Feed aggregator

Rav Yaish Davda, a distinguished Sephardic talmid chochom renowned for his extraordinary hasmadah, has written a rare handwritten letter of chizuk to his nephew, yeshiva bochur Eliyahu Davda, who is being held in an Israeli military prison following his arrest over his military draft status. In the letter, Rav Davda draws a striking comparison between the current draft controversy and the Roman decrees against Torah learning, declaring that the true protectors of Klal Yisroel are the children learning Torah, yeshiva bochurim, avreichim and talmidei chachomim.

Eliyahu Davda was arrested by military police in the middle of the night at his parents’ home, just days before the beginning of the winter zeman. According to reports in the chareidi media, the bochur had followed the directives of Gedolei Yisroel regarding dealings with military authorities.

His arrest has generated considerable distress and anger throughout the chareidi community, prompting a series of letters of support addressed to the bochur and his parents.

Among those who have written to the family are senior members of the Moetzes Chachmei HaTorah, including Rav Moshe Maya, the senior member of the Moetzes, and Rosh Yeshiva Rav Avrohom Salim, along with other prominent roshei yeshiva.

An additional letter of chizuk has now emerged from Eliyahu’s uncle, Rav Yaish Davda, a renowned Torah scholar who rarely leaves the confines of his home and whose decision to write a personal letter is regarded as highly unusual.

The handwritten message, obtained by Matzav.com, offers both encouragement to the imprisoned bochur and an extended hashkafic discussion of the obligation to remain steadfast in Torah learning despite outside pressure.

Rav Davda begins by addressing his nephew with words of admiration, describing him as a devoted ben Torah who is constantly immersed in learning. He also praises Eliyahu’s father, Rav Yitzchok Davda, his own brother, as a righteous talmid chochom, and expresses a bracha that he merit to spread Torah and raise many talmidim.

The letter then turns to the well-known account in Maseches Brachos 61b concerning the Roman government’s decree prohibiting Jews from studying Torah.

Despite the danger, Rav Akiva continued gathering groups of Jews publicly to learn Torah. When Pappus ben Yehudah questioned why he was not afraid of the authorities, Rav Akiva responded with the famous parable of the fox and the fish.

In the parable, a fox walking along a riverbank observed fish swimming frantically to escape the nets and traps threatening them. The fox suggested that they leave the water and join him on dry land, where they could live together without fear.

The fish rejected the suggestion, explaining that although they faced danger in the water, leaving it would mean certain death. If they were vulnerable even in the environment that sustained their lives, how much greater would their danger be outside it?

Rav Akiva explained that the same principle applied to Klal Yisroel. Torah learning is the source of Jewish life, and abandoning it in response to persecution would be far more dangerous than continuing to learn despite the threats.

The Gemara relates that Rav Akiva was subsequently arrested and imprisoned for teaching Torah, while Pappus was also incarcerated, but for unrelated, insignificant matters.

When Pappus encountered Rav Akiva in prison, he acknowledged the difference between their circumstances, praising Rav Akiva for having been imprisoned over Torah learning while lamenting that he himself had been arrested for trivial matters.

Drawing on this account, Rav Davda identifies seven lessons that he believes are directly applicable to the challenges facing yeshiva bochurim today.

His first point compares the Roman prohibition against Torah study with the present military draft legislation and enforcement measures. Rav Davda describes the contemporary situation as resembling a decree of religious persecution, arguing that its underlying purpose is to undermine the Torah world in Eretz Yisroel.

He then emphasizes that the appropriate response to such pressure is an even greater commitment to Torah learning.

Just as Rav Akiva continued publicly teaching Torah despite the Roman decree, Rav Davda writes that the current circumstances demand increased hasmadah. Someone accustomed to learning one chapter, he says, should now undertake to learn two.

His third point addresses those who attempt to persuade yeshiva bochurim to enter military service, comparing their arguments to the question Pappus posed to Rav Akiva about the danger of defying the authorities.

Rav Davda warns that such persuasion can be presented in appealing language, with promises of opportunities and benefits that might appear attractive to young men.

Expanding on the fox’s invitation to the fish, he describes the message directed at yeshiva bochurim: “Become soldiers like us, and you will receive status, benefits, education and professions.”

He cautions his nephew against becoming drawn into arguments with those promoting military enlistment, writing that one should “not argue with them at all, so as not to become sullied.”

Rav Davda’s fourth lesson continues the comparison between the fox’s promises and what he regards as the spiritual dangers confronting young men who leave the protective environment of the yeshiva.

He then turns to the fish’s declaration that even in the water, the source of their lives, they faced danger. Rav Davda explains that even those who remain within the world of Torah must constantly strengthen themselves against the spiritual challenges of the generation, including inappropriate sights in the streets and the widespread waste of precious time.

His sixth point focuses on what he describes as the spiritual dangers of military life. In his letter, Rav Davda warns of serious violations of kedushah, inappropriate behavior, mockery, idle conversation and instances of chillul Shabbos that he says occur without considerations of pikuach nefesh.

The seventh lesson returns to the conclusion of the Gemara, in which Pappus expresses regret that he was imprisoned over meaningless matters while Rav Akiva was imprisoned because of his dedication to Torah.

Rav Davda writes that if it has been decreed upon a person to experience imprisonment, that experience will come about in one way or another. The distinction, he explains, is whether the imprisonment is connected to something worthwhile, such as Torah learning, or to matters of no spiritual value.

Toward the end of the letter, Rav Davda presents what he describes as the true source of protection for Klal Yisroel.

In a particularly emphatic passage, he writes that the true army consists of the children studying Torah, the yeshiva bochurim, avreichim and talmidei chachomim, whose learning provides spiritual protection for the Jewish people.

“We protect the Jewish people, and through the merit of Torah, the world continues to exist,” he writes.

He supports this declaration with the possuk in Yirmiyahu, “If not for My covenant, day and night, I would not have established the laws of heaven and earth,” which Chazal explain as referring to the indispensable role of Torah learning in sustaining creation.

Rav Davda then cites the account in Melachim II, chapter 19, describing the miraculous destruction of the Assyrian army of Sancheriv, when a malach of Hashem struck down 185,000 members of the invading force in a single night.

He notes the Gemara’s explanation that those killed included the commanders of the Assyrian forces, indicating that the total army was vastly larger.

The letter also references the possuk in Yeshayahu, “And the yoke shall be destroyed because of the oil,” together with Rashi’s explanation, based on Chazal, that the yoke of Sancheriv was broken in the merit of the oil burning in the lamps of the shuls and batei medrash.

Rav Davda points to these sources as illustrations of the protection that Torah and avodas Hashem provide for Klal Yisroel, adding that numerous other pesukim and teachings express the same principle.

He concludes with a heartfelt bracha to his nephew, expressing the hope that he will soon be released from prison and return to his learning in yeshiva.

“May it be Hashem’s will that, with His help, you will be released speedily and return to Torah learning in the holy yeshiva, marry and have children and grandchildren, and that the possuk be fulfilled in you and in us: ‘One thing I have asked of Hashem, that I shall seek: that I may dwell in the house of Hashem all the days of my life.’ Amen. May the redemption come soon. Yaish Davda, your uncle, who awaits good news. Amen.”

Eliyahu Davda, a talmid of Yeshivas Orchos Meir in the Bayit Vegan neighborhood of Yerushalayim, was arrested at approximately 4 a.m. on October 7 at his family’s home in Be’er Sheva. He was subsequently transferred to Military Prison 10 and sentenced to 20 days of imprisonment.

The arrest has prompted additional letters from prominent rabbonim, including Rav Tzion Boaron, Rav Avrohom Salim, Rav Yehudah Cohen and Rav Meir Vaknin, rosh yeshiva of Orchos Meir.

Rav Salim, in his own letter, expressed deep pain over the imprisonment and assured the bochur that the Torah world stands behind him. Rav Vaknin also called for a gathering outside Prison 10, where talmidim and rabbonim assembled to express solidarity and offer chizuk.

Attorney Shlomo Hadad, representing the Chayei Olam organization, is expected to visit Eliyahu at Prison 10 and personally deliver the letters of support and chizuk sent by Gedolei Yisroel and roshei yeshiva.

{Matzav.com}

The Gerer Rebbe is expected to issue a personal directive calling on his chassidim to vote for United Torah Judaism in Israel’s upcoming Knesset elections, a significant development following weeks of tensions between Ger and Degel HaTorah that had raised concerns about the party’s electoral strength.

The Rebbe’s message is scheduled to appear Sunday in Hamodia, the newspaper affiliated with Agudas Yisroel. It will instruct Gerer chassidim to support the United Torah Judaism and Shabbos list, represented on the ballot by the letter Gimmel.

According to the report, the Rebbe’s statement reads: “As the elections approach, I hereby ask all members of our community, may they live and be well, to vote for the United Torah Judaism and Shabbos list, whose symbol is Gimmel, Agudas Yisroel.”

The Rebbe concludes with a bracha: “May Hashem help that through this, the honor of Heaven will be increased.”

The message, reportedly prepared on Motzoei Shabbos, represents an important development in efforts to restore cooperation between Ger and Degel HaTorah ahead of the elections.

For weeks, party officials had been concerned that Ger might withhold its extensive organizational resources from the campaign, potentially weakening United Torah Judaism’s turnout operation.

Efforts to resolve the disagreement intensified Thursday, when United Torah Judaism chairman MK Yaakov Asher held a lengthy meeting with MK Yitzchok Goldknopf, a senior representative of Ger, in an attempt to reach understandings and restore cooperation between the factions.

Earlier Saturday, figures within Degel HaTorah expressed cautious optimism that an agreement with Ger could be reached, although tensions reportedly persisted over the involvement of Motty Babchik, a prominent Gerer askan.

Some Degel HaTorah officials accused Babchik of attempting to undermine the negotiations. However, no public evidence was presented to substantiate those allegations.

The dispute originated in disagreements over the proposed military draft legislation and the political pressure that should be applied to the government over delays in advancing the measure.

Ger had demanded a more aggressive response to the government’s failure to move forward with legislation addressing the status of yeshiva bochurim, while Degel HaTorah opposed adopting the more confrontational approach advocated by Ger.

Gerer representatives maintained that previous commitments to advance the legislation and increase pressure on the government had not been honored. They also argued that Ger had paid a political price for its position without securing the promised results.

The disagreement was further complicated by internal divisions within Agudas Yisroel, where tensions had developed between the faction associated with Goldknopf and MK Yaakov Tessler and the group aligned with MK Meir Porush and Chomas Toras Yisroel.

Those disputes raised concerns that the party’s internal struggles could discourage chassidim from participating in the election or weaken the organized turnout operations traditionally maintained by its constituent communities.

Additional reporting indicated that Goldknopf visited the Gerer Rebbe before Shabbos and again afterward, with discussions focusing on the wording and timing of the public announcement. The decision was ultimately made to publish the message in Hamodia without further delay.

Sources within Ger described the announcement as an effort to end speculation about the chassidus’s intentions and put to rest reports suggesting that its members might boycott the election.

The dispute had also attracted attention outside United Torah Judaism. Reports indicated that figures close to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu were concerned about the possible electoral consequences of the disagreement and had considered becoming involved in efforts to resolve it.

Degel HaTorah, however, rejected outside intervention. According to reports, Yaakov Asher conveyed a message to Netanyahu’s office requesting that it refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of the chareidi parties.

The electoral significance of Ger’s position stems from its large, highly organized voting base, which has traditionally played an important role in United Torah Judaism’s election campaigns.

Political reporting has estimated Ger’s electoral strength at approximately one Knesset seat. Within United Torah Judaism, officials have been particularly concerned about the party’s ability to secure an eighth mandate, making the participation of Gerer voters an important factor in the campaign.

The Rebbe’s announcement addresses the immediate question of whether Gerer chassidim are being instructed to vote Gimmel. However, a separate question remains regarding the extent to which the chassidus will activate its election-day organizational apparatus.

Some reports have noted that the new announcement does not include the explicit instruction to work on behalf of the party that appeared in previous election directives. As a result, it remains unclear whether Ger’s campaign machinery will operate at its customary level.

