Intense consultations inside the Religious Zionist party — including a gathering of its leading rabbonim — have led to a developing consensus that the faction may ultimately support the government’s proposed draft law, even though it grants wide exemptions to the chareidi tzibbur. The matter drew unusual public scrutiny, prompting the party to convene a serious, in-depth gathering on Tuesday to address the wave of criticism over the possibility of backing the bill.
At the closed-door meeting, party MKs sat together with rabbonim, who were invited to express their views on the bill’s long-term consequences for Klal Yisroel. Among those who came to weigh in were Rabbi Chaim Gantz, Rabbi Chananel Etrog, Rabbi Shimon Cohen, Rabbi Chaim Wolfson, Rabbi Eliyahu Blumenzwieg, Rabbi Yaakov Medan, Rabbi Yoel Manovitch, Rabbi Eyal Greiner, Rabbi Yigal Levenstein, Rabbi Yehuda Sadan, Rabbi Shmuel Haber, and Rabbi Eliezer Shinwald.
The party later explained that the purpose of the gathering was to “examine ways to enable significant chareidi enlistment to the IDF,” particularly given the sharp disagreements over the proposed framework. A range of perspectives was voiced. Some argued that the bill was unlikely to produce meaningful results on the ground, while others cautioned that pushing it through without revisions could weaken trust between the party and its core dati leumi supporters — especially after repeated commitments to the Hesder yeshivos were, in their view, not adequately honored.
By the end of the discussion, the assembled rabbonim had reached a unified recommendation: the party should insist on substantial amendments. Party chairman Minister Bezalel Smotrich accepted the guidance of the rabbonim and committed to pursue changes that would reshape the proposal into one that is workable, fair, and aligned with the party’s responsibilities to the tzibbur.
In its statement, the party emphasized that it will continue the internal dialogue and intends to push for revisions that ensure any final law includes genuine, actionable mechanisms to encourage chareidi enlistment, while safeguarding Torah values and maintaining respect for those who already serve.
As public speculation intensified, the party released a follow-up announcement clarifying: “Contrary to various reports, no practical decisions have yet been made, and the faction is formulating its demands and conditions for supporting the law. The meeting was held as part of an in-depth learning process for faction members and rabbis, focusing on the law, its implications, and ways to correct historical injustices and encourage haredim to enlist in the IDF. At the meeting, various opinions were expressed, both by the rabbis and the faction members, and it was agreed that the discussions would continue.”
The faction underscored that its only guiding principle is the protection of Am Yisroel: “Even now, the entire faction is determined to vote only for a law that will lead to real and swift enlistment of chareidim to the IDF, in order to meet Israel’s security needs and ease the burden on the combat soldiers and their families. The Religious Zionist party, which represents the sector that serves the most, is committed to changing the current situation in practical terms and will make its decisions solely based on the merits of the matter, detached from campaigns and political interests from all sides. The faction has only one consideration before its eyes: the security of Israel and the religious and national obligation of IDF service for all parts of the nation,” the statement concluded.
{Matzav.com}
A series of lawsuits filed Wednesday in Dallas County claims that American-made microchips repeatedly surfaced inside Russian missiles and drones used in lethal attacks across Ukraine, Newsmax reports. The filings come against the backdrop of staggering civilian losses, with the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights confirming at least 14,775 civilian deaths — including 755 children — while cautioning that the true toll is “likely significantly higher.”
The complaints collectively accuse several major U.S. semiconductor manufacturers of failing to prevent their technology from entering Russia’s weapons pipeline, despite export bans, sanctions, and what the filings describe as “extensive notice” that their electronics were appearing inside President Vladimir Putin’s missiles. The suits argue that the companies ignored clear warnings and allowed sensitive components to be diverted into military systems used to bombard Ukrainian cities.
Each lawsuit names Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, and distributor Mouser Electronics, asserting that their semiconductors turned up in weapons used in deadly attacks and alleging the firms “armed the Russian military” through what the filings call “domestic corporate negligence.” Plaintiffs say the companies prioritized profits over legal obligations, citing the accusation that they “have chosen to maximize profit ahead of and in favor of their duties to take reasonable, and legally required, steps to keep their products out of the wrong hands.” Newsmax has reached out to the manufacturers for comment.
