Feed aggregator

Former Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit acknowledged Monday that investigators pursued certain investigative steps connected to the corruption case against Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu without his knowledge, as a heated courtroom confrontation raised new questions about whether authorities exceeded their authorization while building Case 4000.

The dramatic exchanges unfolded during Mandelblit’s second day of testimony at the Yerushalayim District Court, where Netanyahu’s attorney, Amit Hadad, challenged the former attorney general over investigative actions taken in 2017, months before formal authorization was granted to investigate the prime minister in the Bezeq-Walla affair.

Hadad presented documents, correspondence and investigative records that he argued demonstrated that Securities Authority investigators were already pursuing allegations involving Netanyahu while operating under the authority of a separate investigation into the Bezeq telecommunications company.

According to the defense, investigators used the Bezeq inquiry to gather evidence concerning Netanyahu before receiving the legally required approval to investigate a sitting prime minister.

Hadad confronted Mandelblit with a memorandum indicating that the relevant authorization process began in October 2017, several months after investigators had already collected materials that would later become central to Case 4000.

When asked whether authorization had been granted to investigate Netanyahu in June 2017, Mandelblit acknowledged that the memorandum suggested it had not.

Hadad argued that investigators had effectively developed the case without informing the official whose approval was required.

The defense attorney also questioned Mandelblit about a 2015 newspaper article alleging that Netanyahu had received favorable coverage from the Walla news website in exchange for regulatory benefits benefiting businessman Shaul Elovitch, who controlled Bezeq and Walla.

Mandelblit said he was aware of the article but could not recall whether he had read it when it was published. He acknowledged learning later that the article had helped prompt investigative interest in the allegations.

Hadad then presented records indicating that investigators had collected Walla articles and other materials connected to the allegations during the summer of 2017.

Mandelblit said he had not been informed of several of those actions and explained that an attorney general does not personally authorize every individual document collection or investigative step.

However, he emphasized that any deliberate investigation targeting a sitting prime minister would have required his approval.

The questioning also focused on emails involving former Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua and Ze’ev Rubinstein, an associate of Netanyahu and Elovitch, which investigators had reportedly obtained during the Bezeq investigation.

Hadad argued that the correspondence concerned allegations involving Netanyahu rather than the original Bezeq investigation and therefore should not have been collected without additional authorization.

Mandelblit responded that he had not approved an investigation of Netanyahu at that stage, although he stressed that he did not personally supervise the collection of every email.

The former attorney general also acknowledged that he had not been aware of certain search warrants and investigative materials presented by the defense.

Hadad questioned him about a search involving Iris Elovitch’s telephone and whether investigators had exceeded the scope of the original Bezeq inquiry.

Mandelblit said he did not recall the particular warrant and explained that the underlying Bezeq investigation did not initially fall into the category of investigations requiring his personal authorization.

Prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh strongly objected to Hadad’s interpretation, arguing that the materials were obtained as part of a legitimate investigation into Bezeq and its controlling shareholder.

She disputed the defense’s assertion that the collection of those materials constituted an unauthorized investigation of Netanyahu.

The defense also raised questions about the dates on which certain documents had been collected and subsequently entered into investigative records.

Hadad alleged that materials gathered in July 2017 were formally marked as evidence only in November, creating what the defense described as a misleading impression about when the information had actually been obtained.

Tirosh rejected the allegation that the documents had been deliberately misdated or concealed.

Another significant exchange concerned instructions reportedly issued to investigators in July 2017 directing them to avoid asking specific questions about Netanyahu or then-minister Tzachi Hanegbi.

Hadad argued that investigators nevertheless pursued information concerning Netanyahu indirectly, without explicitly mentioning his name.

Mandelblit said he had not been familiar with the particular instructions and indicated that deliberately circumventing restrictions in that manner, if established, would be problematic.

The former attorney general also faced questions about discussions involving investigators and prosecutors concerning the possibility of securing the cooperation of Shlomo Filber, a former senior Communications Ministry official who later became a state witness.

Hadad presented material concerning discussions about the potential terms of Filber’s cooperation, suggesting that investigators had considered what benefits might be offered in exchange for information.

Mandelblit said he was unfamiliar with some of the specific conversations but explained that discussions about possible cooperation agreements could involve assessing the value of information a witness might provide.

Throughout the questioning, Mandelblit repeatedly distinguished between investigative actions requiring his approval and routine investigative procedures handled by police, prosecutors and other authorized officials.

He maintained that although certain actions had not been brought to his attention, that did not necessarily establish that investigators had acted unlawfully.

Mandelblit also rejected the suggestion that prosecutors had deliberately concealed information from him, saying he would be very surprised if such conduct had occurred.

The courtroom proceedings became increasingly tense as Hadad pressed the former attorney general over discrepancies between his recollection and the investigative records.

At one point, Mandelblit complained about remarks directed toward him from individuals attending the hearing, prompting a sharp exchange with Hadad.

The confrontation eventually became heated enough that the proceedings were briefly interrupted.

Monday’s testimony followed Mandelblit’s appearance Sunday, when he acknowledged that investigators had undertaken certain serious actions without his personal approval.

The defense has sought to establish that the investigations leading to Netanyahu’s indictment were compromised by procedural irregularities and unauthorized investigative activity.

Prosecutors maintain that the investigations were conducted lawfully and that the defense is mischaracterizing investigative procedures and the scope of the approvals that were required.

Case 4000 concerns allegations that Netanyahu provided regulatory benefits to Bezeq’s controlling shareholder in exchange for favorable coverage on the Walla news website. Netanyahu has denied wrongdoing and maintains that the charges against him are unfounded.

Mandelblit, who served as attorney general from 2016 until 2022, authorized the investigations that ultimately led to Netanyahu’s indictment in Cases 1000, 2000 and 4000.

His testimony is particularly significant because he was called as a witness by Netanyahu’s defense, which is attempting to establish that critical investigative decisions were made without the knowledge or approval of the official legally responsible for authorizing investigations of a sitting prime minister.

The court has not determined that the disputed investigative actions were unlawful, and the legal significance of the evidence presented during the cross-examination remains contested.

President Donald Trump is reportedly having second thoughts about allowing the execution of convicted Fort Hood mass murderer Nidal Hasan to be broadcast live, following criticism from Republican and Democratic lawmakers and concerns raised by members of his own administration.

Hasan, a former U.S. Army major who murdered 13 people and wounded 32 others in a 2009 shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, is scheduled to be executed by firing squad on December 3. Although Trump initially supported making the execution available for public viewing, he has since indicated that he may reverse course.

According to a report published Monday by Axios, four individuals who have spoken with the president said he has privately expressed reservations about the proposed broadcast. A senior administration official indicated that Trump has received considerable “negative input” about the idea.

During a private conversation with someone outside the administration, Trump reportedly acknowledged that the livestream “might not happen.”

“He didn’t sound particularly enthusiastic” about moving forward with the broadcast, the individual said.

The controversy began Thursday when War Secretary Pete Hegseth announced that Hasan’s execution would be livestreamed, arguing that the public should witness the consequences of carrying out a mass-casualty attack against American military personnel.

Hegseth maintained that allowing Americans to watch the execution would send a powerful warning to anyone contemplating similar violence.

“We’ll make sure that people are able to watch it — that it’s public — because people need to understand that there’s serious consequences for these types of things,” Hegseth said.

Trump initially embraced the proposal when questioned by reporters Friday, offering an unequivocal endorsement.

“Absolutely, I approve,” the president said.

By Saturday, however, his position had become less definite. Speaking with reporters, Trump acknowledged that competing arguments were being presented to him and indicated that he would personally determine whether the execution should be televised.

“There are two thoughts: Don’t show it and show it,” Trump said. “By showing it, maybe other people won’t be doing what he did.”

The president’s remarks suggested that he was weighing the possible deterrent effect of a public execution against concerns about broadcasting the death of a condemned prisoner.

Vice President JD Vance also expressed uncertainty about whether the proposed livestream would ultimately take place.

“I don’t know if that’s actually going to happen,” Vance said Friday, adding that he had no intention of watching the execution himself.

The proposal has generated criticism from Republican lawmakers who support Hasan’s death sentence but question whether turning the execution into a public broadcast would serve the interests of justice.

Rep. Austin Scott of Georgia argued that the United States should not adopt practices associated with terrorist organizations.

“livestreaming executions is what jihadists do. America is better than that,” Scott said.

Rep. Rob Bresnahan of Pennsylvania similarly warned against allowing the execution to become a spectacle, emphasizing that the focus should remain on the victims and their families rather than on creating a widely viewed event.

Other Republicans defended the administration’s emphasis on accountability. Rep. Matt Van Epps of Tennessee was among those who expressed support for ensuring that Hasan faces the consequences of his actions.

The dispute has also attracted attention from religious leaders and human rights organizations, some of whom have warned that a publicly broadcast execution could undermine the dignity traditionally associated with the administration of capital punishment.

Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina called the proposed livestream “beyond disgusting,” despite supporting Hasan’s execution. Sen. John Curtis of Utah likewise argued that broadcasting a person’s death would diminish the country rather than provide an effective deterrent.

The proposal has even drawn international objections. Australian officials and lawmakers have raised concerns that footage of the execution could circulate on social media and become accessible to children. Questions have also emerged about whether major technology platforms would permit such a broadcast.

Hasan, now 56, was an Army psychiatrist stationed at Fort Hood when he carried out one of the deadliest attacks on an American military installation.

On November 5, 2009, he opened fire inside the base’s Soldier Readiness Processing Center, killing 13 people, including a pregnant woman, and wounding 32 others.

The attack shocked the military community and prompted investigations into how Hasan’s increasingly extremist views had escaped intervention before the shooting.

A subsequent Senate investigation criticized military officials for failing to adequately respond to warning signs of Hasan’s Islamist radicalization.

Hasan was convicted by a military court in 2013 of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted murder and was sentenced to death.

His execution is scheduled to take place at Fort Hood, now officially known as Fort Cavazos, on December 3.

If carried out, it would be the first execution conducted by the United States military since 1961, when Army Private John Bennett was hanged following his conviction for rape and attempted murder.

The Pentagon has confirmed that Hasan is scheduled to die by firing squad, a method approved by Trump following a recommendation from Hegseth.

Military officials have said the execution will proceed regardless of whether the administration ultimately permits the public to watch it.

The planned livestream would represent an extraordinary departure from established American execution procedures, under which attendance is generally limited to designated witnesses, including representatives of victims’ families, officials, and selected journalists.

Legal experts have also noted that Hasan could potentially seek additional judicial intervention before the scheduled execution, although the Pentagon has continued preparing for the December date.

