Feed aggregator

Sen. Ted Cruz is warning that the election of Michigan Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed could create an extraordinary national security threat, alleging that the candidate’s family connections to the Muslim Brotherhood raise serious questions about whether he should be entrusted with classified American intelligence.

The Texas Republican delivered the warning Wednesday during an episode of his “Verdict” podcast, where he argued that El-Sayed’s election could potentially give him access to highly sensitive information concerning American military operations, intelligence activities, and national security planning.

“If he wins, I believe that poses an unprecedented national security risk,” Cruz told podcast co-host Ben Ferguson.

Cruz said his concerns stem in part from the possibility that El-Sayed could eventually serve on the Senate Intelligence Committee or Armed Services Committee, both of which receive sensitive briefings and oversee matters involving the military and intelligence community.

“I believe if Abdul El-Sayed has access to that classified material, that it will endanger the lives of service men and women,” Cruz said.

The senator emphasized that members of Congress do not undergo the same executive-branch security clearance procedures required of many government employees before obtaining access to classified information. Congressional access to such material is nevertheless governed by separate institutional rules and restrictions.

Much of Cruz’s criticism centered on El-Sayed’s recent appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” during which moderator Kristen Welker questioned him about possible connections between himself, his family, and the Muslim Brotherhood.

El-Sayed answered the question with a categorical “No.”

Cruz challenged that response by pointing to statements published years earlier by El-Sayed’s half-sister, Eman Abdelhadi, on social media.

In a 2012 post, Abdelhadi wrote, “My family has long been MB,” using an abbreviation commonly associated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

In the same message, she said she “always felt” that the organization “has navigated the political sphere poorly/destructively.”

Cruz also referenced a separate social media post from 2013 in which Abdelhadi expressed concern about relatives in Egypt who supported the Muslim Brotherhood.

The posts, Cruz argued, contradicted El-Sayed’s public denial of family connections to the organization.

However, the statements attributed to his half-sister do not, by themselves, establish that El-Sayed is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, has participated in its activities, or has engaged in conduct that would compromise American national security.

Cruz also cited an opinion article El-Sayed published in the Huffington Post in 2011, during the political upheaval that eventually brought the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Egypt.

In the commentary, El-Sayed argued that a government led by the organization would look “nothing like Iran.”

Cruz portrayed the article as evidence that El-Sayed had long held a sympathetic view of the Islamist movement, which subsequently governed Egypt under President Mohamed Morsi before being removed from power by the Egyptian military in 2013.

The senator also raised questions about financial support for El-Sayed’s Senate campaign, citing a reported $300,000 contribution from the candidate’s father-in-law, Tayeb Jukaku, to a super PAC supporting his election.

Cruz highlighted Jukaku’s association with the Islamic Society of North America, an organization that federal prosecutors identified as an unindicted co-conspirator during the Holy Land Foundation terrorism-financing prosecution.

That designation did not constitute a criminal conviction, and the association does not establish wrongdoing by Jukaku or El-Sayed. Cruz nevertheless argued that the combination of family connections, political positions, and financial relationships warranted greater scrutiny.

El-Sayed’s positions concerning Israel have also become a major source of controversy in the closely contested Michigan race.

The Democratic candidate has accused Israel of committing genocide during its military campaign against Hamas in Gaza and has advocated ending American military assistance to the Jewish state.

He also drew criticism after declining to directly affirm Israel’s right to exist during a CNN interview.

“Israel exists,” El-Sayed responded when questioned on the issue, dismissing the formulation as a political “gotcha game.”

El-Sayed has maintained that opposition to Israeli government policies should not automatically be treated as hostility toward Jews.

“To be anti-Israel is not the same as to be anti-Jewish,” he declared.

The controversy has intensified as El-Sayed competes against Republican Mike Rogers in one of the country’s most closely watched Senate contests, a race that could help determine which party controls the chamber following the November elections.

Recent polling has shown El-Sayed holding a narrow advantage over Rogers, although the contest remains competitive. A Washington Post-Schar School survey released in September placed El-Sayed at 48 percent and Rogers at 45 percent among likely voters, a difference within the poll’s margin of error.

The race has also attracted significant outside spending. A political action committee affiliated with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee has recently begun financing campaign materials opposing El-Sayed, reflecting concern among pro-Israel activists about the possibility of his election.

Republicans have increasingly focused attention on El-Sayed’s background and views, while the Democratic candidate has accused his opponents of using allegations about his religion and family to divert attention from economic and healthcare issues.

His campaign previously characterized allegations connecting him and his relatives to the Muslim Brotherhood as “racist” and “untrue.”

Cruz, however, insisted that the controversy should be viewed as a matter of national security rather than an ordinary political disagreement.

“This is a profound danger,” Cruz said.

The senator urged Michigan voters to reject El-Sayed, warning that the consequences of the election could extend well beyond the state’s representation in Washington.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is resisting a federal recommendation that would automatically activate agents’ body cameras when they draw their weapons, setting up a dispute over accountability, officer safety, and the recording of sensitive encounters during immigration enforcement operations.

The Department of Homeland Security has rejected the proposed requirement, arguing that automatic recording technology could create serious operational problems, including accidental activation and the unintended recording of confidential interactions.

The disagreement follows a Government Accountability Office investigation that identified shortcomings in body-camera policies, training, and oversight at ICE and U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Investigators warned that unclear requirements could result in important enforcement encounters taking place without video documentation.

According to a report published Wednesday by Axios, DHS agreed with six of the GAO’s seven recommendations but declined to adopt the proposal calling for automatic camera activation and additional measures to ensure officers record arrests, searches, and detentions when required.

In explaining its objections, the department said the technology “presents significant operational risks, including inadvertent or false activations during routine movement.”

DHS officials also expressed concern that cameras triggered automatically could record conversations with confidential informants, crime victims, and other individuals whose identities or interactions require protection.

The department further warned that unintended recordings might capture people engaged in constitutionally protected activities, raising privacy and First Amendment concerns.

The dispute highlights a significant difference between the two federal law enforcement agencies. Customs and Border Protection already employs systems capable of activating body cameras automatically when officers draw firearms or turn on emergency lights. ICE, however, has not implemented comparable technology.

The GAO’s examination found that confusion over existing recording rules was widespread enough to raise questions about whether officers consistently understood when they were required to activate their cameras.

At six of the ten locations reviewed by investigators, personnel expressed uncertainty about the circumstances in which recording was mandatory.

Some employees characterized the rules as “not mandated,” “up to interpretation,” or containing “gray areas.”

The uncertainty extended to several common enforcement situations, including searches of vehicles, transportation of detainees, undercover assignments, and interviews with individuals already in custody.

These findings raised concerns that officers might fail to record significant encounters even when agency policy called for cameras to be operating.

The federal watchdog also examined how the agencies handled violations of their body-camera requirements and found remarkably little documented disciplinary action.

From the beginning of ICE’s body-camera program through September 2025, the agency had not issued a single written reprimand for violations of its recording policies.

Customs and Border Protection had issued just one such reprimand during the period examined.

The findings come as federal immigration authorities face growing public scrutiny over enforcement tactics, including several fatal shootings involving ICE personnel.

Body cameras have become a particularly contentious issue as the Trump administration expands immigration enforcement and critics demand greater transparency surrounding arrests and confrontations between federal agents and members of the public.

Earlier this year, White House border czar Tom Homan publicly supported expanding ICE’s body-camera program, emphasizing that the administration wanted Americans to have confidence in the professionalism of federal immigration officers.

Homan said in February that he had discussed the initiative with then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who approved the expansion.

“We have nothing to hide,” Homan said, adding that Americans “seek and deserve professional and trustworthy law enforcement.”

He explained that approximately $20 million included in federal spending legislation would help finance the expansion of body-camera use among immigration agents.

Homan also stressed that the administration would not excuse improper conduct by federal personnel.

“Any misconduct will not be tolerated and will be swiftly addressed,” he said.

At the same time, Homan defended ICE’s enforcement methods, rejecting suggestions that agents were conducting indiscriminate immigration sweeps.

He said officers generally begin operations with specific targets in mind, particularly individuals with criminal records who have been identified for arrest.

“When we leave this building, we know who we’re looking for,” Homan said.

The GAO’s investigation focused on whether ICE and CBP had established sufficient procedures to ensure body cameras were deployed appropriately, officers understood recording requirements, and violations were addressed consistently.

Investigators found that weaknesses in those areas made it difficult for the agencies to assess whether their camera programs were accomplishing their intended purposes.

The watchdog called for clearer operational standards, improved training, stronger oversight, and updated deployment plans that would allow agency leadership to measure the effectiveness of body-camera use.

Although DHS accepted most of the recommendations, its refusal to adopt automatic activation technology leaves unresolved one of the report’s central concerns: how to ensure that critical encounters are recorded when officers are focused on fast-moving or potentially dangerous situations.

The GAO concluded that without more consistent requirements and reliable measures of compliance, federal immigration agencies cannot adequately determine whether their body-camera programs are improving accountability, protecting officers, or strengthening public confidence in law enforcement.

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that individuals who disclose classified military information “should be shot,” revealing that a leak exposing the timing of a planned American strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities prompted him to postpone the operation over concerns that U.S. forces could be placed in danger.