With the November 3 elections approaching, the public declaration marks a significant change from the uncertainty of recent weeks, even as the practical details of Ger’s participation in the United Torah Judaism campaign remain to be determined.

President Donald Trump’s newly appointed White House press secretary, Katie Zacharia, is leaving her position after just five days, following a widely criticized debut at the briefing room podium and mounting questions about her professional credentials. The abrupt departure has stunned White House reporters, several of whom say her appointment was a serious miscalculation that exposed weaknesses in the administration’s communications operation.

Zacharia, who succeeded Karoline Leavitt following her departure in August, delivered her first White House press briefing Tuesday but quickly attracted criticism for appearing nervous, struggling to communicate effectively and taking questions from only three reporters before ending the session.

By Friday, her brief tenure had effectively come to an end, with White House correspondents offering sharply critical assessments of her performance and questioning how she had been selected for one of the most demanding public-facing positions in the federal government.

“Brutal,” one White House correspondent told Fox News Digital when asked to describe Zacharia’s short-lived appointment.

Another reporter said the difficulties were apparent almost immediately after Zacharia began speaking at her first briefing, particularly when compared with the performance of her predecessor.

“I knew she was out two minutes into her prepared remarks on Tuesday,” a second White House reporter told Fox News Digital. “It was just too drastically different from Karoline. We were all shocked after.

“Karoline was beautiful and hardcore MAGA … and dignified and professional and substantive. She set a new standard for press secretaries. You can’t just be hot and good on TV.”

A third correspondent expressed astonishment that Trump had selected Zacharia in the first place, arguing that the president generally demonstrates strong instincts when evaluating whether potential appointees possess the qualities needed for prominent public roles.

“Usually, he’s spot on about who has ‘it’ and who doesn’t.

“There is no excuse for Katie’s first briefing performance,” the reporter said. “In that role, you have to be the best communicator because your job is speaking to the American people on the president’s behalf. No one expected her to have all the answers or even most of them. But I expected basic communication skills that were simply not there.”

Another member of the White House press corps suggested Zacharia might have improved with additional preparation, but acknowledged that her initial performance had been exceptionally poor.

“She probably could have been better than Karine Jean-Pierre if she had more time to prepare. But it was a brutal start,” a fourth White House reporter told Fox News Digital.

The criticism extended beyond Zacharia’s difficulties at the podium. Questions about her repeated assertions that she had worked as a lawyer emerged as a potentially more damaging controversy than her handling of the briefing itself.

One correspondent described the concerns surrounding her legal credentials as a “bigger threat” to her position than the widely criticized appearance before reporters.

The questions over Zacharia’s background intensified scrutiny of the White House’s vetting process and raised concerns about whether officials had adequately examined her professional qualifications before placing her in such a prominent position.

A fifth White House correspondent offered a more complicated assessment, arguing that Zacharia bore responsibility for accepting a position for which she appeared unprepared, while also criticizing Trump for appointing her.

The reporter described Zacharia as “manifestly unqualified for” the position and suggested that questions about her embellished professional background were bound to emerge once she assumed the role.

“On the other hand, shame on the president,” the correspondent said. “He was clearly getting antsy and impulsive. He wanted his new press secretary now, and he wasn’t going to let mean old Susie Wiles tell him to wait while she convinced someone more competent and more prepared for one of the hardest jobs in government to actually take that job.”

The correspondent argued that the administration already employed experienced communications officials capable of handling the position, specifically identifying Anna Kelly and Lauren Bis as potential alternatives.

According to the reporter, those officials possessed the necessary professional skills but lacked the television-ready appearance that Trump reportedly values in high-profile public representatives.

The correspondent suggested that neither woman fit the president’s preference for “central casting,” despite their qualifications.

“He took someone who seemed like a nice young woman who was defending him on TV, doing an OK job of that, and subjected her to a massive amount of humiliation and made her a national laughingstock because he didn’t want to be told no,” the reporter said of Zacharia.

“I don’t want to say he ruined her life, but she’s gonna be a punchline for a very long time. And that’s not fair.”

The episode has also fueled criticism from reporters who believe the administration’s communications problems extend beyond Zacharia’s individual performance.

A sixth White House correspondent argued that the identity of the press secretary was ultimately irrelevant because of the difficulties involved in representing a president whose public statements and positions can change rapidly.

The reporter said it “doesn’t matter” who occupies the position under the current administration.

“Trump lies every day about everything and frequently changes his mind completely, leaving his staff looking foolish,” the correspondent told Fox News Digital.

NBC News White House correspondent Garrett Haake offered a broader assessment, arguing that the controversy surrounding Zacharia had become another distraction for the administration as the midterm elections approached.

“The ouster of now-former Press Sec Katie Zacharia highlights a bigger problem for the Trump White House two weeks til the midterms: They’re struggling to drive any message. Meandering rallies, staff stories taking up oxygen, long hard-to-hear gaggles, no briefings,” Haake wrote on X.

White House communications director Steven Cheung strongly rejected the criticism, accusing members of the press corps of ridiculing someone who had accepted a difficult government position while being unwilling to endure similar scrutiny themselves.

“There is nothing more cringe than a bunch of reporters cackling amongst themselves because they’ll never have the talent to take on a job as important as press secretary,” White House communications director Steven Cheung told Fox News Digital.

“It’s easy to sling arrows at others, but when they are on the receiving end, they’ll complain like it’s the end of the world. Reporters have the thinnest skin.”

Zacharia’s departure was confirmed Friday when Fox News senior White House correspondent Peter Doocy reported that she would be “transitioning out” of the position.

The announcement followed comments from Trump suggesting that he had personally encouraged Zacharia to reconsider whether she wanted to remain in the job.

“I just spoke to her about it. I said, ‘Katie, is this really for you?'” Trump said. “I said to her, ‘Honestly, if I were you, I’d reconsider. You think about it.

“Maybe it’s not for her,” he later added.

Trump also defended Zacharia against the intense criticism, suggesting that reporters had treated her unfairly. He denied that he had simply fired her and expressed concern about the personal toll of the controversy.

The turmoil began almost immediately after Zacharia was appointed on October 9. She formally began her duties the following week and conducted her first briefing on October 13, appearing before the White House press corps for approximately 14 minutes.

During that appearance, she answered only three questions, drawing criticism over both the brevity of the briefing and her apparent difficulty responding confidently to reporters.

Zacharia subsequently defended the abbreviated session, explaining that she had received limited preparation time and had sought to leave room in the day’s schedule for Trump to answer questions himself.

The scrutiny intensified when questions arose about her description of herself as an attorney. Zacharia, a graduate of Pepperdine University’s law school, acknowledged during a television interview that she had not passed the California bar examination and had never obtained a license to practice law in the United States.

She maintained that her professional background included work involving international legal transactions in China and defended her previous use of the term lawyer. Critics questioned whether those explanations adequately accounted for the way she had presented her credentials.

Zacharia previously worked as a senior communications adviser for Trump Media & Technology Group, the company behind Truth Social, and briefly served in a public affairs position at the Department of Homeland Security.

Her departure made her tenure one of the shortest in White House press secretary history, ending before she had an opportunity to conduct a second briefing.

Despite the controversy, Zacharia subsequently issued a public statement praising Trump and expressing gratitude for the opportunity to serve in his administration.

The White House now faces another search for a permanent press secretary following Leavitt’s departure in August. Leavitt, who had become one of the administration’s most recognizable public representatives, subsequently joined Fox News as a contributor.

Trump has indicated that he is not rushing to announce a replacement, leaving the administration to manage its communications operation during the final weeks before the November 3 midterm elections.

The United States military says Iran has failed in its efforts to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, with approximately 97% of commercial vessels attempting to cross the strategically vital waterway successfully completing their journeys despite repeated Iranian attacks. American forces are simultaneously protecting international shipping and enforcing a strict blockade on Iranian maritime trade, according to senior US Central Command officials.

US Navy Capt. Tim Hawkins, a spokesman for CENTCOM, said American military personnel have helped safeguard thousands of merchant vessels traveling through the strait, frustrating Tehran’s attempts to disrupt one of the world’s most important energy transportation routes.

The comments came after a Singapore-flagged, Cyprus-owned container ship, the GFS Pride, was struck by an Iranian projectile Wednesday while traveling through the Strait of Hormuz. The vessel caught fire and subsequently sank as crews attempted to tow it toward shore.

Speaking to Fox News Digital, Hawkins emphasized that although Iranian forces have continued targeting civilian shipping, most of their attacks have failed to prevent vessels from reaching their destinations.

“The vast majority of Iran’s attempted attacks on innocent civilian mariners transiting an international waterway, being the Strait of Hormuz, they are unsuccessful,” Hawkins said.

He credited the US military’s coordinated maritime security operations with allowing commercial traffic to continue despite the dangers posed by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

“As a matter of fact, the U.S. military has assisted in providing coordinated protection for thousands of ships that have safely transited.

“That translates to about 97% of the ships that have sought to transit the Strait of Hormuz have done so successfully without being hit by an Iranian projectile.

“But let’s be clear here. What the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran is doing is unjustified, and it’s also unsuccessful because they are not achieving their objective of closing the Strait of Hormuz,” he added.

Hawkins rejected suggestions that Tehran had succeeded in bringing shipping through the waterway to a halt, stressing that vessels were continuing to move through the strait.

“It is open, it is available for transit and we’ve seen that transit continue this very day.”

The Strait of Hormuz, which connects the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea, is one of the world’s most strategically significant maritime passages. Disruptions to shipping through the narrow corridor can have major consequences for international energy supplies and global markets.

CENTCOM Commander Adm. Brad Cooper also addressed the Iranian attacks in a Friday update, accusing the Revolutionary Guard of repeatedly targeting commercial vessels and causing civilian deaths.

“In recent days and months, we have seen the IRGC continually attack merchant ships transiting the Strait of Hormuz, and, in many cases, kill innocent civilian mariners.

“The International Maritime Organization reports that more than 20 civilian mariners have been killed by Iran’s attacks against commercial shipping since February,” Cooper continued.

Despite those attacks, Cooper reported that commercial traffic has continued at a substantial pace, supported by American forces working with regional allies.

“Over the last seven days alone, about 400 merchant ships have sailed through the Strait. U.S. forces have also assisted Gulf partners in shipping over 100 million barrels of crude oil during the same period, adding to the more than 1.3 billion barrels of crude we have helped regional allies ship through the Strait in recent months.”

The figures underscore the scale of the American-led effort to preserve maritime access while Iran attempts to use the strait as leverage in its ongoing confrontation with the United States and its regional partners.

Hawkins praised the American military personnel deployed across the Middle East, emphasizing that they are carrying out two demanding operations simultaneously: defending international shipping against Iranian attacks and preventing unauthorized maritime commerce with Iran.

He said “every American should be proud of American service members who are serving in the Middle East, in particular focusing on doing two things at once as it relates to Iran.

“And one is helping maintain flow through the Strait of Hormuz in the form of commercial vessels despite Iran’s unjustified aggression,” Hawkins said, noting that thousands of ships have crossed through the waterway over the last few months, “in addition to more than 1 billion barrels of crude oil.

The second component of the American mission involves maintaining a naval blockade that restricts Iran’s ability to import and export goods without US authorization.

“At the same time that they are encouraging traffic flow in support of international shipping, they are maintaining a steel wall blockade against Iran. There have been no exports or imports to Iran without U.S. permission in the form of allowing humanitarian ships to go through,” Hawkins continued.

The blockade is intended to exert economic pressure on Tehran while allowing commercial vessels serving other countries in the Persian Gulf to continue operating.

“So, that shows the precision, dedication and professionalism of our troops who are executing this complex mission — not just one — but two at the same time.”

More than 50,000 American military personnel are currently stationed throughout the Middle East, according to Hawkins, supporting maritime security operations, regional air defenses and other missions connected to the confrontation with Iran.

The latest American assurances come amid an intensified series of attacks on commercial shipping. Maritime reports indicate that at least 10 vessels were targeted in or near the Strait of Hormuz over several days this week, including six incidents in a single day, making it one of the most dangerous periods for shipping since the conflict began in February.

The GFS Pride was among the vessels hit during the escalation. The container ship caught fire after being struck and later sank near Oman. All 21 crew members were safely evacuated, according to maritime reporting.