The decision about broadcasting the execution remains unresolved, with Trump reportedly consulting advisers and weighing the objections raised by lawmakers and other officials.

A senior administration official told Axios that the president had been receiving considerable criticism of the plan, while another person familiar with his thinking said he appeared increasingly reluctant to proceed with the livestream.

The president has not publicly withdrawn his earlier approval, but his latest comments indicate that the final decision will be his.

Administration officials stressed that the debate over public access should not be confused with the decision to carry out Hasan’s sentence.

“Hasan will be executed for his crimes,” one official told Axios, “and that’s what matters.”

Afrah lepumei.

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich ignited a storm of criticism in the chareidi community on Monday after declaring that he davens for Maran Hagaon Rav Dov Landau, Rosh Yeshivas Slabodka.

The disgusting remark came during an interview at an Arutz Sheva conference in Ofra, where Smotrich, chairman of the Religious Zionist Party, discussed the ideological differences between the national-religious and chareidi communities, the controversy surrounding military conscription, and recent statements attributed to Rav Landau concerning Zionism and religious soldiers.

Asked why he had refrained from publicly responding to Rav Landau’s remarks, Smotrich explained that his silence should not be interpreted as agreement. Rather, he said, he was reluctant to enter into a public confrontation with a talmid chochom.

Smotrich invoked the warning of Chazal to exercise caution when dealing with Torah scholars, explaining that he did not believe publicly challenging Rav Landau would accomplish anything constructive.

He then added that the Rosh Yeshiva’s views caused him considerable pain and that he was praying for a change in his outlook.

“It pains me, and I pray to Hashem that He brings him, too, to repentance,” Smotrich said, referring to Rav Landau.

The statement immediately drew sharp criticism in chareidi media, where commentators expressed outrage that a government minister would speak about one of the generation’s leading gedolei Torah in such terms.

The controversy followed the release last week of recordings in which Rav Landau, 96, was heard expressing fierce opposition to Zionism and the religious Zionist worldview.

The recordings, broadcast by Channel 12 on October 5, reportedly originated from a private discussion held at the Rosh Yeshiva’s home approximately a year and a half earlier.

In the conversation, Rav Landau criticized the establishment of the State of Israel, argued that Zionism had brought serious difficulties upon the Jewish people, and rejected the religious Zionist understanding of the state’s establishment as part of the process of geulah.

The recordings also included sharp criticism of religious Zionist rabbonim and their approach to military service, particularly the participation of religious soldiers in Israel’s wars.

Those comments provoked condemnation from several Israeli politicians, including figures who accused the chareidi leadership of failing to recognize the sacrifices of religious soldiers.

Smotrich, however, initially avoided directly criticizing Rav Landau, citing his respect for Torah scholars despite his fundamental disagreement with the Rosh Yeshiva’s views.

During Monday’s interview, journalist Chagai Segal pressed Smotrich on the matter, pointing out that Rav Landau had characterized the state and its founders in exceptionally harsh terms.

Smotrich responded by distinguishing between the views of individual figures and the broader communities they represent, arguing that an entire population should not necessarily be judged by the statements or conduct of particular individuals.

When Segal emphasized that Rav Landau was a leading figure in the chareidi world, Smotrich acknowledged his distress over the remarks but reiterated that he would not engage in a direct public confrontation with the Rosh Yeshiva.

His subsequent reference to praying for Rav Landau to do teshuvah became the central focus of the controversy.

Smotrich also used the interview to level broader criticism at the chareidi community’s longstanding opposition to Zionism.

He argued that the success of the Zionist movement and the development of the State of Israel should be understood as evidence of Divine intervention in Jewish history.

“I think the chareidim are ungrateful to Hashem, and we have a sharp disagreement with them over their attitude toward the state and the process of redemption,” Smotrich said.

He went further, questioning how the chareidi worldview could remain unchanged in light of Israel’s achievements.

“I don’t understand how it is possible to be chareidi today. The Zionist enterprise has succeeded. Is there greater proof of redemption than that?” he asked.

Those statements highlighted the longstanding ideological divide between the religious Zionist movement, which generally regards the modern State of Israel as possessing religious significance, and the chareidi worldview, which rejects the identification of the secular Zionist movement with the promised geulah.

Smotrich insisted that his own ideological position was firmly grounded in Torah and would not change because of criticism from chareidi leaders.

He described the religious Zionist approach as one that combines Torah learning with participation in the practical responsibilities of national life, including military service.

Turning to the contentious issue of drafting chareidi men into the IDF, Smotrich argued that the government’s failure to advance proposed conscription legislation approximately two years ago had been a serious mistake.

According to the finance minister, the legislation could have created a framework under which thousands of chareidi men would already have entered the military with the approval of their communal leadership.

He maintained that such a framework would have allowed the government to develop a broader national program for increasing chareidi enlistment while reducing resistance within the community.

Smotrich nevertheless acknowledged that compulsory enlistment could not succeed through coercion alone.

He argued that meaningful change would require persuasion, cooperation, and an approach that recognizes the particular concerns of the chareidi population.

He also expressed appreciation for positive qualities within the chareidi community and praised those individuals who have already taken steps toward military service.

The minister’s comments come amid an increasingly heated national debate over the draft, with chareidi leaders maintaining their opposition to compulsory military service for yeshiva bochurim and government officials facing pressure to address the burden carried by serving soldiers and reservists.

The issue has become a major point of contention ahead of Israel’s November 3 Knesset elections, with parties across the political spectrum attempting to define their positions on military service, Torah learning, and the relationship between religion and the state.

The dispute surrounding Rav Landau has also drawn attention because of his central role in the leadership of Degel HaTorah and his considerable influence over the chareidi political establishment.

Earlier criticism of Rav Landau’s recorded statements prompted explanations from those close to the Rosh Yeshiva that his remarks concerning military operations were being interpreted outside their original halachic context.

Smotrich had previously addressed similar remarks by Rav Landau in July, saying at the time that he faced a difficult dilemma between the need to respond to statements he found objectionable and the obligation to show respect toward talmidei chachomim.

A federal judge in New York has ordered the Trump administration to immediately stop airing television advertisements featuring President Donald Trump that were financed with taxpayer money, handing a victory to organizations challenging the use of federal funds for what they contend amounts to political campaigning ahead of the November midterm elections.

U.S. District Judge Jennifer Rochon issued the temporary restraining order Sunday evening, directing the administration to cancel any remaining advertisements and prohibiting further government spending on the disputed campaign for the next two weeks.

The advertisements, which began appearing on television in late September, were funded through approximately $20 million allocated by the Department of Homeland Security. They featured Trump discussing his administration’s policies and accomplishments, prompting allegations that government resources were being used to promote his political agenda.

The ruling came in response to a lawsuit brought by Common Cause, a government watchdog organization, together with the Service Employees International Union Local 32BJ, its political action committee and Robert Hunter, a Democratic candidate for the Alabama state legislature.

The plaintiffs argued that the advertisements violated federal restrictions against using congressionally appropriated money for unauthorized publicity or propaganda. They also maintained that the campaign improperly blurred the distinction between official government communications and political advertising.

In granting the emergency order, Rochon prohibited the administration from entering into new agreements or extending existing arrangements connected to the advertisements.

“Defendants shall not enter into, renew, or expand any agreement authorizing the development, creation, dissemination, placement, or airing of the challenged advertisements,” the judge wrote.

The restrictions will remain in effect for 14 days while the litigation proceeds. The order does not constitute a final determination that the administration violated federal law.

The administration had argued that judicial intervention was unnecessary because the advertising campaign was already scheduled to conclude.

In a court filing submitted Saturday, Justice Department attorneys maintained that the challenged activity would end the following day, making an emergency restraining order unnecessary.

President Trump had previously defended the advertisements as a legitimate means of informing Americans about his administration’s work.

In an October 5 social media statement, Trump described the advertisements as “rather standard” and indicated that future advertising of this kind could be financed through political fundraising rather than taxpayer money.

The White House referred reporters seeking comment on the ruling to that earlier statement.

The advertisements have generated controversy because of their timing, appearing just weeks before the November 3 congressional elections, when control of Congress will be decided.

Critics contend that the commercials resemble campaign advertisements and were designed to benefit Republicans politically. The administration has maintained that the broadcasts were legitimate government communications highlighting its policies.

The dispute also concerns the source of the funding. The Department of Homeland Security used money made available for government purposes, raising questions about whether those appropriations could legally be used to produce and distribute advertisements prominently featuring the president.

The plaintiffs welcomed Sunday’s ruling, arguing that it would prevent additional taxpayer funds from being spent on what they characterize as political messaging.

“We are pleased the court acted swiftly to prevent more taxpayer dollars from being used for such blatantly unlawful political propaganda,” the organizations said in a joint statement.

The legal challenge is one of several disputes arising from the advertising campaign. The Democratic National Committee has also filed a separate lawsuit challenging the administration’s use of government resources for the commercials.

The controversy has attracted attention from both Democrats and some Republicans, with questions raised about the propriety of taxpayer-financed advertisements that closely resemble political promotions.

It remains unclear how much of the original $20 million allocation has already been spent and whether the administration will ultimately be required to account for or reimburse any of the money used.

For now, the court’s order prevents the administration from continuing the disputed advertising campaign with federal funds while the legal challenge moves forward.

Approximately 1,000 residents of Yerushalayim’s Har Nof neighborhood have signed an urgent petition demanding that Mayor Moshe Lion intervene in a massive road construction project that has turned one of the neighborhood’s busiest streets into a daily traffic nightmare, with residents warning of dangerous conditions, disappearing parking spaces and serious disruptions to thousands of frum families.

The growing protest centers on Shaulzon Street, a major thoroughfare running through the heavily populated chareidi neighborhood, where prolonged infrastructure work has created severe congestion, restricted pedestrian access and caused mounting frustration among residents and local business owners.

The situation has become particularly contentious following plans to eliminate approximately 50 parking spaces along the street to accommodate a new bicycle lane, despite an existing parking shortage in the neighborhood.

Residents argue that the decision demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of Har Nof’s needs, particularly given the neighborhood’s steep terrain, large families and heavy dependence on private vehicles.

In their petition to Mayor Lion, residents warn that removing dozens of parking spaces in an already congested commercial district would cause substantial harm to local businesses and visitors.

They maintain that the municipality is prioritizing a bicycle path that they believe is poorly suited to the neighborhood while overlooking the transportation needs of thousands of families who use the street daily.

The parking controversy is only one part of a much broader list of complaints.

Residents describe lengthy traffic jams, sidewalks closed without adequate alternative pedestrian routes, persistent dust and noise, and construction delays that have made ordinary activities increasingly difficult.

Parents navigating the area with children and strollers have expressed particular concern about pedestrian safety, while drivers say that routine trips through the neighborhood have become unpredictable and time-consuming.