Below is a complete rewrite of the detailed breakdown of all five lawsuits, preserving every quoted line exactly as written:
Lawsuit 1: Shumylo et al. vs. Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Mouser (Attack on Kryvyi Rih – Apr. 4, 2025)
The first case focuses on the April 4, 2025 strike in Kryvyi Rih, alleging that U.S.-origin parts “powered Iskander-M ballistic missiles and drones that Russia used to attack Ukrainian citizens on April 4, 2025, in Kryvyi Rih.” The filing identifies multiple victims, stating: “This strike killed Plaintiff A.K., the daughter of Plaintiff Marta Shumylo; Plaintiff D.N., the son of Plaintiff Nataliia Nikitska; and Plaintiff T.T., the grandson of Plaintiff Valentina Tsvitok.” The lawsuit contends defendants “armed the Russian military by selling semiconductor components … that Russia used as critical components in weapons systems for its attacks on Ukraine and its citizens.” It also argues the companies were repeatedly warned, noting “Defendants had extensive notice … that their products were being diverted to Russian and Iranian weapons programs” but still “failed to implement and enforce reasonable measures to prevent such diversion.” In closing, the complaint asserts the harm was foreseeable, stating: “Defendants’ domestic conduct in Texas … was a substantial factor in causing the injuries suffered abroad.”
Lawsuit 2: Dmytrivna et al. vs. Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Mouser (Attack on Okhmatdyt Children’s Hospital – Jul. 8, 2024)
This filing centers on the attack against Ukraine’s largest pediatric medical center and claims the weaponry involved included U.S.-linked components that “powered Kh-101 missiles and Shahed 136 drones” used in the strike. Two of the young plaintiffs, M.D. and S.F., are described as children receiving dialysis at the moment of impact, with the filing noting they “were patients at the children’s hospital receiving kidney dialysis care when the Russian military launched the attack,” and emphasizing that the blast “killed multiple civilians, including a hospital doctor.” Medical staff were also endangered, with the complaint stating that Dr. Olha Babicheva and nurse Viktoriia Didovets were “treating patients at the hospital when it came under attack,” making clear they were “directly in harm’s way as Defendants’ products enabled greater strike precision.” The filing cites political warnings as well, including the statement: “Looking the other way when you know your products continue to empower Russian slaughter is not just morally dubious, it is against the law.” This lawsuit argues the assault was facilitated through “the illicit flood of semiconductors into Russia … enabled by the knowing neglect or willful ignorance of American companies.”
Lawsuit 3: Babich et al. vs. Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Mouser (Attack on Kryvyi Rih – Jun. 13, 2023)
The third suit revisits another devastating attack in Kryvyi Rih, alleging U.S. electronics were used in weapons that “killed Plaintiff Anton Babich … Plaintiff A.R. … Plaintiff Khvitcha Khupatsaria … and Plaintiff Vladyslav Kuznetsov.” The filing claims those components “powered Kh-101 missiles and Iranian-made Shahed drones that Russia used to attack Ukrainian citizens on June 13, 2023.” It further accuses the defendants of ignoring overwhelming evidence, asserting they “had extensive notice from government agencies, public advisories, forensic investigations, and media reporting that their products were being diverted,” yet “failed to implement and enforce reasonable measures to prevent such diversion.” The complaint frames this as a breach of responsibility, stating: “Defendants owe a common-law duty of care to the Ukrainian people … to not empower Russia to use their products to facilitate unlawful military attacks on civilians.” As in the earlier filings, it stresses foreseeability: “The foreign injuries were the foreseeable and natural consequences of Defendants’ Texas-based decisions.”
Lawsuit 4: Zaplyvanyi et al. vs. Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Mouser (Attack on Uman – Apr. 28, 2023)
This lawsuit focuses on the Uman strike, arguing defendants’ components “powered drones and Kh-101 missiles that Russia used to attack Ukrainian citizens on April 28, 2023, in Uman.” It recounts the human toll, noting the assault “killed multiple civilians, including a 2-year-old child,” and demolished residential buildings. The filing maintains that the companies disregarded clear warning signs, stating they “failed to identify and resolve distribution red flags” despite the fact that “U.S. laws imposed a duty … to exercise reasonable care” to prevent diversion. The complaint then summarizes the accusation: “Defendants’ semiconductor components foreseeably powered missiles and drones that struck Plaintiffs’ homes, workplaces, hospitals, and communities, causing death, severe injury, and widespread devastation.” It additionally charges the firms with complicity in “a conspiracy to evade and/or violate export restrictions to Iran and Russia.”
