Feed aggregator

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), one of the most influential pro-Israel lobbying organizations in Washington, announced Wednesday that it will stop endorsing candidates for federal office and discontinue direct contributions through its political action committee, a significant shift in its approach to influencing American elections.

The decision follows months of internal discussions among AIPAC’s leadership and comes after three election cycles in which the organization formally backed congressional candidates and helped channel substantial financial support to their campaigns.

Despite abandoning endorsements and direct PAC donations, AIPAC is not withdrawing from electoral politics. Instead, the organization plans to concentrate on encouraging individual Americans to contribute directly to candidates who support a strong relationship between the United States and Israel.

Its affiliated super PAC, the United Democracy Project (UDP), will also continue operating, preserving a major avenue for independent political spending in congressional elections.

According to Jewish Insider, AIPAC’s board approved the change following an extensive strategic review aimed at determining how the organization could most effectively maintain its political influence amid an increasingly contentious national debate over Israel.

In a letter distributed to members, AIPAC’s leadership outlined the reasoning behind the new approach, emphasizing the need to adapt its political activities to changing circumstances.

“To win the fight for the future of the country and the US-Israel alliance, we must build a more strategic, consequential, and nimble political operation. We will prioritize increasing direct, organized contributions from individual Americans to candidates – expanding upon our current efforts – and maximizing the emerging political fundraising tools,” the letter stated.

The organization said its previous system of formal endorsements, PAC contributions and earmarked donations would be replaced by a model that places greater emphasis on coordinated individual fundraising.

“Endorsements, direct PAC contributions, and earmarking will no longer be part of our approach so we can expand individual giving and utilize new tools to help our friends win.”

Under AIPAC’s existing fundraising arrangement, supporters could donate to endorsed candidates through an online portal operated by the organization. Those contributions were ultimately recorded in federal campaign finance disclosures as donations from individuals facilitated through AIPAC’s political operation.

That system will now be phased out as AIPAC shifts toward other methods of organizing financial support for congressional candidates.

The organization nevertheless intends to maintain close relationships with lawmakers and candidates who share its policy priorities.

AIPAC staff members and local organizational leaders will continue working with supporters to coordinate fundraising initiatives and identify political figures “who are worthy of your support”.

The change is expected to alter how AIPAC publicly signals its preferences in congressional races, although the organization will retain considerable influence through its network of donors, activists and political relationships.

AIPAC established its political action committee in 2021, marking a departure from its longstanding practice of avoiding formal candidate endorsements while lobbying members of both major political parties on issues involving Israel.

Since then, the organization has endorsed hundreds of congressional candidates and developed an extensive fundraising operation supporting lawmakers who favor strong American-Israeli relations.

Its affiliated super PAC, UDP, has separately spent tens of millions of dollars on advertising and other independent political activities, becoming a major force in several closely watched Democratic congressional primaries.

Unlike traditional political action committees, super PACs may raise and spend unlimited amounts of money independently of candidates’ campaigns, subject to federal restrictions on coordination.

AIPAC’s decision to preserve UDP while discontinuing its formal endorsement program means that the organization’s political allies could continue benefiting from substantial outside spending even without receiving an official AIPAC endorsement.

The policy reversal comes as AIPAC faces growing political resistance from both ends of the ideological spectrum, with critics increasingly targeting candidates over their financial relationships with pro-Israel advocacy organizations.

Within the Democratic Party, opposition to AIPAC has become particularly pronounced among progressive activists and candidates critical of Israeli government policies. Some candidates have publicly rejected contributions associated with the organization, while others have faced pressure to distance themselves from its political activities.

Resistance has also emerged among certain Republican candidates, illustrating how controversy surrounding AIPAC has expanded beyond traditional partisan divisions.

In its communication to members, AIPAC acknowledged the difficult political environment, describing the 2026 election cycle as “one of the most challenging environments in recent memory.”

The organization also warned that the political challenges facing supporters of Israel are likely to continue, requiring a more extensive effort ahead of the 2028 elections.

AIPAC spokeswoman Deryn Sousa emphasized that the changes should not be interpreted as a retreat from the organization’s central mission.

“Our mission and strategy remain the same,” Sousa said, explaining that AIPAC remains committed to strengthening the relationship between the United States and Israel.

“Our goal is to build support for the U.S.-Israel relationship. AIPAC members gave more than $90 million directly to candidates this cycle, and that organized, direct giving from our members will continue and increase.”

Federal Election Commission records show that AIPAC contributed nearly $25 million to candidates and political committees during the current election cycle through September 30.

Its affiliated super PAC separately reported approximately $53.5 million in independent political expenditures during that period, in addition to contributions to political committees.

The United Democracy Project has remained active in several prominent congressional contests, including Michigan’s closely watched Senate race, where it has spent money opposing Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed.

Earlier in the election cycle, AIPAC also took action against Democratic lawmakers who supported legislation to reduce American assistance to Israel.

Following that vote, the organization suspended fundraising through its political portal for 18 House Democrats who had previously received its endorsement.

The move left active contribution links for 178 Republican lawmakers and 72 Democrats, underscoring the organization’s willingness to withdraw political support from candidates whose positions diverged from its priorities.

Under the new arrangement, AIPAC will no longer publicly maintain the same system of formal endorsements and candidate-specific donation links. Instead, its activists and donors will be encouraged to contribute directly to lawmakers and candidates identified through the organization’s political outreach.

The organization has indicated that its political action committee may continue supporting other political committees even as it ends direct contributions to individual candidates.

The shift returns AIPAC in some respects to its earlier model of political engagement, which relied heavily on relationships with lawmakers, grassroots organizing and fundraising by individual supporters rather than formal endorsements.

AIPAC’s leadership has made clear, however, that the change is intended to strengthen its electoral operation rather than reduce its involvement in congressional races.

The organization will continue supporting candidates from both major parties who favor strong American-Israeli relations, while UDP remains positioned to spend substantial sums independently in future elections.

The announcement represents a significant adjustment in how one of Washington’s most prominent lobbying organizations intends to exercise its political influence, as AIPAC prepares for an increasingly contentious debate over American policy toward Israel in the years ahead.

R’ Michoel Sorotzkin recounting Rav Chaim Shmulevitz’s tearful plea at Kever Rochel for Mamme Rochel to weep for her children, and revealing the profound power of her tears in safeguarding Klal Yisroel throughout the long exile, as foretold by Yirmiyahu Hanavi.

WATCH:

{Matzav.com}

WATCH:

LISTEN:

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

LISTEN:

Shas Knesset member Yinon Azoulay has issued a warning against voter abstention ahead of Israel’s upcoming elections, arguing that staying home would weaken chareidi political representation and strengthen parties he accuses of seeking to undermine Torah learning and Jewish religious life.

In an interview with Avi Mimran on Kol Chai radio, Azoulay, who serves on the Knesset’s Finance and Foreign Affairs and Defense Committees, also condemned attacks against Gedolei Yisroel, defended Shas’s record in government, and emphasized the party’s efforts to represent working chareidim alongside those learning in yeshivos and kollelim.

Azoulay described the upcoming election as particularly consequential for the chareidi community, claiming that its political opponents were pursuing an agenda extending well beyond ordinary disagreements over government policy.

“These elections are different from anything we have known, because our opponents are not content with a political struggle, but seek to uproot religion and Judaism from the public sphere and harm the soul of the Torah world—the Torah learners themselves,” Azoulay said.

“Anyone who chooses to stay home or refrain from voting is not merely wasting his vote, but is directly strengthening the weight of the left and granting legitimacy to continued persecution. Refraining from voting is a direct blow to the education of our children, whom we teach every day to obey the Gedolei Yisroel completely.”

The Shas lawmaker also addressed criticism directed at the party’s leadership, insisting that its representatives had consistently consulted with senior rabbonim before making major political decisions.

According to Azoulay, the party’s actions throughout the outgoing Knesset term were undertaken with direct guidance from the Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah, including Rav Yitzchak Yosef and Rav Moshe Maya.

“Every step and every decision we led was carried out under the direct guidance of our rabbonim, headed by Maran the Rishon Letzion Rav Yitzchak Yosef, Rav Moshe Maya, and the senior members of the Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah,” he said.

“We sat before them, were asked difficult questions, and acted according to everything they instructed us.”

Azoulay then sharply criticized individuals involved in recent incidents of hostility and violence directed at prominent rabbonim, accusing fringe elements of exploiting communal frustrations to encourage disrespect toward Torah leaders.

“On the other hand, the attempts by fringe elements to harm and belittle Gedolei Yisroel are a terrible chillul Hashem,” he declared. “These elements exploit hardships and incite young people while undermining the honor of the Torah and its leaders. Who are you to behave violently toward Gedolei Yisroel?”