Another major concern involves access for emergency vehicles. Residents fear that the severe congestion and narrowed roadways could delay ambulances, fire trucks and other emergency responders attempting to reach homes and businesses.

Local merchants have also complained that the construction is discouraging customers from visiting their establishments, particularly as parking becomes increasingly difficult and access to storefronts is disrupted.

The petition reflects growing frustration with municipal officials and neighborhood representatives, whom residents accuse of failing to adequately protect the community’s interests during the planning and implementation of the project.

The construction is part of a major infrastructure improvement initiative extending approximately 1.5 kilometers along Shaulzon Street. The project includes replacing underground infrastructure, upgrading sidewalks and street lighting, installing new street furnishings and constructing a designated bicycle lane.

Municipal planning records from earlier this year indicate that the broader Shaulzon Street bicycle path and roadway improvement initiative involves tens of millions of shekels in public spending. An April municipal document listed an estimated overall project cost exceeding 41 million shekels, with an additional allocation of approximately 11 million shekels sought for work on the western section.

The Yerushalayim municipality, responding to the complaints, defended the project as an important long-term investment in the neighborhood’s infrastructure and public safety.

City officials said the construction has been divided into six separate phases specifically to minimize inconvenience to residents and businesses.

However, the municipality confirmed that the work is not expected to be completed until September 2027, meaning residents could face nearly another year of construction-related disruptions.

The city disputed claims that parking spaces in the commercial center have already been eliminated, stating that no such spaces have been removed at this stage and that officials are continually reviewing the plans to preserve as much parking as possible.

Municipal officials also insisted that safe, accessible pedestrian routes are being maintained throughout construction and that complaints about specific hazards are addressed as they arise.

Regarding dust and noise, the city said contractors are required to follow strict procedures to reduce disturbances and remove construction debris. Nighttime work, officials added, is conducted only with authorization and may continue no later than 11 p.m.

The municipality said the project is being coordinated with the Har Nof community administration and encouraged residents to report problems through the city’s 106 municipal hotline.

The dispute has already prompted some adjustments. Following earlier complaints about transportation difficulties, the upper portion of Shaulzon Street was reopened to two-way traffic, and officials announced plans for bus route 55 to resume its regular route through the area.

Representatives of the municipality and the Moriah Jerusalem Development Corporation have also been examining residents’ complaints about the project’s impact on the neighborhood.

Nevertheless, the latest petition indicates that those measures have done little to resolve the broader dissatisfaction, particularly regarding the planned bicycle lane, the threatened loss of parking and the extended construction timetable.

For Har Nof residents, the municipality’s promise of improved infrastructure upon completion offers limited comfort as they face another year of traffic congestion, construction noise and uncertainty over the future of parking along one of the neighborhood’s central streets.

New York authorities have declined to honor more than 16,000 federal immigration detainer requests since President Donald Trump returned to the White House, involving individuals whose criminal records collectively include more than 52,000 charges or convictions, according to newly released Department of Homeland Security figures.

The statistics have intensified the confrontation between the Trump administration and New York’s Democratic leadership over sanctuary policies, with federal officials accusing state and local governments of obstructing efforts to apprehend illegal immigrants with serious criminal histories.

According to DHS, law enforcement agencies throughout New York State have refused to comply with 16,070 immigration detainer requests since January 2025. The individuals associated with those requests had accumulated 52,503 criminal charges or convictions, including allegations involving homicide, immoral offenses, kidnapping, robbery, and violent assault.

The figures represent charges and convictions rather than 52,503 separate convicted criminals, and the department did not provide a breakdown showing how many of the offenses resulted in guilty verdicts.

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin sharply criticized New York officials, arguing that restrictions on cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement have made communities less safe and forced federal agents to undertake more dangerous operations.

“While sanctuary politicians continue to release dangerous criminals onto their streets, our brave law enforcement officers will continue to risk their lives to arrest these heinous criminals and make America safe again. Illegal aliens have no sanctuary in America,” Mullin told the New York Post.

“We enforce these laws with no help from Mayor [Zohran] Mamdani and Governor [Kathy] Hochul.

“The Trump Administration is committed to protecting the American people in every city and every state, and we won’t let sanctuary politicians stand in our way,” Mullin said.

ICE detainers are requests issued to state or local authorities asking them to notify federal immigration officers before releasing an individual and to maintain custody for up to an additional 48 hours, allowing federal agents time to assume responsibility for that person.

Such requests are administrative immigration measures rather than criminal arrest warrants signed by a judge, a distinction that has become central to disputes between federal authorities and jurisdictions that limit immigration enforcement cooperation.

New York allows municipalities to establish their own policies governing cooperation with ICE, and New York City has adopted restrictions that generally prevent local law enforcement agencies from honoring many federal civil immigration detainers.

The Trump administration has designated New York a sanctuary state because of policies it argues interfere with federal immigration enforcement.

The dispute escalated further in August when Gov. Kathy Hochul signed the Local Cops, Local Crimes Act, placing additional limits on certain forms of cooperation between state law enforcement agencies and federal immigration authorities in civil immigration matters.

Supporters of the restrictions maintain that local police should concentrate on enforcing state criminal laws rather than carrying out federal immigration duties. Federal officials counter that the policies can result in individuals with serious criminal histories being released before ICE can take them into custody.

The newly disclosed DHS statistics provide a detailed picture of the criminal allegations associated with the rejected detainers.

According to the department, the records included 131 homicide offenses and 132 kidnapping offenses, along with 1,017 immoral offenses.

The figures also identified 1,561 driving-under-the-influence offenses, 1,631 burglaries, 1,776 robberies, and 2,198 weapons-related offenses.

Assault represented one of the largest categories, with 9,502 associated charges or convictions, while offenses involving dangerous drugs accounted for another 4,324.

The department did not specify whether each detainer corresponded to a different individual or whether some people were the subjects of multiple requests. Nor did the figures establish that every person associated with a detainer was ultimately released into the community.

Nonetheless, federal officials pointed to the totals as evidence that New York’s sanctuary restrictions are interfering with efforts to remove individuals accused or convicted of serious crimes.

Hochul’s administration disputed the suggestion that New York provides protection from federal immigration enforcement to individuals convicted of violent crimes.

“Governor Hochul has been clear: New York State is not and never will be a sanctuary for violent criminals,” the governor’s spokeswoman, Alexia Nizhny, said in response to the federal allegations.

“By law, New York State always notifies federal immigration enforcement of any non-citizen serving a State prison sentence,” she added.

The governor’s office argued that the Trump administration was misrepresenting the state’s record of cooperation with federal authorities.

“Any assertion otherwise is a blatant mischaracterization of the facts meant to distract from the cruelty and violence we saw from Secretary Mullin’s ICE agents earlier this week.”

According to Hochul’s office, approximately 2,000 individuals held in New York State correctional facilities have been transferred to federal immigration authorities during Trump’s current administration.

That figure, state officials contend, demonstrates that New York continues to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement in circumstances involving individuals serving state prison sentences.

The dispute concerns the distinction between those transfers and immigration detainers issued to local law enforcement agencies, particularly when an individual is otherwise eligible for release from custody.

The latest federal figures cover the period from January 20, 2025, through October 8, 2026, according to the DHS announcement released Monday. That amounts to an average of approximately 26 detainer requests going unfulfilled each day across the state.

The federal agency has not released a case-by-case accounting that would allow an independent determination of how many of the 16,070 requests involved individuals convicted of violent offenses, how many involved pending allegations, or how many people were subsequently apprehended by ICE.

The announcement follows a particularly contentious week in New York City after federal immigration officers shot Oscar Belgal, a 28-year-old Dominican migrant, during an attempted arrest in the Bronx.

ICE officials said Belgal refused instructions to leave his vehicle and attempted to escape, striking two government vehicles before accelerating toward federal agents.

An officer opened fire, striking Belgal in the neck.

Belgal’s five-year-old son was sitting in the backseat of the SUV during the encounter but escaped physical injury.

The shooting prompted demonstrations and strong criticism from Mamdani and Hochul, who questioned the conduct of the federal agents and the danger posed to the child.

Federal authorities defended the operation, pointing to Belgal’s criminal history and alleging that he had attempted to use his vehicle against officers.

Belgal survived the shooting and was subsequently taken into federal custody.

The circumstances of the confrontation remain under investigation, with competing accounts of the events preceding the gunfire.

In a separate statement Monday, Mullin accused Hochul of allowing dangerous individuals to remain on the streets despite federal efforts to take them into immigration custody.

He argued that New York’s policies had contributed to violent crimes against innocent residents and called on state officials to change their approach.

The Department of Homeland Security also pointed to its recent Operation Rotten Apple enforcement initiative, reporting that ICE arrested 2,197 individuals in New York between July 27 and August 29, including suspects accused or convicted of serious offenses.

The mayor of the Israeli city of Kfar Saba and his wife were ordered held in custody until October 19 after being arrested Monday in a sweeping corruption investigation involving allegations of cash bribes, rigged municipal contracts, organized crime figures and threats against competing businesses.

Mayor Rafi Saar and his wife, Meital, were among 17 suspects arrested during an early-morning operation by Israel Police’s Lahav 433 anti-corruption unit. Seven additional individuals were detained for questioning as investigators carried out searches at approximately 30 locations, including municipal offices, private residences and businesses.

The investigation, which had been conducted secretly for approximately a year and a half, centers on suspicions that Saar and other officials manipulated municipal tenders worth tens of millions of shekels in exchange for substantial payments from contractors and businessmen.

Police say Saar’s wife, despite holding no official municipal position, allegedly played a central role in the operation, serving as an intermediary between businessmen seeking government contracts and officials capable of awarding them.

Investigators believe contractors delivered packages containing large amounts of cash to Meital Saar, who allegedly used her influence over her husband and other municipal officials to ensure that the businessmen received lucrative contracts.

The suspected corruption extended across numerous municipal departments and projects, including sanitation services, school renovations, infrastructure improvements, urban redevelopment and the operation of food trucks.

According to investigators, when obstacles arose in awarding contracts to favored businessmen, certain projects were allegedly transferred to the municipality’s economic development corporation, whose director-general is also among those arrested.

Police suspect that the corporation’s management cooperated in directing contracts toward predetermined winners while making it more difficult for competing companies to participate.

The investigation has also uncovered suspected involvement by organized crime figures operating in central Israel. Authorities believe individuals connected to criminal organizations were used to intimidate competing contractors, including allegedly threatening businessmen to discourage them from submitting bids.

A senior police official described the alleged scheme as an extraordinary case of municipal corruption, declaring, “This is a city that was sold.”