Addressing supporters at a campaign rally in Bullhead City, Arizona, Trump expressed outrage over the release of sensitive details surrounding Operation Midnight Hammer, the June 2025 American bombing mission targeting Iranian nuclear installations.

The president said information about the planned departure and arrival times of American military aircraft had reached major news organizations before the operation was carried out, potentially compromising the element of surprise.

“Somebody leaked, some sleazebag. They ought to go to jail and be shot. For the rest of their life, they should be in jail,” Trump told the crowd.

Trump specifically accused individuals of disclosing the scheduled departure time of the aircraft from Missouri, along with details of when they were expected to reach their targets.

“They leaked that we were leaving at 12:07 from Missouri, and it was in The New York Times, CNN,” Trump said.

“They leaked the time we were leaving, the time we were arriving,” he said.

According to the president, the disclosure was serious enough that he personally raised the matter with Gen. Dan “Razin” Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to determine whether the mission could still proceed safely.

“I said, ‘General, that’s not good, is it?’ He said, ‘Not good, sir, but we can do it anyway.’ I said, ‘Let’s change the time.’ So I called off the raid,” Trump recalled.

Trump said he ultimately held the mission back for two days before allowing the military to proceed using the same departure schedule that had originally been planned. He suggested the decision helped mislead Iranian officials, who may have believed the leaked information was no longer accurate.

The president repeatedly returned to the danger posed by unauthorized disclosures, arguing that revealing operational details during an impending military attack could jeopardize American lives and national security.

“But they leak. Leakers should be, in my opinion, leakers should be shot,” Trump said. “In the old days, we used to shoot leakers.”

“When they leak what time you’re going to attack a country, and the reason you’re attacking is really for defense because you don’t want them to have a weapon that can blow up millions of people in one shot,” he added.

“No, leakers should be dealt with very, very strongly,” Trump continued. “To me, they’re the scum of the earth.”

Trump also directed his criticism toward the news media, accusing journalists of spreading inaccurate information and relying on sources he suggested might not exist.

“They’re almost as bad as a leaker,” Trump said of reporters.

“They leak false information, that makes them a leaker. Oftentimes, without a source. I think they make up a lot of their sources,” the president said.

The remarks came as Trump campaigned for Republican candidates ahead of the November 3 midterm elections. His appearance in Bullhead City included support for Arizona gubernatorial candidate Andy Biggs, but much of the president’s discussion turned to the continuing confrontation with Iran.

Trump portrayed the Iranian regime as increasingly disorganized following American military operations, suggesting that the country’s leadership had suffered such significant losses that officials were reluctant to assume positions of authority.

“Nobody wants to be the president of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” Trump said. “Who would like to be the president of Iran?

“Please raise your hand. No, I don’t want to be.”

The president then acknowledged that the American campaign against Iranian leadership may have gone further than he initially anticipated.

“I probably went a little too far. I’m sorry, because I don’t know who the hell we’re dealing with anymore,” Trump added, before predicting that the confrontation would soon conclude.

Trump defended American military operations as essential to preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, describing Tehran as the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism and warning that a nuclear-armed Iranian regime would pose a catastrophic threat to Israel, the broader Middle East, Europe, and the United States.

“If they had a nuclear weapon, within 24 hours they would use it,” Trump claimed. “They’ll knock out the Middle East, then they’ll start hitting us on the West Coast.”

“They’ll hit Europe because they’re crazy,” he said.

Trump’s assertions about how quickly Iran would use a nuclear weapon were his own predictions, rather than findings established by publicly released American intelligence assessments.

Operation Midnight Hammer involved American B-2 stealth bombers and other military assets striking Iranian nuclear facilities in June 2025, during the 12-day war between Israel and Iran. The operation targeted major installations associated with Tehran’s nuclear program, including deeply fortified sites.

Following the strikes, news organizations reported findings from a preliminary Defense Intelligence Agency assessment suggesting that the damage to Iran’s nuclear program might have been less extensive than the administration initially claimed. Trump strongly disputed those assessments.

The president’s latest account of a leak forcing a two-day postponement has not been independently substantiated in the public reporting. He did not identify the alleged leaker or provide documentation establishing that the disclosure caused the military to change its operational schedule.

Trump has repeatedly criticized unauthorized disclosures of national security information, and his administration has pursued investigations into leaks involving sensitive government and military matters.

The president also sought to reassure Americans about the economic consequences of the ongoing conflict, particularly higher fuel costs, predicting that gasoline prices would decline sharply once hostilities with Iran ended.

“When that ends, your gasoline is going to go down to even lower than it was before it started,” Trump said.

Former Vice President Kamala Harris is accusing both President Donald Trump and the Biden administration, in which she served for four years, of failing to exert sufficient pressure on Israel during the war against Hamas in Gaza, arguing that Washington should have intervened earlier and more aggressively to restrict Israeli military operations.

Speaking Wednesday at the Asan Institute for Policy Studies in Seoul, South Korea, Harris criticized American policy toward Israel under both administrations, portraying the Jewish state’s military campaign as unacceptable and faulting U.S. leaders for failing to use American influence to force a change in Israel’s conduct.

“Most recently, the failure to use our leverage to curtail the Israeli government’s horrific conduct in the war in Gaza, both under the current administration, which offers [Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu a blank check, and our administration before, where we should have acted sooner and more forcefully,” Harris said.

The remarks amounted to an unusually direct criticism of former President Joe Biden, whose administration Harris helped lead as vice president throughout the Gaza war. They also represented another attack on Trump’s support for Israel and his relationship with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

Harris’s comments come as she weighs another presidential campaign in 2028, following her defeat to Trump in the 2024 election. She has publicly acknowledged that she is considering another run for the White House.

Her latest statements are consistent with a series of increasingly critical remarks she has made about Israel, Netanyahu, and American military involvement in the Middle East.

In April, Harris accused Netanyahu of drawing Trump into the military confrontation with Iran, arguing that the conflict was unwanted by American voters and had contributed to higher gasoline prices.

“Trump entered a war – and he got pulled into it by Bibi Netanyahu, let’s be clear about that – that the American people didn’t want. Among the many consequences of it is jacking up the price of gas,” Harris said at the time.

Harris also generated controversy during the 2024 presidential campaign over her response to an anti-Israel protester who accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza.

During an October 2024 campaign appearance at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, the demonstrator interrupted her remarks with accusations against Israel before being escorted from the venue.

Rather than directly rejecting the allegation, Harris appeared to validate the protester’s concerns, telling the audience that the issue “was real.”

“Listen, what he’s talking about, it’s real. That’s not the subject that I came to discuss today, but it’s real and I respect his voice,” she said.

The Republican Jewish Coalition responded to Harris’s latest remarks by accusing her of maintaining a record of hostility toward Israel. The organization described her criticism as “unsurprising” and pointed to several previous controversies involving her statements and positions on the Jewish state.

Among the incidents cited by the RJC was a confrontation at a Harris event just ten days after the October 7, 2023, Hamas massacre, when an audience member accused Israel and the United States of genocide. According to the organization, Harris responded by telling the individual, “I appreciate your leadership”.

The RJC also recalled Harris’s decision to skip Netanyahu’s address to a joint session of Congress in July 2024, attending a sorority luncheon instead. The organization further criticized her record on legislation intended to counter the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.

Another point raised by the group was Harris’s opposition to Israeli military operations in Rafah. During the Gaza war, she repeatedly expressed concern about the humanitarian consequences of an Israeli offensive in the southern Gaza city. Israeli forces subsequently located and rescued hostages in the Rafah area, an outcome the RJC cited in challenging her position.

The organization also revisited an incident from 2021 in which a student accused Israel of “ethnic genocide” during an exchange with Harris. Her response at the time, “Your truth cannot be suppressed”, drew criticism from those who argued that she had failed to challenge the accusation.

Harris’s latest comments also drew a sharp reaction from Warren Kinsella, a Canadian attorney and author who worked on her 2024 presidential campaign. Following her remarks about Israel, Kinsella wrote that he was “ashamed to have worked with her.”

Her criticism of Biden represents a further shift from the position she maintained while serving in his administration. During the 2024 presidential campaign, Harris generally defended Israel’s right to protect itself following the October 7 Hamas attacks, even as she voiced concern about civilian suffering in Gaza.

Since leaving office, however, Harris has become increasingly willing to criticize the administration’s handling of the conflict. In her 2025 memoir, 107 Days, she faulted Biden for what she regarded as an inadequate public response to Palestinian suffering, suggesting that his expressions of concern lacked the intensity of his statements supporting Israel.

The Israel controversy was only one component of Harris’s appearance in Seoul, where she delivered a broader critique of American foreign policy and the Trump administration’s approach to international alliances.

She criticized Trump’s tariff policies and his handling of relations with South Korea, arguing that Washington was weakening important partnerships at a time of growing international instability.

Harris also warned about the dangers posed by artificial intelligence, calling for stronger international safeguards and cooperation between the United States and China to address emerging technological threats.

Her remarks come as she remains politically active ahead of the November midterm elections and considers whether to seek the Democratic presidential nomination again in 2028.

During her appearance in South Korea, Harris predicted that Democrats could capture both chambers of Congress in November, while declining to make a final announcement about her own political plans.

President Donald Trump announced Thursday that the scheduled execution of convicted Fort Hood terrorist Nidal Hasan will proceed on December 3, but that plans to broadcast the execution live to the public have been abandoned following objections to televising his death.