Turning to Shas’s accomplishments during the outgoing government, Azoulay highlighted the party’s efforts to preserve the kosher cellular telephone system, which has been a longstanding priority for chareidi representatives concerned about maintaining communal standards.

“During the past term, we fought and succeeded in saving the kosher cellular network and preserving the spiritual well-being of our generation and our children,” he said.

Azoulay also sought to emphasize that Shas regards working chareidim as an integral part of its constituency, rejecting any distinction between those studying full-time in kollelim and those employed to support their families.

“The Shas movement is one home and one large family for every Torah-observant Jew, whether he sits in kollel or goes out to earn a living,” he said.

“The working chareidi community is an inseparable part of us, and we call on everyone not to be drawn into complacency, to remain on the path of emunah, and to unite around the instructions of Gedolei Yisroel.”

{Matzav.com}

In an unusual arrest operation that has sparked outrage in the chareidi community, Israeli military police allegedly tricked a yeshiva bochur into leaving his home in a chareidi neighborhood of Yerushalayim by pretending that a delivery was waiting for him downstairs, arresting him as soon as he emerged from the building.

The incident occurred Wednesday evening in the Gan neighborhood of Yerushalayim, where military police reportedly contacted the bochur by telephone and informed him that a package had arrived for him at the entrance to his building.

Unaware of the trap awaiting him, the bochur went downstairs to collect what he believed was a delivery. Instead, he was confronted by military police officers, who immediately placed him under arrest.

According to the report by Kikar HaShabbat, the operation represents an unprecedented development in the military’s enforcement campaign against yeshiva bochurim classified as draft avoiders.

The report described the arrest as the first documented case of its kind in which military police used such a tactic to apprehend a yeshiva bochur inside a chareidi residential neighborhood.

The incident comes amid a growing wave of arrests involving yeshiva bochurim whose military service status has become the subject of enforcement action.

On Tuesday, dozens of Chabad bochurim returning to Eretz Yisroel after spending a year studying at a Chabad yeshiva in Brooklyn were detained upon arriving at Ben Gurion Airport. Some were subsequently released that evening and transferred to an IDF induction center after expressing willingness to enlist.

In another incident, Elchonon Damati, a talmid at Yeshivas Torah B’Tifartah in Elad, was arrested after appearing at a police station in Kfar Saba in connection with a traffic matter.

During the police investigation, authorities discovered that Damati was classified as a military draft avoider and transferred him to military police custody. His detention prompted demonstrations outside the police station and along Highway 4 near Ra’anana.

Attorney Shlomo Haddad, acting on behalf of the Notnim Gav organization, subsequently intervened in Damati’s case, and the bochur received a sentence of ten days in military detention.

The latest arrests have also drawn sharp criticism from chareidi political leaders, who have accused authorities of escalating enforcement measures in the days immediately preceding Israel’s elections.

United Torah Judaism lawmaker Yaakov Asher, chairman of Degel HaTorah, claimed that the arrests were part of an effort to interfere with the electoral process.

“For some time now, I have been warning about attempts to disrupt the election process through an increase in unnecessary arrests that contribute nothing to the army or to enlistment,” Asher said.

Shas also issued a strongly worded condemnation of Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, accusing her of “blatant and unprecedented political interference in the election campaign through issuing instructions for violent arrests of yeshiva students.”

At the direction of Shas chairman Aryeh Deri, MK Yinon Azoulay has been contacting senior IDF officials to demand the immediate release of the detained bochurim.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has sharply criticized Shas lawmakers for attacking him ahead of the upcoming elections, accusing them of turning against him for political reasons despite repeatedly seeking his assistance throughout the past four years, including telephone calls in the middle of the night.

In an extensive interview with Yishai Cohen of Kikar HaShabbat, conducted less than a week before the elections, the Otzma Yehudit chairman also addressed criticism from Rav Yitzchak Yosef, the arrests of yeshiva bochurim over military service, his increasingly strained relationship with Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, and concerns that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu could exclude him from the next government.

Responding to Rav Yitzchak Yosef’s criticism of his visits to Har Habayis, which the Rishon Letzion maintains are prohibited under the severe Torah prohibition carrying the punishment of kareis, Ben-Gvir insisted that he would not speak against the Sephardic Torah leader.

“I will not say a single word, not one word, against Maran the Rishon Letzion,” Ben-Gvir declared. “I do want to say one thing: I believe that everyone has their own rabbonim. I have my rabbonim, and my rabbonim have very, very broad shoulders! Don’t belittle my rabbonim. They have enormous shoulders. My complaint, G-d forbid, is not with Maran the Rishon Letzion, but with the Knesset members and political activists.”

Ben-Gvir then directed his criticism toward Shas politicians, accusing them of forgetting the assistance he had provided when they needed his help.

“I have never exploited the chareidi community for political gain,” he said. “It was always with love, always with an embrace. Aryeh Deri told me countless times, ‘You’re not like Bezalel, you’re truly a friend.’ You knew whom to turn to during these four years! For every little problem, for every phone call at two in the morning, you really called me, you picked up the phone, and I was always there. Don’t change your colors because of the elections.”

The minister also addressed the controversy surrounding police arrests of yeshiva bochurim classified as military draft avoiders, an issue that has generated growing anger within the chareidi community.

Ben-Gvir said that although he supports military enlistment for those who are not studying Torah, he opposes attempts to achieve that objective through arrests and coercive measures.

“First of all, I’ll say it in the simplest terms: I support enlistment, but the way to enlist people—and those who aren’t learning Torah, yes, as the rabbonim say—is not through beatings, arrests, or actions of that kind, but through an embrace and love!”

Asked why police under his ministry continue arresting yeshiva bochurim, Ben-Gvir maintained that Israeli law does not permit him to interfere in individual police operations.

“You know very well that I have no authority!” he said. “Everyone knows that, Deri knows that, that I’m forbidden to call a police officer or tell the police commissioner, ‘Arrest him, don’t arrest him.’ What am I allowed to do? Set policy.”

Ben-Gvir then accused the chareidi parties of having blocked his earlier efforts to dismiss Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, whom he blamed for restricting his authority.

“I was allowed to lead a move to fire Gali Baharav-Miara—and the ones who prevented that move at the beginning of the term were the chareidi partners! When I came in and told them, ‘Let’s fire her,’ they told me, ‘We can make deals with her.'”

On the subject of integrating chareidim into law enforcement, Ben-Gvir pointed to the establishment of a special chareidi Border Police unit as an example of his efforts to accommodate the community’s religious requirements.

“I opened a chareidi Border Police unit,” he said. “I took care of everything for them: strictly kosher food, all the conditions, bases, everything according to what they wanted. When you bring in these chareidi police officers, the level of violence decreases, the understanding of the community is different, and they know the sensitivities.”

Turning to the elections, Ben-Gvir addressed the emergence of smaller chareidi parties seeking to attract voters dissatisfied with Shas and United Torah Judaism.

He argued that these parties would fail to cross the electoral threshold and urged voters considering them to support his party instead.

“I say this in the clearest possible terms: It is not right, not appropriate, and not smart to give your vote to these parties! These parties ultimately will not cross the electoral threshold. Shas and United Torah Judaism are something entirely different, but whoever does not vote for Shas and United Torah Judaism should vote for Otzma Yehudit! Otherwise, whoever votes for them is giving a gift to Gali Baharav-Miara.”

Ben-Gvir emphasized that he was not seeking to persuade chareidim who follow the instructions of their rabbonim to vote for the established chareidi parties. Rather, he said, he was addressing those considering abstaining or supporting smaller factions.

“Whoever follows the rabbonim who say to vote for Shas and United Torah Judaism—go vote. I’m speaking to those who stay home or are disappointed. There are many members of the chareidi community who don’t want to vote… Come vote, don’t give a gift to Gali Baharav-Miara.”

The interview also highlighted Ben-Gvir’s deteriorating relationship with Smotrich, whom he accused of belittling his rabbonim and displaying arrogance toward him.

“You can’t ignore it!” Ben-Gvir said. “He held a rabbonim conference and said, ‘These are the rabbonim of the right.’ When they asked him why he didn’t invite Itamar, he said, ‘Itamar doesn’t have rabbonim.’ I don’t have rabbonim?! Rav Shmuel Eliyahu isn’t a rav?! Rav Dov Lior isn’t a rav?! How dare you say such a thing?!”

When Cohen asked whether he believed Smotrich’s attitude reflected ethnic prejudice, Ben-Gvir suggested that his Sephardic background and status as a baal teshuvah were factors.

“Condescension? Yes! Arrogance, conceit. Sephardic, baal teshuvah… There are all kinds of things.”

Ben-Gvir also expressed concern that Netanyahu might attempt to establish a broader coalition after the elections by bringing former IDF chief of staff Gadi Eisenkot into the government while leaving Otzma Yehudit in the opposition.