Brigadier General Eli Makmel, who heads the National Fraud Investigations Unit, said investigators believe the mayor’s wife exercised substantial influence over municipal affairs, including appointments, dismissals and budgetary matters.

Police also suspect that some businessmen involved in the alleged bribery operation had previously assisted Saar politically, including helping mobilize support for his election campaigns.

During Monday’s raids, investigators confiscated large quantities of cash, expensive jewelry, designer handbags, luxury watches and vehicles.

Among the items reportedly seized were Rolex and Cartier watches and Prada handbags. Investigators discovered cash stored in closets, bags and vehicles, according to Israeli media reports.

Authorities are examining whether the couple’s reported lavish lifestyle, including expensive vacations and luxury purchases, was financed in part through illicit payments.

The case took a significant turn later Monday when the Rishon Lezion Magistrate’s Court ordered Saar and his wife held for eight additional days, until October 19, rejecting requests to release them while the investigation continues.

Judge Yuval Kedar determined that the evidence presented by police established substantial grounds for suspicion and justified continued detention.

According to details presented in court, investigators believe Meital Saar received money through several channels and that her husband was aware of the payments and took actions in his official capacity to benefit those providing them.

The allegations against the mayor include bribery, fraud, breach of trust, money laundering, tax offenses and conspiracy to commit a crime.

His wife faces suspicions of bribery, acting as an intermediary in bribery transactions, money laundering, tax offenses, extortion through threats and obstruction of justice.

Police told the court that approximately 135 investigative steps remain to be completed, including 85 that could potentially be compromised if suspects were released.

Prosecutors argued that Saar’s position as mayor, his relationships with other suspects and his familiarity with municipal operations created a substantial risk of interference with the investigation.

A major issue during Monday’s hearing was whether the mayor knew about the large amounts of money allegedly received by his wife.

Saar’s attorney, Micha Fettman, argued that the couple maintained separate financial arrangements and that his client was unaware of the source of certain funds held by his wife.

The defense pointed to an earlier incident involving the couple’s return from overseas, during which Meital reportedly told customs authorities that her husband did not know about money in her possession.

Investigators rejected that explanation, arguing that the supposed financial separation may have been deliberately established to distance the mayor from his wife’s activities.

Police maintained that Saar knew about the money and was aware of the explanation his wife intended to provide to customs officials.

The defense insisted that the mayor’s routine involvement in municipal contracts, committees and meetings with residents was part of his official responsibilities and did not, by itself, constitute evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

Fettman told the court that his client denied any improper conduct and was cooperating with investigators.

The judge nevertheless ruled that the evidence presented supported suspicions that the mayor and his wife had worked together, with Meital allegedly receiving improper payments and Saar taking official actions to advance the interests of those providing the money.

The court also extended the detention of several other suspects.

Eliran Dostan, who is suspected of serving as an intermediary in bribery transactions and transferring money to Meital Saar, was ordered held for an additional week. The judge said investigators had presented particularly strong evidence concerning alleged transfers of funds that would require explanation.

Two other suspects, Yanir Sudai and Ephraim Kahlon, had their detentions extended by two and three days, respectively, in connection with suspected bribery and related financial offenses.

Saar, who was first elected mayor in 2018 and is currently serving his second term, issued a public statement following his arrest, pledging to cooperate with investigators and asking residents not to reach conclusions before the facts are established.

He also announced that Deputy Mayor Dani Harosh would temporarily assume his responsibilities to ensure the municipality continues operating.

Tens of thousands of yeshiva bochurim across Eretz Yisroel returned to their yeshivos on Monday for the opening of the winter zeman, beginning an unusually long stretch of uninterrupted learning as the olam haTorah continues to grapple with the ongoing controversy surrounding the military draft of bnei yeshivos.

This year’s winter zeman will be particularly lengthy because 5787 is a Jewish leap year, with an additional month of Adar extending the period of learning until shortly before Pesach. For many bochurim, the coming months will provide one of the longest continuous periods of intensive Torah study in the yeshiva calendar.

The return to the yeshivos follows the conclusion of the Tishrei Yomim Tovim and the traditional bein hazemanim break, during which bochurim spent time with their families before returning to their regular sedorim.

Throughout the country, yeshivos have been preparing for the extended zeman, with roshei yeshiva and mashgichim emphasizing the opportunity presented by six months of sustained learning, particularly during the long winter evenings.

The winter zeman has traditionally been regarded as a particularly productive period in the yeshiva world, when the absence of major Yomim Tovim allows talmidim to devote themselves to their learning with relatively few interruptions. The additional month this year offers an even greater opportunity for growth and advancement in learning.

The beginning of the winter zeman also comes at a difficult time for the yeshiva world in Eretz Yisroel, as the unresolved military draft issue continues to cast uncertainty over thousands of bochurim and their families. Arrests of bnei yeshivos during bein hazemanim have heightened concern, with the question of military service exemptions remaining one of the most contentious issues in Israeli public life.

The return to regular learning takes place as Israel prepares for another Knesset election, with the draft controversy expected to remain a central concern for the chareidi parties. Gedolei Yisroel and roshei yeshiva have repeatedly emphasized the importance of maintaining uninterrupted Torah learning despite the political and legal uncertainty.

In many yeshivos, the extended winter zeman will include additional learning opportunities during the evenings and on Shabbosos, with particular attention devoted to strengthening hasmadah and ensuring that the momentum established at the beginning of the zeman continues through the coming months.

{Matzav.com}

Nearly two weeks after passengers aboard Flydubai Flight FZ1073 survived a terrifying attempt by a co-pilot to hijack their aircraft and crash it into Ben Gurion Airport, the airline has finally contacted those who were on board, offering psychological support and a dedicated assistance desk while making no mention of financial compensation.

The email, sent Monday to passengers who experienced the September 30 attack, has drawn criticism from survivors who question why the airline waited so long to reach out and whether its response is intended to limit its exposure to potential lawsuits.

According to a report by Israel’s Channel 12, the airline acknowledged the distress experienced by passengers and assured them that their welfare remains a priority.

“We are writing to you directly because you were on board flight FZ 1073,” the airline stated in its message. “We understand that the events surrounding the flight were distressing for passengers.”

The company continued, “While we are relieved that we were able to ensure your safe arrival on our replacement aircraft to Tel Aviv, we understand that you may have questions or concerns following the events surrounding the flight. We want to assure you that Flydubai is fully committed to providing you with support.”

Passengers were informed that the airline had established a dedicated support desk through which they could submit questions and requests for assistance.

Flydubai also offered to help passengers obtain professional psychological services if they were having difficulty accessing such assistance through their regular healthcare providers.

However, the correspondence contained no indication that the airline intends to compensate passengers for the ordeal, which began when the aircraft’s Omani co-pilot allegedly attacked the captain with an emergency axe while attempting to seize control of the plane.

One passenger who received the email told Channel 12 that its timing and contents raised serious questions about the company’s intentions.

“Flydubai’s outreach nearly two weeks after the difficult incident is surprising, and not in a good way. The feeling is that Flydubai initiated this move in a desperate attempt to limit damage from a future lawsuit, and not out of a genuine and sincere desire to help treat the passengers.”

The airline’s outreach comes as approximately 100 passengers have authorized a committee to coordinate potential legal claims arising from the attempted hijacking.

The committee, headed by Tzvika Manes, an Israeli businessman who helped overpower the attacker, has been consulting with legal professionals in Israel and is expected to explore additional representation internationally.

The passengers are considering claims against Flydubai and potentially government authorities responsible for aviation oversight. Reports have indicated that the compensation being sought could collectively reach hundreds of millions of dollars, although no final legal action or award has been announced.

The attempted hijacking occurred aboard a flight traveling from Dubai to Tel Aviv, when the co-pilot, identified as 29-year-old Omani national Hamam al-Hamami, allegedly launched a premeditated attack intended to bring down the aircraft at Ben Gurion Airport.

According to findings released Friday by the United Arab Emirates attorney general, the suspect had developed extremist beliefs years earlier and had used two previous flights to Tel Aviv to familiarize himself with the route and airport.

Investigators said the co-pilot attacked the captain with an emergency axe, inflicting serious head injuries as the captain struggled to resist and summon assistance.

Another pilot traveling aboard the aircraft noticed suspicious activity around the cockpit door and intervened with the assistance of a crew member and passengers. Together, they managed to restrain the attacker, allowing other pilots to regain control of the aircraft.

The plane was diverted to Tabuk Airport in Saudi Arabia, where it landed safely before passengers were eventually transported to Israel aboard replacement aircraft.

Emirati investigators have said the suspect confessed to planning the attack and claimed to have acted alone. Authorities are continuing to investigate whether other individuals were involved and whether additional security failures contributed to the incident.

Rep. Ilhan Omar has accused President Donald Trump of using federal law enforcement to intimidate his political opponents after Homeland Security investigators raided her Washington, D.C., residence Monday morning as part of a reported investigation into her immigration history.

The Minnesota Democrat, a prominent member of the progressive congressional group known as the “Squad,” issued a defiant statement following the search, insisting that she had done nothing wrong and accusing the administration of pursuing a politically motivated campaign against her.

“I’m ok. Make no mistake: this is an attempt to target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement,” Omar wrote on X. “For ten years, Trump has targeted me with baseless lies and smear campaigns. This is just the latest escalation in his campaign of political intimidation.”

“I will not be silenced,” the congresswoman added.

The raid took place early Monday at Omar’s home in Northeast Washington, where agents from Homeland Security Investigations, the principal investigative division of the Department of Homeland Security, executed a search warrant.

Photographs from the scene showed federal personnel entering and leaving the residence, with investigators carrying boxes of materials out of the property.

The operation reportedly began before dawn, startling residents of the surrounding neighborhood.

One neighbor described hearing a “loud banging” at the congresswoman’s door at approximately 4 or 5 a.m., followed by “a man screaming, ‘Open the door, open the door.”

The early-morning operation immediately drew attention on Capitol Hill, where Democratic lawmakers denounced the search and questioned the circumstances surrounding the federal investigation.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, another member of the Squad and a close political ally of Omar, condemned the action in a social media statement.

“DHS raiding a member of congress’s home is exactly what a fascist police state does,” Tlaib wrote on X.

Omar’s office similarly rejected any suggestion of wrongdoing, portraying the investigation as an extension of the president’s longstanding political conflict with the congresswoman.

Her spokesperson, Jacklyn Rogers, said Omar had “done nothing wrong.”

“For a decade, Donald Trump has relentlessly targeted Congresswoman Ilhan Omar with inflammatory rhetoric, repeatedly putting a target on her back,” Rogers said. “Now, those attacks have escalated to a pointless federal raid.”