Another cargo vessel, the Cape Dao, also sank near the strait following damage sustained in an earlier attack. One crew member was killed in that incident, underscoring the continuing dangers faced by civilian sailors.

Although CENTCOM maintains that most ships attempting the passage are reaching their destinations without being struck, the attacks have significantly disrupted commercial operations. Shipping companies face heightened security risks, increased insurance expenses and the possibility of lengthy delays.

Industry tracking has also shown that overall shipping activity remains substantially below prewar levels, even as American officials emphasize the continued movement of vessels through the strait.

Iranian authorities have repeatedly threatened to restrict access to the waterway, while American commanders insist that Tehran cannot unilaterally close an international shipping route essential to the global economy.

The confrontation has created a complex military situation in which US forces are working to protect commercial traffic moving between the Persian Gulf and international markets while simultaneously restricting maritime access to Iran itself.

Hawkins said the American mission also depends on extensive cooperation with regional governments, particularly Gulf countries facing the threat of Iranian missile and drone attacks.

He praised the readiness and professionalism of American troops and their regional partners, saying they remain committed to defending shipping lanes and protecting allied territory.

“They are highly vigilant, they are highly dedicated and they’re serving with courage and bravery. And they’re doing so alongside our regional allies and partners. It shouldn’t be forgotten that we continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with our Gulf allies and partners to help them defend their airspace from unjustified and unwarranted attacks from Iran, and we have been highly successful in working together. And will continue to do that,” he said.

House Majority Whip Tom Emmer is calling for Democratic Congresswoman Ilhan Omar to face imprisonment and deportation if a federal investigation determines that she or her father falsified immigration documents to obtain her American citizenship, escalating a bitter political confrontation surrounding the Minnesota lawmaker just weeks before the midterm elections.

Emmer, a Minnesota Republican who holds the third-highest leadership position in the House of Representatives, said the allegations against Omar must be thoroughly investigated and argued that any proven deception in the citizenship process should carry serious legal consequences.

The controversy centers on questions about Omar’s age when her father became a naturalized American citizen in 2000. Federal investigators are examining allegations that her birth year may have been misrepresented on immigration paperwork, potentially allowing her to obtain citizenship through her father’s naturalization when she otherwise would have been required to apply independently.

Omar has categorically rejected the allegations, accusing President Donald Trump and his administration of using federal law enforcement agencies to intimidate political opponents. Democratic leaders have similarly condemned the investigation, particularly after federal agents searched Omar’s Washington, D.C., residence earlier this week.

Speaking to Fox News Digital, Emmer said questions surrounding Omar’s immigration history had circulated for years and insisted that the matter should not be dismissed merely because she is an elected member of Congress.

Emmer said “there have been rumors for years” concerning Omar’s background and maintained that the investigation should establish whether any federal laws were violated.

“I would say, first, she should probably serve time in the gray bar motel and then get the hell out of here. She should go back to where she came from” if the allegations are proven to be true, Emmer said. “If it’s determined that she lied to gain citizenship, then, absolutely, she should go back to the front of the line.”

Omar, who represents Minnesota’s heavily Democratic 5th Congressional District, is a prominent member of the progressive congressional group commonly known as the Squad, which also includes Democratic Representatives Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.

The federal investigation intensified earlier this week when agents from Homeland Security Investigations executed a search warrant at Omar’s Washington home, seizing her cellphone and other personal belongings.

The investigation reportedly concerns the circumstances under which Omar acquired citizenship after her family fled Somalia and settled in the United States during the late 1990s.

Under the account being examined by investigators, Omar’s father became a naturalized American citizen in 2000, when Omar was believed to be 17 years old.

Her reported status as a minor was significant because federal immigration law provides a pathway for qualifying children to derive citizenship through a naturalized parent, provided the applicable legal requirements are satisfied.

Investigators are examining allegations that Omar may actually have been 18 at the time, which could have affected her eligibility to acquire citizenship through her father and required her to pursue naturalization through a separate process.

The accusations remain unproven, and the existence of a federal investigation does not establish that Omar or any member of her family committed immigration fraud.

Following the search of her residence, Omar issued a defiant statement accusing the Trump administration of pursuing a politically motivated campaign against her.

“I’m ok. Make no mistake: this is an attempt to target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement. For ten years, Trump has targeted me with baseless lies and smear campaigns. This is just the latest escalation in his campaign of political intimidation,” Omar posted on X after the raid.

“I will not be silenced.”

The search has triggered a broader political dispute over the use of federal investigative powers against an elected member of Congress, particularly because the investigation is unfolding less than three weeks before the November 3 midterm elections.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and other senior Democrats have accused the administration of abusing its authority to target a prominent political opponent.

In a joint statement, Jeffries and his leadership team described the raid as “deeply disturbing and raises serious questions about the continued corrupt weaponization of the federal government against Donald Trump’s adversaries.”

Emmer rejected the allegation that the investigation was politically motivated, pointing to the fact that federal agents obtained judicial authorization before searching Omar’s residence.

The Republican leader argued that the issuance of a search warrant indicated that investigators had presented sufficient evidence to persuade a federal judge that a crime might have occurred.

“That judge had to determine that there was probable cause that a federal crime has been committed. And I’ll tell you what, as long as it was Ilhan Omar, it was going to be scrutinized to the very detail,” Emmer said.

He suggested that the investigation could finally produce accountability for allegations that have followed Omar throughout her political career.

“So, the fact that they issued the warrant in the first place and then executed it, I mean, maybe after all these years, someone is finally going to hold Ilhan Omar accountable.”

The investigation has also expanded to members of Omar’s family. Federal authorities have reportedly issued more than a dozen subpoenas seeking information about the family’s immigration history, including documents related to their arrival in the United States in 1995 and their subsequent citizenship applications.

According to additional reporting, investigators are examining possible false statements, immigration fraud and conspiracy. The inquiry could potentially lead to efforts to revoke Omar’s citizenship if federal authorities establish that it was obtained unlawfully, although any such action would face substantial legal requirements and likely court challenges.

Omar’s attorneys have meanwhile demanded the return of property seized during the search, including electronic devices and documents. They have accused investigators of failing to comply with restrictions designed to protect congressional materials and the constitutional rights of lawmakers.

The legal team has also questioned the timing of the investigation, arguing that the raid conflicts with longstanding Justice Department practices intended to prevent law enforcement actions from improperly influencing elections.

Federal officials have maintained that the search was authorized by a judge and conducted in accordance with applicable legal procedures.

The allegations have also revived questions about earlier government scrutiny of Omar’s immigration records. A review conducted during Trump’s first administration in 2019 reportedly failed to uncover evidence sufficient to pursue a citizenship fraud case.

Omar, who arrived in the United States as a Somali refugee and became an American citizen in 2000, is seeking another term in Congress from Minnesota’s 5th District.

No criminal charges against Omar have been announced in connection with the current investigation, and she continues to deny that she obtained citizenship through fraudulent means.

A historic French town hall dating back to the 19th century has been largely destroyed after rioters set it ablaze during violent anti-government demonstrations, as France endured another weekend of nationwide unrest that saw hundreds of arrests, attacks on public buildings and fierce clashes between police and radical protesters.

The devastating fire at Limoges Town Hall, in central France approximately three hours south of Paris, caused extensive structural damage to the 143-year-old landmark, including the collapse of much of its roof and the destruction of large portions of the building’s exterior.

The violence unfolded today as demonstrations over the rising cost of living entered their fourth consecutive week, with more than half a million people participating in protests across the country. Although many demonstrations remained peaceful, authorities reported widespread disorder involving masked rioters, attacks on government facilities and confrontations with security forces.

Limoges Town Hall, constructed in 1883 and officially designated a historic landmark in 1975, suffered catastrophic damage after rioters reportedly entered the building and started a fire.

Local prefect Maurice Barate described the scale of the destruction, saying that the flames had consumed much of the historic structure and caused its upper sections to collapse.

“The roof has collapsed onto lower floors, except the west wing, and two-thirds of the exterior has already disappeared,” Barate told the AFP news agency.

The prefect condemned the destruction as an intentional attack on one of the city’s most important architectural landmarks, calling it “a deliberate act by hooligans,” and a “catastrophe for heritage.”

The destruction of the town hall became one of the most dramatic incidents in a wave of anti-government protests that has spread across France, fueled by anger over living expenses and opposition to government policies.

Outgoing French President Emmanuel Macron issued a forceful condemnation of the violence today, declaring that attacks on public institutions and private property would not be tolerated.

“There is no place for violence in our republic,” Macron wrote on social media.

The president warned that those responsible for vandalizing public buildings, attacking government offices and looting businesses would face criminal consequences. He also defended the police officers deployed to maintain order and protect the right to peaceful protest.

“Those who have broken, attacked the prefectures as well as businesses, looted even our town halls, will be prosecuted and punished,” he added translated from French. “To the law enforcement forces, guarantors of the right to demonstrate, I express the support of the Nation. We will all stand united against the sowers of chaos, who seek only to bring down our institutions and prevent those who peacefully express their demands from doing so.”

Macron, who is scheduled to leave office in approximately six months, made his remarks as the escalating unrest presented another major challenge for French authorities.

French Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez said approximately 400 people had been arrested during today’s disturbances, which erupted alongside more than 100 demonstrations attended by hundreds of thousands of protesters nationwide.

Government estimates placed participation at approximately 550,000 people, while protest organizers claimed that as many as 800,000 had joined the marches. The demonstrations brought together students, labor unions, activists and other groups demanding relief from rising living expenses and improvements in public services.

In Limoges, several thousand people had participated in a demonstration before masked individuals began attacking public property. Rioters reportedly set fire to a municipal police vehicle outside the town hall, smashed windows and forced their way into the building, where they started the blaze.

Firefighters battled the flames as they spread through the historic structure and reached its roof. The building’s distinctive tower was engulfed, and sections of the roof eventually collapsed into the floors below.

The town hall was designed by architect Charles-Alfred Leclerc, who had also worked on the palaces of Versailles and the Trianon. Its architectural design was influenced by Paris City Hall, and its designation as a protected historic monument in 1975 reflected its importance to the city’s heritage.

Authorities said people were inside the building when the fire was started, including municipal employees, elected officials and police personnel. No injuries were reported among those occupants.

Elsewhere in France, masked groups attempted to force their way into municipal buildings in Lille and Calais, while a police station in Brest was also targeted. Officials reported additional disturbances in Rennes, Toulouse, Montpellier, Grenoble and several other cities.

Nuñez attributed much of the organized violence to “extremely violent, radical far-left groups,” accusing militant factions of exploiting otherwise peaceful demonstrations to attack government institutions and security personnel.

In Paris, police confronted groups of masked and hooded rioters near the Place de la République, where demonstrators hurled fireworks and other objects at officers. Security forces responded with tear gas and water cannons to disperse the crowds and restore order.

The unrest also spread to Bordeaux, where shops were looted along the busy Rue Sainte-Catherine shopping district. A fire that began at a sporting goods store reportedly spread into the surrounding building, adding to the destruction.

In Marseille, Lyon and other major cities, authorities reported vandalism, attacks on public buildings and damage to commercial properties. Police said some groups moved rapidly between locations, making it difficult for security forces to contain simultaneous outbreaks of violence.

The Interior Ministry also reported that approximately 60 members of the security forces had been injured during the disturbances, including two who were transported to hospitals unconscious.

In Saint-Etienne, a protester suffered a devastating hand injury in an incident involving a police grenade. Authorities were examining the circumstances of the injury as questions arose about the use of riot-control weapons.

French Justice Minister Gérald Darmanin called for a particularly tough judicial response, urging prosecutors to seek detention for individuals accused of attacking police officers, firefighters, public buildings and businesses.

The nationwide protests have drawn support from labor organizations, student groups and activists associated with the country’s earlier Yellow Vest movement, which began in 2018 amid widespread anger over fuel taxes and living expenses.

The latest demonstrations have also focused on wages, pensions and deteriorating conditions in France’s education system, reflecting broader dissatisfaction with the government’s handling of economic and social issues.