“I know that the prime minister wants a calmer term this time,” Ben-Gvir said. “With Itamar Ben-Gvir there are more challenges—I want to fire the attorney general, I want to conquer Gaza, I want to encourage emigration. Netanyahu has decided that perhaps a term with Eisenkot would be quieter. His associates are saying it, Danny Danon, Miki Zohar, Bardugo… There is an intention there to bring in Eisenkot.”

The minister said that if his party emerged with greater parliamentary strength, he would seek senior cabinet positions, including the Defense Ministry for himself and the Justice Ministry for Likud lawmaker Tally Gotliv.

“If Otzma Yehudit is large, there will be a right-wing government,” he declared. “If the public supports us, I will demand the Defense Ministry and the Justice Ministry for Tally Gotliv in order to fire the attorney general.”

{Matzav.com}

Major security construction has been underway over the past two days at Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s private residence on Gaza Street in Yerushalayim, where workers have been installing protective netting designed to defend the property against possible drone attacks.

The operation has transformed the residence, which is officially designated as an alternative prime ministerial residence, into a heavily secured construction site. Two large cranes were brought in to carry out the work, forcing the closure of a major roadway in the Rechavia neighborhood, while at least ten workers were involved in installing the new aerial defenses.

The extensive security measures are being implemented even though Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, are not currently living at the Gaza Street property. Instead, the couple is residing at another location in the area while the official prime ministerial residence on Balfour Street remains under renovation.

Work at the Balfour Street residence is not expected to be completed before the beginning of 2027.

The latest installation is part of a much larger series of renovations and security upgrades that have been carried out at the Gaza Street home over approximately the past year and a half.

Previous projects have included construction of an elevator, installation of metal scaffolding, placement of a protective shelter, erection of barriers restricting traffic, replacement of a bathtub, and the positioning of large concrete security blocks around the property.

The continuing construction and repeated street closures have generated considerable frustration among neighborhood residents, who say their daily routines have been repeatedly disrupted by the security arrangements surrounding the prime minister’s home.

Some neighbors have also expressed concern that the installation of anti-drone defenses suggests a heightened security threat in their immediate residential area, while no comparable protective measures are being provided for surrounding homes.

One resident, speaking to Ynet, questioned why the authorities were investing in extensive protection for Netanyahu’s property without addressing the safety of nearby families.

“This is an upper-middle-class neighborhood in the center of the capital, with very dense construction,” the neighbor said. “If you’re worried about drones, maybe do us a favor and take care of the neighbors too, instead of unnecessarily causing anxiety? This protection is really frightening. What about us?”

The latest construction comes amid a dramatic increase in government spending on security measures at residences associated with Netanyahu and other prime ministers.

According to figures covering the period from 2023 through October 2026, the Prime Minister’s Office spent a total of 127,432,277 shekels on security-related projects at official and private prime ministerial residences, including properties on Balfour Street and Gaza Street in Yerushalayim, as well as in Caesarea.

The annual figures reveal a particularly sharp increase in spending during 2025.

In 2023, security expenditures totaled approximately 10.9 million shekels. That amount rose to 27.8 million shekels in 2024 before surging to approximately 72.5 million shekels in 2025.

An additional 16.2 million shekels was spent between the beginning of 2026 and October.

The Prime Minister’s Office explained that the figures encompass security work at residences belonging to both serving and previous prime ministers, rather than exclusively properties used by Netanyahu.

Officials attributed the substantial increase in expenditures to changes in the security threat environment, which required significant investments in additional protective infrastructure.

The heightened security concerns are believed to be connected, at least in part, to the October 2024 drone attack on Netanyahu’s private residence in Caesarea.

During that incident, a drone launched from Lebanon struck the property, highlighting the potential danger posed by unmanned aircraft even at locations protected by extensive security arrangements.

The installation of anti-drone netting at the Yerushalayim residence is the latest visible indication of efforts to strengthen defenses against similar threats.

Meanwhile, Ynet reported that another unusual security project had recently been undertaken at the Gaza Street property in preparation for Yom Kippur.

According to the report, the Shin Bet and the security division of the Prime Minister’s Office began constructing a special enclosed passageway intended to allow Netanyahu to travel safely between his residence and a nearby street on his way to shul.

The structure, described as a sterile, air-conditioned tunnel approximately 15 to 20 meters long, was designed to provide a protected route for the prime minister during the Yom Kippur holiday.

Its construction reportedly involved significant expenses and caused additional inconvenience to residents living nearby.

Despite the preparations, work on the passageway was ultimately halted before completion.

Netanyahu did not use the specially constructed route and did not attend shul during Yom Kippur, leaving the partially completed security project unused.

{Matzav.com}

Israel’s Shin Bet director, David Zini, traveled to Paris on Tuesday for meetings with senior French intelligence officials, with discussions reportedly focusing on counterterrorism and the growing challenge of radical Islam in France.

According to a report by Kan News, the visit had been arranged in advance, although recent unrest in France brought additional attention to the threat of terrorism and Islamic extremism during the discussions.

While in the French capital, Zini held meetings with senior representatives of two of France’s principal intelligence organizations.

The first was the Directorate General for Internal Security (DGSI), France’s domestic intelligence agency, which is responsible for identifying and preventing threats to national security and is considered the French counterpart of Israel’s Shin Bet.

Zini also met with officials from the Directorate General for External Security (DGSE), France’s foreign intelligence service, which performs functions similar to those of Israel’s Mossad.

The meetings took place against the backdrop of continuing diplomatic friction between Yerushalayim and Paris, as the French government pursues measures targeting Israel, including restrictions on imports from Israeli communities in Yehuda and Shomron.

Despite those political disagreements, the visit highlights the continuing security relationship between the two countries, particularly in areas where their intelligence agencies face common threats.

Israel’s Shin Bet has extensive experience in counterterrorism operations, intelligence gathering, and identifying security threats within civilian populations. Those capabilities could be particularly relevant to French authorities as they confront domestic unrest and concerns about radical Islamic activity.

The discussions reportedly addressed these security challenges, although specific details regarding the intelligence exchanged or potential areas of expanded cooperation have not been disclosed.

The Shin Bet declined to confirm the substance of Zini’s meetings or provide additional information about his visit.

In response to inquiries, the agency stated that it does not comment on the schedule or movements of its director.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is facing a growing electoral concern ahead of Israel’s October 27 elections, with Likud officials warning that as many as 200,000 to 220,000 right-wing votes could be effectively wasted on small parties that fail to cross the electoral threshold, potentially affecting the distribution of Knesset seats.

According to a report Wednesday evening by Channel 12 political commentator Amit Segal, Netanyahu has been working to persuade several smaller right-wing and chareidi parties to withdraw from the race, but his efforts have so far encountered significant resistance.

Likud officials are particularly concerned about former IDF Brigadier General Ofer Winter, whose Amcha Yisrael party is expected to remain in the election despite pressure to withdraw.

“The nightmare scenario in Likud is the loss of up to 200,000–220,000 votes. Of course, it could end up being less,” Segal reported.

The concern stems from Israel’s electoral system, under which parties must receive at least 3.25 percent of the nationwide vote to qualify for representation in the Knesset.

Votes cast for parties that fall below that threshold do not translate into parliamentary seats, meaning that support for several small parties could reduce the number of seats available to the larger parties in the same political camp.

According to Segal, a substantial portion of the potential losses depends on Winter’s decision about whether to continue his independent campaign.

Winter, a former senior military commander who established the Amcha Yisrael party, is reportedly preparing to announce that he will not withdraw from the election.

Such a decision would complicate Netanyahu’s attempts to consolidate right-wing support behind parties capable of entering the Knesset.

The prime minister is also trying to persuade Moti Leitner, chairman of the Chareidi Public Party, to remove his party from the ballot.

Negotiations between Netanyahu’s representatives and Leitner’s camp have been taking place, although no agreement has been reached.

Segal noted that even if Leitner ultimately agrees to withdraw, the political benefit to Likud would likely be relatively small, since the party currently attracts only a fraction of a percentage point in electoral support.

Leitner has publicly resisted pressure to end his campaign, maintaining that his party represents chareidi voters dissatisfied with the established political leadership of Shas and United Torah Judaism.

His refusal to withdraw has created another obstacle for Netanyahu as he attempts to prevent votes from being cast for parties that may not qualify for Knesset representation.

Another source of concern for Likud is the Noam party, which currently has representation in the Knesset but faces uncertainty over whether it will pass the electoral threshold independently.

According to Segal, Rav Tzvi Tau, the spiritual leader associated with Noam, has refused even to meet with Netanyahu to discuss the matter.

The party’s continued participation could place thousands or potentially tens of thousands of additional votes at risk of failing to produce Knesset seats.

