborated on his position when challenged about comparing enforcement by Israeli authorities to the Inquisition. He defended his right to express his feelings about the treatment of chareidim and argued that attempting to force enlistment without the agreement of the community’s spiritual leadership would not succeed.

Nevertheless, the minister emphasized that his opposition to coercive measures does not extend to young men who are not genuinely engaged in full-time Torah learning. He maintained that those individuals should serve in the army and that fictitious yeshiva enrollment arrangements should not be permitted.

Netanyahu’s criticism of the arrests drew sharp responses from opposition politicians Gadi Eisenkot, Naftali Bennett, and Avigdor Liberman, who accused the prime minister of yielding to chareidi political demands at the expense of equal military service obligations.

With Israel’s elections approaching, the arrests have become another flashpoint in the continuing battle over the future of yeshiva bochurim and military conscription, as chareidi representatives press for protections for Torah learners while opponents demand stricter enforcement of existing draft laws.

{Matzav.com}

French President Emmanuel Macron has accused foreign political leaders, including President Donald Trump, of exploiting the violent unrest gripping France to advance their own election campaigns, while appearing to direct similar criticism at Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

Speaking Wednesday during a visit to Qatar, Macron charged that politicians outside France were spreading misleading accounts of the riots, including claims about mass immigration and radical Islam, in an effort to influence public opinion ahead of upcoming elections.

Without initially identifying the leaders by name, Macron referred to “leaders who are in the midst of election campaigns, whether here in the region or across the Atlantic, who are innocently spreading narratives that certain circles are clearly trying to promote,” in remarks widely understood as referring to Netanyahu and Trump.

The French president expressed frustration that the unrest in his country had become a subject of political debate abroad, accusing outside leaders of using France’s domestic difficulties to promote their own agendas.

“They are using our country for their political campaigns. And we don’t need that. We already have our own difficulties to deal with.”

Macron also alleged that false and misleading information circulating about the disturbances had contributed to inflammatory statements from prominent political figures around the world.

“Information manipulation has led to comments that are both unacceptable and foolish from many people, including foreign leaders,” he said.

When reporters pressed Macron on whether his criticism was specifically aimed at President Trump, he acknowledged that the American president was among those he had in mind.

“Among others,” Macron replied.

The exchange came amid growing international attention to the violence in France, with Trump and Netanyahu both publicly linking the country’s turmoil to immigration and the spread of radical Islam.

Macron disputed the accuracy of some of the material circulating online and in international coverage, alleging that fabricated footage had contributed to exaggerated accounts of the disturbances.

According to the French president, some widely distributed videos were generated using artificial intelligence and falsely presented as authentic footage of events unfolding in French cities.

He described the material as “depicting scenes that never actually took place in France.”

Macron also rejected claims that France was experiencing a mass influx of immigrants and Islamist extremists responsible for the unrest.

“There were people who claimed that France had experienced an invasion by masses of immigrants and Islamists, a claim that is completely false,” he said.

The French president’s remarks followed a series of public statements by Netanyahu and Trump criticizing France’s handling of immigration and the spread of Islamist extremism.

In an interview with i24NEWS, Netanyahu characterized the situation in France as an invasion of radical Islam, suggesting that the country’s current difficulties reflected a broader problem confronting European nations.

Trump likewise connected the violent demonstrations to immigration, arguing that European governments had allowed individuals hostile to their host countries to enter and contribute to instability.

“When I look at France or Italy and see all the turmoil and hatred, it has nothing to do with the schools. It has to do with people entering these countries while hating the country. Close the borders and get the situation under control before it’s too late.”

The American president’s comments came as France struggled to restore order following some of the most serious street violence the country has experienced in years.

The disturbances erupted over the weekend of October 17, when nationwide demonstrations over rising living costs, deteriorating public services, and conditions in French schools descended into rioting and looting in several cities.

Paris and Marseille were among the locations affected by clashes between demonstrators and police, vandalism, and attacks on businesses and public property.

French authorities reported approximately 2,500 arrests in connection with the unrest, with hundreds of suspects facing prosecution. Police officers were also injured during the disturbances, while extensive property damage prompted demands for a stronger government response.

The demonstrations involved a broad range of participants, including students, trade unions, and members of the Yellow Vest movement, which previously organized widespread protests against economic policies and the rising cost of living.

French officials have attributed much of the violence to radical left-wing elements and individuals engaged in criminal activity, while disputing claims that immigrants or Islamist groups were principally responsible.

Macron, whose government has faced mounting criticism over its handling of the crisis, has pledged to restore public order while acknowledging the economic frustrations that initially brought demonstrators into the streets.