Hasan, the former Army psychiatrist responsible for the November 5, 2009, terrorist attack at Fort Hood, Texas, in which 13 people were murdered, is scheduled to be executed by firing squad. Trump said that while the general public will not be permitted to watch the execution through a livestream, victims of the massacre and their immediate families will have the opportunity to witness it if they wish.

The president explained his decision in a Truth Social post, acknowledging that publicly broadcasting Hasan’s execution could potentially discourage future acts of terrorism, but saying that many Americans would find such a spectacle deeply disturbing.

“I think streaming the execution for all to see might have been a strong deterrent for the World to witness how America deals with Terrorists and SCUM like Hasan but, many very good and well meaning people would rather not watch him die, through streaming, or through any other visual device,” Trump posted on Truth Social.

Trump made clear that the decision affects only the public broadcast and will not change the planned execution date or method.

“He will die, as scheduled, by firing squad, but this event will not be streamed,” he added.

The announcement reverses plans outlined last week by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, who had indicated that Hasan’s execution would be made available for public viewing. That proposal generated criticism from both Republicans and Democrats, with opponents questioning the appropriateness of turning a military execution into a publicly broadcast event.

The United States has not conducted an execution open to the general public since the 1930s, making the proposed broadcast a significant departure from longstanding American practice.

Hasan, who was convicted in 2013 of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted murder, carried out the massacre at a military processing facility where soldiers were preparing for deployment. He described the shooting as an act of jihad. The attack remains the deadliest mass shooting at an American military installation.

The decision to cancel the livestream followed objections from prominent Republicans, including Vice President JD Vance and House Speaker Mike Johnson. Johnson raised concerns that footage of the execution could be exploited by terrorist organizations as a recruitment tool, while Vance indicated that he had no intention of watching the broadcast.

Religious leaders and retired military officers also opposed making the execution publicly accessible. Seventy-two retired senior military officers signed a letter objecting to the proposed broadcast, while Archbishop Timothy Broglio, who oversees Catholic ministry within the armed forces, urged Catholic military personnel not to participate in the firing squad.

Trump had initially expressed support for the broadcast, but reports earlier this week indicated that he was reconsidering the proposal after consulting lawmakers, advisers and others who opposed it.

Hasan’s execution, if carried out as scheduled, would be the first conducted by the American military since 1961 and the first military execution by firing squad since 1945.

Elon Musk has placed responsibility for restrictions affecting Ukraine’s military satellite communications squarely on the United States government, saying that decisions limiting the capabilities of SpaceX’s Starshield network are controlled by American military authorities and ultimately President Donald Trump. His remarks come amid reports that Ukrainian forces have experienced disruptions to satellite connectivity at a critical stage in their war against Russia.

The controversy has intensified tensions between Washington and Kyiv, particularly as Ukrainian forces continue striking Russian oil facilities despite American pressure to scale back attacks on Moscow’s energy infrastructure.

Musk addressed the issue Wednesday, explaining that Starshield, the military-oriented satellite communications system developed by SpaceX, operates under government authority rather than the independent control of his company.

“Starshield systems are owned and controlled by the US government. Any limits on speed or usage are decided by the US military and ultimately POTUS,” Musk wrote on X.

His statement drew a distinction between Starshield and the commercial Starlink service. According to Musk, the civilian network is subject to limitations intended to prevent its use in offensive military operations, while Starshield is specifically designed for government and military applications.

The dispute emerged following complaints from Ukrainian officials that satellite terminals had unexpectedly experienced reduced connection speeds, interfering with drone missions and raising concerns about the reliability of communications systems used by Ukrainian forces.

By emphasizing Washington’s authority over Starshield, Musk appeared to distance SpaceX from responsibility for the reported restrictions. The White House, however, has not publicly acknowledged directing any reduction in service. Reports indicate that at least some of the affected connectivity has subsequently been restored.

The satellite controversy has unfolded alongside mounting Ukrainian concerns about the future of American intelligence support, another critical component of Kyiv’s military operations.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Tuesday that his country had received no advance warning from allied intelligence services before five Russian ballistic missiles struck civilian infrastructure. His comments fueled questions about whether intelligence cooperation between Washington and Kyiv had already been affected.

Trump rejected suggestions that the United States had stopped providing intelligence assistance to Ukraine.

“We are helping them, and we are sharing intel,” the president told reporters.

Nevertheless, Ukrainian officials have reportedly been cautioned that intelligence cooperation could face additional limitations, especially if Kyiv persists in targeting Russian energy installations.

The disagreement comes against the backdrop of a separate controversy involving Trump’s arrangement with Russian President Vladimir Putin allowing Russian diesel imports into the United States. Ukrainian officials and some American lawmakers have criticized the move, arguing that renewed energy purchases could provide Moscow with additional revenue to sustain its military campaign.

Ukraine, meanwhile, has made attacks on Russian oil refineries a central element of its strategy to weaken Moscow’s war economy. By damaging refining facilities, Ukrainian commanders hope to disrupt fuel production, complicate military logistics and reduce income flowing to the Russian government.

Kyiv has shown little willingness to abandon those operations, even as its relationship with Washington becomes increasingly strained.

A senior Ukrainian official reportedly told the Financial Times that Ukrainian forces intended to continue setting Russian refineries ablaze, signaling that the government regards the campaign as an essential military tool rather than a bargaining chip to be surrendered under diplomatic pressure.

The determination to continue those strikes was evident Thursday, when Ukrainian drones reportedly attacked an oil refinery in Russia’s Ryazan region, extending a campaign that has become a major source of friction with the United States.

Zelenskyy has also voiced personal frustration over Washington’s shifting approach, describing a sense of betrayal as decisions affecting American military and technological assistance threaten to constrain Ukraine’s ability to wage the war.

The latest developments have prompted renewed scrutiny of whether the Trump administration is seeking to use American-controlled satellite infrastructure and intelligence cooperation as leverage to influence Ukrainian military decisions, particularly regarding attacks on Russian energy targets.

For Ukrainian commanders, access to reliable satellite communications remains essential for coordinating forces, operating drones and responding to Russian attacks. Any restrictions on those capabilities could have immediate consequences for operations on the battlefield, particularly while Kyiv continues its campaign against Russia’s oil industry.

The satellite disruptions were particularly damaging because Ukraine depends on the systems to guide drones traveling at high speeds. Ukrainian officials reported that some terminals initially lost connectivity when moving faster than 80 kilometers per hour, while subsequent restrictions imposed a ceiling of 160 kilometers per hour, approximately 100 miles per hour.

That limit created difficulties for Ukrainian interceptor drones attempting to pursue Russian attack aircraft, some of which travel substantially faster. Serhiy Beskrestnov, a Ukrainian defense adviser, said military personnel had received no advance notification of the changes, resulting in failed missions.

The episode also drew criticism from European officials. Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski publicly challenged Musk over the disruptions, questioning whether political considerations were influencing the availability of satellite services purchased by European customers.

Ukrainian officials contacted representatives of the White House, Pentagon and CIA seeking an explanation. American officials reportedly pointed to a possible technical malfunction, while a senior administration official denied that the White House had been responsible for the restrictions.

By Thursday, Ukrainian officials reported that both Starlink and Starshield services had been restored to full capacity, although questions remained about what had caused the interruptions.

The dispute has also attracted criticism from lawmakers in Washington, including Republican Sen. Thom Tillis, who expressed concern about restrictions affecting Ukraine’s ability to defend itself. Meanwhile, the renewed Ukrainian strike on the Ryazan refinery underscored Kyiv’s determination to continue targeting Russian energy infrastructure despite objections from the Trump administration.

The U.S. military has reportedly developed new plans for possible attacks against Iran that include the potential use of the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb, better known as the “Mother of All Bombs,” as President Donald Trump considers his options for renewed military action against Tehran.

According to a CNN report, Pentagon planners have been examining whether the enormous conventional weapon could be used against Iranian nuclear installations and other strategic targets if the president authorizes another round of strikes. The planning reportedly includes possible attacks on Iran’s energy infrastructure, although no decision to launch additional operations has been announced.

The weapon, commonly referred to by its acronym MOAB, is among the most powerful non-nuclear bombs ever developed by the United States. Weighing approximately 21,600 pounds, or nearly 11 tons, the GPS-guided bomb carries an explosive charge with a destructive force equivalent to roughly 11 tons of TNT.

Despite its extraordinary size and power, the MOAB has been deployed in combat only once. In April 2017, during Trump’s first administration, American forces dropped the bomb on an ISIS tunnel complex in Afghanistan’s Nangarhar province. The strike targeted fortified positions and an extensive network of underground passages used by the terrorist organization.

The possibility of using the weapon against Iran presents a considerably different military challenge, particularly because some of the country’s most sensitive nuclear installations are believed to be buried beneath substantial layers of rock.

One location reportedly under consideration is an underground Iranian facility known as Pickaxe Mountain, which has attracted attention because of its suspected connection to Tehran’s nuclear program.

The installation is believed to have been constructed deep inside a mountain and shielded by thick granite formations, raising questions about whether even a bomb as powerful as the MOAB could penetrate far enough to destroy its most important underground components.