Segal emphasized that Netanyahu’s ability to influence the decisions of these smaller parties is limited, particularly in the case of Winter.

While discussions with Leitner are continuing, there are effectively no negotiations underway between Netanyahu and Winter.

“A great deal of this depends on Ofer Winter, but Netanyahu’s control over it is quite limited,” Segal said.

The situation has left Likud facing the possibility that a substantial number of voters who support right-wing parties could cast ballots for lists that ultimately receive no representation in the next Knesset.

With less than a week remaining before Election Day, Netanyahu’s efforts to secure the withdrawal of smaller parties have become an increasingly urgent part of Likud’s preparations, although the decisions remain in the hands of the individual party leaders.

{Matzav.com}

Dozens of chareidi protesters gathered outside a police station in Kfar Saba on Wednesday after a yeshiva bochur who had reported to the station in connection with a traffic incident was arrested upon authorities discovering that he was classified by the IDF as a military draft avoider.

The bochur, Elchonon Damati, a talmid at Yeshivas Torah B’Tifartah in Elad, was subsequently transferred to military police custody despite an emergency mobilization of demonstrators who attempted to prevent his transfer. Protests also broke out along Highway 4 near Ra’anana in response to the arrest.

According to reports, the incident began on Tuesday when Damati was apparently involved in a traffic accident. He was instructed to appear at the Kfar Saba police station on Wednesday to address the matter. During the processing of his case, officers checked his identification and discovered that he was listed as a military draft avoider.

Police then moved to transfer him to the military authorities, prompting an immediate response from activists involved in efforts to assist yeshiva bochurim facing military enforcement.

At approximately 1 p.m., word of the arrest spread through the “Tzeva Shachor” (Black Alert) emergency notification system, which is used to mobilize protesters when yeshiva bochurim are detained over military service issues.

Within a short period, dozens of demonstrators arrived outside the police station, hoping that their presence would prevent the authorities from transferring Damati to military custody.

Despite the rapidly organized demonstration, police proceeded with the transfer, and Damati was handed over to military police.

Attorney Shlomo Haddad, representing the Notnim Gav organization, subsequently intervened on the bochur’s behalf. According to the organization, his efforts resulted in Damati receiving a sentence of only ten days in military detention.

Notnim Gav is also providing assistance and support to Damati and his family as they deal with the situation. Efforts are continuing to secure his release.

The arrest comes amid a series of similar incidents involving yeshiva bochurim whose military status has led to their detention, frequently triggering demonstrations and confrontations with police.

Earlier this week, protesters blocked Highway 4 near the Yavneh interchange following the arrests of two yeshiva bochurim who were sentenced to 20 days in military prison.

Separately, another controversy erupted over the past 24 hours following the detention and questioning of Chabad yeshiva bochurim returning to Eretz Yisroel from New York. The bochurim were stopped after authorities determined that they were required to resolve outstanding matters concerning their military status with the IDF.

{Matzav.com}

The United States and Israel have developed extensive plans for a new military offensive against Iran that could begin shortly after the November 3 midterm elections, with American and Israeli forces preparing for a concentrated assault on Iranian nuclear installations, energy facilities and weapons infrastructure, according to a report published Wednesday by The New York Times.

The proposed operation would involve several days of intensive attacks intended to inflict substantial damage on Iran’s military and economic capabilities, potentially forcing Tehran to accept American demands concerning its nuclear program and the Strait of Hormuz.

Although military preparations are advancing, President Donald Trump has not approved another offensive, and officials cautioned that the administration has yet to decide whether to resume large-scale combat operations.

According to American officials and others familiar with the discussions, military commanders are examining plans for a short but powerful campaign that would strike critical Iranian facilities, including nuclear sites, oil and energy infrastructure, missile production centers and drone installations.

American and Israeli forces have reportedly stepped up preparations for such an operation, including conducting aerial exercises over Iraq to practice flight patterns and other maneuvers that could be required during attacks on Iranian territory.

The possibility of renewed strikes was also discussed during a previously undisclosed meeting in Israel earlier this week between U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

Hegseth acknowledged Tuesday that the meeting had taken place but declined to provide details about the discussions.

The reported preparations come after nearly eight months of confrontation with Iran, during which American and Israeli military operations have severely damaged Iranian facilities but have not produced a comprehensive agreement resolving the dispute over Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

Some American officials believe another devastating round of strikes, particularly against Iran’s energy sector, could create sufficient economic pressure to force Iranian leaders to make concessions they have so far refused to consider.

One proposal being examined by military planners calls for a three-day offensive against strategically important targets, with the goal of rapidly increasing pressure on Iran without becoming involved in another prolonged military campaign.

The Pentagon has continued assembling additional forces throughout the Middle East, with the current buildup expected to be completed during the first part of November.

The planned deployment reportedly includes three aircraft carriers, thousands of Marines, fighter jets and American Special Operations personnel, providing Washington with the resources necessary to conduct extensive military operations if Trump authorizes them.

The timing of a possible offensive is also being influenced by operational considerations.

American military planners generally favor nighttime attacks to take advantage of darkness, and the longer nights in Iran during November could provide additional opportunities for air operations.

While an attack before the end of October has not been completely ruled out, the period immediately following the American midterm elections is receiving particular attention.

Trump publicly stated earlier this month that the United States would not launch new attacks against Iran before November 3.

According to The New York Times, the president has also turned down several proposals for renewed large-scale military action during the year, despite continuing to authorize preparations for possible future operations.

The latest account follows a separate report published Wednesday by the Financial Times indicating that Netanyahu had sought to launch a major Israeli offensive against Iran earlier this month.

According to that report, Netanyahu instructed the IDF to prepare for strikes during the weekend of October 10, but the operation was abandoned after Trump opposed moving forward.

The reported disagreement illustrates the continuing discussions between Washington and Yerushalayim over how aggressively to confront Iran and when additional military action might be necessary.

Among the potential targets being examined by American and Israeli planners is Pickaxe Mountain, a heavily fortified underground installation associated with Iran’s nuclear program.

The facility presents significant difficulties for military operations because of its location deep beneath mountainous terrain, making it far more challenging to destroy than conventional aboveground nuclear infrastructure.

Trump recently discussed the possibility of using the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb, widely known as the Mother of All Bombs, against the site.

The approximately 22,000-pound weapon is among the largest conventional bombs in the American arsenal and is designed to produce an enormous explosion over a broad area.

According to officials familiar with the president’s discussions, Trump has expressed particular interest in the weapon, including its widely recognized nickname.

However, military weapons specialists have questioned whether the bomb would be capable of destroying a nuclear installation buried beneath substantial layers of rock.

Unlike specialized bunker-busting weapons designed to penetrate hardened underground targets before exploding, the MOAB is intended to detonate above the surface and produce a powerful blast across a wide area.

Experts therefore believe that its effectiveness against a facility protected by granite and located deep underground would be limited.

Despite the preparations for another military campaign, Washington has continued pursuing a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, with American negotiators seeking concessions from Tehran on its nuclear activities and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

The strategic waterway, through which a substantial portion of the world’s oil supplies normally passes, has become a central issue in the confrontation between the United States and Iran.

American officials have reportedly sought to use the threat of renewed military action as leverage in negotiations, calculating that the prospect of further destruction to Iran’s energy infrastructure could encourage its leadership to compromise.

Iranian representatives, however, have resisted demands involving their nuclear program and have sought to postpone substantive negotiations on that issue.

The diplomatic impasse has left American officials divided over whether another military offensive would produce concessions that previous operations have failed to secure.

Some administration officials believe additional attacks could inflict enough economic damage to force Tehran to reconsider its position, while others question whether more bombing would lead to a meaningful diplomatic breakthrough.

The military preparations also follow months of American efforts to strengthen its position in the region. Two U.S. aircraft carrier strike groups are already operating in the Middle East, with a third being deployed to reinforce the American military presence.

The expanded deployment is intended to provide the president with additional offensive and defensive capabilities while also preparing for possible Iranian retaliation against American forces, Israel or other countries in the region.

Iran has warned that renewed attacks could trigger a broader military response, raising concerns about further disruptions to international shipping and energy supplies.

The possibility of another offensive has also been discussed at the highest levels of the Trump administration. Earlier this month, Vice President JD Vance and senior national security officials reviewed military options during meetings at Camp David.

According to previous reports, the Pentagon has presented Trump with several proposals for major strikes against Iran or Iranian-backed Houthi forces in Yemen during recent months. The president rejected those earlier proposals, although American forces have conducted more limited retaliatory operations.

The latest planning comes amid concerns in Israel that Iran has been attempting to rebuild elements of its nuclear program damaged during earlier American and Israeli attacks.

Israeli officials have reportedly presented Washington with updated intelligence concerning Iranian nuclear activities and potential targets for another operation.