The search comes amid reports that federal investigators have been examining questions surrounding Omar’s immigration records for several years, including whether inaccurate information may have appeared in documents associated with her family’s entry into the United States.

People familiar with the investigation indicated that the inquiry may involve statements allegedly made by Omar’s father during the immigration process.

The precise nature of the suspected discrepancies has not been publicly established, and authorities have not announced criminal charges against Omar.

The Justice Department has confirmed that the search was conducted under a warrant authorized by a judge, but officials have declined to disclose the precise allegations being investigated.

“Today in the Washington, D.C. area, Homeland Security Investigations executed a judicially authorized search warrant secured by the Department of Justice,” a department spokesperson said. “This enforcement action is part of an ongoing federal criminal investigation.”

The investigation reportedly focuses on immigration documents completed by Omar’s late father when she was a child. Federal authorities are examining whether those records contained false statements, although no public finding of fraud has been announced.

Questions surrounding Omar’s immigration history have been raised repeatedly by President Trump and other Republican officials, including allegations that she entered into a fraudulent marriage with her brother to obtain immigration benefits.

Omar has consistently denied those accusations, and she has never been charged with an immigration-related offense.

In September, White House border czar Tom Homan publicly acknowledged that immigration authorities were conducting an investigation involving the congresswoman.

“I’m confirming that ICE is, yeah — look, I said months ago that there’s something that’s been reported and needs to be looked at,” Homan told Fox News at the time.

Omar previously said that federal investigators had not contacted her about the matter.

Vice President JD Vance has also publicly discussed allegations concerning Omar’s immigration history, adding to the political attention surrounding the investigation.

One potential consequence being discussed is denaturalization, the legal process through which the government can seek to revoke citizenship obtained through fraud or material misrepresentation.

Such proceedings would require the government to meet demanding legal standards and would almost certainly face extensive litigation if pursued against a sitting member of Congress.

Omar, 44, was born in Somalia and came to the United States as a child after her family fled the country’s civil war. She became a naturalized American citizen in 2000, when she was 17.

She was first elected to the House of Representatives in 2018, becoming one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress and the first Somali American to serve in the chamber.

Representing Minnesota’s Fifth Congressional District, which includes Minneapolis, Omar has become one of the most outspoken progressive Democrats in Washington and a frequent critic of Trump’s immigration and foreign policies.

The timing of Monday’s search has generated additional controversy because it occurred just three weeks before the November 3 midterm elections, in which Omar is seeking a fifth term.

The Justice Department has traditionally maintained guidelines discouraging overt investigative actions involving political candidates close to an election when such steps could influence the outcome. Those guidelines do not constitute an absolute prohibition, however, and exceptions may apply depending on the circumstances.

The department has not publicly explained why investigators considered it necessary to execute the search warrant at this particular time.

Federal officials have also declined to identify the documents removed from Omar’s residence or indicate whether additional searches, interviews, or legal proceedings are planned.

No criminal charges against Omar had been announced as of Monday afternoon, and the existence of a search warrant does not establish that the congresswoman committed a crime.

The investigation now places one of Trump’s most prominent congressional opponents under direct federal scrutiny as the country approaches the midterm elections, with Omar insisting that she will continue speaking out despite the raid.

[Video below.] The United States Secret Service is deploying sophisticated artificial intelligence-powered technology to protect President Donald Trump and other senior government officials from a growing threat posed by hostile drones, including a remarkable flying interceptor capable of tracking an approaching aircraft, trapping it in a net, and bringing it to the ground.

Secret Service Director Sean Curran offered a rare demonstration of the agency’s advanced defensive capabilities during an interview with CBS News correspondent Norah O’Donnell that aired Sunday on 60 Minutes. The demonstration highlighted the agency’s efforts to prepare for a form of aerial attack that has become increasingly common on battlefields overseas and could eventually pose a serious danger at political rallies and other large public gatherings.

During the segment, O’Donnell accompanied Curran and other Secret Service personnel to an outdoor testing location in the Washington, D.C., area, where officials demonstrated several counter-drone systems intended to detect and neutralize potentially dangerous unmanned aircraft.

Among the devices on display was an unusual-looking interceptor known as a drone hunter. Resembling a large mechanical spider in flight, the aircraft uses radar and artificial intelligence to identify, pursue, and intercept other drones without requiring an operator to manually guide every movement.

Curran and Secret Service Deputy Director Matthew Quinn explained the system as O’Donnell watched a simulated aerial threat unfold above the testing field.

For the exercise, officials launched a drone representing a hostile aircraft. The interceptor located its target, maneuvered toward it, and established a tracking lock before firing a net designed to entangle the opposing drone.

The net successfully captured the simulated threat and pulled it out of the sky, bringing the aircraft down to the ground. CBS cameras also recorded footage from the perspective of the targeted drone, showing the moment it was intercepted and dragged downward.

Although the demonstration involved an unarmed aircraft, officials emphasized that the danger posed by similar drones in an actual attack could be devastating, particularly in crowded locations where security personnel must protect thousands of people simultaneously.

“The concern is that a small, rudimentary drone like this one could be weaponized with explosives and do serious damage to a large concert, sporting event, or campaign rally,” O’Donnell explained.

The Secret Service has been paying particularly close attention to developments in the war between Russia and Ukraine, where inexpensive drones have become widely used weapons capable of striking personnel, vehicles, and other targets. Officials believe the tactics and technology emerging from that conflict could eventually be employed by attackers inside the United States.

“We know that technology is going to hit the homeland at some point, so we’re using lessons learned there to build our program and make sure we’re ahead of it before it gets here,” Quinn said.

O’Donnell pressed Curran on whether the agency genuinely anticipates the possibility of drone attacks taking place on American soil.

“You mean you think drone attacks will happen here in the United States?” O’Donnell followed up.

“We have to plan for it. We have to assume that it’s possible. The second we’re not, we’re going to get caught flat-footed,” Curran said.

The demonstration was part of a broader, multimillion-dollar Secret Service initiative overseen by Quinn to develop both defensive and offensive drone capabilities. The agency is also testing fixed-wing aircraft that can remain airborne for extended periods and provide security teams with real-time surveillance of surrounding areas.

Quinn revealed that Secret Service personnel recently returned from Ukraine after observing drone warfare firsthand, gathering information intended to help American security officials prepare for similar threats.

The agency has already confronted unauthorized drone activity at major events attended by the president. According to CBS, Secret Service personnel used electronic jamming equipment to bring down a drone during the Army-Navy football game in Baltimore last December, when Trump and members of Congress were present.

Despite the advances in counter-drone technology, officials acknowledged that one particularly dangerous scenario remains unresolved: a coordinated attack involving numerous drones approaching simultaneously.

“Swarms are a huge problem and a big threat,” Quinn acknowledged during the interview. “I’d love to tell you the swarm problem is solved. It’s not. I will tell you that at the White House, White House is the safest place on Earth.”

The new defensive systems are being developed amid a dramatic escalation in threats against people under Secret Service protection. Curran disclosed that the agency has investigated approximately 10,000 threats so far in 2026, with threats involving full-time protectees increasing by more than 40 percent compared with the previous year.

The agency has also been implementing substantial security changes following the July 2024 assassination attempt against Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, where Curran was among the agents assigned to protect him. Those changes include expanded training, additional protective equipment, and new emergency medical capabilities accompanying the presidential motorcade.

Officials said the ultimate objective is to strengthen protection against increasingly sophisticated threats while allowing the president to continue appearing at public events without turning every location into an overtly militarized security zone.
WATCH:

{Matzav.com}

Former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie launched a blistering attack on fellow Republicans Sunday, accusing party leaders of engaging in “political malpractice” as they attempt to preserve their congressional majorities in the November midterm elections, and charging that loyalty to President Donald Trump has taken precedence over sound political judgment.

Appearing on ABC’s “This Week,” Christie singled out House Republican leader Tom Emmer, arguing that the party’s messaging in the final weeks before Election Day has become increasingly difficult to defend.

Christie said Republicans were undermining their own electoral prospects by defending controversial positions involving Russia, the economy and the federal government’s use of capital punishment, rather than concentrating on issues that could help them retain control of the House and Senate.

The former governor, who has frequently criticized Trump despite having supported him in the past, said he was astonished by the arguments Emmer had presented during his appearance on the program.

Christie said, “Look, as a Republican, I sat here shaking my head at the political malpractice that was committed on this air with you by Tom Emmer. Here is the Republican argument for the last three weeks. It’s OK to sell, or to buy oil from a thug, KGB dictator in Russia that will use it to kill free Ukrainians. The American people don’t get the fact that the economy is great and so when they have to pay all they have to pay at the grocery store and at the gas station, they just don’t get it. And, by the way, it’s OK to livestream a murder by the United States government executing on the death penalty. Those are our three closing arguments to try to maintain our majorities in the House and Senate. This is malpractice.”

Christie’s criticism focused in part on what he portrayed as a disconnect between the administration’s positive characterization of the economy and the financial pressures Americans continue to experience when purchasing groceries and gasoline.

He argued that Republicans risk alienating voters by insisting that economic conditions are strong while many households remain concerned about everyday expenses.

Christie also objected to the party’s positions regarding Russian oil transactions, contending that such purchases provide financial support to Russian President Vladimir Putin during the war in Ukraine.

His third criticism concerned the prospect of the federal government publicly livestreaming an execution, which Christie cited as another example of an issue he believes Republicans should not be defending as part of their closing election message.

Beyond those individual controversies, Christie suggested that a broader problem within Republican leadership was preventing officials from expressing independent positions when they disagreed with Trump.

He argued that Emmer was sufficiently experienced to recognize the political risks involved but was nevertheless unwilling to challenge the president publicly.

Christie went on to accuse Republican congressional leaders of placing their positions within the party leadership above their responsibility to speak candidly about the administration’s policies.

He added, “And the fact, Tom is smarter than that, he knows better than that, but what you heard throughout it is this absolute requirement that you must stand by everything Donald Trump says and does if you want to remain in leadership in the House or the Senate. And it is malpractice to good Republicans all across this country who care about the issues we care about and then we have guys like Tom, who know better, on the air, on his knee in front of Donald Trump as he is saying things like he said in the lead-in here that he can say the stupidest things in the world and people will believe him. It’s not true anymore.”

Christie’s remarks followed an interview in which Emmer defended Trump’s decision to permit purchases of Russian diesel in an effort to ease fuel prices. Emmer described the move as an example of the president pursuing unconventional solutions to economic problems.

During the same appearance, Emmer acknowledged that gasoline prices around $4 per gallon and diesel prices around $6 were unacceptable, while defending the administration’s broader approach to the economy and national security.

Emmer also defended Trump’s handling of the war with Iran, arguing that the president had taken necessary action against Tehran’s military capabilities and expressing confidence that the conflict would eventually be resolved.