Although the MOAB is designed to produce an exceptionally powerful blast over a broad area, it is not a specialized bunker-busting weapon. Its principal destructive effect comes from the enormous pressure wave generated by its explosion rather than its ability to burrow through layers of reinforced concrete and solid rock.

That distinction has led military analysts to question whether the bomb would be effective against deeply buried Iranian nuclear facilities, even if it caused extensive destruction to surrounding infrastructure, entrances, or surface installations.

The latest reporting indicates that the potential use of the MOAB is part of a broader set of military options requested by Trump in recent weeks. One official familiar with the discussions said the president had asked for additional strike plans covering “a lot of energy infrastructure,” with the massive bomb included among the weapons being considered.

Another official said the Pentagon’s plans for attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities specifically include the possibility of deploying the MOAB against Pickaxe Mountain.

The facility, located near Iran’s Natanz nuclear complex, has become a particular focus of American and Israeli concern. Iran previously described the underground installation as a future centrifuge assembly facility, but Israeli intelligence has raised suspicions that Tehran may have transferred advanced centrifuges and highly enriched uranium into the mountain.

Recent analysis of satellite photographs has also indicated increased construction activity at the site, including reinforcement of tunnel entrances and work believed to be taking place inside the mountain. Researchers have warned that the depth of the installation could make it extremely difficult to destroy through conventional airstrikes.

One individual familiar with the Pentagon’s deliberations questioned whether the MOAB would accomplish the military’s intended objectives.

“The MOAB is a massive information operation type weapon that is great for huge area clearance but not much else,” the source told CNN. “It is definitely not designed as a deep penetration warhead.”

The weapon’s enormous blast radius could also raise concerns about civilian casualties if deployed against infrastructure near populated areas.

Nevertheless, officials believe that the threat of deploying such a powerful weapon could have psychological value, demonstrating Washington’s willingness to escalate military pressure even if the bomb could not completely destroy Iran’s underground nuclear facilities.

The discussions come as the Trump administration weighs how to conclude the confrontation with Iran without allowing the regime to rebuild its nuclear capabilities. According to the reporting, some advisers have considered the possibility of carrying out additional strikes before withdrawing American forces from the region.

Trump has publicly indicated that he does not intend to resume attacks before the November 3 midterm elections, although officials familiar with White House deliberations have suggested that the administration’s plans could still change.

The United States has meanwhile maintained its naval blockade of Iranian ports, while Tehran has continued threatening international shipping and reinforcing sensitive military installations.

A White House official declined to discuss the reported military plans, saying the administration does not comment on sensitive operational matters that may or may not exist. The official reiterated that Trump “keeps all options on the table” to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

{Matzav.com}

For many, the idea of earning Smicha has been sitting quietly in the background for years.

It’s something people think about, often seriously, but are unsure how to act. Not because of a lack of interest, but because of a lack of clarity. Where do I start? How do I stay consistent? And most importantly, how does it realistically fit into an already full life?

That gap is exactly what Machon Smicha was created to address.

Machon Smicha is a structured, fully developed program designed specifically for the English-speaking Torah community. Its goal is simple: to provide a clear, guided path from initial interest to actual Smicha, without pulling participants away from their current responsibilities

At the core of the program is a carefully built system that removes the uncertainty that often comes with independent learning. Participants receive a complete set of Machon Smicha’s Translated and Explained Shulchan Aruch, giving them direct access to the material in a format that is both comprehensive and accessible. This is paired with a full online platform that includes organized learning modules, video shiurim, and built-in review systems to reinforce understanding.

Beyond the materials themselves, the structure of the program is what sets it apart. Each stage is clearly defined, with ongoing support from experienced rabbonim and maggidei shiur. Regular assessments ensure that participants are not only learning, but retaining and mastering the material as they progress.

At the same time, flexibility remains a central feature. The program is designed to work within the reality of busy schedules, allowing participants to move forward at a steady pace without compromising their professional or personal commitments.

Participants include yeshiva students, working professionals, educators, and retirees, all sharing the same goal of achieving Smicha practically and sustainably.

Upon completion of the program, participants receive Smicha signed by the Vaad Harabbanim of Machon Smicha.

If you  have been considering Smicha but have yet to find a clear way forward, Machon Smicha offers something that has often been missing: a structured path, a supportive system, and the empowerment to accomplish a dream.

The next cohort begins on Sunday, October 18, 2026 (7 Cheshvan 5787).

For more information or to register, visit onlinemachon.com/smicha.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and senior officials in United Torah Judaism are increasingly concerned that as many as 30,000 Ger chassidim could decline to vote in Israel’s October 27 Knesset elections, potentially dealing a serious blow to the chareidi party and Netanyahu’s chances of assembling a governing coalition.

The concern comes amid deep frustration within Ger over the government’s failure to secure legislation protecting yeshiva bochurim from military conscription, as well as a separate internal dispute within Agudas Yisroel over the composition of the United Torah Judaism electoral list.

According to reports aired Wednesday evening on Israel’s Channel 12, Ger has yet to mobilize its extensive electoral apparatus, despite the election being less than two weeks away. Unlike previous election campaigns, when the chassidus organized extensive efforts to bring voters to the polls, there have been virtually no public calls for participation, and local campaign headquarters have reportedly not been established.

The unusual silence has also been evident in Hamodia, the newspaper closely associated with Ger, where election coverage and appeals to vote have been noticeably absent.

Political officials fear that Ger could effectively conduct a quiet election boycott, with its members remaining home rather than voting for United Torah Judaism, the party they have traditionally supported.

Another possibility being discussed is that some Ger voters could cast ballots for minor parties with little chance of crossing the electoral threshold, effectively removing those votes from the allocation of Knesset seats.

Ger’s electoral strength is estimated at approximately 30,000 votes, representing roughly one Knesset seat, with the chassidus also exercising influence among other chassidic communities.

In an election in which the balance between competing political blocs could be determined by a relatively small number of votes, the loss of such a substantial voting bloc could have consequences extending well beyond United Torah Judaism itself.

Sources within Ger acknowledged to Channel 12 that considerable anger remains toward Netanyahu and indicated that the chassidus is currently making no concerted effort to encourage its members to vote.

Those sources suggested that Ger’s leadership is waiting to see whether political developments before Election Day will justify a change in its approach.

The dispute over the draft law is one major source of dissatisfaction.

Ger representative Yitzchok Goldknopf resigned as housing minister last year amid frustration over the coalition’s inability to advance legislation regulating the status of yeshiva bochurim.

His departure reflected a broader breakdown in relations between Ger and Netanyahu, with the chassidus taking an increasingly confrontational position toward government efforts to address the military draft issue.

Despite subsequent political discussions, Netanyahu has reportedly been unable to repair the relationship.

However, additional Israeli reporting Thursday indicated that the controversy involves more than dissatisfaction with the prime minister.

A significant internal dispute within Agudas Yisroel has also emerged following the decision by MK Meir Porush, representing Shlomei Emunim, and Eliakim Stark, representing Belz, to break away from Agudas Yisroel’s organizational framework shortly before the electoral lists were submitted.

The two established a separate faction within United Torah Judaism called Toras Chomas Yisroel, while retaining positions on the joint electoral list.

Porush was placed fourth on the United Torah Judaism list, while Stark was assigned the sixth position.

The arrangement has generated considerable opposition within Ger, where officials contend that the two representatives separated themselves from the authority of Agudas Yisroel’s institutions, including its Moetzes Gedolei HaTorah, while continuing to benefit from the electoral strength of the joint party.

According to Thursday’s reporting, some within Ger believe that a strong turnout by the chassidus could help secure an additional Knesset seat for United Torah Judaism, potentially enabling Stark to enter the Knesset.

One Ger source explained the calculation by pointing out that Goldknopf, who occupies the second position on the list, is expected to win his seat regardless.

The concern, according to the source, is that Ger’s votes could provide the additional support needed to elect Stark, despite the unresolved dispute over his faction’s relationship with Agudas Yisroel.

The controversy is particularly sensitive because Ger traditionally holds the senior position within Agudas Yisroel and has played a central role in organizing the party’s election campaigns.

Stark was selected as Belz’s representative by the Belzer Rebbe, replacing longtime MK Yisroel Eichler, who has served in the Knesset for much of the period since 2003.

Ger officials are reportedly seeking understandings regarding the distribution of political positions and the relationship between the factions before committing to a full election mobilization effort.

Among the demands being discussed is an arrangement with Degel HaTorah concerning the status of Porush and Stark, including the possibility of restricting future independent negotiations with their faction unless it returns to the Agudas Yisroel framework.

No agreement has yet been announced.

Despite the tensions, sources within Ger have indicated that a final instruction to vote for United Torah Judaism may still be issued before Election Day, as has been customary in previous elections.

Such a directive would ultimately depend on the decisions of the Gerer Rebbe, Rav Yaakov Aryeh Alter.

Political observers nevertheless warn that a last-minute call to vote might not produce the same level of participation as a fully organized campaign that had been operating for weeks.

The absence of election headquarters, public appeals and the usual mobilization efforts could make it difficult to generate the turnout Ger has traditionally delivered.

The developments come as both Shas and United Torah Judaism have declared that they will not support a future government unless legislation is passed protecting the status of yeshiva students.

Shas chairman Aryeh Deri reiterated that position Wednesday, insisting that his party would neither join nor support any coalition without an acceptable legislative arrangement.