The prospect of renewed military action has become particularly sensitive because both countries are approaching elections, with Israelis scheduled to vote on October 27 and Americans heading to the polls on November 3.

Trump has publicly maintained that he will not authorize another major offensive against Iran before the American elections, citing ongoing negotiations that he has characterized as productive.

The White House has also disputed some reports concerning the president’s private discussions with Netanyahu about possible military action, emphasizing that no final decision has been made.

Asked Wednesday about the latest reports of preparations for renewed strikes, a White House official declined to discuss the administration’s military planning, saying it does not comment on operations “that may or may not exist.”

The official reiterated that Trump continues to consider every available option to ensure that Iran does not obtain nuclear weapons.

For now, American and Israeli forces are continuing their preparations while the president weighs whether additional military pressure is necessary to secure an agreement with Tehran.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump declared Wednesday that the war against Iran is nearing its conclusion, asserting that American military operations have devastated Tehran’s nuclear program and left the Islamic Republic severely weakened. However, the president made clear that additional strikes remain an option as Washington seeks to ensure that Iran will never acquire nuclear weapons.

Speaking at a campaign rally in South Carolina ahead of the November 3 midterm elections, Trump said the United States had achieved extraordinary military successes against Iran and predicted that the conflict would conclude “very soon,” although he indicated that his administration was determined to secure lasting results before bringing the fighting to an end.

Trump on Iran War: We could leave now, but we want to make sure it lasts for a long time. pic.twitter.com/DE75CcbhZ8

— Acyn (@Acyn) October 21, 2026

Trump traced his administration’s confrontation with Iran back to his decision to withdraw from the nuclear agreement negotiated during Barack Obama’s presidency, arguing that the arrangement had allowed Tehran to move closer to developing nuclear weapons.

He characterized the agreement as “a road to a nuclear weapon for Iran. I terminated it. That was a road to a nuclear weapon.”

The president then pointed to two major American military campaigns, Operation Midnight Hammer and Operation Epic Fury, which he credited with inflicting enormous damage on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and broader military capabilities.

“We obliterated Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity with Operation Midnight Hammer, a beautiful operation, and Operation Epic Fury. And we defeated them militarily, financially, and otherwise,” Trump declared.

“And now we’re ensuring that, and as you know, Iran will never have a nuclear weapon. Should have been done years ago,” the President added.

Trump warned that the consequences of allowing Iran to obtain nuclear weapons would have been catastrophic, arguing that Tehran’s leadership posed a danger that previous administrations had failed to confront adequately.

He said that if Iran had developed such weapons, “we would be a tinderbox. Our lives would be very different, because they (the Iranians -ed.) are nuts. [But] they don’t play games with me.”

Despite his assessment that the United States has already achieved overwhelming military superiority, Trump indicated that Washington was unwilling to end its operations prematurely if doing so could allow Iran to rebuild its capabilities.

The war, he stated, will “end very soon. We could leave now, but we want to make sure it lasts for a long time. Now, if you look at that, it’s amazing what we did. Our military is unbelievable.”

Trump’s remarks at the South Carolina rally followed statements earlier Wednesday outside the White House, where he defended the decision to launch military operations against Iran and described the campaign as one of the most significant achievements of his presidency.

“I think it’s one of the greatest things we’ve done. We’ve stopped Iran from having a nuclear weapon. It’s one of the best things that we’ve done,” Trump said.

The president maintained that earlier administrations had avoided the difficult decisions necessary to confront Iran’s nuclear ambitions. He claimed that without his intervention, Tehran would already have acquired and used nuclear weapons.

“It took a lot of courage to do it because no other president was willing to do it. And if we didn’t do it, Iran would right now have already used massive nuclear weapons.”

The president’s latest comments come amid indications that the White House is weighing whether another round of military action will be required before the United States considers its objectives in Iran fully achieved.

During remarks in the Oval Office on Tuesday, Trump suggested that the administration was approaching a decisive moment and had multiple options available for bringing the confrontation to an end.

“We just have to make a final decision. Which way do we want to win? Do we want to win the nice way or the not nice way?” he said.

The president’s statements coincided with new reports that American and Israeli military commanders have prepared detailed operational plans for another major assault on Iran, potentially beginning after the November 3 elections.

According to The New York Times, military planners from both countries have intensified preparations for a possible short but powerful campaign against Iranian targets. The proposed operation could involve strikes on nuclear facilities, energy infrastructure, missile production capabilities and drone arsenals.

American and Israeli aircraft have reportedly conducted exercises over Iraq to rehearse long-range attack maneuvers, while U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth traveled to Israel this week for discussions with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu concerning possible additional military action.

Among the locations reportedly under consideration is Pickaxe Mountain, a deeply buried Iranian nuclear facility that presents particular challenges for military planners because of its underground construction.

The preparations have also included proposals for an intensive three-day bombing campaign intended to damage Iran’s military capabilities and increase pressure on Tehran to accept American demands.

Despite the advanced planning, Trump has not authorized a new offensive. Reports indicate that he has rejected several proposals for renewed large-scale military operations in recent months, even as the Pentagon has continued developing options at his direction.

Earlier in October, Trump publicly stated that the United States would not resume attacks against Iran before the November 3 midterm elections, citing ongoing diplomatic discussions with Tehran.

The president has nevertheless continued to warn that military action remains available if negotiations fail to produce an acceptable agreement.

The possibility of renewed fighting has also generated discussions between Washington and Yerushalayim over the timing and scope of any additional strikes.

A separate Financial Times report indicated that Netanyahu had sought to launch another offensive against Iran earlier this month, but Trump opposed restarting major combat operations before the American elections.

According to that account, Israeli military preparations had advanced sufficiently for strikes to be carried out around October 10, with proposed targets including Iranian nuclear installations, government facilities and energy infrastructure.

The planned operation was reportedly more extensive than the American and Israeli attacks carried out earlier this year, but ultimately did not receive the necessary American approval.

The latest military preparations come as diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict remain stalled over Iran’s nuclear activities, its stockpile of enriched uranium and disagreements involving the Strait of Hormuz.

Tehran has resisted American demands concerning its nuclear program, while Washington continues to insist that any settlement must permanently prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

The conflict began on February 28 with major American and Israeli strikes against Iranian targets, followed by Iranian missile and drone attacks across the region and disruptions to commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

Although major military operations have subsided from their initial intensity, tensions remain elevated, with American forces maintaining a substantial presence in the Middle East.

The United States has continued strengthening its regional military capabilities, including deploying additional aircraft carrier forces as Washington evaluates the possibility of another confrontation.

Asked Wednesday about reports of preparations for renewed attacks, a White House official declined to confirm the existence of specific operational plans, saying the administration does not discuss military operations “that may or may not exist.”

The official reiterated that Trump intends to preserve every available option to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Trump’s latest remarks therefore leave open two possibilities: a negotiated conclusion to the conflict in the near future or another round of military operations intended to compel Tehran to accept Washington’s terms.

For now, the president maintains that American military action has already accomplished its central objective of crippling Iran’s nuclear capabilities, while making clear that he is prepared to use additional force if necessary.

{Matzav.com}

New York Governor Kathy Hochul visited Boro Park on Wednesday, making stops at Boro Park Hatzolah and meeting with local yeshiva administrators and community representatives as she continues an extensive series of visits to Orthodox Jewish communities ahead of next month’s gubernatorial election.

The governor began her visit at Boro Park Hatzolah, where she toured the organization’s ambulances and emergency dispatch room, receiving a firsthand look at the operations of one of the community’s most important volunteer emergency medical services.

The visit provided an opportunity to highlight the work of Hatzolah volunteers, who respond to medical emergencies throughout the neighborhood and provide critical assistance to residents around the clock.

Hochul was shown the ambulances used by Hatzolah members and visited the dispatch center, which coordinates emergency calls and directs volunteer responders to incidents throughout the area.

Following her stop at Hatzolah, the governor met with yeshiva administrators, joined by Assemblyman Simcha Eichenstein and State Senator Sam Sutton, two elected officials representing significant portions of Brooklyn’s Orthodox Jewish community.

The meeting came at a particularly important time for New York’s yeshivos, with state funding, educational independence, school security and financial assistance for parents continuing to be major concerns for administrators and families.

Hochul has made outreach to the state’s Orthodox Jewish communities a visible part of her activities in recent weeks, including visits to yeshivos and meetings with rabbonim, school officials and communal leaders.

Earlier this month, the governor visited Bnos Malka Academy, an Orthodox girls’ school in Forest Hills, Queens, where she discussed education funding, security assistance and resources available to nonpublic schools.

That visit included discussions about New York’s participation in a new federal scholarship tax credit program, which is expected to begin in 2027 and could provide additional financial assistance to families paying private school tuition.