While the overwhelming majority of participants demonstrated peacefully, the scale of the violence has raised concerns about the ability of French authorities to prevent radical groups from hijacking large public gatherings.

The destruction of Limoges Town Hall has become one of the most prominent symbols of the unrest, with officials warning that the damage to the historic building is so extensive that much of the landmark may be beyond recovery.

President Donald Trump called on Republican voters to turn out in large numbers for the upcoming midterm elections during a campaign rally in northern Kentucky on Saturday, warning that a Democratic takeover of Congress could jeopardize his administration’s accomplishments. Trump also predicted that the American military campaign against Iran would soon conclude, while claiming that US forces had destroyed Tehran’s nuclear capabilities.

Speaking in Highland Heights, Kentucky, near Cincinnati, the president delivered a wide-ranging address promoting Republican candidates in several competitive congressional races, highlighting his administration’s economic policies and outlining his positions on national security, manufacturing, trade and immigration.

Trump urged supporters to approach the November elections as though his own presidency were at stake, arguing that Republican victories were essential to protecting the policies his administration had implemented.

“In this election, I’m asking you to pretend that I’m on the ballot,” Trump told supporters at the rally, which was broadcast live on Newsmax.

He warned that Democrats could reverse much of his administration’s work if they succeeded in winning control of Congress.

“This is the most important midterm in the history of our country because we’ve gotten more things done and they can undo them,” he added.

With 17 days remaining before Election Day, Trump devoted particular attention to Kentucky’s Senate race, endorsing Republican Congressman Andy Barr against Democratic candidate Charles Booker.

The president praised Barr’s years of service in the House of Representatives and predicted that he would become an outstanding member of the Senate if elected.

“He’s been an amazing congressman,” Trump said. “He’ll be one of the great U.S. senators.”

Trump also threw his support behind Ed Gallrein, a former Navy SEAL running for Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District. He repeatedly highlighted Gallrein’s military experience and recalled being impressed by his appearance and bearing when the candidate visited the Oval Office.

Turning to the conflict with Iran, Trump declared that American military operations had eliminated the country’s nuclear capabilities, although he acknowledged that continued vigilance was necessary to prevent Tehran from rebuilding its program.

“We have to make sure it doesn’t come back. That’s what we’re doing,” Trump said. “It’s going to end very quickly.”

The president offered no specific deadline for concluding the military campaign, but expressed confidence that the fighting would end in the near future. He also predicted that gasoline prices would decline once the conflict was over, eventually dropping below their prewar levels.

A substantial portion of Trump’s speech focused on the American economy, with the president claiming that his policies had produced unprecedented results in employment, wages, exports and stock market performance. He also asserted that poverty had fallen to historically low levels.

“More Americans are working today than at any time in the history of our country,” he said.

Trump argued that the employment gains were especially significant because his administration had reduced the federal workforce by more than one million employees.

He claimed that many workers who left government employment had subsequently obtained higher-paying positions in private industry, although he did not present statistics supporting that assertion.

“What’s making America great again is the private sector,” Trump said.

The president also pointed to the performance of financial markets, claiming that the stock market had recorded 88 all-time highs since his election. He argued that the gains were strengthening retirement savings and investment accounts held by millions of Americans.

On manufacturing, Trump claimed that his administration had attracted more than $21 trillion in investment commitments and incoming capital, presenting the figure as evidence that businesses were increasingly choosing to establish or expand operations in the United States.

He specifically highlighted new automobile manufacturing facilities and what he described as approximately $600 billion in pharmaceutical construction projects.

“We’re going to make all our drugs here,” he said.

The president’s campaign message extended well beyond Kentucky as he endorsed Republican candidates in several other closely watched Senate races, emphasizing that the party needed victories across the country to preserve its legislative agenda.

In Ohio, Trump backed Republican Senator Jon Husted against Democratic challenger Sherrod Brown. He highlighted Husted’s background as a college football player and claimed that the candidate’s standing in the polls had improved by nine or ten percentage points after Trump began drawing attention to his athletic career.

Trump also promoted Republican Michael Whatley in North Carolina’s Senate contest against Democrat Roy Cooper, the state’s former governor. He credited Whatley with helping secure Republican election victories through legal efforts in North Carolina and praised his leadership of the Republican National Committee alongside Lara Trump.

The president criticized Cooper’s handling of prisoner releases during the COVID-19 pandemic, using the issue to argue that North Carolina voters should reject the Democratic candidate.

In Texas, Trump expressed support for Republican Ken Paxton in his Senate race against Democrat James Talarico. He said a survey released Saturday showed Paxton ahead, although he did not identify the poll. Trump also praised Paxton’s record as the state’s attorney general.

The president discussed the United States’ trade relationship with Canada, accusing Canadian leaders of benefiting unfairly at America’s expense while predicting that his administration would ultimately negotiate a favorable new agreement.

Trump described the prospective agreement as “amazing” and maintained that he would not accept a trade arrangement that he believed imposed a substantial financial burden on the United States.

“I do not want to lose, as your representative, $90 billion,” Trump said, characterizing the trade relationship as a financial loss.

Immigration was another major subject of the speech, with Trump warning that Democrats would reopen the southern border if they regained political power. He defended his administration’s border wall and repeated his assertion that Mexico had effectively paid for its construction through tariffs and other charges.

The rally took place at Truist Arena on the campus of Northern Kentucky University, where Trump sought to energize Republican voters ahead of elections that will determine control of both chambers of Congress.

Trump also announced a proposed $100 million Defense Department investment to revitalize a pharmaceutical manufacturing facility in Winchester, Kentucky, operated by Antheia. He linked the investment to Republican victories in the upcoming elections, warning that Democrats could prevent the project from moving forward if they gained control of Congress.

The Kentucky appearance was particularly important for Barr, who is seeking the Senate seat being vacated by retiring Republican Senator Mitch McConnell. His Democratic opponent, Charles Booker, previously served in the Kentucky House of Representatives.

Gallrein, meanwhile, is the Republican nominee for the congressional seat currently held by Thomas Massie, whom he defeated in the party’s primary with Trump’s endorsement. Massie had clashed with the president over several issues, including the war with Iran.

The campaign stop came amid mounting political pressure on Republicans over the economy and the prolonged military conflict with Iran. Higher fuel costs and concerns about household expenses have become important issues in the closing weeks of the election campaign, with Democrats seeking to make the administration’s economic record a central focus of the midterms.

Trump nevertheless maintained that his campaign appearances were helping Republicans regain momentum. He argued that the party’s electoral prospects had improved considerably since he began traveling around the country to promote its candidates.

Throughout the rally, the president returned to his central message that Republican voters must participate in November to prevent Democrats from reversing his policies on economic growth, national security, immigration and trade.

“Two weeks ago, they had a lot,” Trump said of Democrats. “Then I started the rallies and all of a sudden the Republican Party is starting to look very good.”

US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee issued a blistering condemnation tonight of the assault on American photojournalist Heidi Levine in Yehudah and Shomron, describing the attack as an act of terrorism and demanding that those responsible be arrested, prosecuted and sentenced to lengthy prison terms.

Levine, a 63-year-old photographer for The Washington Post, was injured Friday while covering confrontations in the Binyamin region during the annual olive harvest. The attack has drawn widespread condemnation from American and Israeli officials, with growing demands for law enforcement authorities to bring the perpetrators to justice.

In a strongly worded statement, Huckabee emphasized that Levine was an American citizen who had been clearly identifiable as a journalist when she was assaulted.

“Heidi Levine, photojournalist for the Washington Post, suffered serious injuries from vicious & cowardly attack,” Huckabee wrote. “Heidi is US Citizen, clear ID as journalist.”

The ambassador said investigators were still working to determine the identities of those involved, but insisted that anyone responsible for attacking an unarmed journalist should face severe criminal penalties.

Huckabee said the attackers’ identities remained “under investigation, but those who attacked unarmed reporter should spend years in prison.”

He stressed that the American government was demanding a comprehensive investigation and the prosecution of every individual who participated in the assault.

“We have called for a full investigation, arrest, and prosecution to the fullest extent of the law to whoever participated in this,” he stressed.

Huckabee also condemned the nature of the attack, directing particularly harsh criticism at the masked individuals accused of assaulting the photographer.

“Attacking a female photographer is despicable act of terror carried out by masked cowards. Dishonorable act of senseless violence.”

The assault took place near the village of Abu Falah, northeast of Ramallah, as Levine was photographing disturbances involving Palestinian olive harvesters and masked Israelis. Witnesses reported that a group of attackers descended on the area, assaulting several people and disrupting the harvest.

Levine, a veteran conflict photographer who has spent decades documenting events in the Middle East and other war zones, was wearing protective clothing marked with the word “PRESS” when she was attacked.

According to accounts of the incident, she was knocked to the ground, repeatedly beaten and kicked, and robbed of photographic equipment and personal belongings. She sustained four fractured vertebrae, a broken rib and numerous cuts, requiring treatment at hospitals in Ramallah and Israel.

The Washington Post condemned the assault and demanded that Israeli authorities conduct a thorough investigation. Press freedom organizations also denounced the violence, emphasizing the dangers facing journalists covering confrontations in the region.

The attack drew criticism from American lawmakers, including members of both political parties, who called for accountability and stronger measures to protect journalists and civilians.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio also addressed the incident tonight, saying the Trump administration was deeply troubled by the images and had repeatedly urged Israel to take stronger action against violence in Yehudah and Shomron.

Rubio acknowledged that he was still awaiting a detailed report from the US Embassy concerning the circumstances of the assault, but said the available accounts and video footage were deeply disturbing.

Earlier today, Israeli President Isaac Herzog personally telephoned Levine to express his regret and apologize for the violence she had experienced.

“As President of the State of Israel, I strongly condemn this outrageous and shocking violence, both the terrible attack you endured and other grave incidents of violence, such as what took place today in Taybeh,” Herzog said. “This weighed heavily on my conscience throughout Shabbat (Saturday – ed.), and I express my deep sorrow and apologize for what you went through.”

Herzog emphasized that the conduct of those responsible was contrary to Israel’s national values and that the country’s law enforcement institutions had an obligation to pursue the perpetrators.

He added, “The despicable behavior of the perpetrators of this attack does not represent the citizens or the values of the State of Israel. Israel is a democratic state governed by the rule of law, and it must act with full force against every form of violence. I know that the circumstances of each incident are being thoroughly investigated, and we await the findings. All government, security, and law enforcement authorities must use every means at their disposal to investigate thoroughly, apprehend these lawbreakers, and bring them to justice with the fullest extent of the law.”

The president concluded his remarks by extending his wishes for Levine’s recovery and expressing solidarity with her family.

“We all embrace you and your family, and on behalf of the entire nation, I wish you good health and a speedy recovery.”

The attack on Levine was followed today by another confrontation near Taybeh, where a delegation that included European diplomats and Catholic representatives reportedly came under attack during a visit connected to the olive harvest.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu condemned violence by Jewish extremists and announced that he had enlisted the Shin Bet to help combat the problem, while cautioning against drawing conclusions about individual incidents before investigations are completed.

Israeli police are investigating the incidents, as American officials continue pressing for the identification and prosecution of those responsible for the assault on Levine.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog personally apologized today to American photojournalist Heidi Levine, who was injured in an attack by rioters in the Binyamin region on Friday, condemning the violence and demanding that Israeli authorities identify, arrest and prosecute those responsible.

Herzog telephoned the 63-year-old Washington Post photographer following the assault, expressing his distress over what she had experienced and emphasizing that such conduct was contrary to the values of the State of Israel.

During the conversation, Herzog also denounced a separate confrontation in Taybeh today involving European diplomats, amid heightened tensions in Yehudah and Shomron during the annual olive harvest.

“As President of the State of Israel, I strongly condemn this outrageous and shocking violence, both the terrible attack you endured and other grave incidents of violence, such as what took place today in Taybeh,” Herzog said. “This weighed heavily on my conscience throughout Shabbat (Saturday – ed.), and I express my deep sorrow and apologize for what you went through.”

The president made clear that those responsible for attacking Levine did not represent the broader Israeli population and that their actions should not be attributed to Israeli society as a whole.

“The despicable behavior of the perpetrators of this attack does not represent the citizens or the values of the State of Israel.”