Lawsuit 5: Tereschenko et al. vs. Texas Instruments, AMD, Intel, Mouser (Attack on Rzhyschiv – Mar. 22, 2023)
The final filing turns to the Rzhyschiv drone strike, alleging that U.S.-made parts “powered Iranian-made Shahed-131 and Shahed-136 drones that Russia used to attack Ukrainian citizens on March 22, 2023,” destroying a high school dormitory. According to the lawsuit, “This strike killed Plaintiffs Natalia Pipchenko, Oleksander Gorgul, and R.Z.,” and left many others injured, including minors V.M. and Z.M., after the building collapsed. The complaint says the defendants “failed to implement adequate export-controls, distributor screening, and diversion-prevention systems — conduct that directly caused the injuries abroad.” It argues that decisions made in the United States “materially contributed to the diversion of semiconductor components overseas” and ultimately enabled the attack. Congress’ warning is quoted once more: “Every day, millions of dollars are made … while American technology is still fueling Russia’s murderous war against Ukraine.”
{Matzav.com}
At a campaign stop in Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania, President Donald Trump ignited a new line of attack against Joe Biden, claiming that key personnel decisions at the Federal Reserve may not hold up legally. Trump told the crowd he had been informed that Biden had used an autopen to sign the documents elevating several Democrats to the Fed’s Board of Governors, a detail he argued could undermine their authority.
Trump used the Pennsylvania rally, billed as an economic address, to raise doubts about whether those appointments conform to federal law. He said he is weighing whether to formally challenge the validity of the signings, noting that he plans to speak with legal advisers before deciding how to proceed.
He folded the Fed appointments into a broader critique of what he called Biden’s “autopen presidency,” maintaining that an array of Biden-era actions lacked legitimacy because the signatures weren’t personally executed. Trump argued that many directives, memos, and administrative decisions “should not carry the force of law” if Biden did not physically sign them.
During Biden’s tenure, aides openly acknowledged frequent reliance on the autopen — a device used by multiple past presidents — for routine paperwork or when Biden was out of Washington. The practice was described as a standard procedural tool for managing a high volume of official documents.
Trump has already vowed to roll back a number of Biden-era measures on the grounds that they were finalized with an autopen. He has said that certain regulatory steps and administrative orders will be canceled because, in his view, they lacked direct presidential authorization.
Democrats have rejected that premise, arguing that Trump’s denouncements distort a long-accepted White House practice and create unnecessary confusion about the legitimacy of government processes.
Legal scholars in recent commentary have emphasized that the decisive factor is whether the president authorized the action, not whether the ink on the page came from his own hand. They maintain that Biden’s team consistently met those requirements.
Experts have also pointed out that presidents from both parties — including George W. Bush and Barack Obama — used the autopen to sign routine matters and even time-sensitive legislative items.
Analysts say that the legality of such signatures hinges entirely on the president’s explicit direction, a condition they argue Biden satisfied throughout his term.
Trump closed his remarks in Mount Pocono by suggesting that Biden’s autopen usage raises deeper questions about who was “actually running things” in Washington. He cited reporting from Reuters as justification for raising the issue with supporters.
{Matzav.com}
A highly unusual and distinguished encounter took place when the Ashlag Rebbe visited the bais medrash of the senior kabbalist Rav Dovid Batzri, rosh yeshiva of Yeshivat HaShalom, accompanied by his son Rav Moshe Batzri. The meeting brought together two influential figures in the world of Kabbolah, along with a circle of their leading talmidim.
The Rebbe arrived at the bais medrashin Bnei Brak at the head of a delegation from the editorial team behind the new Zohar edition, Bnei Heichala. Rav Batzri, who has delivered his teachings there for years, welcomed the Rebbe with great honor. During the visit, the Rebbe presented him with the newly released volume of the Zohar featuring the Bnei Heichala commentary, prompting an extended discussion on the essential role of in-depth Zohar study and the commentary’s contribution to greater clarity.
When the Rebbe entered the bais medrash, Rav Batzri was in the middle of delivering an advanced shiur on the inner dimensions of Torah. Surrounding him were prominent talmidim, rabbanim, and fellow mekubalim. After greeting his guest, Rav Batzri was shown the first volume of the new edition, which incorporates the classic Sulam commentary alongside additional layers of analysis.
The Rebbe described the decades of work that went into producing the commentary and supplements. He remarked, “Here, in this place, there is certainly no need to elaborate on the importance of precision in every single word of the Zohar. At times, one word changes the entire picture and the entire understanding.” He demonstrated several examples where a single term in the text significantly shifts the meaning, explaining the necessity of an “analysis” section within the new Zohar edition, one that lays out questions, contradictions, and textual challenges with methodical, deeply grounded answers.