Authorities imposed nighttime curfews in parts of Paris and increased security deployments in anticipation of additional demonstrations scheduled for the coming weekend.

The government has also considered deploying military personnel to support police operations, although Macron has so far stopped short of declaring a nationwide state of emergency.

The French president’s criticism of Trump and Netanyahu comes at a politically sensitive time for both leaders.

Trump is campaigning ahead of the November midterm elections in the United States, where immigration and border security remain prominent issues in the Republican Party’s political messaging.

Netanyahu, meanwhile, faces Israeli elections on October 27, with security concerns and relations with foreign governments occupying a central place in the campaign.

Macron suggested that the two leaders were using France’s unrest to reinforce their own political arguments rather than accurately describe the situation on the ground.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot also addressed the controversy, indicating that Paris was prepared to provide foreign governments with information intended to correct misleading claims about the riots and discourage the spread of inaccurate material.

The dispute unfolded as Macron completed a diplomatic tour of the Persian Gulf, where he sought agreements to strengthen France’s energy supplies amid rising fuel prices.

During the visit, France secured commitments for additional diesel deliveries from the United Arab Emirates, with further supplies under discussion with Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.

The French government said the arrangements could provide more than 10 percent of the country’s monthly diesel consumption, offering some relief as rising energy costs continue contributing to public dissatisfaction.

Macron also announced plans to consult French intelligence and security officials before the next round of demonstrations, promising additional measures to prevent further outbreaks of violence.

With protests expected to resume and political tensions mounting, the French president is facing pressure both to address the economic grievances driving public anger and to prevent a repeat of the widespread destruction witnessed over the weekend.

{Matzav.com}

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani launched another attack against Israel on Wednesday after Israeli security forces detained former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander and dozens of American activists during an olive-harvesting operation near the chareidi city of Beitar Illit, accusing Israel of committing genocide and demanding the immediate release of those detained.

The confrontation prompted a pointed response from Israel’s consul general in New York, Ofir Akunis, who posted a photograph of piles of garbage on New York City streets and told Mamdani to concentrate on cleaning up his own city before criticizing Israel.

The incident unfolded Wednesday morning on agricultural land near the Palestinian village of Nahalin, adjacent to Beitar Illit, where approximately 80 American volunteers and activists had gathered to accompany Palestinian farmers during the olive harvest.

Among those participating was Lander, a political ally of Mamdani and a Democratic congressional candidate, who joined a group that included rabbis and other American volunteers.

According to the report, the activists arrived early in the morning to assist Palestinian farmers who had reportedly not harvested their land since October 7.

Approximately two hours after the group began working, Israeli security personnel arrived and presented a military order declaring the area a closed military zone for 24 hours.

Israeli security officials explained that the property was located immediately adjacent to Beitar Illit and that entry into the area required advance coordination with the military. They said the group had failed to obtain the necessary authorization.

Officials also noted that the gathering was unusually large for the relatively small parcel of land, with approximately 80 people arriving for the activity.

Security forces subsequently detained members of the group, including Lander, who was later released with a warning.

During the incident, Lander recorded himself aboard a bus alongside other activists and Israeli security personnel. He subsequently posted a message on X criticizing the detention.

“I was detained by the IDF, alongside a group of rabbis and volunteers,” Lander wrote. “We were simply harvesting olives in a grove near Nahalin in the West Bank. The occupation is a crime under international law. Harvesting olives is not a crime under any law I know.”

Mamdani responded by publicly condemning the Israeli authorities, portraying the incident as part of what he described as Israel’s broader treatment of Palestinians.

“Today, Brad Lander, rabbis, and other New Yorkers accompanied Palestinian farmers during the olive harvest. For that, they were detained by the Israeli government,” Mamdani wrote on X.

“Harvesting olives is not illegal. The occupation is,” the mayor continued. “I am grateful that Brad has been released. But other New Yorkers remain detained, and they must be released immediately.”

Mamdani then escalated his criticism, accusing Israel of genocide and citing Palestinian casualty figures from the war in Gaza.

“The same Israeli government detaining them has carried out a resounding genocide against Palestinians, killing more than 74,000 people over the past few years alone,” Mamdani declared. “The detention of these New Yorkers must end. The occupation must end. The genocide must end.”

The mayor’s accusations drew a response from Akunis, Israel’s consul general in New York, who rejected Mamdani’s criticism and turned attention to conditions in the city he governs.