For Netanyahu, the uncertainty surrounding Ger presents an additional political challenge as he attempts to retain the support of the chareidi parties while preparing for an election in which every Knesset seat could prove decisive.

As of Thursday, Ger had issued no formal instruction directing its members to abstain from voting, and discussions aimed at resolving the internal Agudas Yisroel dispute were continuing.

{Matzav.com}

Shas chairman Aryeh Deri declared Wednesday that his party will neither join nor support Israel’s next government unless legislation is passed securing the status of yeshiva bochurim and protecting them from military conscription, establishing a firm condition for coalition negotiations ahead of the October 27 Knesset elections.

Speaking in an interview with Yishai Cohen of Kikar HaShabbat, Deri made clear that the demand would apply to any government seeking Shas’s participation or parliamentary backing, regardless of which political party is tasked with forming the coalition.

Deri said the position reflects explicit instructions from the Shas Moetzet Chachmei HaTorah and Rishon Letzion Rav Yitzchak Yosef, who have insisted that the status of those studying Torah must be legally secured.

“We are continuing in the path of Maran,” Deri said, referring to Rav Ovadia Yosef zt”l. “Maran told us to do everything, absolutely everything, to regulate the status of yeshiva students, with the principle being that anyone who studies Torah should be able to continue.”

Asked whether legislation protecting yeshiva bochurim would be Shas’s first condition for entering a government after the elections, Deri responded unequivocally.

“We have already declared this. Maran the Rishon Letzion said it himself, and I said it as well. There will be no government in Israel that Shas supports or participates in without regulating the status of yeshiva students. How can we accept this sword of arrests hanging over them?”

The declaration comes as the controversy surrounding the military draft has intensified, with renewed enforcement measures against yeshiva bochurim and growing concern within the chareidi community over the possibility of additional arrests.

Deri accused government legal officials of deliberately escalating the confrontation for political purposes, arguing that arrests of yeshiva students would accomplish nothing toward addressing the IDF’s manpower needs.

He claimed that Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara and members of her office were attempting to use the draft controversy to generate protests and weaken Netanyahu’s political position ahead of the elections.

According to Deri, the prime minister had largely succeeded in preventing the draft issue from dominating the election campaign, partly because of the country’s ongoing security challenges. He alleged that opposition leaders and government legal officials were now seeking to bring the controversy back to the forefront.

Deri specifically accused the attorney general and her deputies of encouraging arrests in the expectation that they would provoke demonstrations by members of the Yerushalmi Faction.

He described the attorney general as an anarchist and accused her of acting maliciously, insisting that arresting yeshiva bochurim would not result in additional soldiers joining the military.

“Everyone admits that not a single arrest produces a soldier,” Deri said, arguing that the enforcement measures were also harmful to the army itself.

He concluded his criticism with a reference to the Jewish people’s history of overcoming persecution, declaring, “We survived Pharaoh, and we will survive this as well.”

Deri’s position closely mirrors the ultimatum recently issued by United Torah Judaism, whose chairman, MK Yaakov Asher, has likewise insisted that his party will not enter or support a government that fails to pass legislation regulating the status of yeshiva students.

Asher has emphasized that promises to address the issue at some unspecified future date will not be sufficient, and that the party expects concrete legislative action.

The declarations by both chareidi parties place the draft controversy at the center of potential coalition negotiations, with their leaders seeking assurances that the next government will address the issue before they agree to provide political support.

The latest statements also follow the disclosure earlier this week of remarks Deri made during a private gathering in Modiin Illit, in which he acknowledged the difficulty of achieving a comprehensive solution to the draft crisis under current political and legal circumstances.

In those remarks, reported by Israel’s Channel 13, Deri said senior rabbonim had instructed chareidi political leaders to gain time rather than expect an immediate resolution to the longstanding dispute.

“You cannot solve the problem. The instruction from the rabbonim was to buy time,” Deri was quoted as saying.

Those comments drew criticism from opposition figures, who accused the chareidi parties of deliberately delaying efforts to increase military enlistment.

Deri’s latest declaration, however, makes clear that Shas intends to insist on legislation protecting yeshiva students as a prerequisite for supporting the next coalition.

Opposition leaders Naftali Bennett and Avigdor Liberman responded sharply to Wednesday’s interview, accusing Deri of seeking to perpetuate military exemptions at a time when the IDF has repeatedly warned of serious personnel shortages.

Bennett argued that Netanyahu’s political alliance with the chareidi parties would place additional burdens on soldiers and reservists, while Liberman accused Deri of demanding permanent exemptions as the price of coalition support.

The dispute comes less than two weeks before Israelis are scheduled to vote, with the question of military service for chareidi men emerging as one of the most contentious issues separating the country’s political parties.

Israel’s government faces a Thursday deadline to update the country’s High Court of Justice on its enforcement of military conscription requirements for yeshiva bochurim, as the ongoing draft controversy intensifies and concerns mount over additional arrests of those who have not reported for military service.

The October 15 deadline comes amid increasing pressure from judicial and legal authorities to demonstrate that the state is actively enforcing conscription laws against eligible chareidi men. The issue has become a major source of tension between the government, the military, and the chareidi community, particularly following reports that the IDF was preparing a new operation to arrest yeshiva bochurim classified as draft evaders.

The court proceedings are part of the continuing legal battle over the status of yeshiva students following the expiration of the previous legal framework that allowed them to defer military service while continuing their Torah studies.

In June 2024, the High Court ruled that, without legislation providing a legal basis for exemptions, the government could not continue treating eligible chareidi yeshiva students differently from other citizens subject to military conscription.

The ruling also prohibited continued state funding for yeshivos on behalf of students whose military service was not legally deferred.

Since then, the government has struggled to establish a new legislative arrangement acceptable to the chareidi parties while also satisfying legal requirements and the IDF’s demands for additional personnel.

The latest court deadline is expected to require government officials to address the practical steps being taken to enforce conscription, including the handling of draft notices, restrictions on those who fail to report, and possible arrest measures.

The IDF has previously indicated that proactive enforcement operations could resume during October, raising concerns that large-scale arrests could trigger widespread demonstrations in chareidi neighborhoods.

Those concerns intensified following Israeli media reports that military authorities had planned an arrest operation for next week but postponed it after police raised objections.

According to those reports, the IDF had sought police assistance for an operation targeting yeshiva bochurim considered draft evaders. Police officials reportedly refused to commit the Tel Aviv District to securing the operation because of fears that the arrests would provoke major demonstrations.

Police reportedly warned that widespread protests could continue through the October 27 Knesset elections and potentially disrupt voting arrangements and public order.

The military subsequently acknowledged that the operation had been postponed because of police considerations.

The disagreement highlights the practical difficulties facing authorities as they attempt to implement conscription enforcement measures in communities where opposition to drafting yeshiva students remains strong.

The legal pressure on the government has intensified over the past several months. In April, the High Court ordered authorities to adopt more effective measures against eligible men who had not complied with draft orders, including personal economic restrictions and criminal enforcement proceedings.

In July, the Knesset attempted to suspend arrests and other enforcement measures against qualifying yeshiva students for three months. The High Court initially froze the legislation and subsequently struck it down in September, leaving the existing enforcement framework in place.

The court found serious defects in the legislative process and concluded that the measure improperly suspended enforcement against one population while leaving the underlying military service obligation intact.

The attorney general’s office has continued pressing the government and security establishment to demonstrate that enforcement is being carried out effectively.

In an August submission to the High Court, Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara reported that approximately 80% of those classified as draft evaders were from the chareidi community, despite an increase in enlistment among graduates of chareidi educational institutions.

The submission also acknowledged that demonstrations and resistance to arrests had complicated enforcement operations.

The government, for its part, has argued that aggressive arrests could undermine efforts to encourage voluntary enlistment and further deepen tensions between the chareidi community and state authorities.

Chareidi political leaders have repeatedly maintained that arrests of yeshiva bochurim will not produce meaningful increases in military enlistment and have warned that such measures could provoke widespread unrest.

The dispute has also become a central issue in the campaign leading up to the October 27 elections, with Shas and United Torah Judaism insisting that legislation protecting the status of yeshiva students must be a condition for their participation in the next government.

For now, the immediate question is how the government will respond to the court’s demands while military and police authorities remain divided over the practical implementation of additional arrest operations.

New York City Comptroller Mark Levine has reversed a major campaign promise to resume investing city funds in Israel Bonds, drawing fierce criticism from Jewish leaders and former city officials who accuse him of retreating under pressure from Mayor Zohran Mamdani and the Democratic Party’s anti-Israel wing.

Levine, who repeatedly pledged during his 2025 campaign to restore the city’s longstanding investment in Israeli government bonds, announced Wednesday that his office would not move forward with the purchases, citing financial concerns, credit ratings and what he described as technical obstacles.

The reversal represents a significant political victory for Mamdani, who has openly opposed the city’s purchase of Israel Bonds and has advocated boycotts targeting the Jewish state.

Levine insisted that his decision was based entirely on investment considerations rather than political pressure.

“I always said this would be based on financial considerations only, not politics — that’s still my position,” Levine told The New York Times.

“But as of now, we feel that because of some technical challenges, and because of financial considerations, that this is not an investment that we can make right now.”

The explanation marks a sharp departure from Levine’s position during last year’s Democratic primary, when he presented Israel Bonds as a reliable investment and explicitly promised to restore them to the city’s portfolio.