Herzog stressed that Israel’s democratic institutions and legal system must respond forcefully to such incidents, calling on the country’s security and law enforcement agencies to conduct comprehensive investigations and ensure accountability.

“Israel is a democratic state governed by the rule of law, and it must act with full force against every form of violence. I know that the circumstances of each incident are being thoroughly investigated, and we await the findings. All government, security, and law enforcement authorities must use every means at their disposal to investigate thoroughly, apprehend these lawbreakers, and bring them to justice with the fullest extent of the law.

Herzog concluded his conversation by offering Levine and her family his support and wishing her a complete recovery.

“We all embrace you and your family, and on behalf of the entire nation, I wish you good health and a speedy recovery.”

The assault occurred Friday near Abu Falah, northeast of Ramallah, where Levine was documenting confrontations involving Palestinian olive harvesters and masked Israelis. According to Levine and eyewitnesses, the attackers knocked her to the ground and repeatedly kicked her despite her wearing a protective vest clearly identifying her as a journalist.

Levine suffered serious injuries, including fractured bones and damage to her hand that required surgery. Her cameras and other personal belongings were reportedly taken during the attack. She initially received treatment in Ramallah before being transferred for further medical care.

The incident drew strong condemnation from US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, who demanded that those responsible be arrested and prosecuted. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also expressed concern, saying the Trump administration had repeatedly urged Israel to crack down on such violence.

The separate confrontation in Taybeh involved a visiting delegation that included representatives from Belgium, France and Poland, along with Catholic officials. Israeli authorities launched an investigation, while the Prime Minister’s Office cautioned against reaching conclusions before the circumstances had been fully established.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu also addressed the recent incidents, condemning violence by Jewish extremists and announcing that he had enlisted the Shin Bet to help combat the problem.

Herzog’s call came as Israeli police continued investigating the attack on Levine and the events in Taybeh, with growing demands from Israeli and American officials that those responsible be brought to justice.

A massive collection of confidential Israeli war cabinet records has exposed repeated confrontations between Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and the country’s most senior military and intelligence officials, revealing sharp disagreements over major wartime decisions, including the invasion of Rafah, the campaign against Hezbollah, the killing of Hassan Nasrallah, military operations in Syria and renewed fighting in Gaza.

The documents, disclosed in a report by i24NEWS, portray a prime minister frequently pressing for aggressive military action despite objections from senior defense officials who warned of operational dangers, diplomatic repercussions and potential damage to Israel’s relationship with the United States.

The revelations are based on approximately 1,000 documents containing records of security cabinet meetings and other high-level discussions spanning several years. Netanyahu reportedly submitted the material to the State Comptroller in connection with an investigation that was subsequently suspended by the Supreme Court.

The published accounts are not necessarily word-for-word transcripts of the conversations. Rather, they are presented as summaries reflecting the positions expressed by participants and the nature of the exchanges.

One of the most consequential confrontations described in the documents occurred in May 2024, as Israel prepared to launch its long-debated military operation in Rafah, the southern Gaza city that had become a major Hamas stronghold.

At the time, President Joe Biden’s administration was exerting substantial pressure on Israel to abandon or limit the offensive, warning that an operation in Rafah could jeopardize American military assistance.

During a May 2 cabinet discussion, then-Defense Minister Yoav Gallant reportedly warned that Israel faced a difficult choice between proceeding into Rafah and preserving crucial American support.

Netanyahu rejected the suggestion that Washington’s opposition should determine Israel’s military strategy. He reportedly reminded the ministers that Biden had previously warned Israel it might have to act without American assistance if it proceeded with the operation.

Ronen Bar, then director of the Shin Bet, also expressed opposition to launching the offensive at the expense of a major confrontation with Washington. Gadi Eisenkot, who was serving as a minister in the war cabinet, similarly warned against damaging relations with the Biden administration.

Netanyahu, however, argued that Israel could not allow outside pressure, even from its closest ally, to dictate decisions affecting its national security. According to the report, he maintained that Israel needed to preserve its freedom to act independently when confronting threats to its survival.

Israel ultimately launched the Rafah operation, capturing the Rafah border crossing with Egypt and establishing control over the Philadelphi Corridor, the strategically important strip of territory along the Gaza-Egypt border.

The IDF subsequently dismantled Hamas’ Rafah Brigade and dealt significant blows to the terrorist organization’s infrastructure in southern Gaza. The campaign also played a role in the broader effort to eliminate Hamas’ senior leadership, culminating in the killing of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar.

The leaked records also describe disputes over the concessions Israel should consider during negotiations for the release of hostages held by Hamas.

Among the proposals discussed were an Israeli withdrawal from the Philadelphi Corridor, relinquishing control of the Rafah crossing and reducing the military’s presence in territories captured during the war.

Gallant reportedly argued that Rafah should not be regarded as an indispensable national asset comparable to the Kosel or Har Chermon, suggesting that Israel could consider territorial concessions there if they helped secure an agreement.

Eisenkot likewise questioned whether maintaining a permanent Israeli-controlled buffer zone inside Gaza would provide meaningful long-term security benefits.

According to the documents, Eisenkot challenged the strategic value of retaining an area amounting to approximately 20% of the Gaza Strip, including agricultural territory, arguing that such a deployment might impose substantial costs without delivering a corresponding security advantage.

Despite the disagreements within Israel’s leadership, the report states that Hamas ultimately withdrew from the possibility of reaching an agreement during that stage of negotiations, irrespective of the Israeli positions under consideration.

Another major series of confrontations involved Israel’s escalating military campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon and the decision to eliminate the terrorist organization’s longtime leader, Hassan Nasrallah.

The records indicate that Bar advocated using the damage already inflicted on Hezbollah as leverage to secure a broader ceasefire arrangement that could also help bring an end to fighting in Gaza.

Bar reportedly believed that Israel’s operations had inflicted a particularly severe psychological blow on Hezbollah, even if the damage had not yet decisively destroyed the organization’s military capabilities.

Before the assassination of Nasrallah, Bar allegedly argued against proceeding with the operation, contending that killing the Hezbollah leader at that stage would not advance Israel’s immediate strategic interests.

Instead, the Shin Bet chief favored exploring a diplomatic arrangement, even if reaching a ceasefire required Israel to accept certain security risks.

Netanyahu took a sharply different position, arguing that Israel should maintain military pressure and expand its offensive against Hezbollah rather than stop short of delivering a decisive blow.

According to the report, Netanyahu succeeded in securing sufficient cabinet backing to proceed with the expanded campaign despite reservations from senior members of the security establishment.

Israel subsequently carried out its extraordinary operation involving explosive pagers used by Hezbollah personnel, followed by the assassination of Nasrallah in Beirut and additional strikes that severely weakened the terrorist organization.

The campaign ultimately led to a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Lebanon that took effect on November 27, 2024.

The documents also provide a detailed account of disagreements following the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria, when Israeli leaders faced urgent decisions about securing the northern border and preventing hostile forces from taking control of strategic territory.

Then-IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi reportedly opposed moving too quickly into Syrian territory, warning that an operation launched without sufficient preparation could create unnecessary military and logistical complications.

Halevi was particularly skeptical about the need to occupy the summit of Har Chermon, arguing that maintaining a permanent Israeli military presence there would be difficult and might not provide enough additional security to justify the commitment.

Instead, he reportedly recommended monitoring the territory and maintaining operational control from a distance, avoiding the complications of physically holding additional Syrian territory.

Netanyahu dismissed that approach, arguing that Assad’s sudden downfall had created a dangerous security vacuum that Israel needed to address immediately.

According to the records, the prime minister demanded that the IDF secure strategically important positions and establish a defensive zone extending from the Har Chermon summit toward the Yarmouk region.

Although Halevi continued raising concerns about the operational implications, Netanyahu insisted that Israel could not afford to delay its response while the political and military situation in Syria remained unstable.

Another extraordinary revelation concerns a direct telephone conversation between Netanyahu and Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa during the deadly attacks against Druze communities in the Sweida region in July 2025.

According to additional details published by i24NEWS, the conversation occurred on July 16, 2025, at approximately 1:30 p.m., amid reports of killings and attacks against Druze civilians.

Netanyahu reportedly opened the discussion by accusing Syrian government forces of participating in atrocities against the Druze and warning that messages previously delivered through intermediaries had not produced the necessary response.

The Israeli prime minister then demanded that Syrian forces withdraw from Sweida by 10 p.m. that evening, threatening further Israeli military strikes if his ultimatum was ignored.

Al-Sharaa reportedly expressed surprise at the confrontational nature of the call, indicating that he had expected a different discussion.

The Syrian president attempted to explain that coordinating an immediate withdrawal would be difficult because of the challenges involved in communicating with all the forces operating in the area.

When al-Sharaa requested 48 hours to arrange the withdrawal, Netanyahu refused, insisting that Syrian forces begin pulling out before any additional time could be considered.

The confrontation was followed within hours by Israeli airstrikes against high-profile Syrian government targets in Damascus, including the presidential palace complex and the headquarters of the Syrian military’s General Staff.

According to the report, al-Sharaa subsequently ordered Syrian government forces to withdraw from the area.

Netanyahu publicly discussed the previously undisclosed conversation at a gathering with members of Israel’s Druze community on Thursday, describing his intervention as brief and forceful and crediting the combination of military strikes and direct pressure with helping halt the killings.

The revelations about Syria provide another example of the pattern described throughout the documents: senior military officials expressing reservations about rapid intervention while Netanyahu argued that immediate action was essential to prevent more dangerous developments.

The reported disagreements did not end with the departure of Halevi and other senior security officials. The documents also describe serious tensions between Netanyahu and the current IDF chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir, during discussions in August 2026 about renewed military operations in Gaza.

Those deliberations centered on Operation Gideon’s Chariots II and plans for a major Israeli advance into Gaza, including an operation to enter and encircle the area.

Zamir reportedly warned that the proposed timetable placed Israeli soldiers at unacceptable risk, arguing that the operation, as then planned, could expose troops to a deadly trap.

The chief of staff questioned whether the military could safely accomplish its objectives under the schedule being demanded by the political leadership.

Netanyahu rejected those objections, maintaining that the operation was achievable and that the IDF possessed the capabilities necessary to carry it out successfully.

Zamir also raised concerns about the humanitarian and diplomatic consequences of the proposed offensive, particularly the anticipated need to evacuate approximately one million residents.

With Israel already facing mounting international criticism over the war in Gaza, the chief of staff reportedly warned that such a large-scale operation could further damage the country’s diplomatic standing and intensify pressure from foreign governments.

Netanyahu nevertheless pressed ahead with the proposed military plan, insisting that Israeli forces enter Gaza and complete the encirclement.

According to the report, the subsequent military campaign, together with Israel’s strike in Qatar, helped create conditions that ultimately advanced negotiations for a hostage agreement.

The collection of documents reportedly extends beyond these confrontations and includes discussions concerning Operation Rising Lion, Operation Roaring Lion and other significant military and diplomatic decisions made during the war.

The records have also emerged amid a broader political dispute over Netanyahu’s presentation of security discussions to the State Comptroller. Separate reporting earlier this month raised questions about whether some materials submitted by the prime minister accurately reflected the original discussions and warnings that preceded the October 7 massacre. Netanyahu’s Likud party rejected those allegations as politically motivated.

The newly publicized cabinet discussions present a striking account of the tensions that repeatedly emerged between Israel’s elected leadership and its senior defense establishment throughout the war.

On questions ranging from the American response to an offensive in Rafah to the strategic value of eliminating Nasrallah, the occupation of Syrian territory and the dangers of another major Gaza operation, Netanyahu and his security chiefs frequently reached sharply different conclusions about the proper course of action.

The records portray Netanyahu repeatedly favoring more extensive or immediate military measures, while senior officials urged restraint, questioned whether the proposed operations would achieve their objectives and warned about the consequences for Israeli soldiers and the country’s international relationships.

Rachel is only 15 years old. She cannot eat at all, weighs just 62 lbs, and is completely dependent on a feeding tube. Her body is dangerously weak, and her heart is struggling.

Doctors say she urgently needs intensive treatment, nutritional therapy, and constant medical supervision to survive.

The family is desperately trying to get her the life-saving care she needs, but they simply cannot afford the overwhelming medical costs.

Every hour matters right now. CLICK HERE TO DONATE.

Please help give Rachel a chance to live, recover, and be a child again. Your donation can truly save her life life.

Voting at Israeli embassies and consulates around the world has concluded ahead of the October 27 Knesset elections, with an exceptionally high 86.7% of eligible voters participating, a sharp increase from the previous election.

The Central Elections Committee announced Friday that 4,218 Israelis had cast their ballots out of 4,863 individuals authorized to vote at diplomatic missions overseas, reflecting particularly strong participation among Israeli diplomatic personnel and other eligible voters stationed abroad.

The turnout represents a jump of 17.1 percentage points compared with the election for the 25th Knesset, when participation among eligible overseas diplomatic voters reached 69.6%.

Voting was conducted at 101 polling stations established across 99 Israeli diplomatic missions, allowing eligible Israelis serving overseas to participate in the election before polling stations open throughout Israel.

Because the voting process spanned numerous time zones, the first ballots were cast at Israel’s embassy in Wellington, New Zealand, while polling concluded at diplomatic facilities along the West Coast of the United States.

The overseas voting operation is designed to ensure that Israelis serving the country abroad can exercise their voting rights despite being unable to return home on Election Day.

Under Israeli election law, citizens generally must be physically present in Israel to vote in national elections. Limited exceptions are provided for certain categories of Israelis stationed abroad, including diplomatic representatives and other authorized personnel.

The unusually high turnout meant that just 645 eligible individuals did not participate, underscoring the substantial level of engagement among those permitted to vote at overseas missions.

The ballots are now being transported to Israel under the supervision of election officials, where they will be held for counting as part of the nationwide vote for the 26th Knesset.

The overseas election required a coordinated logistical effort by the Foreign Ministry and Central Elections Committee, including the distribution of ballots and voting equipment, training of polling personnel and oversight of polling stations operating across multiple continents.

Two election operations centers monitored the process, one at the Foreign Ministry and another at the Central Elections Committee, ensuring that voting procedures were followed and any problems were addressed.

Among the overseas polling locations, the Israeli Consulate in New York had the largest number of eligible voters, with more than 700 people registered to participate.

The voting process lasted approximately 30 hours worldwide. Following Wellington, polling opened at Israel’s newest diplomatic mission in Suva, Fiji, before proceeding westward through other countries and concluding in Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Yisrael Beytenu chairman Avigdor Lieberman welcomed the turnout, praising Israelis serving overseas for exercising their voting rights and expressing hope that participation in Israel would be similarly strong.

The figures, however, do not represent the broader population of Israelis living or traveling abroad. Israel generally does not permit absentee voting, meaning most citizens outside the country must return to Israel if they wish to participate in national elections.

Election organizations estimate that more than 50,000 Israelis may travel back to Israel specifically to cast their ballots, amid intense efforts by political activists to encourage participation in what is expected to be a closely contested election.

Early voting will also begin shortly for IDF personnel, with at least 850 polling stations scheduled to operate at military installations and outposts. Soldiers will be able to begin casting ballots on October 20, a week before the general election, to accommodate operational requirements.

The overseas turnout comes as opinion surveys continue to suggest a closely divided electorate, with neither the pro-Netanyahu nor anti-Netanyahu bloc assured of securing the 61 Knesset seats necessary to form a majority government.

The results of the diplomatic voting will remain sealed until the official counting process, with the country’s general election scheduled for October 27.

Yisrael Beytenu chairman Avigdor Lieberman has launched a blistering attack on Yashar party leader Gadi Eisenkot, accusing him of positioning himself to join a government headed by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu after the October 27 elections, potentially alongside Shas chairman Aryeh Deri and United Torah Judaism’s Yitzchok Goldknopf.

In a lengthy statement published Friday, Lieberman charged that Eisenkot’s campaign strategy was weakening the very political bloc seeking to replace Netanyahu. He suggested that Eisenkot was pursuing his own ambitions at the expense of a unified effort to defeat the current government.

Lieberman titled his statement “Gadi Eisenkot – Benny Gantz 2,” drawing a comparison between Eisenkot and another former IDF chief of staff who entered politics and ultimately joined a Netanyahu-led government.

At the center of Lieberman’s criticism was Eisenkot’s campaign to emerge from the elections as the leader of the largest party. According to Lieberman, the strategy would accomplish little beyond transferring votes between parties already opposed to Netanyahu.

“Eisenkot’s ‘largest party’ campaign is not designed to move a single vote from the draft-dodgers’ bloc to the serving public’s bloc. Its purpose is to siphon votes from within the bloc itself,” Lieberman wrote.

He maintained that the approach ran counter to understandings reached among opposition party leaders at a September 26 meeting, where they had discussed coordinating their efforts ahead of the election.

Lieberman argued that Eisenkot’s ultimate objective was to gain enough parliamentary strength to negotiate directly with Netanyahu, rather than secure a government composed exclusively of parties opposed to the prime minister.

“Gadi Eisenkot is planning for the day after the elections, and what interests him is not being the largest party in the serving public’s bloc, but being larger than Likud and entering negotiations to form a government with Netanyahu from a position of strength.”

Lieberman pointed to several political developments that he said reinforced his suspicions, including comments from Likud Minister Miki Zohar suggesting cooperation with Eisenkot might be possible.

He also referenced reports of efforts by President Isaac Herzog to encourage a unity government involving Netanyahu and Eisenkot, along with alleged messages from the White House concerning Israel’s post-election political landscape.

“When I hear Minister Miki Zohar discussing the possibility of cooperation with Eisenkot, read reports about President Herzog’s initiative to form a Netanyahu-Eisenkot government, and hear the briefings coming from the White House, the pieces begin to fall into place,” he wrote.

The Yisrael Beytenu leader also attacked Eisenkot’s position on the military draft, arguing that his proposed arrangement for yeshiva students would perpetuate the existing system of exemptions rather than fundamentally change it.

Under the framework Lieberman criticized, thousands of yeshiva students would continue to receive annual deferments from military service. Lieberman maintained that such a policy was incompatible with the principle of universal enlistment advocated by his party.

“The implication is that things will remain exactly as they are. The exemption from IDF service will not be abolished,” Lieberman claimed, emphasizing that Yisrael Beytenu opposes military service exemptions and supports universal enlistment.

Lieberman invoked his party’s refusal to enter a Netanyahu-led coalition in 2019 because of disagreements over the draft legislation, presenting that decision as evidence that he would not compromise his position for political advantage.

He further criticized Eisenkot’s proposals concerning a constitution, arguing that the Yashar leader had failed to offer a sufficiently clear path toward the changes Lieberman believes Israel requires.

Another major point of contention was the possibility of establishing a government dependent on Arab political parties, even if those parties remained formally outside the coalition.

Lieberman ruled out any arrangement in which Yisrael Beytenu would participate in a government relying on support from Ra’am or the Joint List.

To explain his opposition, he cited MK Ofer Cassif’s backing of a petition connected to proceedings against Israel in The Hague, as well as statements by Ra’am lawmaker Yasser Hujirat concerning Hamas.

“Anyone who wants to form a government and rely on Cassif and Hujirat is welcome to do so. Yisrael Beytenu will not be part of it,” he declared.

Lieberman then laid out what he described as Eisenkot’s likely post-election strategy: negotiating a coalition with Netanyahu and the chareidi parties while simultaneously keeping open the prospect of a minority government as a bargaining tool.

“My conclusion from Eisenkot’s conduct is that he is seeking to form a government with Netanyahu, Goldknopf, and Deri, while keeping the possibility of a minority government on the table as leverage against Netanyahu in order to secure the first turn in a rotation agreement.”

Lieberman accused Eisenkot of prioritizing the possibility of becoming prime minister over the ideological objectives of the political camp he claims to represent.

“Unfortunately, I see far more personal ambition here than a genuine desire to correct the injustices of the draft-dodgers’ government.”

The Yisrael Beytenu chairman also questioned whether Eisenkot possessed the political judgment needed to navigate Israel’s complicated coalition system, arguing that a distinguished military career did not necessarily prepare a former general for the challenges of parliamentary politics.

“Unfortunately, Gadi’s lack of political experience reminds me of a phenomenon we have already seen among former chiefs of staff who entered politics. From Yigael Yadin, through Ehud Barak, to Benny Gantz, military rank and experience are no substitute for political experience,” he wrote.

Lieberman urged the four parties he considers central to the anti-Netanyahu bloc to work toward securing a clear parliamentary majority without depending on Eisenkot’s participation.

He warned that anything less could leave Eisenkot holding the balance of power, potentially allowing him to negotiate a coalition arrangement that would keep Netanyahu in office.

The election campaign has increasingly exposed divisions among Netanyahu’s opponents, who remain united in their desire to replace him but disagree over coalition partners, military enlistment requirements and the possibility of forming a government with parties from the current coalition.

Lieberman insisted that his preferred outcome was a government committed to what he described as Zionist and liberal principles, with particular emphasis on military service, employment and the obligations of citizenship.

“I believe in the Israeli public, I believe in the serving public’s bloc, and I believe that on October 27, we will win, and win big,” Lieberman concluded.

The criticism drew a sharp response from Blue and White chairman Benny Gantz, who accused Lieberman of contributing little to the country despite his decades in public office.

“After 30 years in Israeli politics, Liberman has not accomplished even ten percent of what Gadi Eisenkot and I have done for the State of Israel. Ever since I exposed his plan to form a minority government with Bennett and the Arab parties, he has been under pressure and lashing out in every direction.”

Gantz also rejected Lieberman’s approach to coalition building, arguing that the political deadlock could be overcome only through a broad unity government bringing together parties from opposing political camps.

“Liberman, your attacks will not conceal the dead end toward which you are leading Israel. There is only one solution: a broad-based Zionist unity government that crosses political blocs. And only Blue and White can deliver it. Vote for unity. Save the country.”

Channel 14 television host Yinon Magal has found himself at the center of a political controversy after describing Yashar party leader Gadi Eisenkot as a “monkey,” prompting furious accusations from Eisenkot and his party. Magal subsequently defended his remarks, insisting that he had used terminology associated with the criminal underworld to describe a political figure being controlled by others, rather than making a comparison to an animal.

The dispute erupted just days before Israel’s upcoming elections, with Eisenkot’s party accusing Magal, a prominent supporter of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, of making an offensive remark about the former IDF chief of staff’s Moroccan background.

Magal addressed the controversy in a video released overnight, arguing that his words had been deliberately stripped of their context to manufacture a political scandal.

The original comment was made during a discussion on Magal’s Channel 14 program, “The Patriots,” in which he claimed that Eisenkot was being promoted as the face of a political movement whose real power brokers were members of Israel’s Ashkenazi establishment.

“He’s a monkey. They put forward a Mizrachi Moroccan. They gave you a Moroccan prime minister, as if we can’t see what’s really going on,” Magal said.

The remark immediately drew condemnation from Eisenkot’s Yashar party, which portrayed it as an insult directed at a decorated military commander who had devoted decades to serving Israel.

In its response, the party invoked a notorious episode from Israeli political history involving entertainer Dudu Topaz, whose derogatory reference to Mizrahi voters became a symbol of ethnic tensions in Israeli politics.

“45 years after Dudu Topaz called Mizrahim ‘chachchachim,’ Netanyahu’s leading mouthpiece, who makes a living spreading lies and poison, tonight calls a candidate for prime minister who will return Israel to the Israelis, a former IDF Chief of Staff who served the country for 45 years and gave it everything, a monkey,” the party stated.

Yashar went on to accuse Netanyahu’s political camp of revealing its underlying attitudes toward Mizrahi Israelis as the election approached, predicting that Eisenkot would soon defeat the prime minister.

“The fear of defeat exposes your ugly truth and what you really think of a huge and remarkable segment of the public that you have looked down on for decades. We can see right through you,” the statement continued. “The hysteria is understandable. In ten days, the people of Israel will elect as prime minister the son of immigrants from Morocco, a Golani veteran, a true patriot who grew up in the periphery. And he will repair all the damage Netanyahu’s government has caused here.”

Eisenkot himself weighed in during an election rally, dismissing Magal’s comments as beneath serious discussion while placing responsibility for the political atmosphere on Netanyahu and his allies.

“Yinon Magal said that I’m a monkey controlled by Ashkenazim, so I have nothing to say in response to such a low level of discourse. The problem isn’t Yinon Magal, but the man behind Yinon Magal. We will bring change to this country. We will remove the phenomena of ‘Magalism’ and ‘Bardugoism’ from our lives and build a better country,” Eisenkot said.

In his subsequent explanation, Magal said the controversy had been manufactured by political opponents looking to exploit his remarks during the final days of the election campaign.

“I see that another Yinon Magal controversy is developing, another fake controversy ahead of the elections, so a few things need to be clarified,” Magal began.

He insisted that the disputed expression had nothing to do with Eisenkot’s appearance or ethnic background. Instead, Magal said, he was referring to a term used in criminal circles for someone placed in a visible position while others exercise control behind the scenes.

“I called Eisenkot a monkey, not, God forbid, because he’s ugly or looks like a monkey, but as an expression borrowed from the criminal underworld. You put someone out front, you control him, and he’s supposedly the one who takes the fall.”

Magal explained that the discussion had centered on political commentator Avishai Ben Haim’s argument that Israel’s traditional Ashkenazi establishment maintains an alliance with Arab political forces that serves to marginalize Mizrahi Jews.

“The discussion was about Avishai Ben Haim saying that there is an alliance here between the elite and the establishment, on the one hand, and the Arabs, on the other, to exclude Mizrahim,” Magal noted, elaborating on his response: “So I said to him, what does it matter that he’s a Moroccan Mizrahi? He’s a monkey they put out front while controlling him from behind. The entire Ashkenazi elite is standing behind him. That’s what this is about.”

Additional coverage of the original broadcast identified former IDF spokesman Ronen Manelis as one of the individuals Magal specifically accused of influencing Eisenkot. During the televised exchange, Magal argued that Manelis and other establishment figures were directing the Yashar leader’s political messaging.

The controversy quickly spread across Israeli news outlets and social media, with critics describing the language as racist and Magal’s defenders emphasizing his claim that the expression referred to political manipulation rather than ethnicity.

Magal also linked the uproar to an earlier dispute involving his criticism of bereaved families and relatives of hostages who had participated in a book critical of Netanyahu. He maintained that coverage of that episode had similarly distorted his comments.

Returning to the latest controversy, Magal accused political figures, including opposition leader Yair Lapid, of rushing to condemn him without considering his intended meaning.

“So they run headlines saying Yinon Magal called Gadi Eisenkot a monkey, and immediately they issue responses, and Yair Lapid responds, and as usual, it’s all a lie,” Magal added, concluding with a message to his viewers: “Don’t get worked up over their controversies. On the contrary, when they create a controversy, relax. Thank you.”

Flydubai pilot Smit Machchhar has described the terrifying moments when he was violently attacked inside the cockpit of Flight 1073 during an attempted terrorist attack, revealing how he struggled to remain conscious and regain control of the aircraft as it began losing altitude.

In his first English-language interview about the incident, Machchhar told The National that he initially had no idea he was being attacked. When he felt the first blow to his head, he believed something had gone wrong mechanically inside the cockpit.

“I was sure there had been a malfunction and that something had fallen on my head,” Machchhar recalled.

That explanation quickly became impossible to believe as the blows continued, forcing him to recognize that he was facing a deliberate physical assault while responsible for an aircraft in flight.

According to Machchhar, he was struck repeatedly in the head. When he turned to confront his attacker and tried to protect himself, he sustained an injury to his hand as well.

The attack unfolded as the aircraft began descending, leaving the pilot struggling with two immediate dangers: defending himself against the assault and preventing the plane from plunging further.

The repeated blows left Machchhar on the verge of losing consciousness. Despite his injuries and the disorientation caused by the attack, he fought to remain alert and concentrate on the aircraft’s condition.

The incident occurred aboard Flydubai Flight 1073, which became the focus of a major security investigation following revelations about an alleged terrorist plot involving a member of the flight crew.

Israeli and Emirati authorities subsequently investigated the circumstances of the attempted attack, including reports that the suspected perpetrator had undergone flight training in Britain and that the plot may have involved plans targeting Ben Gurion Airport.

Further details of the September 30 incident reveal that the aircraft, a Boeing 737 traveling from Dubai to Tel Aviv, was cruising at approximately 34,000 feet when the co-pilot launched his assault using an emergency axe kept inside the cockpit.

The attacker, identified as Omani national Hammam al-Hammami, allegedly seized the flight controls and sent the aircraft into a steep descent. Reports indicate that the plane lost approximately 17,000 feet in less than a minute, creating a potentially catastrophic emergency for everyone aboard.

Despite suffering serious injuries, Machchhar managed to reach and unlock the cockpit door, allowing passengers and other crew members to enter and overpower the attacker.

Among those who intervened was Israeli passenger Yaniv Hayun, who helped stabilize the aircraft’s descent. Other crew members, including an off-duty pilot, subsequently assisted in regaining control.

The aircraft was diverted to Tabuk, Saudi Arabia, where it landed safely. All passengers and crew survived the attempted attack.

Emirati investigators subsequently described the incident as a premeditated terrorist plot. Authorities said the co-pilot had been influenced by extremist material and had intended to use the aircraft to strike Ben Gurion Airport.

Al-Hammami was taken into custody and faces terrorism charges, while investigators continue examining how the plot was prepared and whether warning signs had been overlooked.

Machchhar, who has 17 years of aviation experience, has been recovering at a hospital in Abu Dhabi. His actions have drawn praise from Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, both of whom personally contacted him following the attack.

The pilot has also credited the passengers and fellow crew members who rushed into the cockpit with helping prevent a catastrophe.

Although still recovering from the physical and emotional effects of the assault, Machchhar made clear that the experience has not ended his aviation career.

“I’m just an ordinary person,” he said. “I’ll fly again. Hopefully, very soon.”

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu pledged tonight to take decisive action against Jewish extremists responsible for violence in Yehudah and Shomron, announcing that he has enlisted the Shin Bet to help combat the problem. He also issued a warning to Iran, saying Israel would respond forcefully to any attempted attack ahead of the country’s upcoming elections.

Speaking in an interview with i24NEWS, Netanyahu described violent activity by a small minority of Jewish residents in Yehudah and Shomron as a serious problem that his government intends to eliminate.

“I am not prepared to accept [these] groups, even if they are groups of young people who come from troubled families,” Netanyahu said. “I have brought in the Shin Bet. We will eradicate this affliction. It is absolutely an affliction.”

His remarks followed a series of reported confrontations in Yehudah and Shomron, including allegations involving masked Israelis, Palestinian olive harvesters, foreign diplomats and an American photojournalist.

Netanyahu made clear that his government would not tolerate violent conduct by Jewish extremists, regardless of the personal circumstances of those involved.

At the same time, the prime minister cautioned against assuming that every reported incident had occurred exactly as initially described, stressing the importance of establishing the facts before reaching conclusions.

“You need to understand that we are investigating the incident, because many times we have been told things, and afterward it turned out that wasn’t exactly what happened,” he explained.

The prime minister’s comments came amid heightened attention to incidents during the annual olive harvest, when tensions have increased in several areas of Yehudah and Shomron.

Earlier, Netanyahu’s office questioned allegations that European diplomats had been attacked by masked Israelis, arguing that photographs and video footage circulating from the incident did not establish the full sequence of events or identify those responsible.

The Prime Minister’s Office also emphasized that the diplomatic delegation had entered an area with a history of confrontations without coordinating its visit in advance with the IDF, while maintaining that any proven violence against diplomats was unacceptable.

Israeli authorities have opened investigations into the reported incidents, including allegations of an assault on Washington Post photojournalist Heidi Levine and a separate confrontation involving European diplomats near Taybeh.

Netanyahu’s decision to involve the Shin Bet signals that the government intends to address the issue through Israel’s internal security apparatus, in addition to the police and other law enforcement authorities.

The interview also addressed growing concerns that Iran could attempt to interfere with Israel’s October 27 elections by initiating a military confrontation or orchestrating security incidents designed to influence the political atmosphere.

Asked whether Tehran might launch an attack before Israelis head to the polls, Netanyahu acknowledged that Israeli officials were monitoring the possibility and taking steps to prevent such an operation.

“That is a possibility. There are preparations of that kind. Will they be carried out? No. We will do everything to thwart them.”

Netanyahu warned that Iran would face serious consequences if it proceeded with an attack.

“There will be a very harsh response.”

His warning followed remarks earlier in the week in which he said Israel was prepared for attempts by its enemies to test its military readiness during the election period.

Netanyahu has also rejected suggestions that he intends to initiate another military confrontation with Iran for electoral purposes, while maintaining that Israel will respond forcefully to any attack against it.

In his interview, the prime minister further addressed threats directed against him personally by Israel’s enemies, pointing to the country’s military operations against hostile organizations and their leaders.

“They openly declare that they want to eliminate me. So far, we have eliminated them; they have not eliminated us.”

Netanyahu also suggested that Iran might seek to influence the elections through security incidents intended to undermine public confidence in Israel’s recent military achievements. He insisted that the elections would proceed as scheduled despite any such attempts.

The prime minister’s comments came just ten days before Israelis are scheduled to vote in the October 27 Knesset elections, with security concerns, relations with Iran and the continuing tensions in Yehudah and Shomron among the issues dominating the campaign.

The IDF announced today that four Hamas terrorists, including an operative who participated in the October 7 massacre, have been eliminated in a series of targeted strikes across the Gaza Strip over the past three days. The military said the terrorists had been preparing additional attacks and working to rebuild Hamas’ operational capabilities in violation of the ceasefire agreement.

According to the IDF, the operations were carried out at several locations throughout Gaza, targeting members of Hamas’ military wing who continued to pose a threat to Israeli soldiers and civilians.

Among those eliminated was Adham Khalil Mohammed Marouf, a Hamas terrorist who infiltrated Israeli territory during the October 7, 2023, attacks. The military confirmed that Marouf was killed in a strike on Friday.

Also eliminated Friday was Ubaida Suhail Hamad Murtaja, who served as a sniper in Hamas’ military wing. The IDF identified him as another operative involved in the terrorist organization’s military activities.

The operations began Thursday with the elimination of Mahmoud Khaled Mohammed Madhoun, a member of Hamas’ elite Nukhba force.

According to the military, Madhoun had participated in combat operations throughout the war and was responsible for firing anti-tank missiles at Israeli troops.

A fourth Hamas operative, Abd al-Jawad Juda, was eliminated today in another strike targeting the organization’s military infrastructure.

The IDF said the four terrorists had recently been involved in efforts to prepare further attacks against Israeli forces and civilians, while simultaneously attempting to restore Hamas’ weakened military capabilities.

“Recently, the terrorists advanced attacks against IDF troops and Israeli civilians and attempted to restore the organization’s military capabilities, in systematic violation of the ceasefire. The terrorists were eliminated to remove the threat they posed.”

The military emphasized that the strikes were conducted in response to specific threats and that precautions were taken to reduce the risk to civilians in the surrounding areas.

“Prior to the strikes, steps were taken to mitigate harm to civilians, including the use of precision munitions and aerial surveillance.

“IDF troops under the Southern Command remain deployed in the area in accordance with the agreement and will continue to operate to remove any threat.”

The announcement follows additional IDF operations against Hamas personnel in Gaza. On Friday, the military disclosed that two other operatives had been killed in recent strikes, including Maher Walid Omar al-Husseini, a commander in Hamas’ Nukhba force who also participated in the October 7 invasion of Israel.

The second terrorist identified in that announcement was Mohammed Mohammed Abd al-Khalek Hala, whom the IDF described as an operative involved in weapons production for Hamas.

The latest eliminations come as Israeli forces continue targeting Hamas personnel accused of rebuilding the terrorist organization’s military infrastructure despite the ceasefire.

According to the IDF, recent operations have focused on terrorists involved in planning attacks, restoring weapons capabilities and reestablishing Hamas’ operational networks throughout the Gaza Strip.