{Matzav.com}

The cost of everyday groceries in Israel has surged by as much as 20% over the past four years, with some basic products experiencing dramatically steeper increases, including a popular chocolate bar whose price has skyrocketed nearly 78%, according to a new Tel Aviv University study released Sunday.

The research, conducted by Professor Itai Ater and doctoral student Ad Omer of Tel Aviv University’s Faculty of Management, found that grocery price increases have accelerated sharply compared with the preceding four-year period. The rate of inflation in the basket of products examined was nearly five times higher than during the previous period.

The findings underscore the growing financial pressure on Israeli households, which are paying substantially more for many of the same products they purchased just a few years ago.

Researchers tracked a fixed basket of approximately 80 consumer products across roughly 700 stores belonging to Israel’s major supermarket chains. They compared prices during two consecutive four-year periods: September 2018 through August 2022, and September 2022 through August 2026.

The study examined average monthly prices after discounts, providing a comparison of what shoppers actually paid rather than relying solely on listed retail prices.

The products surveyed covered a broad range of household necessities, including dry groceries, dairy products, coffee, chocolate, baby food, fruits and vegetables, beverages and cleaning supplies.

The sharpest overall increases by shopping format were recorded at neighborhood grocery stores, where the cost of the basket rose 19.6% over the four-year period.

Online grocery shopping was nearly as expensive in terms of inflation, with prices climbing 19%, while discount supermarket chains recorded a more moderate, though still substantial, increase of 14.5%.

A breakdown by individual supermarket chain revealed significant differences in the extent of the price increases.

Shufersal Deal recorded the largest increase among the chains examined, with the cost of the surveyed basket rising 22.7%.

Shufersal Sheli and Freshmarket followed with increases of 19.6%, while Victory registered a 16% rise.

Rami Levy, widely associated with discount grocery shopping, recorded an increase of 10.3%, while Yochananof had the smallest increase among the chains listed, at 8.5%.

The differences indicate that consumers experienced considerably different levels of grocery inflation depending on where they shopped, even when purchasing the same basket of products.

Some individual items experienced increases far exceeding the overall average, with chocolate emerging as one of the most striking examples.

A 100-gram bar of Elite milk chocolate, popularly known in Israel as Parah chocolate, rose from an average of 5.21 shekels to 9.26 shekels in neighborhood stores.

That represents an increase of 77.9% in just four years.

Even at discount supermarkets, where prices generally remained lower, the same chocolate bar became 57.6% more expensive, climbing from 4.93 shekels to 7.77 shekels.

Other familiar grocery items also recorded significant increases.

A package of Maadanot cheese bourekas rose 30.9% in neighborhood stores, from 19.15 shekels to 25.07 shekels.

A 200-gram jar of Taster’s Choice coffee increased 26.1%, with its average price climbing from 31.40 shekels to 39.60 shekels.

Sug at jasmine rice, sold in one-kilogram packages, became 17.7% more expensive at discount supermarkets, rising from 9.72 shekels to 11.44 shekels.

That increase was particularly notable because the price of the same rice product had actually fallen 10.5% during the preceding four-year period.

The researchers identified several economic factors that may have contributed to the widespread price increases, including higher value-added tax, rising municipal property taxes and increased electricity and water costs.

These expenses can affect food manufacturers, distributors and retailers, potentially contributing to higher prices for consumers.

At the same time, the researchers pointed to the strengthening of the Israeli shekel as a factor that could help moderate price increases, particularly for imported products and raw materials purchased abroad.

Beyond the broader economic pressures, the study’s authors suggested that food companies have taken advantage of the limited attention being devoted to the cost-of-living crisis by the government and the public.

According to their assessment, the lack of sustained political and public scrutiny has created an environment in which manufacturers and retailers have been able to increase prices with relatively little resistance.

The findings also raise questions about the effectiveness of competition in Israel’s grocery market, given the substantial differences in price increases among supermarket chains.

For consumers, the cumulative effect is considerable. A shopping basket that cost 500 shekels four years ago would now cost approximately 600 shekels if its price increased by 20%, even though the shopper would be purchasing the same products.

For families making several substantial grocery purchases each month, those increases can translate into hundreds of additional shekels in household expenses.

{Matzav.com}

The political campaign against the chareidi community over the military draft is losing its effectiveness as Israeli voters increasingly shift their attention toward national security and economic concerns, according to political analyst Matti Tuchfeld, who also believes that chareidi parties have few realistic alternatives to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu despite their reluctance to commit publicly to supporting him.

Speaking with Avi Mimran on Kol Chai’s main news program, Tuchfeld, a political commentator for Channel 14, argued that the political atmosphere has changed significantly in recent weeks, leaving parties that continue to make chareidi military enlistment the centerpiece of their campaigns increasingly disconnected from the issues driving voters.

Tuchfeld also discussed Netanyahu’s recent warnings about the electoral balance between the right and left, explaining that the prime minister is particularly concerned about votes going to smaller right-wing parties that may fail to cross the electoral threshold, as well as relatively low voter turnout in traditional Likud strongholds.

Addressing the relationship between Netanyahu and the chareidi parties, Tuchfeld acknowledged that MK Yaakov Asher and other United Torah Judaism representatives have carefully avoided making firm commitments to the prime minister ahead of the elections. Nevertheless, he argued that the political realities leave them with limited room to maneuver.

He recalled that chareidi parties had previously participated in governments headed by Labor and other parties outside the right-wing bloc, including administrations led by Yitzchak Rabin, Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert.

According to Tuchfeld, however, the Israeli left has undergone a fundamental ideological transformation that makes such partnerships considerably more difficult today.

“Today’s left is a left that is entirely progressive, anti-Jewish, anti-traditional,” he said, characterizing what he views as the movement’s departure from the positions held by previous generations of left-wing leaders.

Tuchfeld maintained that the political preferences of chareidi voters have also changed, with many now identifying more strongly with the right-wing bloc and favoring Netanyahu over other candidates for prime minister.

“They, too, expect the right, and they, too, prefer Netanyahu over all the other candidates,” he said.

As a result, Tuchfeld argued, chareidi elected officials have considerably less freedom to explore alternative political alliances than they once did, although he did not rule out the possibility entirely.

The discussion then turned to the ongoing controversy surrounding the drafting of yeshiva bochurim, an issue that has dominated Israeli political debate and become a central campaign theme for several opposition figures.

Mimran pointed to an apparent contradiction between the prominence of the draft issue in political advertising and its relative importance to voters. According to the polling trends he cited, the matter ranks only fourth or fifth among voters’ concerns, well behind security and the economy.

Tuchfeld explained that the campaign targeting the chareidi community had initially proved highly effective, particularly among certain segments of the right-wing and religious Zionist electorate.

“What we are seeing now is actually the final days of the anti-chareidi campaign, which was very, very successful,” he said.

He suggested that the messaging had been especially influential among right-leaning voters in communities such as Ra’anana and Elkana, where military service and the demand for equal participation in the national defense burden had become particularly important political issues.

According to Tuchfeld, former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett had also adopted this approach as part of his efforts to appeal to those voters.

The political analyst argued, however, that the issues dominating the national conversation have since changed substantially.

Security developments, including the attempted takeover of a Flydubai passenger aircraft that narrowly avoided disaster, have redirected public attention toward questions of national defense and leadership.

Tuchfeld also credited Netanyahu with working to shape the political agenda around security concerns rather than allowing the opposition to dictate the terms of the election campaign.

Another factor, he said, is polling that suggests parties opposed to Netanyahu would struggle to establish a governing coalition without the participation or support of Arab parties.

Together, these developments are, in Tuchfeld’s assessment, weakening the effectiveness of a campaign centered primarily on opposition to exemptions from military service for chareidi yeshiva students.

He argued that the number of voters choosing a party principally because of its promise to draft chareidim is declining.

“Those who are still trying to continue along this line are simply not up to date,” he said.

“They are relying on polls and a political agenda from two or three months ago. They do not understand that the public mood has changed completely.”

The interview also examined Netanyahu’s recent remarks at a Likud conference, where he warned party activists that the election could produce an evenly divided political map, with 60 Knesset seats on each side.

That warning appeared to contrast with polling presented by political strategist Shlomo Filber, whose surveys have suggested a more favorable position for the right-wing bloc.

Tuchfeld explained that Netanyahu’s comments were intended primarily to mobilize party activists and impress upon them the importance of maximizing every available vote.

According to his analysis, Filber’s polling does not show Yaron Zelekha and Ofer Winter crossing the electoral threshold. If those parties are instead assumed to enter the Knesset, the resulting distribution of seats becomes more similar to other surveys, in which neither bloc possesses a clear governing majority.

Tuchfeld said Netanyahu’s warning was therefore aimed partly at preventing right-wing votes from being lost to smaller parties that might ultimately fail to win Knesset representation.

“There are three seats there that we have to bring in. Three seats with Zelekha and Winter,” he said, explaining the message Netanyahu was seeking to convey to Likud candidates.

A second major concern, according to Tuchfeld, is voter participation in areas traditionally associated with the political right.

He noted that turnout in some right-wing strongholds has historically been lower than the national average, creating a potential obstacle for Netanyahu even when public opinion appears favorable to his bloc.

In that context, Tuchfeld pointed to the joint campaign operation established by Likud and Religious Zionism to encourage their supporters to vote.

“There is a very big difference, really, between defeat and victory, if sixty percent of the right-wing districts come out or seventy percent of the right-wing districts come out,” he said.

“That is something that can tip the scales, and that is what Netanyahu now wants to do.”

Tuchfeld identified a third message Netanyahu is attempting to emphasize in the closing stages of the campaign: the possibility that a government opposed to him could depend on Arab parties for parliamentary support.

According to Tuchfeld, internal examinations conducted by Likud suggested that some voters regard such an arrangement as undesirable but do not necessarily consider it a decisive reason to oppose the alternative coalition.

He said Netanyahu wants Likud representatives to place greater emphasis on that possibility during television appearances and through social media.

The prime minister’s message, as described by Tuchfeld, includes warnings about the political concessions and financial commitments that Arab parties might demand in exchange for joining or supporting such a government.

Among the concerns Netanyahu wants highlighted are the possibility of “massive budget transfers” as a condition for Arab-party participation in a coalition arrangement.

Tuchfeld said the prime minister is seeking to ensure that Likud candidates deliver a consistent message on these issues during the remaining weeks of the election campaign.

“These are the things he is asking for this evening, in order to align the campaign during the two weeks and a bit that remain,” Tuchfeld concluded.