Posting a photograph showing large piles of garbage on New York City streets, Akunis wrote, “First clean up your own city before you talk about Israel. The State of Israel is the home of the Jewish people—including Judea and Samaria.”

According to later reporting Wednesday evening, most of the detained activists were released, with four still facing proceedings. Israeli authorities maintained that the group had entered an area requiring advance coordination, although a Civil Administration map raised questions about whether that requirement applied to the specific location where the harvesting took place.

{Matzav.com}

Moti Leitner, chairman of the newly established Chareidi Public Party, declared Wednesday that his party will remain in Israel’s upcoming Knesset elections despite mounting pressure from Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich to withdraw its candidacy.

Leitner’s announcement comes as Netanyahu and his political allies scramble to prevent the new chareidi faction from siphoning votes away from Shas and United Torah Judaism, potentially jeopardizing the right-wing bloc’s chances of securing a parliamentary majority in next week’s elections.

“I am not withdrawing. We are not withdrawing. We are moving forward with full force, building a new political home. The monopoly of Shas and United Torah Judaism is over,” Leitner declared Wednesday evening.

The defiant statement followed a meeting Tuesday between Netanyahu and Leitner, during which the prime minister personally attempted to persuade the party chairman to abandon his independent election campaign.

Netanyahu’s office is concerned that votes cast for the Chareidi Public Party could come at the expense of the established chareidi parties and the broader right-wing bloc. Should the new faction fail to secure enough votes to cross the electoral threshold, those ballots would not translate into Knesset seats, potentially weakening Netanyahu’s prospects of forming the next government.

The party’s determination to remain in the race has consequently become a source of concern for Netanyahu’s political advisers, who have intensified their efforts to reach an arrangement with Leitner before Election Day.

One avenue being pursued involves Rav Dovid Leibel, a prominent rosh yeshiva whose influence extends to several individuals associated with the new political movement.

According to reports, representatives of Netanyahu’s office recently approached Rav Leibel’s residence in an effort to arrange a meeting between him and the prime minister.

Those efforts have thus far been unsuccessful, and no meeting has taken place.

Rav Leibel has not publicly endorsed the Chareidi Public Party, although Leitner previously expressed his desire to obtain the rosh yeshiva’s backing.

Nevertheless, several of the party’s candidates and senior figures identify themselves as Rav Leibel’s talmidim, giving him considerable influence among individuals involved in the political initiative.

Officials in Netanyahu’s office reportedly believe that Rav Leibel could play an important role in persuading the party’s leadership to reconsider its decision to contest the election independently.

Meanwhile, negotiations involving Smotrich and Leitner have reportedly intensified as additional efforts are made to secure the party’s withdrawal.

The latest discussions follow a previously reported meeting between Leitner and Omer Rachamim, a political figure involved in the contacts surrounding the new party.

Channel 14 political correspondent Moti Kastel reported that Smotrich and Leitner are engaged in accelerated negotiations aimed at reaching an agreement before the elections.

Among the proposals discussed is the possibility of holding a joint press conference with Netanyahu, providing a public platform for announcing an understanding between the prime minister and the Chareidi Public Party.

Another proposal reportedly under consideration would involve appointing Leitner to a special government position overseeing initiatives and projects relating to the chareidi community.

Such an appointment could provide Leitner with a prominent role in addressing issues affecting chareidi citizens while allowing Netanyahu to avoid the electoral risks posed by the party’s independent candidacy.

The discussions reflect the importance Netanyahu’s political camp attaches to preventing the fragmentation of the chareidi vote, particularly in an election in which a relatively small number of ballots could determine the composition of the next coalition.

For decades, Shas and United Torah Judaism have dominated chareidi representation in the Knesset, with the two parties serving as the principal political vehicles for the Sephardic and Ashkenazic chareidi communities.

Leitner’s party is presenting itself as an alternative to that longstanding arrangement, seeking to establish a separate political address for chareidi voters who believe their interests are not adequately represented by the existing parties.

Its continued participation threatens to complicate the electoral calculations of both established chareidi factions, as well as Netanyahu’s efforts to consolidate support among parties expected to join a future right-wing government.

Despite the reported negotiations, possible appointments, and personal intervention by Netanyahu, Leitner has given no public indication that he intends to accept an arrangement requiring his party to withdraw.

Instead, he has continued portraying the campaign as an effort to challenge the political dominance of Shas and United Torah Judaism and establish a new force within chareidi politics.

“The monopoly of Shas and United Torah Judaism is over,” Leitner reiterated, making clear that, as far as he is concerned, the battle for the chareidi vote is only beginning.

{Matzav.com}