The Rebbe further noted that in the writings of the Arizal there are more than ten thousand citations from the Zohar, yet the Arizal often does not specify the source. “The more one can trace the Arizal’s foundations back to the Zohar itself, the more the entire inner Torah becomes illuminated,” he told Rav Batzri. The senior mekubal expressed profound admiration for the new work, praising its depth, clarity, and rigorous organization.
After closely reviewing the volume, Rav Batzri spoke with extraordinary enthusiasm. “I testify that there has never been a Zohar like this! It is literally like Shulchan Aruch!” he declared before the Rebbe and the assembled talmidim. He lauded the precision and coherence of the edition and offered a heartfelt brocha to the team behind it, expressing hope that it would “make a revolution in the world,” enabling more people to learn the Zohar and thereby come closer to the teachings of the Arizal and the inner essence of Torah.
The Rebbe also shared a story told to him by Rav David Abuhatzeira: that his grandfather, the Baba Sali, studied the Zohar with the Sulam commentary during his years in Morocco and later said that this commentary gave him “very great clarity in the Zohar.”
Throughout the encounter, the two mekubalim explored numerous intricate passages from the Zohar, engaging in deep discussion on the mysteries of Torah. Rav Batzri referenced the teaching of Rav Shalom Buzaglo in his classic Kisei Melech nearly 280 years ago, emphasizing that one hour of Zohar study with understanding is equivalent to tens of thousands of hours of study in the revealed aspects of Torah.
At the conclusion of the meeting, Rav Batzri accompanied the Rebbe out with warm friendship, and the two parted with heartfelt brachos.
{Matzav.com}
MK Avi Maoz, head of the Noam party, charged that the Israel Defense Forces are not genuinely interested in drafting chareidim in a way that allows them to complete their service while fully maintaining their religious identity.
Maoz made the remarks during an interview at the Kikar Hashabbat studio, with the full conversation set to air later tonight.
Maoz argued that the military has failed to create an environment that preserves the lifestyle and standards of chareidi recruits. “I think that the army is not doing what it needs to do so that a chareidi can enlist as a chareidi and also leave as a chareidi while preserving his way of life,” he said.
He explained that the core issue, in his view, is the lack of formalized protections. “Since the army does not anchor the service conditions of chareidim in IDF regulations, I am waiting for the army to anchor the chareidi service conditions in IDF regulations. Only then will I know that the army really wants to draft them so that they will be fighters and not in order to put them through the IDF melting pot to educate them anew.”
Maoz said his conclusion comes after a long period of evaluation. “I, to my great sorrow, and I say this after a long time, the army does not really want to draft the chareidim and have them also leave as chareidim.”
{Matzav.com}
During a tense appearance on Kan 11 News, MK Yuli Edelstein leveled fierce criticism at the coalition’s latest Draft Law proposal, insisting that the legislation is far from what the army actually requires. He argued that the bill is being pushed forward without genuine conviction and suggested that crucial pieces of the plan were never properly vetted.
Edelstein said the military is grappling with a shortfall of roughly 12,000 soldiers across combat and support roles, yet he believes the proposal fails to offer any meaningful solution to that staffing crisis. He also expressed frustration with last-minute items that appeared in the legislation—provisions he noted were never discussed throughout the year—claiming they were tacked on simply to manufacture disputes so that any eventual horse-trading could be marketed as political “achievements.”
Turning his attention to Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, Edelstein remarked, “I’ve known Netanyahu for 30 years. When something is important to him, he throws himself into it. That’s not what’s happening here. I know how many calls he makes and how many meetings he holds when he wants to get something passed. In this case – I haven’t seen that.” His comments underscored his belief that the prime minister has not been fully invested in steering the law to a workable outcome.
The Likud veteran didn’t mince words when discussing the text of the bill itself. “What’s written there is evasion, not enlistment. The Bismuth Law is, unfortunately, a law of evasion,” he said, labeling the draft as a blueprint that avoids the real problem rather than confronting it.
Edelstein cautioned that the political consequences could be severe, noting that dissatisfaction isn’t coming only from opponents of the government. “Opposition to this law isn’t coming from Kaplan demonstrators – it’s coming from Likud and Religious Zionism voters,” he warned, signaling potential turbulence for both the coalition and his own party.
{Matzav.com}