MK Yaakov Asher, the newly appointed chairman of United Torah Judaism, has spoken publicly for the first time about replacing longtime party leader MK Moshe Gafni, emphasizing his deep respect for his predecessor, his commitment to following the decisions of the Gedolei Yisroel, and his determination to preserve unity within Degel HaTorah despite the controversy surrounding the leadership transition.

In an interview with Kikar HaShabbat, Asher addressed the sensitive circumstances surrounding Gafni’s departure from the leadership position, declining to engage in disputes over how the veteran politician was informed of the change and insisting that Gafni remains an important figure whose experience and guidance will continue to benefit the party.

The leadership change has generated considerable discussion within the chareidi community, particularly given Gafni’s decades of political leadership and his prominent role in representing the interests of the Torah community in the Knesset.

Asked how frequently he now meets with Gafni, Asher stressed that their relationship continues and that he expects them to remain in regular contact.

“We see each other at various events, we meet in the office, and at election events, and we will continue meeting. His office was next to mine, the same office where he sat. As far as we are concerned, he is the chairman of the Degel HaTorah movement. He is a symbol, an example, someone we learned from, someone who brought us into politics,” Asher said.

The interview also touched on one of the most controversial aspects of the transition: reports concerning letters allegedly sent through the mail in connection with Gafni’s removal from the leadership position.

Rather than address the accuracy of those accounts or discuss the internal circumstances surrounding the decision, Asher made clear that he had no intention of becoming involved in the dispute.

“I am not getting into those matters. I ask you not to bring me into these things. There are issues here that I do not want to get into. Whether they are true or not true, I am not entering that argument,” he said.

Asher instead emphasized that the leadership change was determined by the Gedolei Yisroel, whose decisions guide the political representatives of Degel HaTorah.

He said that the party’s longstanding approach, which Gafni himself had taught its representatives, requires elected officials to wait for the direction of the Gedolei Torah rather than regard themselves as candidates for leadership before receiving their approval.

“I will say one thing, and this is something Rav Gafni taught us: Until the Gedolei Torah announce who the candidate is, we are not candidates at that stage. On the day they decide, and they make their decision based on their own considerations, which they explained in the best possible way, there is no blemish whatsoever,” Asher said.

The incoming chairman’s remarks appeared intended to address concerns that the transition could create divisions within Degel HaTorah, particularly among supporters who have long identified Gafni with the party’s political leadership.

Throughout the interview, Asher avoided criticizing his predecessor and repeatedly highlighted Gafni’s contributions, portraying the veteran lawmaker as a source of experience and guidance rather than someone whose role in the movement had ended.

Asher concluded with an explicit message of reconciliation, promising to continue consulting Gafni and expressing hope that the party’s members would ultimately celebrate together.

“We have only what to learn from Rav Gafni, only to continue consulting with him and benefiting from his assistance, and with Hashem’s help, that is what we will do. With Hashem’s help, at the victory celebration, we will all dance together, a genuine dance,” he said.

{Matzav.com}

Passengers aboard the Flydubai flight that was nearly hijacked en route to Israel during Chol Hamoed Sukkos are organizing a major international legal effort, with potential compensation claims reaching hundreds of millions of dollars against the airline, the State of Israel and other parties that may bear responsibility for the incident.

According to a report by Calcalist, approximately 100 of the 174 passengers aboard the flight have already signed powers of attorney authorizing a newly established committee to represent their interests as preparations for possible litigation move forward.

The committee is headed by Tzvika Mans, CEO of the underwriting firm Barak Leumi, who was among the passengers who helped overpower the copilot during the attempted takeover of the aircraft.

Other members include attorney Tal Eisenberg, who resides in Singapore, and passengers Daniel Schlichter, Itai Perlman and Shir Maor.

The group has begun consulting with Israeli law firms and plans to meet with international legal firms before selecting the attorneys who will represent the passengers in what could become a complex, multinational legal battle.

The potential claims are expected to examine the circumstances that allowed the attempted hijacking to occur, the airline’s responsibility for the actions of its crew member, and whether government agencies or aviation authorities failed to meet their legal obligations.

According to the report, the passengers are considering claims not only against Flydubai and Israel but also against aviation and transportation authorities in the United Arab Emirates and potentially other countries.

The possibility of pursuing legal action in additional jurisdictions is being examined partly because some of the passengers hold foreign citizenship, potentially creating additional avenues for compensation claims.

Attorneys are also expected to examine whether the aviation agreements governing flights between Israel and the United Arab Emirates were properly observed.

At this stage, however, the matter remains under preliminary legal review, and no determination has been made that any aviation agreement was violated.

The passengers’ organized effort began shortly after the aircraft returned to Israel, when a WhatsApp group was established to connect those who had experienced the terrifying ordeal.

As discussions developed, approximately 70 passengers approached Mans and asked him to coordinate the legal response on their behalf.

A formal committee was subsequently established, and participation has continued to grow, with roughly 100 passengers now granting authorization for the committee to act in their interests.

The remaining passengers are still considering whether to join the coordinated effort or pursue separate legal action.

Once consultations with attorneys in Israel and abroad are completed, the committee intends to present its recommendations to the passengers, who will then determine how to proceed.

The legal preparations follow the dramatic attempted hijacking aboard a Flydubai flight that departed Dubai for Tel Aviv during Chol Hamoed Sukkos.

According to accounts of the incident, passenger Tali Mans heard screams coming from the cockpit and alerted other passengers to the emergency.

When passengers rushed to investigate, they discovered that the copilot was attacking the captain with a knife.

Several passengers intervened and managed to subdue the attacker, preventing him from maintaining control of the cockpit.

Among those involved in the emergency response was passenger Yaniv Chayon, who helped stabilize the aircraft during the crisis.

Another pilot who happened to be traveling aboard the flight subsequently assisted in bringing the aircraft safely down in Saudi Arabia.

The passengers later returned to Israel following the emergency landing.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli police arrested a prominent mayor in central Israel and his wife Monday morning as part of a sweeping corruption investigation involving allegations of cash bribes, manipulated municipal tenders, money laundering and possible connections to organized crime. A total of 24 suspects were arrested or detained in coordinated raids following a secret investigation lasting more than a year.

Among those taken into custody were the head of a large municipality in central Israel, his wife and the CEO of the municipality’s economic development corporation. Police suspect that municipal officials accepted substantial cash payments in exchange for steering lucrative public contracts to favored businesses and individuals.

The investigation is being conducted by the National Fraud Investigations Unit, known by its Hebrew acronym YACHA, within Lahav 433, Israel’s national police unit responsible for investigating major corruption and organized crime.

Investigators moved into the public phase of the operation early Monday, carrying out simultaneous raids at the homes of suspects, municipal offices and various business establishments.

According to police, 17 individuals were arrested and seven others were detained for questioning. Officers also seized cash, assets and other property that could potentially be confiscated as part of future legal proceedings.

The arrests followed more than 12 months of undercover investigative work, during which police reportedly employed sophisticated technological surveillance, intelligence gathering and other investigative methods to establish the basis for the suspected criminal activity.

Authorities are investigating possible offenses including bribery, fraud, breach of trust, money laundering and tax violations.

At the center of the investigation is an alleged arrangement in which the mayor and the head of the municipal economic corporation used their positions to benefit certain contractors and business interests in exchange for illegal payments.

Investigators believe the mayor’s wife also played a significant role in the suspected bribery operation, with police describing her alleged involvement as particularly prominent.

Under the suspected arrangement, individuals seeking municipal contracts allegedly provided cash bribes, frequently delivered in envelopes, in return for preferential treatment in the bidding process.

Police believe the payments helped secure the awarding of valuable municipal tenders across several areas of activity under the local authority’s jurisdiction.

The investigation has also uncovered suspicions that known criminal figures operating in central Israel participated in the alleged scheme.

According to police, individuals associated with organized crime may have been involved, directly or indirectly, in arranging or facilitating the transfer of bribe money over an extended period.

Investigators are examining whether these criminal elements helped influence the awarding of municipal contracts and whether their involvement extended beyond financial misconduct.

Authorities are also investigating allegations that acts of violence were committed in connection with the affair, potentially adding another serious dimension to the corruption case.

The suspected involvement of organized crime figures has raised additional concerns about the possible penetration of criminal networks into municipal decision-making and the distribution of public contracts.

The investigation is being supervised by the Economic Department of the State Attorney’s Office, which is overseeing the legal aspects of the case as police continue gathering evidence.

All 24 suspects were taken for questioning at the National Fraud Investigations Unit’s offices at Lahav 433 headquarters.

Police are expected to ask the Rishon Lezion Magistrate’s Court later Monday to extend the detention of the principal suspects while investigators continue examining the evidence and their alleged roles in the scheme.

The identity of the mayor and the municipality involved have not yet been disclosed.

{Matzav.com}

The president of the International Committee of the Red Cross has acknowledged that more aggressive efforts to secure an agreement for the release of Israeli hostages held by Hamas could have saved additional lives, an admission that comes after years of criticism over the humanitarian organization’s failure to obtain access to the captives.

Mirjana Spoljaric, who heads the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), made the comments in an interview with The New York Times published Saturday, reflecting on the prolonged negotiations that followed Hamas’s October 7, 2023, massacre and abduction of Israelis into Gaza.

Looking back at the diplomatic efforts to arrange a ceasefire and secure the hostages’ freedom, Spoljaric said she believed that “pressure should have come earlier in the negotiations”, adding, “We could have saved more lives.”

Her acknowledgment comes against the backdrop of repeated complaints from former hostages and their families, who have accused the Red Cross of failing to provide meaningful assistance to Israelis held in Hamas captivity, many of whom endured starvation, physical abuse and prolonged confinement in underground tunnels.

Spoljaric explained that securing freedom for abducted individuals becomes progressively more challenging as their captivity continues, making the timing of negotiations particularly important.

Referring to hostage crises generally, including the abductions carried out during the October 7 attacks, she observed that “the longer it takes, the more complicated it becomes,” she explained.

The Red Cross president was also questioned about the organization’s inability to visit the Israeli hostages while they were being held in Gaza, an issue that became a major source of anger among the families of those abducted.

In her response, Spoljaric argued that arranging humanitarian visits to people held hostage presents different obstacles from negotiating their eventual release.

She responded that “visiting hostages is much more complicated than bringing them back.”

Spoljaric stressed that Hamas should never have made the hostages’ freedom dependent upon negotiations or political concessions, maintaining that their release should have occurred immediately and without conditions.

According to her, the hostages “should have come back unconditionally as of Day 1. But that’s not the reality in which we operate, and so we have to work with the tools that we have.”

She also pointed to situations in which Red Cross employees themselves have been abducted, saying those experiences have reinforced the organization’s understanding of the urgency involved in resolving hostage crises.