The governor’s decision to participate in the program has been welcomed by Jewish education advocates, who have long sought additional avenues of financial relief for parents carrying the substantial expense of yeshiva tuition.

Hochul’s Boro Park appearance also followed a major tour of chassidishe communities in the Hudson Valley on Monday, when she traveled to Kiryas Yoel, Monsey and New Square.

During that trip, she visited schools, met with rabbonim and community leaders, and was welcomed by large gatherings of students and residents.

Among her stops was a visit with the Satmar Rebbe in Kiryas Yoel, followed by meetings with representatives of Viznitz institutions in Monsey and a visit with the Skverer Rebbe in New Square.

The governor’s latest appearance in Boro Park brought her outreach directly to one of the largest Orthodox Jewish neighborhoods in New York City.

Eichenstein, who represents Boro Park and surrounding neighborhoods in the State Assembly, has worked closely with Hochul on legislation affecting the frum community, including measures addressing religious accommodations and neighborhood concerns.

Earlier this year, Hochul signed legislation sponsored by Eichenstein and Sutton addressing sanitation enforcement on Friday afternoons, an issue that had created difficulties for Shabbos-observant residents.

The legislation established a mechanism allowing participating neighborhoods to permit earlier Friday garbage placement without subjecting residents to fines for failing to comply with regulations that conflicted with Shabbos observance.

The governor’s visit comes less than two weeks before the November 3 election, in which she is seeking another term as New York’s chief executive.

{Matzav.com}

The Trump administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday to overturn a federal judge’s order blocking construction of a major border security project in West Texas, arguing that the ruling is undermining national security, delaying efforts to combat illegal immigration and drug trafficking, and costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars each day.

In an emergency application filed October 21, the Justice Department urged the justices to lift an injunction that halted work across approximately 500 miles of the Big Bend region, a remote stretch of the U.S.-Mexico border that includes Big Bend National Park and surrounding private and state-owned land.

The administration is seeking permission to immediately resume construction while litigation challenging the project continues. It has also asked the Supreme Court to take up the case and reverse the lower court’s decision.

The legal confrontation follows an October 2 ruling by U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone in El Paso, who determined that the Department of Homeland Security had likely exceeded its legal authority by waiving dozens of federal environmental and other regulations to accelerate construction.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer sharply criticized the injunction in the administration’s emergency filing, describing the ruling as an unjustified interference with the federal government’s responsibility to secure the southern border.

“This case involves a baseless injunction that halts a major portion of the construction of the border wall,” Sauer wrote.

The administration maintains that Congress explicitly authorized the Department of Homeland Security to bypass certain legal requirements when necessary to expedite the construction of border barriers and related infrastructure.

At the center of the dispute is a federal law dating to 1996, later expanded through the REAL ID Act of 2005, that permits the homeland security secretary to waive legal requirements for certain border construction projects.

Former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and her successor, Markwayne Mullin, issued waivers between February and July, determining that the Big Bend region qualified as an area requiring additional infrastructure to prevent illegal entry.

Environmental organizations, local residents and other opponents challenged those determinations, arguing that the administration was improperly applying emergency construction powers to an area with historically low levels of illegal border crossings.

Judge Cardone agreed that the plaintiffs had demonstrated a likelihood of succeeding in their legal challenge.

“The Court finds that Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their major questions doctrine claim that the Big Bend Waivers were issued in excess of the Secretary’s authority,” Cardone wrote.

The judge ordered construction suspended throughout the affected region while the lawsuit proceeds, preventing the government from relying on the disputed waivers to continue work.

The Trump administration contends that the injunction threatens a critical component of its nationwide border security strategy.

According to the Justice Department, the Big Bend sector covers nearly one-quarter of the approximately 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border and contains a gap of more than 300 miles in existing border defenses.

Federal officials argue that leaving such a large stretch without sufficient barriers would encourage illegal immigrants, human smugglers and drug traffickers to redirect their activities into the region as security measures are strengthened elsewhere.

Sauer warned that the gap could “act as a dangerous magnet for cartels and other bad actors to exploit.”

The government further argued that halting the project would create substantial financial and operational consequences.

According to federal court filings, the construction suspension is costing the government approximately $462,800 per day, while withdrawing equipment and personnel from the affected sites and later redeploying them could result in additional expenses of approximately $7 million.

Before construction was halted, crews had already completed roughly three-quarters of a mile of border barriers and established temporary field offices, supply yards, water delivery systems and concrete production facilities.

The administration said the interruption was creating unnecessary delays to a project it considers essential for border enforcement.

In its filing, the Justice Department argued that the injunction was causing “irreversible delays, costs, and operational harms from halting already-begun construction.”

The government also cited apprehension and drug seizure figures to support its position that the Big Bend region requires additional security infrastructure.

According to administration figures, more than 89,000 people were apprehended attempting to cross illegally in the Big Bend sector between 2021 and 2025.

Opponents dispute the administration’s characterization of the region, pointing out that Big Bend has consistently recorded among the lowest numbers of illegal border crossings along the southern boundary.

They argue that the area’s rugged terrain and natural geographic barriers already discourage unauthorized crossings and that additional surveillance technology could provide security without extensive construction.

The project has generated opposition from environmental organizations, ranchers, local business owners and elected officials from both political parties.

Among the plaintiffs are the Center for Biological Diversity, a local river guide and an organization working to preserve a historic church in Ruidosa, Texas.

They contend that construction could damage wildlife habitats, disrupt tourism, interfere with access to the Rio Grande and threaten historically significant properties.

The controversy intensified in August after construction crews began clearing land in Big Bend National Park, prompting protests and additional legal challenges.

Big Bend National Park encompasses more than 800,000 acres of protected wilderness and is known for its mountains, desert landscapes, canyons and diverse wildlife.

Opponents maintain that extensive construction could permanently alter portions of the region.

“We’re deeply disappointed that the Trump administration is asking the Supreme Court for a green light to bulldoze one of America’s wildest, most extraordinary landscapes,” said Zeynep Graves, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity.

“Once Big Bend’s canyons, cultural treasures and wild ecosystems are destroyed, they’ll be lost forever. We’re confident the law is on our side and that only Congress can authorize something as consequential as walling off the entire U.S.-Mexico border. We won’t stop fighting for Big Bend until it’s protected forever.”

The administration has indicated that the project does not involve erecting a continuous 30-foot steel wall through Big Bend National Park itself.

Instead, the planned infrastructure includes patrol roads, surveillance cameras, sensors and vehicle barriers, while some privately owned areas outside the park could receive taller steel border fencing.

The dispute has also drawn attention because Texas Governor Greg Abbott previously said he had received assurances from Homeland Security Secretary Mullin that a wall or fence would not be built inside Big Bend National Park.

In August, Abbott said Mullin had assured him that there would be “no construction of any type of barrier at Big Bend National Park.”

The federal government has since maintained that its broader border security plans remain necessary, although the precise construction arrangements within protected areas have been subject to review.

The administration’s push to resume work is part of President Trump’s broader effort to strengthen physical barriers and surveillance capabilities along the southern border.

Congressional Republicans allocated approximately $46 billion to the Department of Homeland Security last year for border infrastructure, including steel barriers, vehicle obstacles, patrol roads and advanced surveillance systems.

The Big Bend project alone has been estimated at approximately $1.7 billion.

The Supreme Court application places the dispute before the justices at a time when the administration is seeking to accelerate border security construction and limit legal obstacles to its immigration enforcement agenda.

The case also raises a broader constitutional question concerning how much authority Congress may delegate to executive branch officials to suspend existing federal laws in the name of border security.

The administration argues that lawmakers deliberately provided the homeland security secretary with broad powers to expedite construction, while the plaintiffs contend that those powers cannot be exercised without regard to the statutory limits established by Congress.

The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on the emergency application. Until the justices intervene or the injunction is otherwise lifted, the construction restrictions imposed by Judge Cardone remain in effect.

{Matzav.com}

New York City has completed a massive expansion of its red-light camera program, installing automated enforcement cameras at 600 intersections throughout the five boroughs, quadrupling the number of locations where motorists can be ticketed for running red lights and reaching the maximum permitted under New York State law.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani and New York City Department of Transportation Commissioner Mike Flynn announced the completion of the expansion on Wednesday, October 21, marking the largest deployment of red-light cameras in the city’s history.

The new network covers intersections in Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, the Bronx and Staten Island, with cameras automatically photographing vehicles that enter intersections after traffic signals have turned red.

Motorists caught by the cameras face a $50 fine, with violations mailed directly to the registered owners of the vehicles. Unlike traditional moving violations issued by police officers, red-light camera tickets do not result in points against a driver’s license.

The expansion follows legislation signed by Governor Kathy Hochul in 2024 that increased the number of intersections eligible for red-light camera enforcement from 150 to 600. The city subsequently began an aggressive installation campaign, activating cameras at additional intersections throughout 2026.

