Feed aggregator

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

{Matzav.com}

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

{Matzav.com}

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

{Matzav.com}

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

LISTEN:

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

LISTEN: