LISTEN:
https://matzav.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Bitachon4Life-Shiur-1650-Chikuy-Part-50-Maintaining.mp3For more info, email bitachon4life@gmail.com.
Hamas’s external chief Khaled Mashal delivered a fiery address that openly celebrated the organization’s armed campaign and portrayed the group’s arsenal as a source of national dignity, vowing that its struggle against Israel would continue. Speaking via video to supporters gathered in Istanbul, he praised the October 7 attacks as a defining event meant to push Israel from what he called “our homeland,” while dismissing the foundations of President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza.
His remarks were broadcast on Al Jazeera during the “Pledge to Jerusalem” conference, where Mashal charted an uncompromising vision for the next stage of Hamas’s strategy. Even though the group has publicly entered the first phase of the U.S.-mediated ceasefire that began two months ago, he rejected the core requirements of the American proposal — including international oversight, demilitarization, and Hamas’s removal from governing authority.
Mashal told his audience that although the stage he described as the most brutal period of a “genocidal war” had passed, the conflict with Israel would continue. The message he delivered cast Gaza as the spearhead of a broader regional mission and the October 7 “Al-Aqsa Flood” massacre as an uprising that set into motion what he sees as a turning tide for Palestinians.
He appealed to the global Muslim community to unify around what he described as a religious and national campaign centered on Jerusalem, asserting that the “liberation of Jerusalem” must become the symbol of Palestinian aspirations. Among the ambitions he laid out were claims that the Al-Aqsa Mosque must be “cleansed,” holy sites reclaimed, and that Gaza’s actions had “turned into the pride of the nation and the conscience of nations.”
Israeli media outlets highlighted passages in which he dismissed any possibility of external authority assuming control of Gaza or the West Bank, declaring that Palestinians themselves alone possess the right to govern. Mashal insisted that Hamas will not accept any “guardianship, mandate and re-occupation” of Gaza or “all of Palestine,” and that “the Palestinian is the one who governs himself and decides for himself.”
This rejection extended directly to the International Stabilization Force and the Board of Peace that the Trump peace plan envisions as central elements of Gaza’s transition. Mashal argued that attempts to redefine Palestinian claims “into misleading frameworks are rejected,” reinforcing his refusal to allow outside actors to shape Gaza’s future.
One of the strongest themes of his speech was Hamas’s pledge never to relinquish its arms. He declared that “the resistance project and its weapons must be protected,” describing them as fundamental to Palestinian identity, and stated that “the resistance and its weapons are the honor and strength of the nation.” He mocked diplomatic appeals, saying “a thousand statements are not worth a single projectile of iron.”
Mashal predicted that Gaza would eventually oust foreign forces and described this period as an “opportunity” for Palestinians to “remove this entity [Israel] from our homeland and exclude it from the international stage.” He portrayed Hamas’s war effort as a vehicle for reshaping both regional politics and international legitimacy.
Even the pro-Palestinian outlet Palestine Chronicle underscored that Mashal’s message rested on a few central pillars: Yerushalayim, resistance through arms, and the insistence that no external bodies may direct Gaza’s future. It framed the speech as a blueprint for Hamas’s next phase of activity.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry swiftly circulated clips of Mashal’s remarks, warning that the Hamas leader’s rhetoric “made a mockery of President Trump’s peace plan” and signaled that Hamas has “no intention of disarming, giving up its weapons, its rule, or its path.” The ministry stressed that Mashal had also rejected any international presence in Gaza, calling his speech a repudiation of the plan’s fundamental conditions.
Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar reinforced that interpretation, noting that Mashal had publicly thrown out every requirement that made the ceasefire and hostage-release process possible. He argued that Mashal’s statements illustrate why negotiations with Hamas remain deeply unstable.
HonestReporting, which monitors media portrayals of Israel, pointed out that Mashal’s sweeping rejection of disarmament was ignored by Western outlets. Idit Bar, a researcher on Arab and Islamic affairs quoted by the group, said Mashal “put all the cards on the table: no to disarmament, no to relinquishing Hamas’ rule, yes to the annihilation of Israel, yes to the liberation of Jerusalem.” She emphasized that calls for “cleansing” Al-Aqsa of “impure Jews” and freeing prisoners effectively incentivize more kidnappings, given Hamas’s lessons from October 7.
Mashal also laid out additional goals, including halting what he described as the “Judaization” of Judea and Samaria and intensifying regional coordination against Israel. He urged supporters to challenge Israeli officials in international bodies and to expand activism on college campuses and in the media.
Within Hamas-friendly networks, the speech circulated widely as a statement of direction for the organization, placing Jerusalem and armed struggle above all other considerations. The celebration of resistance and the rejection of outside authority became the speech’s defining features.
Mashal’s hardline posture stood in stark contrast to comments released one day later by another senior Hamas official, Bassem Naim. Speaking to the Associated Press in Doha, Naim said Hamas was “very open minded” about pursuing a “comprehensive approach” that could involve “freezing or storing” its weapons for a period of five to ten years as part of an extended truce intended to pave the way for a Palestinian state.
Naim maintained that Hamas still holds its “right to resist,” yet acknowledged that the group might permit its arsenal to be placed under Palestinian controls with guarantees “not to use it at all during this ceasefire time or truce.” At the same time, he insisted that international forces would not be permitted “inside the Palestinian territories,” limiting any foreign role to border-monitoring duties.
Under Trump’s 20-point plan, such a temporary weapons freeze falls short of what the proposal requires. The framework, endorsed by the UN Security Council, calls for Hamas’s complete disarmament, the transfer of internal security responsibilities to vetted Palestinian police units supported by an International Stabilization Force, and the handover of governance to a technocratic Palestinian committee.
One of the plan’s provisions makes clear that Hamas and similar organizations must “not have any role in the governance of Gaza, directly, indirectly, or in any form,” and that all terrorist infrastructure, including tunnels and weapons factories, must be dismantled and prevented from reemerging.
The plan mandates the creation of a temporary International Stabilization Force in Gaza to cooperate with Israel and Egypt on border security, to prevent weapons from entering the Strip, and to oversee the reconstruction process through a controlled flow of goods. The ISF would effectively manage the transition from IDF control to Palestinian civilian administration under a deconfliction mechanism.
Point 17 allows Israel and stabilization forces to move ahead district by district if Hamas refuses to uphold the agreement, enabling reconstruction to occur in “terror-free areas handed over from the IDF to the ISF” while remaining pockets of resistance are addressed separately.
Retired U.S. Army Major John Spencer referenced this clause in his analysis online, arguing that Hamas’s leadership no longer holds the leverage it once did. He suggested that the IDF could continue “high intensity operations against Hamas to kill, capture, disarm Hamas one area at a time while other forces create bubbles of stability for ever increasing size of the population,” implying that Mashal’s stance fits within contingencies anticipated by the plan.
{Matzav.com}
The widening federal fraud scandal tied to a taxpayer-funded meal program is casting a long shadow over Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s future prospects, with allies beginning to question whether he can survive another gubernatorial run—let alone pursue higher office. According to a report from The Hill, the fallout from the scheme, which siphoned away staggering sums intended to feed children during the COVID-19 shutdowns, is reshaping political calculations across the state.
The controversy centers around elaborate theft operations involving members of Minnesota’s sizable Somali community, where federal investigators say participants stole huge amounts of money from pandemic-era nutrition initiatives. More than 50 people have already been convicted, and prosecutors have suggested that the overall haul—across several schemes—may total as much as $1 billion. The scope of the scandal gained national visibility after The New York Times highlighted it on November 29.
The political ramifications are mounting quickly. Longtime associates of Walz are reportedly wondering whether he should abandon the idea of seeking a third term, with several of them telling The Hill that the governor’s vulnerability is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.
One of the most striking assessments came from Ember Reichgott Junge, a former Democratic state senator and a well-known political commentator in Minnesota, who told the outlet, “The governor, I think, has done a very respectable job, a good job, in Minnesota for the years that he’s been here. But he clearly is vulnerable and in my view, he is riskier than any Democratic candidate that might run.” She emphasized that the fraud “happened on his watch” and added that Walz “can’t erase that.” Though she acknowledged that he has ordered audits and corrective measures, she warned that those probes will “probably uncover more.”
Reichgott Junge noted that the scandal dominates local news cycles, appearing “nearly every other day,” and predicted it will “continue to surface through the next year.”
Compounding the pressure, Small Business Administration Secretary Kelly Loeffler wrote on X that her agency has found evidence of fraud as well, accusing Walz of using his “best efforts to obstruct” inquiries.
Another veteran Walz ally, speaking anonymously, told The Hill that the damage may stretch far beyond the governor’s local prospects, potentially crushing any national ambitions. The source explained, “The challenges are that Minnesota has a very low tolerance for fraud, waste and abuse. It’s a very low threshold, and that’s one of the reasons the state has worked so well for so long. It’s clearly a real vulnerability.”
Additional reporting from Breitbart News revealed that nearly 500 state employees claim Walz repeatedly dismissed their warnings about widespread fraud carried out by Somalis in state-funded aid programs. Some even allege that whistleblowers were punished by Walz’s political allies for sounding the alarm.
Walz, now 61, first burst into national relevance roughly a year and a half ago when then–Vice President Kamala Harris selected him as her running mate, sparking high hopes among Democrats. But one senior party strategist offered a blunt retrospective, telling The Hill, “I think we all had high hopes for him, but I don’t think he was a very effective running mate at the end of the day. It never seemed like he was comfortable in the role beyond his rollout.”
{Matzav.com}
Hamas hinted Sunday that it may be willing to place its weapons under long-term storage or suspension as part of its ceasefire arrangement with Israel—an unprecedented suggestion from a senior figure in the organization and one that touches the core dispute in the US-brokered truce process.
The remarks came from Bassem Naim, a senior member of Hamas’s political bureau, as both sides prepare to move from the initial stage of President Donald Trump’s 20-point Gaza framework into the far more complicated second phase. Speaking in Doha, where much of the group’s leadership is based, Naim said, “We are open to have a comprehensive approach in order to avoid further escalations or in order to avoid any further clashes or explosions.”
The ongoing ceasefire began on October 10, halting two years of combat that followed the Hamas rampage in southern Israel on October 7, 2023—a massacre in which roughly 1,200 people were murdered and 251 were kidnapped. When asked whether that invasion had been a strategic error, Naim rejected the premise, calling it an “act of defense.” Hamas leaders have openly pledged to carry out additional attacks modeled on October 7 as part of their stated aim of destroying Israel.
Under the terms of the ceasefire, Hamas was obligated to return every hostage — living or deceased — in exchange for Palestinian security prisoners held by Israel. With only the remains of Israeli policeman Ran Gvili still in Gaza after his murder on October 7, the parties are now shifting toward the next stage of the agreement.
The upcoming phase outlines the political and security blueprint meant to reshape Gaza after years of conflict. It envisions a multinational force to stabilize the region, the establishment of a technocratic Palestinian administrative committee, an incremental withdrawal of Israeli troops, and ultimately the disarmament of Hamas. Oversight of the plan — including Gaza’s reconstruction — is to be handled by an international board led by President Donald Trump.
Israel has insisted that Hamas surrender its arsenal entirely, a demand Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said he is prepared to enforce “the hard way” if the group resists. In response, Naim asserted that Hamas still claims a “right to resist,” yet he maintained that the movement would consider relinquishing its weapons as part of a wider process that leads to the creation of a Palestinian state.
He offered only a sketch of how such a mechanism might function but suggested that the talks could take place over an extended calm lasting five or 10 years. Naim emphasized, “This time has to be used seriously and in a comprehensive way,” describing Hamas as “very open-minded” regarding the future of its arsenal.
He even outlined specific options under discussion, saying, “We can talk about freezing or storing or laying down, with the Palestinian guarantees, not to use it at all during this ceasefire time or truce.” Whether this formulation satisfies Israel’s demand for total disarmament remains unclear.
The components of this stage were included in Trump’s 20-point proposal unveiled in October alongside several “guarantor” nations. Though it was later approved by the UN Security Council, major questions remain unanswered, and the plan will require intricate diplomacy involving the US and partners such as Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey. As Naim acknowledged, “The plan is in need of a lot of clarifications.”
One urgent issue is the composition and mandate of the planned International Stabilization Force. Countries including Indonesia have expressed willingness to contribute troops, yet its leadership structure, mission parameters, and geographic authority are still undefined. US officials have indicated they expect “boots on the ground” early next year.
A central question is whether this force would play any role in disarmament. Naim made Hamas’s position clear, stating that such an approach would be rejected. Instead, he said the force should limit itself to monitoring the truce, explaining, “We are welcoming a UN force to be near the borders, supervising the ceasefire agreement, reporting about violations, preventing any kind of escalations.” But he added emphatically, “We don’t accept that these forces have any kind of mandates authorizing them to do or to be implemented inside the Palestinian territories.”
Despite the many unresolved issues, Naim said that Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have made progress on forming the technocratic panel that will oversee Gaza’s day-to-day governance. According to him, the sides have agreed on a West Bank–based Palestinian cabinet minister originally from Gaza to lead the body. He withheld the individual’s name, though Hamas officials — speaking anonymously — identified the figure as Health Minister Majed Abu Ramadan.
{Matzav.com}
The mobile phone belonging to captivity survivor Bar Kupershtein made its way back to him on Sunday evening, more than half a day after it vanished when his vehicle was burglarized during the night. The break-in, which happened while he slept, left a shattered window and a missing device—but not a broken spirit.
A friend managed to track down the phone’s location after Kupershtein shared its live coordinates through an app. Kupershtein later posed with the recovered device and wrote joyfully, “He actually found my phone, what a champ! Thank you so much.”
Earlier that morning, he had told his followers about discovering the scene of the break-in, recalling his reaction upon stepping outside. “I woke up this morning, went to the car, and saw it had been broken into. They smashed the window and stole the phone. And you know what? It’s all fine,” he said.
Instead of dwelling on the theft, Kupershtein chose to frame the experience with perspective born from his time in captivity. He explained why he refused to feel bitter, remarking, “We need to look at the glass half full. I’m grateful that what I have to deal with is going to the police station to file a complaint, and not being stuck in tunnels wondering what I’ll eat now, or if they’ll even give me food. Thank you that this is what I need to deal with. It’s not fun, but it’s more interesting. Thank you to the Lord.”
As the day went on, Kupershtein shared that the phone’s signal had been traced to Petach Tikva. Hopeful and slightly amused, he declared his intention to follow the trail, signing off with a wry message to the culprit: “I’m coming for you, thief.”
{Matzav.com}
Iran and Hezbollah, once the anchors of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, abruptly withdrew from Syria just before Assad’s downfall, according to a newly published AFP account. Their hasty departure unfolded as Islamist-led rebels surged into Damascus last December, leaving Syria’s longtime ruler without the foreign backing he had relied on for more than a decade.
For years, Iran had poured personnel and resources into propping up Assad—deploying Revolutionary Guards, stationing Hezbollah fighters, and bringing in allied militias from Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet the moment rebel forces tightened their encirclement of the capital, that relationship collapsed with stunning speed, the report says, leaving Syrian forces stunned at how quickly Tehran disengaged.
Syrian military personnel described the shock that rippled through Damascus’s Mazzeh district on December 5, when Iranian commander Hajj Abu Ibrahim suddenly informed about twenty Syrian officers, “From today, there will be no more Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Syria. We’re leaving.” He added a second blunt declaration: “It’s all over. From today, we are no longer responsible for you.”
Within hours, units were ordered to burn classified papers and wipe computer systems. Iranian-aligned soldiers received a month of pay and were dismissed outright. Two days later, Assad himself fled to Russia, and Damascus fell with virtually no resistance, the report recounts.
Diplomatic staff vanished as quickly as the fighters. AFP reports that Iran’s consulate had emptied out by the evening of December 5, with diplomats slipping across the Lebanese border. Syrian workers described long lines—up to eight hours—at the Jdeidet Yabus crossing as Iran’s personnel scrambled to get out. Employees were told not to report to work and were handed three months’ salary before operations at the embassy, consulate, and related security facilities ceased entirely on December 6.
Iran had previously built a widespread military footprint across Syria, including entrenched positions in the Damascus suburbs, near the Sayyida Zeinab shrine, at the airport, along border zones with Lebanon and Iraq, and throughout Aleppo. But once Aleppo fell, Colonel Mohammad Dibo—now in Syria’s reconstituted army—summed up the turning point tersely: “Iran stopped fighting.”
What followed was a chaotic evacuation. A former Syrian officer recounted that senior Iranian commander Hajj Jawad and others were rushed to Russia’s Hmeimim airbase and flown directly to Tehran. Dibo said that roughly 4,000 Iranian personnel were moved out through the same base, while additional groups escaped through Iraq and Lebanon. In the confusion, Iranian officers even left behind passports, identification documents, and other personal materials as they fled.
{Matzav.com}