City officials say the expanded enforcement network is intended to address dangerous driving behavior and reduce collisions involving motorists who disregard traffic signals.

According to the Department of Transportation, running red lights was a contributing factor in 22 percent of fatal crashes at New York City intersections between 2023 and 2025.

Transportation officials maintain that the camera program has produced significant improvements at intersections where the devices have been installed. Data collected by the city indicates that red-light violations have declined by more than 80 percent at camera-equipped intersections.

The city also reports that injuries resulting from rear-end collisions have fallen by nearly 60 percent at those locations, while injuries from T-bone crashes have declined by approximately 70 percent since camera installation.

Mayor Mamdani praised the completion of the expansion, arguing that automated enforcement has demonstrated its effectiveness in discouraging dangerous driving.

“Safer streets aren’t a guessing game — we know the tools proven to keep New Yorkers safe. Red light cameras help us get home safely by holding dangerous drivers accountable and preventing crashes before they happen,” Mamdani said.

“With all 600 intersections up and running, we are stopping dangerous behavior before tragedy can strike and making our streets safer for everyone who walks, bikes, drives or takes the bus.”

Flynn said the administration views the additional cameras as an important component of its broader campaign to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries.

“Red light cameras save lives and have proven to change driver behavior. This expansion will help reduce the unacceptable, selfish and dangerous rise in red light running we’ve seen on our streets since the pandemic,” Flynn said.

“We’re proud to have delivered on our commitment to complete this expansion this year, in tandem with the Mamdani administration’s Vision Zero commitments to life-saving street redesigns and safety programs that will usher in a new era of safer streets across the five boroughs.”

The cameras are being installed at locations selected by transportation officials based on several factors, including previous crashes, the frequency of red-light violations and intersections with histories of serious collisions.

Particular attention has been given to locations where vehicles have struck other automobiles from the side, commonly referred to as T-bone collisions, which can result in severe injuries.

The city says its enforcement data also indicates that the overwhelming majority of motorists who receive red-light camera tickets are not repeat offenders.

During 2025, approximately 95 percent of vehicles cited for running red lights received no more than one or two violations throughout the year. Fewer than 0.7 percent of vehicles received five or more tickets.

The data also shows that a substantial portion of the tickets are being issued to motorists who do not reside in New York City.

Approximately 39 percent of red-light camera violations involve vehicles registered outside the five boroughs, meaning drivers traveling into the city from surrounding communities, including New Jersey, Long Island and other parts of New York State, are also significantly affected by the expanded enforcement.

Under the city’s automated enforcement system, cameras capture photographic evidence of vehicles passing through intersections after the traffic signals turn red. The registered owner subsequently receives a Notice of Liability, generally within 30 days of the alleged violation.

The $50 penalty applies regardless of whether the registered owner was personally driving the vehicle at the time. Recipients can review photographic or video evidence of the alleged violation and have the right to challenge tickets through the city’s established adjudication procedures.

The program differs from New York City’s speed camera system, which monitors vehicles exceeding posted speed limits. Red-light cameras specifically target motorists who enter intersections against red traffic signals.

Although the city has now reached the 600-intersection limit authorized by state lawmakers, transportation safety advocates are already pushing for another expansion.

Ben Furnas, executive director of Transportation Alternatives, has called attention to the thousands of intersections throughout New York City that remain without automated red-light enforcement.

More than 10,000 intersections with traffic signals still lack red-light cameras, and advocates are hoping state lawmakers will consider legislation allowing the city to expand the program further during the 2027 legislative session.

Supporters of the cameras argue that automated enforcement provides a consistent deterrent against dangerous driving and reduces the need for police officers to be stationed at busy intersections.

The expansion also forms part of the city’s Vision Zero initiative, which seeks to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries through a combination of street redesigns, traffic enforcement and other safety measures.

With the installation of cameras at all 600 authorized intersections now completed, motorists traveling throughout New York City face a substantially larger network of automated traffic enforcement than existed at the beginning of the year.

Dozens of Israeli Air Force fighter jets and aerial refueling aircraft carried out an unusual long-range mission this week, flying over Syria and Iraq and approaching the Iranian border before returning to Israel, according to a report Wednesday evening by Israel’s Channel 12 News.

Although Israel notified the United States of the operation beforehand and described it as a military exercise intended to deter Iran, American sources reportedly suspect that Israeli officials had an additional objective: provoking an Iranian response that could provide justification for an Israeli military strike.

The operation reportedly took place overnight Monday into Tuesday, involving dozens of Israeli aircraft flying eastward through Syrian and Iraqi airspace toward Iran.

The formation included both fighter jets and refueling planes, suggesting an operation designed to demonstrate the Israeli Air Force’s ability to conduct missions at considerable distances from Israeli territory.

According to the report, the aircraft approached the Iranian border but did not enter Iranian airspace. They subsequently reversed course and returned to Israel.

Israeli officials had informed their American counterparts of the planned mission before the aircraft departed, presenting the flight as a deterrence exercise intended to send a warning to Tehran.

However, American officials familiar with the operation reportedly came away with a different assessment of Israel’s possible intentions.

According to the sources cited by Channel 12, Washington suspected that Israel was hoping its unusually provocative aerial maneuver would prompt an Iranian military reaction.

Such a response, American officials reportedly believed, could have given Israel grounds to launch an attack against Iranian targets.

The suggestion that Israel sought to draw Iran into a confrontation was based on the interpretation of American sources rather than any official Israeli acknowledgment of such a strategy.

No Israeli government or military official was quoted in the report confirming that provoking an Iranian response was among the mission’s objectives.

The reported operation comes amid continuing tensions between Israel and Iran, with both countries closely monitoring the possibility of renewed military confrontation.

The presence of aerial refueling aircraft alongside the fighter jets was particularly significant, given the extensive distances involved in potential Israeli operations against targets inside Iran.

The route through Syria and Iraq also underscored the Israeli Air Force’s ability to project military power far beyond Israel’s borders.

While Israeli officials characterized the flight as a demonstration of deterrence, the reported American suspicions point to differing assessments in Yerushalayim and Washington regarding the risks and objectives of such operations.

The report did not indicate that Iranian forces responded militarily to the flight or that any Israeli attack followed the mission.

The aircraft ultimately returned to Israel after approaching the Iranian border, concluding an operation that, according to the American sources, may have been intended to test Tehran’s willingness to respond.

{Matzav.com}

Israel’s Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara is urging the Supreme Court to consider imposing additional financial sanctions on individuals who have failed to comply with military service requirements, including the possible elimination of municipal property tax discounts, public transportation benefits, subsidized after-school programs, and government housing assistance.

The request, submitted Wednesday just six days before Israel’s Knesset elections, comes as the attorney general accuses the government of failing to adequately enforce military enlistment requirements, despite approximately 110,000 individuals currently being classified as draft avoiders or subject to final military reporting orders.

According to official figures included in the submission, as of September 8, 2026, a total of 110,330 individuals were either formally designated as draft avoiders or classified under what is known as Order 12, a status involving individuals who have received final military orders but have not fulfilled their reporting obligations.

The IDF estimates that approximately 81 percent of those individuals belong to the chareidi community, while the remaining 19 percent come from the general population, including cases that have accumulated over several decades.

The figures encompass two distinct legal categories and do not mean that all 110,330 individuals are yeshiva bochurim or have been formally declared draft avoiders.

In her submission, Baharav-Miara sharply criticized the government’s enforcement efforts, arguing that authorities have failed to use the full range of measures available to compel compliance with military service requirements.

“It cannot be said that the state, across all its branches, is doing everything within its power to combat this phenomenon. Far from it,” the submission stated.

The attorney general pointed to a Supreme Court ruling issued in November 2025 that required the government to formulate a civilian and economic enforcement policy within 45 days. More than ten months later, she noted, the required policy had still not been finalized.

The latest filing asks the court to consider issuing additional binding instructions that would allow government agencies to condition various financial benefits on an individual’s military status, without necessarily requiring new legislation.

Among the measures being considered is the elimination of municipal property tax discounts for individuals who have failed to resolve their military obligations. Similar restrictions could apply to reduced public transportation fares.

According to professional officials at Israel’s Finance Ministry, both measures could potentially be implemented through existing administrative authority, without requiring the Knesset to pass new legislation.

Another proposal involves withdrawing government subsidies for several after-school and vacation programs, including Nitzanim, Nitzanim During Vacations, and the Great Summer School program.

The submission notes that the financial value of the Nitzanim subsidy alone can exceed an average of 1,000 shekels per month per household.

Government legal officials have requested preparations to make eligibility for these subsidies conditional on military status beginning January 1, 2027.

The proposed restrictions could therefore have significant financial consequences for families whose children participate in subsidized educational programs.