The military said its forces remain stationed in designated areas under the ceasefire arrangement and will continue taking action against threats to Israeli soldiers and civilians.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called on Israel to intensify efforts to stop violence in Yehudah and Shomron following an attack that left American photojournalist Heidi Levine injured, warning that President Donald Trump does not want further unrest in the region to ignite a broader crisis.

Speaking with reporters tonight at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland, Rubio said the administration had repeatedly conveyed its concerns to Israeli officials and was pressing for stronger measures against those responsible for violent incidents.

“We’re all very disturbed by those images and what we’re seeing. We’ve asked the Israelis and continue to ask them to crack down on that stuff,” he said.

Rubio emphasized that preventing further instability in Yehudah and Shomron remains an important priority for Trump, who has warned against allowing localized confrontations to escalate into a larger conflict.

“The President’s been very clear. He’s said this repeatedly. He does not want to see friction or anything, a crisis going on in the West Bank. Now, I understand that these are groups that are out there doing it. And the President’s been repeatedly clear when he said that he doesn’t want to see a new spark.”

The secretary’s comments came amid mounting concern over an incident Friday involving Levine, a veteran Washington Post photojournalist who was injured while covering confrontations in Yehudah and Shomron.

Asked specifically about the attack, Rubio acknowledged that American officials were still working to establish the full circumstances and that he had not yet received a comprehensive account from the US Embassy in Israel.

“I don’t have all the details. I only go off media reports. I know we’ve inquired with the embassy. They’re supposed to get a cable back later today or tomorrow indicating exactly what they know about it. But from what I understand about media reports, it didn’t look good. It was an American reporter, maybe it was a photojournalist, who was caught behind where some of these groups came in and was beaten. And there was video of that. So the whole thing was just disturbing. Not a good look.”

Rubio’s remarks followed a particularly forceful condemnation from US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee, who demanded a thorough criminal investigation and prosecution of everyone involved in the assault.

Huckabee, writing today, identified Levine as an American citizen who had been clearly identifiable as a member of the press when she was attacked.

“Heidi Levine, photojournalist for the Washington Post, suffered serious injuries from vicious & cowardly attack,” Huckabee wrote. “Heidi is US Citizen, clear ID as journalist.”

The ambassador said investigators had not yet conclusively established the identities of the perpetrators, but insisted that anyone found responsible should face substantial prison time.

He said the attackers remained “under investigation, but those who attacked unarmed reporter should spend years in prison.”

“We have called for a full investigation, arrest, and prosecution to the fullest extent of the law to whoever participated in this,” Huckabee stressed.

Huckabee went further in denouncing the incident, describing the assault on an unarmed female journalist as an act of terrorism.

“Attacking a female photographer is despicable act of terror carried out by masked cowards. Dishonorable act of senseless violence.”

The diplomatic pressure intensified as Israeli President Isaac Herzog personally contacted Levine today to express his regret over the assault and offer an apology on behalf of the country.

Herzog also addressed a separate incident earlier today in Taybeh, where a delegation of European diplomats and Catholic representatives reportedly came under attack while visiting the area during the olive harvest.

“As President of the State of Israel, I strongly condemn this outrageous and shocking violence, both the terrible attack you endured and other grave incidents of violence, such as what took place today in Taybeh,” Herzog said. “This weighed heavily on my conscience throughout Shabbat, and I express my deep sorrow and apologize for what you went through.”

The president told Levine that the conduct of those responsible was fundamentally incompatible with the standards expected of Israeli society and insisted that law enforcement authorities must pursue the perpetrators.

“The despicable behavior of the perpetrators of this attack does not represent the citizens or the values of the State of Israel. Israel is a democratic state governed by the rule of law, and it must act with full force against every form of violence. I know that the circumstances of each incident are being thoroughly investigated, and we await the findings. All government, security, and law enforcement authorities must use every means at their disposal to investigate thoroughly, apprehend these lawbreakers, and bring them to justice with the fullest extent of the law.”

Herzog concluded the conversation by extending his personal wishes for Levine’s recovery.

“We all embrace you and your family, and on behalf of the entire nation, I wish you good health and a speedy recovery.”

Additional reporting identified the location of Friday’s attack as the area surrounding Abu Falah, northeast of Ramallah, where Palestinian residents were gathering olives when dozens of masked Israelis reportedly descended on the area.

Levine, an experienced conflict photographer who has worked extensively in the Middle East and Ukraine, was covering the events when she was knocked to the ground and repeatedly kicked, according to her account and footage of the confrontation.

She was treated for four fractured vertebrae, a broken rib and multiple cuts, initially receiving medical attention in Ramallah before undergoing further treatment in Israel.

The Washington Post condemned the assault and demanded an investigation, while American lawmakers from both parties expressed concern about the safety of journalists and the need to hold those responsible accountable.

The violence has occurred during the annual olive harvest, a period that has repeatedly been accompanied by confrontations involving Palestinian farmers, Jewish residents and visiting activists.

According to the Israeli human rights organization Yesh Din, at least 170 attacks on Palestinians have been documented since the harvest season began on September 27. Israeli authorities have also reported confrontations involving attacks on Israelis and disputed accounts of how some incidents began.

Friday’s assault on Levine was followed by today’s confrontation in Taybeh, where European diplomatic representatives from Belgium, France and Poland were among those caught up in the disturbance. Israeli authorities announced an investigation, while the Prime Minister’s Office urged caution about assigning responsibility before the evidence had been fully examined.

A Jewish father in North London has removed his nine-year-old son from a public elementary school after a teacher allegedly suggested that Jews were responsible for the October 7 Hamas massacre, while school administrators refused his request for antisemitism awareness training for staff members.

The incident, reported by Britain’s Jewish Chronicle, occurred after the boy told his teacher about a conversation he had with his father concerning the Hamas terrorist attack on the Nova music festival in southern Israel.

Rather than acknowledging the atrocities committed by Hamas terrorists, the teacher allegedly challenged the child’s account, responding, “Actually, it’s exactly the opposite.”

According to the father, his son understood the teacher’s remarks to mean that Jews had attacked Palestinians, rather than the other way around. The teacher’s response also allegedly portrayed Hamas terrorists as “freedom fighters,” effectively justifying the violence perpetrated during the October 7 attacks.

Disturbed by what his son had experienced, the father contacted the school’s deputy headteacher and requested that members of the teaching staff receive training to recognize and address antisemitism.

He also suggested that the teacher visit the Nova exhibition in London, which documents the massacre at the music festival and the experiences of those who survived the attack.

School administrators rejected his request, telling him that “you can’t force politics on staff.”

The father subsequently attempted to raise the matter with the school’s headteacher but was reportedly told that she was not involved in the issue.

The confrontation was not the first time the boy had encountered hostility connected to his Jewish identity and Israel while attending the school.

A year earlier, when he was eight years old, the child expressed support for Israel’s representative in a singing competition. Another student responded by shouting abusive language at him, while several classmates began chanting “Free Palestine.”

The father said the combination of incidents, together with what he regarded as the school’s unwillingness to respond appropriately, convinced him that his son could no longer remain in that educational environment.

The family consequently enrolled the boy in a Jewish school for the 2026 academic year.

The father’s decision carried particular emotional significance because of his family’s history in France.

Originally from France himself, he recalled that his grandfather had been forced to remove his mother from school in 1940, when the country was under the antisemitic Vichy regime.

He said it was deeply painful to find himself taking a similar step in Britain in 2026, more than eight decades later, because of concerns about antisemitism.

The allegations have prompted renewed calls from British Jewish organizations for stronger protections for Jewish students in the country’s education system.

The Jewish Leadership Council and the Community Security Trust have urged the British government to urgently publish and implement the findings of an independent investigation into antisemitism in schools led by Sir David Bell.

The review, commissioned by Britain’s Department for Education in March, is examining how schools identify antisemitism, respond to complaints, protect Jewish students and hold educational institutions accountable when incidents are mishandled.

The government has said the review’s recommendations are expected during the autumn of 2026.

The Community Security Trust emphasized that teachers have a responsibility to educate children and maintain a safe learning environment, rather than introduce extremist political positions into classrooms.

The organization also encouraged parents to report similar incidents to both the police and the CST.

The case comes amid persistently high levels of antisemitism across Britain. CST recorded 1,926 antisemitic incidents during the first six months of 2026, a 21% increase over the corresponding period in 2025 and the second-highest first-half total since the organization began compiling its records.

Of those incidents, 178 involved schools, students or educational staff, including 74 cases affecting children or employees at non-Jewish schools.

For the London family, the decision to transfer their son to a Jewish school followed their unsuccessful attempts to secure assurances that the incidents would be addressed and that steps would be taken to prevent similar experiences in the future.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu issued a forceful response Friday to former President Barack Obama, rejecting his suggestion that Israel had taken land belonging to others and insisting that the Jewish people’s presence in Eretz Yisroel is rooted in thousands of years of history, rather than foreign conquest.

In a video posted to his X account, Netanyahu challenged remarks Obama made earlier this week during a public appearance in Northern Ireland, where the former American president acknowledged the Jewish people’s history of persecution but also accused them of taking land from others.

Netanyahu opened his response by expressing disappointment with Obama’s characterization of Israel’s history and moral standing.

“I heard a regrettable statement a few days ago suggesting that ‘Israel is stealing land and losing its moral high ground,'” Netanyahu said. “The Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the land of our forefathers. Our history is not a colonial enterprise. We did not steal this land. This is our homeland.”

The prime minister emphasized the Jewish people’s ancient connection to Yehudah, arguing that comparisons between Israel and European colonial powers fundamentally misrepresent Jewish history.

“It is called Judea. That is where the Jews come from, and we have been connected to it for thousands of years,” Netanyahu declared. “We are not the Dutch in Indonesia. We are not the Belgians in the Congo. We are Jews in Judea.”

Netanyahu went on to argue that the central obstacle to peace in the Middle East is the refusal of Israel’s adversaries to accept the existence of a Jewish state, regardless of its borders.

“The obstacle is the refusal of our enemies, America’s enemies, to recognize the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own,” he said.

The Israeli leader also pointed to the anti-American rhetoric frequently employed by Iran and other enemies of Israel, describing the threats against the two countries as part of a broader ideological confrontation.

“They call us the ‘Little Satan’ and you the ‘Great Satan.’ And we are defending our shared values,” Netanyahu said, addressing the American public.

He warned that diplomatic initiatives built on unrealistic expectations would ultimately fail if they ignored the intentions of those seeking Israel’s destruction.

“Peace based on illusions will shatter against the rocks of Middle Eastern reality,” Netanyahu cautioned.

Netanyahu maintained that Israel would not endanger its security or its continued existence to accommodate those unwilling to recognize the Jewish state’s legitimacy or those seeking to appease terrorism.

“The right of the Jewish people to a state of their own in their historic homeland is not negotiable,” Netanyahu emphasized.

He concluded by declaring that Israel would never compromise that fundamental principle.

“We certainly will not do so, and we never will,” he said.

Obama’s comments came Tuesday evening during an appearance at the O2 Arena in Belfast, where he participated in a public discussion with journalist and author Susan McKay. Earlier in the day, he had received an honorary doctorate from Queen’s University Belfast.

Discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Obama acknowledged the centuries of persecution endured by Jews, particularly in Europe, and their historical connection to the land. However, he argued that Palestinians had also suffered injustices as a result of Israel’s establishment and subsequent policies.

“The fact is that the Jewish people, for millennia, were oppressed, discriminated against, killed. Europe was responsible for much of it. They understandably sought a refuge,” Obama said.

He continued by accusing Israelis of taking land from others and acting excessively, saying Palestinians understandably regarded those actions as unjust and sought the return of their property.

Obama also criticized what he characterized as the Netanyahu government’s reliance on Israel’s military and technological superiority to guarantee its security.

He argued that a strategy built around military strength without concessions to Palestinians might succeed temporarily but would ultimately undermine Israel’s moral standing.

“You have ceded moral ground if that is the position you take,” Obama said.

The former president also maintained that neither Israelis nor Palestinians would disappear from the region and that both peoples would have to confront that reality to achieve a lasting settlement.

{Matzav.com}