“We know that also because our own colleagues find themselves more often than they should in such situations, and we know how important it is to negotiate them out as quickly as possible. So the objective always has to be to bring the hostages back.”

During the war, Spoljaric personally participated in sensitive diplomatic contacts aimed at facilitating an agreement, including separate meetings with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, who was subsequently eliminated by Israel.

Her discussions with Haniyeh were held in Qatar, which played a central role in mediation efforts involving Israel and Hamas.

Although she declined to disclose the substance of those conversations, Spoljaric maintained that Red Cross officials had spoken forcefully behind closed doors.

“These were tough discussions, and trust me, we are very frank in these meetings. This is why these meetings have to always remain confidential,” she told The Times.

The interview revisits a controversy that dogged the Red Cross throughout the Gaza war, as the organization repeatedly failed to secure direct access to the Israelis held by Hamas.

In December 2023, Spoljaric visited the Gaza Strip amid expectations that she would seek permission for Red Cross representatives to examine the condition of the hostages and facilitate humanitarian assistance.

Following the visit, however, she released a video lasting nearly two minutes that concentrated overwhelmingly on the humanitarian crisis affecting Gaza’s civilian population. The Israeli hostages received only a brief mention toward the end of the recording, prompting additional criticism of the organization’s priorities.

The controversy intensified in January 2024, when the Red Cross announced that it would not participate in delivering medications that had been brought into Gaza for Israeli hostages and would not verify whether the medicine ultimately reached those for whom it was intended.

The announcement raised further concerns among relatives of the captives, many of whom had serious medical conditions or required ongoing treatment, with families unable to determine whether their loved ones were receiving essential medications.

As additional hostages were released, firsthand accounts of their experiences brought renewed scrutiny to the Red Cross and other international humanitarian organizations.

Several survivors publicly questioned why they had received no visits or assistance from Red Cross personnel throughout their captivity, despite the organization’s internationally recognized role in providing humanitarian protection during armed conflicts.

Among the most outspoken critics was former hostage Eli Sharabi, who addressed the United Nations Security Council in March 2025 after surviving 491 days in Hamas captivity.

Sharabi described the brutal conditions in which he had been held and challenged the international community over its failure to intervene on behalf of the hostages.

“Where was the Red Cross when we needed them? Where was the United Nations? 491 days of torment. 491 days of starvation, of being chained underground. The civilians saw us suffering, and they cheered our kidnappers. They were definitely involved.”

Sharabi also reminded the Security Council that dozens of Israelis were still being held in Gaza at the time of his testimony, emphasizing that his own release did not bring an end to the crisis.

“I am here today because I survived. But survival is not enough. Not when 59 are still held captive in Hamas tunnels in Gaza. I was freed less than six weeks ago and I come here to the UN with a simple message. Bring them all home.”

Another former hostage, Ohad Ben Ami, delivered similarly forceful criticism during an address to the German Parliament that same month.

Ben Ami, who had also spent 491 days in captivity, said he had never encountered a Red Cross representative while being held by Hamas and questioned why the organization had still not obtained access to those who remained in Gaza.

“During the 491 days of my captivity, we didn’t see anyone [from the Red Cross]. Now, 536 days have passed, and no one from the Red Cross has seen them either! This is an international organization, and someone from it should see the 59 hostages still held in Gaza and report their condition to the world.”

Ben Ami also described the emotional torment caused by the complete absence of reliable information about the hostages’ physical condition, medical needs and chances of survival.

He recalled the psychological abuse inflicted by Hamas terrorists, who sought to convince their captives that Israel had abandoned them and that their lives depended entirely on the decisions of their captors.

“Are they alive? Are they dead? Do they need medicine? Are they being cared for? You’re down there [in the tunnels], and they subject you to psychological terror: ‘Your government doesn’t want you,’ ‘You’re nothing,’ ‘When we decide, you’ll die,’ ‘Your Israeli army wants you dead so they don’t have to pay the price of a deal.’ And in that situation, you have to maintain your mental health.”

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump announced Sunday that Katie Zacharia, his newly selected White House press secretary, officially begins her duties today, October 12, and will make her first appearance before reporters at a White House news conference Tuesday morning.

Zacharia, an attorney and communications professional who has worked for the Trump administration, the president’s political campaigns and Trump Media & Technology Group, succeeds Karoline Leavitt, who left the position at the end of August to devote more time to her family.

Trump confirmed the schedule in a social media announcement Sunday, specifying that Zacharia’s introductory briefing will take place in the White House Press Briefing Room at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday.

“I am pleased to announce that Katie Zacharia will be beginning her term as Press Secretary tomorrow, Columbus Day, and will be doing an introductory News Conference on Tuesday at 9:30 A.M. from the Press Briefing Room in the White House,” Trump wrote.

The president also expressed confidence in Zacharia’s ability to represent his administration and communicate its policies to the American public.

He added, “Katie has been with me, in spirit, from the very beginning, and will do a fantastic job!”

Sunday’s announcement followed Trump’s formal selection of Zacharia on Friday, when he revealed that she would be taking over one of the administration’s most visible communications positions.

In introducing his new press secretary, Trump emphasized her legal training, government communications experience, television appearances and participation in his presidential campaigns. He also praised her longstanding loyalty to his political agenda.

“It is my Great Honor to have just appointed, as Press Secretary, Katie Zacharia. Katie currently serves as Senior Communications Advisor to Truth Social (Trump Media & Technology Group), where she has been outstanding! A native of California, Katie previously served as Spokesperson and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs at the Department of Homeland Security. Katie is a distinguished Graduate of Pepperdine University, and the Pepperdine Caruso School of Law, an attorney, and a frequent Commentator on outlets, including Fox News and Newsmax. She was previously involved in my Campaigns, assisting in key Swing States, where we won 7 out of 7. She has an unblemished record of support, and has been a loyal and brilliant supporter, right from the beginning. She is, likewise, a devoted fan and member of MAGA! I am confident that Katie will deliver strong results for our Country as the next White House Press Secretary, as she has the respect of, and will work fantastically with, the Media, the American People, and my Administration. Katie is replacing the fabulous Karoline Leavitt, who did a fantastic job as Press Secretary. Good luck Katie!”

Before accepting the White House position, Zacharia served as a senior communications adviser to Truth Social, the social media platform owned by Trump Media & Technology Group. Her responsibilities placed her within the communications operation of a company closely associated with the president.

Originally from California, Zacharia earned degrees from Pepperdine University and its Caruso School of Law and is a practicing attorney. She has also established a public profile through appearances as a political analyst and commentator on Fox News and Newsmax.

Her previous government experience includes serving as a spokesperson and deputy assistant secretary for public affairs at the Department of Homeland Security. She departed that agency in March before subsequently taking on her communications role with Trump Media.

Zacharia also worked on Trump’s presidential election efforts, including activities in politically competitive battleground states. Trump credited her with contributing to campaign operations in the seven swing states that he carried.

Her appointment marks another transition in the White House communications office following Leavitt’s departure, which Trump first disclosed in August.

At the time, Trump announced that Leavitt would be leaving her position at the end of that month, explaining that she wanted to spend additional time with her children and family.

The president spoke warmly of his departing spokeswoman, describing her as “one of my most trusted aides”, and saying she “will be departing her role at the end of the month so she can spend more time with her beautiful young children and family, a decision I totally understand and respect!”

Leavitt is now expected to move into television commentary, with plans to begin appearing as an on-air contributor for Fox News Channel on November 1.

{Matzav.com}

Iran has declared that Washington’s response to its seven conditions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz falls short of its demands, raising fresh doubts about prospects for a diplomatic breakthrough as President Donald Trump considers the possibility of renewed military action against Tehran.

Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said Sunday that the United States had agreed to certain Iranian demands but had failed to provide satisfactory answers on others. His comments, carried by Iranian state media, came as Qatar continued facilitating indirect communications between the two countries.

The disagreement centers on a proposal Tehran presented during the United Nations General Assembly in September. Under that proposal, Iran offered to restore normal maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz within seven days, provided Washington agreed to seven conditions established by the Iranian government.

The United States subsequently communicated its position through Qatari intermediaries, but Iranian officials say the response left several important questions unresolved.

Rezaei insisted that Iran would maintain its restrictions on American access to the strategically important waterway until its requirements were fulfilled.

“We presented seven conditions to the Americans and clearly stated that the Strait of Hormuz would not be opened to them, and no negotiations would take place, until these conditions are met.”

According to Rezaei, the next diplomatic move must come from Washington, with Tehran awaiting clarification rather than preparing another round of proposals.

Iran is “no longer in the process of responding to the Americans”, Rezaei said.

“In their response, they have accepted some of our conditions, while others remain unclear,” he added.

The White House did not immediately provide a comment when contacted by Reuters regarding the Iranian official’s statements.

The latest developments follow Tehran’s disclosure in late September that it had received an American reply concerning efforts to restore the Gulf ceasefire that had previously collapsed.

That acknowledgment came only days after Trump publicly announced that he had turned down Iran’s proposed arrangement, underscoring the substantial differences that continue to separate the two governments.

Qatar, working alongside other regional mediators, has remained involved in transmitting proposals and responses between Washington and Tehran. Those diplomatic efforts are intended to establish a framework for ending the conflict and restoring shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital passage for international energy shipments.

Despite the ongoing exchanges, neither government has announced an agreement, and the dispute over Iran’s conditions remains unresolved.

At the same time, the Trump administration is weighing its military options while continuing to leave room for a negotiated resolution.

On Thursday, Trump announced that American forces would refrain from launching additional attacks against Iran ahead of the November 3 congressional midterm elections, providing a temporary period for diplomatic efforts to continue.

“We are having productive discussions with the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The president nevertheless portrayed the Iranian government as being under considerable economic and military strain, making clear that the United States would maintain pressure on Tehran as negotiations continued.

Trump returned to the subject during an appearance at the White House on Friday, expressing confidence that the conflict would conclude in the near future.

He suggested that Washington possessed the means to bring the confrontation to an end either through a diplomatic agreement or through additional military action.

He added, “We can do it either way, but it’s very simple – one way or another it’s gonna be over soon.”

The president’s decision to hold off on further strikes until after the midterm elections has not prevented American defense officials from preparing for the possibility that negotiations will fail.

According to a report published Thursday by The New York Times, Pentagon planners have developed military options for another major offensive targeting Iranian military capabilities and infrastructure.

The potential targets reportedly include missile facilities, drone installations, energy infrastructure and other strategically significant sites connected to Iran’s military operations.

Individuals familiar with the planning said the proposals contemplate a concentrated offensive extending over approximately three days.

The reported preparations indicate that Washington is preserving the option of a substantial military response even as regional intermediaries continue their efforts to resolve the confrontation through negotiations.