Additional measures under consideration include limitations on government-supported housing loans, rental assistance, and other financial benefits.

However, the proposals have not yet been implemented across the board. Some would require decisions by the relevant government ministers and ministries, while others could depend on further instructions from the Supreme Court.

The attorney general’s submission also provided figures illustrating the gap between the number of individuals who have not complied with military reporting requirements and the number actually arrested or prosecuted.

During September, authorities arrested 212 individuals classified as draft avoiders or military deserters. According to IDF estimates, approximately 163 of those arrested were chareidim.

Of 360 indictments filed against individuals accused of evading military service, only 49 involved members of the chareidi community, according to estimates provided by military prosecutors.

The filing also revealed that a joint enforcement operation planned by the IDF and Israel Police for October had been postponed for a second time because of disagreements over personnel allocations.

Military officials maintained that a police request for several hundred additional soldiers to assist with the operation was impractical. Police officials, however, presented a different account regarding the purpose of the requested reinforcements.

The dispute has complicated efforts to conduct coordinated arrests, adding to the attorney general’s criticism that the government has failed to fully utilize its enforcement capabilities.

Meanwhile, the IDF reported an increase in chareidi enlistment, with the number of chareidim joining the military rising from 2,811 in the previous recruitment year to 4,298 during the 2025 recruitment year.

Despite the increase, the state’s submission maintained that the current rate of enlistment remains far below the military’s manpower requirements.

The attorney general’s latest intervention comes amid growing tensions over the arrests of yeshiva bochurim, with demonstrations erupting in several locations across Eretz Yisroel in recent days.

In Kfar Saba, protesters gathered outside a police station after Elchonon Damati, a talmid at Yeshivas Torah B’Tifartah in Elad, was arrested when he appeared at the station in connection with a traffic incident. A routine check revealed that he was classified as a military draft avoider, and he was transferred to military custody.

In another incident in Yerushalayim, military police reportedly contacted a yeshiva bochur and informed him that a delivery was waiting outside his building. When he came downstairs, officers arrested him.

The arrests have prompted criticism from chareidi political leaders, who have accused authorities of intensifying enforcement measures immediately before the elections.

The attorney general’s submission emphasized that any restrictions on financial benefits must be applied equally to all individuals who have failed to resolve their military service obligations, regardless of whether they belong to the chareidi community.

It also clarified that the proposed measures are not intended to affect populations that are not subject to military conscription.

The state is now asking the Supreme Court to consider additional intervention, including operative orders requiring the withdrawal of financial benefits and the establishment of an early deadline for another update on the enforcement activities of the IDF and Israel Police.

{Matzav.com}

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, has been ordered to pay $25 billion in penalties after a New Mexico judge ruled that the social media giant repeatedly deceived consumers about its handling of personal information in connection with the Cambridge Analytica data scandal, delivering another major legal blow to Mark Zuckerberg’s technology empire.

The sweeping judgment, issued Wednesday, October 21, follows a September jury verdict finding that Meta violated New Mexico consumer protection laws tens of millions of times through misleading representations about the privacy and security of Facebook users’ personal information.

The lawsuit, filed by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez in 2021, centered on revelations that Cambridge Analytica, a British political consulting company involved in President Donald Trump’s 2016 election campaign, obtained information belonging to as many as 87 million Facebook users without their knowledge or permission.

The information was gathered through a third-party Facebook application and subsequently used to develop detailed profiles of American voters. The controversy erupted publicly in 2018, raising serious questions about Facebook’s privacy protections and the extent to which outside companies could access information about its users.

On September 25, jurors determined that Meta had committed more than 43 million violations of the state’s consumer protection statutes. Each violation was potentially subject to a penalty of $5,000, leaving the court to determine the appropriate financial punishment.

New Mexico District Judge Francis Mathew ultimately imposed a $25 billion penalty, substantially below the maximum of approximately $219 billion permitted under state law. State prosecutors had urged the court to assess between $35 billion and $40 billion in penalties.

In his 20-page decision, Mathew said the company’s misconduct involved fundamental aspects of its relationship with users and extended over a prolonged period.

“Facebook’s wrongdoing — over the course of years and systematically broadcast to the public — goes to the heart of Facebook’s core business practices,” Matthew wrote in a 20-page filing explaining his decision.

The jury’s findings were based in part on statements issued by Facebook and its senior executives concerning the Cambridge Analytica incident and the company’s broader privacy practices. Of the 29 statements examined during the proceedings, jurors concluded that 26 were misleading.

The ruling represents one of the largest financial penalties ever imposed on a technology company in a state consumer protection case, although Meta has made clear that it intends to challenge the judgment.

Vincent Joralemon, a senior fellow at the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology, said the underlying evidence against Meta could make overturning the liability findings difficult, even if an appellate court ultimately reduces the financial penalty.

“The fact pattern is pretty damning for Meta, and I dont see much to dispute there,” Joralemon told The Post.

“The actual damages might get reduced on appeal, but the district court judge did a pretty good job trying to make these as reasonable as possible (and already reduced by something like 90% of the maximum allowable under New Mexico law).”

Meta had argued before the ruling that any penalty should be limited to $3.45 billion. The company warned that imposing a substantially larger financial punishment could discourage businesses from operating in New Mexico and create damaging economic consequences.

Following Wednesday’s decision, Meta Chief Legal Officer C.J. Mahoney reiterated the company’s opposition to the judgment and confirmed that an appeal would be pursued.

“At its core, this lawsuit seeks to impose a tax on speech to enforce new rules for what people can say online,” he said in a statement.

“Meta will continue to build a safe and free platform to connect millions of Americans, grow small businesses, and help the country maintain its competitive edge.”

The Cambridge Analytica case adds to a mounting series of costly legal challenges confronting Meta over its treatment of users, protection of minors, privacy safeguards and the alleged harmful effects of its social media platforms.

New Mexico has emerged as a particularly aggressive state in pursuing litigation against the company. In March, a jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million in civil penalties after finding that it misrepresented the safety of its platforms for children and failed to adequately protect young users from online predators.

That case resulted in further financial consequences in August, when a judge imposed an additional $567 million in penalties related to the same allegations.

Meta also reached an $18 billion settlement in August with a coalition of 48 state attorneys general who accused the company of contributing to social media addiction and mental health problems among teenagers.

Under the terms of that agreement, Meta allocated $459 million toward penalties sought by certain states in connection with the Cambridge Analytica controversy.

The company continues to face thousands of additional lawsuits nationwide involving online safety, privacy, social media addiction and other aspects of its business operations.

The New Mexico ruling drew praise from Fairplay, an organization advocating stronger protections for children and families online, which described the $25 billion judgment as a “landmark penalty.”

Fairplay Executive Director Josh Golin said the case illustrated the seriousness of Meta’s alleged disregard for consumer privacy and the need for meaningful financial consequences.

“Everyone, regardless of their political beliefs, should be horrified by Meta’s reckless disregard of privacy law and its brazen lies about its practices,” Fairplay executive director Josh Golin said in a statement.

“Every internal document we’ve seen from Meta demonstrates that the company only cares about its bottom line, so we congratulate New Mexico for hitting the company where it hurts.”

The judgment also carries an additional financial consequence: the court ordered interest to accrue at an annual rate of 15% until the penalty is paid in full. That provision could substantially increase Meta’s liability if the judgment survives its planned appeal.

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez welcomed the ruling as a major victory for consumers, saying it demonstrated that even the world’s largest technology corporations must answer for violations of state law.

“This is a historic day for New Mexico and for consumers across the country,” Torrez said. “For too long, powerful technology companies have operated as though their size and influence put them beyond the reach of the law. A New Mexico jury found nearly 44 million violations of our consumer protection statute, and this penalty order demonstrates that those violations carry real consequences. We took on one of the largest companies in the world because New Mexicans deserve honesty, accountability, and the protection of their personal information. Today’s result makes clear that no corporation is too powerful to be held accountable.”

The attorney general emphasized that New Mexico had chosen to pursue its claims independently rather than resolve them through a broader multistate settlement, allowing the allegations to be presented to a jury and resulting in a finding of 43,899,725 violations of state law.

“This case has always been about more than one company or one scandal,” Torrez said. “It is about whether corporations can mislead consumers about what happens to their personal information without facing meaningful consequences. New Mexico stood its ground, took this case to trial, and secured a verdict establishing millions of violations of our law. This outcome reinforces a fundamental principle, companies that do business in our state must follow our laws and respect the rights of our people.”

The court has not yet resolved whether Meta must also make changes to its business practices. Judge Mathew reserved that question for additional legal arguments, leaving open the possibility of further court-ordered restrictions beyond the financial penalty.

The judgment remains subject to appeal, meaning the ultimate amount Meta will be required to pay, and when New Mexico might receive the money, have yet to be determined.