During a June 2025 debate against former Brooklyn Councilman Justin Brannan, Levine defended the bonds’ longstanding financial record.

“We have a globally diversified portfolio, and that should include investments in Israel and Israel bonds, which have paid solid dividends for 75 years,” he declared at the time.

Levine continued defending the proposed investments after taking office in January, including as recently as April, despite growing opposition from anti-Israel activists.

His announcement Wednesday effectively maintains the policy established by his predecessor, Brad Lander, who allowed the city’s Israel Bond holdings to expire in 2023 without purchasing replacements.

New York City had invested in Israel Bonds for nearly five decades, beginning in the 1970s. At the time Lander discontinued the purchases, the city held approximately $40 million in the securities.

The investments had historically generated returns of approximately 5%, and previous comptrollers had defended them as financially sound.

Levine’s reversal drew particularly sharp criticism from former City Comptroller Scott Stringer, who had expanded the city’s investments in Israel Bonds during his tenure.

“They were a very sound investment,” Stringer said Wednesday.

Stringer warned that the decision could embolden activists associated with the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which seeks to isolate Israel economically.

“This inaction will further empower the BDS [boycott, divestment and sanctions] movement around the country. That is my worry. And it could continue to contribute to more antisemitism.”

Former Brooklyn Assemblyman Dov Hikind, founder of Americans Against Antisemitism, was even more outspoken in his condemnation of Levine.

“A perfect example of a coward: a sellout and a fraud trying to appease the dangerous lunatics on the left driving NY and the country off a cliff. Shame on you,” Hikind wrote on social media.

The decision was welcomed by Mamdani, who has made opposition to Israel a prominent feature of his political career.

Speaking at a Wednesday press conference, the mayor expressed approval of Levine’s announcement.

“I don’t believe that our city should purchase Israel bonds. We don’t purchase the bonds of any other sovereign nation. I don’t think we should make an exception when it comes to Israel,” Mamdani said.

The mayor’s comments underscored the political significance of Levine’s reversal, particularly given the differences between the two officials on Israel.

Levine, who is Jewish and has maintained close relationships with mainstream Jewish organizations, has generally described himself as a supporter of Israel while criticizing certain policies of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s government.

Mamdani, by contrast, has long identified with the movement to boycott Israel and has repeatedly faced criticism from Jewish organizations over his positions.

The two officials initially appeared headed for a confrontation over Israel Bonds when they took office at the beginning of the year, but have since developed a cooperative working relationship.

Levine’s decision removes one of the most visible disagreements between them.

The comptroller’s office maintained Wednesday that the decision should not be interpreted as a broader withdrawal from investments connected to Israel.

A spokesperson emphasized that Levine remains supportive of the Jewish state and said the city continues to hold more than $285 million in investments involving Israeli companies and other Israel-related assets.

Those holdings include publicly traded Israeli businesses and more than $1 million invested in Israeli real estate investment trusts.

The spokesperson said decisions concerning Israel Bonds and other securities are evaluated according to their suitability for the city’s investment portfolio and the financial interests of municipal employees and retirees.

New York City’s five public pension funds currently hold approximately $326 billion in assets, making the comptroller one of the most influential financial officials in municipal government.

The Israel Bond holdings previously represented a relatively small portion of the city’s overall investments, but their symbolic importance has made them a recurring source of political controversy.

Levine’s office pointed to changes in Israel’s credit ratings following the wars involving Hamas and Iran, as well as the performance of alternative investments.

Fitch Ratings lowered its outlook for Israel in 2024, while Moody’s and S&P Global also downgraded the country’s credit standing during the conflicts.

Although Moody’s and S&P have since restored their outlooks to stable, Israel’s overall credit ratings remain below their prewar levels.

Levine’s investment team also argued that the approximately 5% return available on certain two- and three-year Israel Bonds compares unfavorably with the city’s pension system, which recorded a 13% return over the previous year.

Critics countered that comparing fixed-income securities with the performance of an entire pension portfolio does not fully account for the different purposes and risk profiles of those investments.

They also noted that the comptroller’s office holds other securities with returns below those available from Israel Bonds.

In explaining why he had made such a firm campaign commitment before completing a full financial assessment, Levine acknowledged that he had expected Israel’s credit outlook to improve.

“Perhaps a year and a half ago,” he said, “I would have expected that the ratings would have been improved by now and/or that the interest rate would have gone up.”

Representatives of Israel Bonds disputed the suggestion that the securities were no longer attractive investments.

A spokesperson for the organization said Levine had repeatedly promised to restore the city’s purchases and had previously characterized the bonds as “a long-term safe and secure investment.”

The organization maintained that the description remains accurate.

Israel Bonds officials have also reported strong investor demand since the October 7, 2023, Hamas massacre, with purchases more than doubling during the subsequent period.

Other major public institutions have continued investing in the securities despite the political and security challenges facing Israel.

New York State’s pension system, overseen by State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli, reportedly holds more than $360 million in Israel Bonds.

Former CUNY trustee and financier Jeffrey Wiesenfeld, who has been active in promoting the investments, criticized Levine’s decision and pointed to the continued purchases by other public entities.

“I am grievously disappointed. NYS AND Palm Beach county alone hold $1 BILLION [in Israel bonds],” Wiesenfeld said.

“There has been no change in the high quality. Because of the US 10-year treasury, the rates are the highest ever. At least be truthful.”

The reversal has also been celebrated by anti-Israel activists who had urged Levine to maintain Lander’s policy of avoiding direct purchases of Israeli government debt.

For Jewish leaders who supported Levine’s campaign, however, the announcement has raised questions about the reliability of his commitments on issues involving Israel, particularly at a time when Mamdani’s administration is seeking to reshape the city’s relationship with the Jewish state.

Levine has left open the possibility of purchasing Israel Bonds at a later date if financial conditions change, but his office has announced no timetable for reconsidering the decision.

Britain’s domestic intelligence chief has revealed that more than 50 people have been arrested in Iran-linked security operations over the past year, warning that Jewish communities have been among the principal targets of Tehran’s campaign of terrorism and intimidation on British soil.

Sir Ken McCallum, director general of MI5, disclosed the figures during his annual national security assessment on Tuesday, October 13, describing an increasingly aggressive Iranian effort to carry out attacks through criminal operatives recruited to act on behalf of the regime.

The intelligence chief said British authorities had identified Iranian involvement in a series of attacks and suspected plots directed against Jewish institutions, Israeli interests and Iranian opposition figures. He also warned that Tehran has begun expanding its operations to include more heavily protected targets, including military installations.

Addressing the threats facing Britain’s Jewish population, McCallum expressed solidarity with communities that have endured repeated attacks and security scares.

“Sadly, much of this aggression has been aimed at British Jewish communities, with whom I want to express solidarity,” he said.

The MI5 chief described Iran as a government increasingly willing to arrange violence in Britain through intermediaries rather than relying exclusively on its own intelligence officers.

“The other state keen on subcontracting its UK violence is Iran,” McCallum said, explaining that British security officials have been tracking the practice for several years.

He said the regime has used criminal proxies to intimidate political opponents, Iranian media organizations and Israeli-linked sites, while significantly increasing the scope of its activities during 2026.

“Over the last twelve months, our Iran-linked operations have led to more than fifty arrests in the UK,” McCallum disclosed.

The arrests span multiple investigations and do not all relate specifically to threats against Jewish targets.

Among the most disturbing cases highlighted by the intelligence chief was an alleged terrorist plot targeting Manchester’s Jewish community, for which two Iranian nationals were charged earlier this month.

Salam Ahmadyan, 36, of Liverpool, and Rahman Salehi, 34, of Salford, were arrested on September 20, shortly before Yom Kippur, and charged on October 2 with preparing acts of terrorism.

British prosecutors allege that the suspects conducted surveillance of Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation in Manchester and the Jewish Museum in the city’s Cheetham Hill neighborhood.

According to allegations presented in court, the men were communicating with a third individual believed to be in Iran, who provided instructions concerning the construction of a homemade chlorine bomb.

The allegations remain before the courts, and neither defendant has been convicted.

The alleged targets were especially sensitive because Heaton Park Hebrew Congregation had already been the scene of a deadly terrorist attack on Yom Kippur in 2025, when two Jewish worshippers were killed and several others were wounded.

The discovery of another suspected plot involving the same shul has heightened concerns over the continuing vulnerability of Jewish institutions in Britain.

McCallum also drew attention to a wave of arson and sabotage attacks earlier this year against Jewish institutions and businesses in Britain and other European countries.

The attacks included incidents involving Jewish ambulances, shuls and commercial properties, with responsibility claimed by a previously obscure organization calling itself the Islamic Movement of the Companions of the Right.

British intelligence authorities have concluded that the organization functioned as a front for operatives connected to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

McCallum said the group’s apparent independence concealed its ties to the Iranian regime.

“Behind this front sat members of the IRGC,” he declared.

British authorities have since designated both the organization and the IRGC under the National Security Act, providing additional powers to investigate and prosecute individuals suspected of assisting their activities.

The intelligence chief described the attacks on Jewish communities as deeply disturbing and emphasized that the threat extends beyond individual acts of vandalism or intimidation.

His warning comes amid broader concern that Iran has been recruiting criminals and other intermediaries across Europe to conduct attacks that can be difficult to trace directly to Tehran.

Such operations allow hostile governments to attempt acts of violence while maintaining a degree of separation from those physically carrying them out.

Beyond the attacks on Jewish targets, McCallum revealed that British intelligence has detected a significant escalation in Iranian ambitions, including suspected operations against military facilities.

One of the most serious incidents occurred near RAF Fairford, a British air base used by American military aircraft, including bombers involved in operations against Iran.

On September 27, counterterrorism officers intercepted three vans near the base and arrested seven individuals in connection with a suspected plot.

Those detained were subsequently released on bail while the investigation continued.

The incident reportedly prompted the United States to remove B-1 bombers from the installation as a precaution.

British authorities suspect that the operation may have been connected to the IRGC, although the investigation remains ongoing and no final determination of responsibility has been publicly established.

McCallum warned that the Fairford incident should not be viewed as an isolated development.

“The other major shift this year has been Iranian ambitions to come at harder targets, like military sites,” he said.

He declined to disclose certain details because of continuing investigations and the possibility of future criminal proceedings.

Iran has denied involvement in terrorist plots and other hostile operations on British territory, including the suspected activity near RAF Fairford.

The MI5 director general also identified Russia as Britain’s most aggressive state adversary, warning that Moscow has expanded its use of sabotage, cyberattacks and other hostile activities designed to remain below the threshold of open military conflict.

He said both Russia and Iran have increasingly relied on locally recruited individuals and criminal organizations to conduct operations that would previously have required trained intelligence personnel.

The growing threat has forced MI5 to devote substantially more resources to countering hostile foreign governments, with the agency’s work in that area now approaching the scale of its traditional counterterrorism responsibilities.

McCallum additionally warned that artificial intelligence could make it easier for terrorists and hostile governments to develop sophisticated cyberattacks, operate autonomous weapons and obtain dangerous technical knowledge.

MI5 has established a specialized AI Threat Assessment Centre to examine those emerging risks.

The intelligence chief compared the transformation now confronting Britain’s security services to the changes that followed the September 11 attacks, arguing that the country has entered a fundamentally different security environment.

He said the intelligence agency intends to respond aggressively to those who organize or finance violence in Britain, regardless of whether they operate directly or through intermediaries.

“What I can say is that those who seek to cause mayhem on British streets – whether hired thugs here or their paymasters overseas – will meet an unflinching response,” McCallum declared.

Four Jewish schools across the United States were targeted by bomb threats within days of one another, forcing the evacuation of hundreds of students and staff members in Brooklyn and Florida and triggering a frightening lockdown at a Jewish school in Los Angeles. Authorities have since determined that all four threats were hoaxes, although investigations into the incidents remain underway.

The incidents, which occurred between October 9 and October 12, targeted two Brooklyn yeshivos, a Jewish preschool in Boca Raton, Florida, and a Jewish middle and high school in Los Angeles. The threats prompted significant police responses, including searches by specialized emergency units and bomb-sniffing dogs, and renewed concerns about the security of Jewish educational institutions.

The first two threats were reported Friday morning, October 9, when the Yeshivah of Flatbush Joel Braverman High School and the United Talmudical Academy of Williamsburg received threatening telephone calls just minutes apart.

According to the NYPD, the initial call came into the Yeshivah of Flatbush, located at 1609 Avenue J, at approximately 9:54 a.m. Six minutes later, a similar threat was received at the United Talmudical Academy, located at 590 Bedford Avenue in Williamsburg.

Both schools immediately implemented emergency procedures, evacuating students and faculty while police officers secured the surrounding areas.

NYPD Emergency Service Unit personnel and K-9 teams were dispatched to the buildings to conduct searches for possible explosive devices. Police vehicles and fire trucks surrounded the affected locations, and nearby streets were temporarily restricted as authorities investigated.

Video footage from Flatbush showed students gathered outside near school buses while officers examined the premises. In Williamsburg, emergency vehicles lined the street as police secured the area around the yeshiva.

After completing their searches, authorities determined that neither threat was credible. No explosive devices were discovered, and students and staff were permitted to return to their classrooms.

The NYPD confirmed that no injuries had been reported and that no arrests had been made in connection with the incidents.

The Yeshivah of Flatbush sent a message to parents during the emergency, advising them not to come to the school while police and security personnel handled the situation.

The threats came just two days after the third anniversary of the October 7 Hamas massacre in Israel, a period of heightened concern among Jewish communities over possible antisemitic incidents.

Three days after the Brooklyn incidents, another Jewish educational institution was forced to evacuate when a bomb threat was received at the Donna Klein Jewish Academy preschool in Boca Raton, Florida.

The threat, reported Monday afternoon, October 12, prompted an emergency response at the Jewish Federation of South Palm Beach County’s campus, which houses several Jewish educational and communal organizations.

The affected preschool is located on the Toby and Leon Cooperman Campus, a large Jewish communal complex that also accommodates the Adolph and Rose Levis Jewish Community Center and other institutions.

Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office deputies responded to the scene and searched the affected facilities while students and staff were evacuated as a precaution.

The incident caused traffic disruptions in the surrounding area, including difficulties for parents attempting to reach nearby schools during dismissal.

A student at the nearby Katz Yeshiva High School described the disruption, explaining that students were informed of the emergency through a school announcement.

“I was in my classroom during English and we just had an announcement on the loudspeaker that there was a bomb threat at the school next door to us. Traffic was blocked, because they weren’t letting any vans or cars in for carpool.”

“They told us we needed to stay inside for a while, and they’d tell us when it was time to come out,” the student added.

Authorities eventually determined that the threat was unfounded, and the Jewish Federation confirmed that the threatening call had been fraudulent.

All students and staff members were reported safe, and children were reunited with their families following the police investigation.

Rep. Jared Moskowitz, a Jewish Democrat representing a Florida congressional district, condemned the incident and expressed relief that no one had been harmed.

“Let’s be clear: there is no cause in the world that’s served by scaring children. If your grievance leads you to a K–12 school, you’re the problem,” Moskowitz wrote on social media.

A similar emergency unfolded Monday at Milken Community School, a private Jewish middle and high school in the Los Angeles area.

Police initially responded to a report of an active shooter at the school, but authorities subsequently clarified that the emergency involved a bomb threat.

The school was placed on lockdown as officers investigated the report, with students instructed to follow emergency security procedures inside their classrooms.

One parent described the frightening experience of a child who was attending class when the threat was received.

“My son was in math class when the bomb threat was called in,” the parent said.

“They had to pull down the shades on the classroom door and windows, lock the door, turn off the lights, and sit under their desks,” the parent explained.

“It sounds pretty intense to have to prepare the classroom like that. He was scared and nervous.”

The Los Angeles Police Department later confirmed that the threat was a hoax and that no actual danger had been discovered at the school. An investigation into the source of the call remains ongoing.

Despite the frightening experience, the parent said the family’s confidence in the school’s security arrangements had not been shaken.

“Jewish schools tend to have higher-caliber security than at non-Jewish schools, so I’m not worried,” the parent said. “I don’t feel like it’s unsafe for my son to go there. He had no problem going to school yesterday or today.”

The series of incidents has renewed attention to the disruption caused by fraudulent emergency threats, which can force schools to suspend classes, evacuate buildings, and mobilize substantial police resources even when no actual explosive device exists.

Security professionals warn that such threats should not be dismissed merely because they are ultimately determined to be false.

Richard Priem, chief executive officer of Community Security Service, said the incidents must be considered against the broader backdrop of threats and attacks targeting Jewish communities in the United States and abroad.

“We should not look at these incidents in isolation and base our assessment on that,” Priem said.

“We’re living in an era where, over the last 18 months, we’ve had a number of serious attacks on the Jewish community in the United States and abroad. That should warrant all of us working and thinking about this to take the threats against our community seriously.”

Priem explained that bomb threats can serve as a means of intimidation even when those responsible have no intention or ability to carry out an actual attack.

“It’s very easy to make a bomb threat, and they don’t necessarily indicate advance preparation,” he said.

“We have seen a lot of bomb threats over the years that were meant to intimidate, harm and dissuade Jewish community members from participating in Jewish life.”

Michael Masters, national director and chief executive officer of the Secure Community Network, similarly emphasized the importance of advance preparation and coordinated emergency procedures.

“We tend to see these bomb threats come in waves,” Masters said.

“The difference in how these threats are responded to usually comes down to the training, the preparation and the plan that the institution puts in place. It’s so important for institutions to have a plan, to review it, and to implement it prior to these calls coming in.”

Masters drew a parallel between school security preparations and the Torah account of Noach, emphasizing the importance of taking precautions before an emergency develops.

“It’s absolutely vital that we work to be prepared,” he said. “This week, we read the parsha of the story of Noah. When did Noah build the ark? Before it began to rain.”

The latest threats recall a widespread campaign of bomb hoaxes targeting Jewish institutions in 2017, when numerous Jewish community centers and schools across the United States and other countries received threatening calls.

That investigation eventually led Israeli authorities to arrest an Israeli-American teenager, who was subsequently sentenced to prison for his involvement in the threats.

Authorities have not established whether the four latest incidents were coordinated or carried out by the same individual or group. Investigations into the threatening calls are continuing.

WATCH:

LISTEN:

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

LISTEN:

[Video below.] United Torah Judaism’s newly released election campaign video, featuring singers Naftali Kempeh and Shmueli Ungar, which can be watched below, is drawing criticism for focusing on music and party representatives while leaving out the images of the gedolei Yisroel who have traditionally occupied a central place in the party’s election campaigns.

In a commentary published by Emess, Eliezer Chassid questioned the direction of the party’s latest campaign, arguing that its polished musical presentation lacks the connection to Torah leadership that has characterized previous efforts to mobilize chareidi voters.

The campaign was launched considerably later than those of competing parties ahead of Israel’s 26th Knesset elections. Shortly before Sukkos, United Torah Judaism introduced its slogan, “The Privilege of Being Chareidi,” but the accompanying musical video did not appear until approximately two weeks before Election Day.

The video brings together several familiar melodies from the contemporary Jewish music world, including the Pittsburgh tune for the Shabbos zemirah “Tzamah Nafshi LeElokim,” the Belzer “Ule’orer Libi,” the Skulener “Al Ta’azveinu,” and the energetic “Ratevet,” composed by Hershy Weinberger and originally performed with Shmueli Ungar.

Kempeh and Ungar deliver the medley with considerable energy and emotion, accompanied by the Malchus Choir under the direction of Pinchos Bichler. Chassid praised the musical arrangement, lyrics and performances, making clear that his criticism was directed at the campaign’s messaging rather than its production.

The central issue, he argued, is the absence of the gedolei Yisroel from a campaign representing a party whose voters have historically been encouraged to follow the guidance of their rabbonim.

For decades, the words “Ve’asisa kechol asher yorucha” — the Torah’s instruction to follow the rulings of Torah authorities — have been closely associated with chareidi election campaigns.

Chassid suggested that archival footage of Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv and Rav Chaim Kanievsky casting their ballots for United Torah Judaism, together with images of the Yeshuos Moshe of Vizhnitz, the Pnei Menachem of Ger and the Biala Rebbe, would have provided a connection to the party’s spiritual heritage.

Instead, the new video features United Torah Judaism’s candidates for the next Knesset sitting together in the sukkah of party chairman Yaakov Asher.

Another point raised in the commentary concerns the decision to feature Shmueli Ungar, an American Bobover chossid who does not reside in Israel and cannot vote in the upcoming election.

While acknowledging Ungar’s considerable musical talent, Chassid questioned why the campaign did not choose an Israeli performer who would share the electoral experience of the audience being addressed.

He suggested that an Israeli singer could have brought an additional dimension to the presentation through his own participation in the election.

At the same time, Chassid acknowledged the apparent intention behind the production’s musical choices. The combination of Kempeh and Ungar appears designed to represent both Litvishe and chassidishe audiences, with the Malchus Choir adding another element to the arrangement.

The commentary also drew a comparison with Shas, whose election materials prominently feature images of Rav Ovadia Yosef zt”l. Chassid noted that some polls have shown Shas recovering from six seats to eight, although the commentary did not establish that the campaign’s use of Rav Ovadia’s image was responsible for the reported improvement.

By contrast, United Torah Judaism’s video includes scenes of chareidi demonstrations and yeshiva learning, but does not prominently feature the rabbinic figures traditionally associated with the party’s political direction.

Chassid concluded that while the slogan “The Privilege of Being Chareidi” may resonate with the party’s supporters, the campaign’s emphasis on music, communal identity and political representatives differs from the appeals to rabbinic authority that have defined many of its previous election efforts.

WATCH:

{Matzav.com}

The Vaad Hayeshivos in Eretz Yisroel has issued an extensive set of instructions to yeshiva bochurim and kollel yungeleit as the winter zeman begins, warning of serious legal complications involving military authorities and border crossings amid the ongoing controversy over the draft status of Torah learners.

The advisory, distributed to yeshivos and kollelim throughout Israel, emphasizes the need for extreme caution when dealing with military and security authorities. It also contains specific instructions for students arriving from overseas, particularly those who hold Israeli citizenship and may be subject to military service requirements.

The letter opens with warm brachos for the thousands of bochurim and yungeleit beginning another zeman of dedicated Torah learning. The Vaad praises their commitment to Torah study and expresses the hope that the sound of Torah learning will continue to grow and flourish without interruption.

However, the letter quickly turns to the increasingly complicated legal situation facing yeshiva students, cautioning that seemingly routine interactions with government authorities could result in unexpected difficulties.

The Vaad strongly warns students against approaching border crossings or military authorities without first obtaining appropriate guidance. Anyone planning to leave Israel or needing to clarify his military status is instructed to contact the Vaad Hayeshivos offices in advance to receive specific instructions regarding his circumstances.

The advisory further cautions that independently submitting documents to military authorities does not necessarily protect a student from legal proceedings or resolve outstanding issues concerning his military status.

Particular attention is devoted to yeshiva bochurim from abroad who possess Israeli citizenship, including children of Israeli emigrants living overseas.

According to the Vaad, these students must ensure that their legal status is properly arranged through the Israeli consulates in their countries of residence before traveling to Israel, or immediately upon arrival if the matter has not yet been addressed.

The organization explains that numerous students have encountered serious complications because they were unaware of the requirements applicable to their citizenship and military status.

In some cases, students arriving in Israel to learn in yeshiva have discovered that their circumstances require additional documentation or formal arrangements with the relevant authorities.

To prevent such situations, the Vaad is urging both yeshiva administrators and individual students to seek assistance as early as possible rather than waiting until a problem develops.

The organization says its offices are available to provide guidance, assistance and ongoing support to students navigating the necessary procedures, with the goal of ensuring that their status is properly regulated and that they can continue learning without unnecessary legal complications.

{Matzav.com}

Kamala Harris is pushing back against years of public criticism and online ridicule of her distinctive laugh, declaring in a new podcast interview that she refuses to allow her detractors to rob her of her happiness or change her personality.

The former vice president and unsuccessful 2024 Democratic presidential nominee addressed the subject during an appearance on the “Baby, This Is Keke Palmer” podcast, where host Keke Palmer asked how Harris manages the tension between her personal identity and the public expectations associated with holding high political office.

Harris acknowledged that maintaining that balance can be challenging, particularly when personal characteristics become the subject of widespread commentary and internet memes. She explained that her manner of laughing reflects the influence of the strong women who surrounded her during her upbringing.

Kamala Harris: I'm aware of memes about my laugh. I was raised in a family that included very powerful women who laughed from their bellies. They would sit around the kitchen table with their coffee, laughing loud laughs. And that's how I laugh–and the people that I respected. https://t.co/jhn5KUsRsD pic.twitter.com/MnAAQXppbP

— Ezydu (@ezradulis) October 13, 2026

“It can be difficult. It can be very difficult, Keke. I’m aware of the, whatever the memes are about my laugh,” Harris said. “Well, look. I was raised in a family that included very powerful women, who laughed from their bellies. And, powerful I mean, they were powerful in their space. They were powerful in their family, in their community. Not necessarily titles and money.”

Recalling her childhood, Harris described family gatherings in which the women would sit together over coffee, speaking and laughing without restraint. She said those experiences shaped her understanding of confidence and personal strength.

The former vice president said she views efforts to ridicule her laughter as attempts to undermine her confidence, adding that she has no intention of allowing such criticism to succeed.

“Those who try to take your joy are trying to make you weak, and that’s where my fight comes in,” Harris continued. “I know what you’re trying to do, you’re not going to take my joy. There is nothing you can do to me that will take my joy, you are not that powerful.”

Harris’s laughter became a recurring subject of political commentary during her vice presidency and subsequent presidential campaign. Videos of her laughing during speeches, interviews and exchanges with reporters circulated widely online, with critics questioning the timing of some of those moments and supporters arguing that the attention reflected unfair scrutiny of her personality.

One incident that drew attention occurred in August 2021, when Harris was speaking at a community health center about the Biden administration’s domestic policy agenda, including proposals to expand Medicaid and provide additional health benefits.

During that appearance, Harris encouraged additional states to broaden Medicaid eligibility while discussing the administration’s proposals to extend coverage for dental, vision and hearing services.

“We also must work together to call on Congress to advance other components of our Build Back agenda. To expand Medicaid in every state … people live in every state.”

Harris then repeated the observation, laughing as she emphasized her point.

“People live in every state. That’s the logic,” she said.

Another widely circulated exchange took place later that month, when journalists approached Harris with questions about the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan as the United States completed its military withdrawal.

Before addressing the reporters’ questions, Harris laughed and asked them to “hold on,” a moment that subsequently attracted criticism over the seriousness of the subject being discussed.

The new podcast appearance also addressed Harris’s political future. Asked whether she intends to seek the presidency again in 2028, Harris said she has not yet made a decision, instead emphasizing the importance of the upcoming congressional midterm elections.

“I haven’t decided yet. There are things that are not only about what will be helpful but also about stopping what is harmful that we can do right away with these midterm elections,” Harris said.

Harris also discussed the financial pressures facing American families, including the cost of groceries, gasoline, housing, child care and medical coverage. She argued that economic hardship can make it more difficult for voters to focus on government accountability and broader political issues.

The interview comes as Harris remains active in Democratic politics following her defeat by President Trump in 2024. Although she has left open the possibility of another presidential campaign, she has not formally announced a candidacy for 2028.

{Matzav.com}