Feed aggregator

Barack Obama has formally endorsed Democratic Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, releasing a campaign advertisement Monday urging voters to support the progressive candidate in his November 3 contest against Republican Mike Rogers, even as Rogers intensifies his criticism of El-Sayed over alleged family connections to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The endorsement places Obama behind El-Sayed in one of the country’s most closely watched Senate contests, with the former president portraying the Michigan election as part of a broader struggle over the direction of the United States.

“America was founded on a simple idea. This country belongs to all of us,” Obama said in the video. “Not just the wealthy, not just the well-connected — everyone.

“Today, that idea is under attack. And Michigan is where we fight back. That’s why I’m asking you to support Abdul El-Sayed for the United States Senate.”

Obama praised El-Sayed’s record in public health and his progressive economic agenda, presenting him as a candidate willing to challenge powerful interests on behalf of working Americans.

The former president said El-Sayed has “taken on special interests to fight for good jobs, better healthcare, and lower costs.”

Among the positions Obama highlighted were El-Sayed’s advocacy for Medicare for All, his decision not to accept contributions from corporate political action committees, and his opposition to American involvement in foreign wars.

El-Sayed previously served as the health director of Wayne County, which includes Detroit, and has emphasized his background in public health throughout his political career.

Although some coverage has described him as a physician, El-Sayed’s professional qualifications have drawn closer scrutiny. He earned a medical degree from Columbia University but does not hold a license to practice medicine, according to reporting by Bridge Michigan.

The endorsement had been anticipated after Obama and El-Sayed announced plans to appear together at a campaign event in Detroit later this month. Until Monday, however, Obama had not publicly issued a formal endorsement.

The announcement comes as El-Sayed attempts to consolidate Democratic support following a competitive primary contest against Representative Haley Stevens of Michigan.

El-Sayed must now persuade Stevens’ supporters and other Democratic voters to unite behind his candidacy while also appealing to independents in a state where statewide elections have frequently been decided by narrow margins.

The endorsement arrives at a politically sensitive moment for El-Sayed, who has recently attempted to distance himself from harsh criticism he directed at Obama earlier in his career.

In a 2012 opinion piece, El-Sayed sharply questioned Obama’s record on immigration, healthcare, civil liberties, and American military involvement overseas. Those criticisms resurfaced ahead of the planned joint campaign appearance.

During an interview Sunday on NBC’s Meet the Press, El-Sayed attributed his earlier remarks to his “younger” and “angry self.”

“You grow up, you start to appreciate just how hard change is and how important it is to pick up and push,” El-Sayed said.

He explained that his views had evolved as he gained experience in public service and came to better appreciate the difficulties of achieving major policy changes. El-Sayed also suggested that progressive Democrats had drawn important lessons from Obama’s presidency, even where they continued to disagree with aspects of his record.

Meanwhile, Rogers has been pursuing a sharply different campaign strategy, focusing attention on El-Sayed’s political positions and raising allegations about his family’s purported connections to Islamist organizations.

In a Monday post on X, Rogers made no reference to Obama’s endorsement. Instead, he repeated an allegation concerning El-Sayed’s family.

“According to his own sister, Abdul El-Sayed’s family has ‘long been’ Muslim Brotherhood,” Rogers wrote. “Abdul needs to be honest with Michiganders about he and his families ties to terrorism.”

El-Sayed has denied that he or members of his family have connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. Rogers has not publicly provided evidence establishing the alleged ties, and the accusations remain disputed.

The allegations had already surfaced during the candidates’ October 8 debate in Grand Rapids, where Rogers repeatedly raised questions about El-Sayed’s background and associations. El-Sayed accused his Republican opponent of attempting to make his Muslim identity an issue in the election.

The debate also exposed substantial differences between the candidates over Israel and American foreign policy. El-Sayed has opposed continued American military assistance to Israel, while Rogers has criticized that position and portrayed his opponent’s foreign policy views as a national security concern.

Rogers, who previously chaired the House Intelligence Committee, has emphasized his background in national security and law enforcement. His campaign has also targeted El-Sayed over policing, crime, and government spending.

El-Sayed, meanwhile, has campaigned on expanding healthcare access, reducing household expenses, limiting corporate influence in politics, and changing American foreign policy priorities.

The two candidates are competing for the Senate seat being vacated by Democrat Gary Peters, who is retiring. With Republicans currently holding a 53–47 Senate majority, Michigan is among the states receiving intense attention from both national parties.

Obama’s scheduled October 24 appearance in Detroit will also feature Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jocelyn Benson and other party leaders. The event coincides with the beginning of early in-person voting in Michigan.

The location is significant for El-Sayed, who struggled in Detroit during the Democratic primary, losing the city to Stevens by a substantial margin. His campaign is now seeking to bring those voters into the Democratic coalition for the general election.

Rogers has simultaneously attempted to appeal to voters dissatisfied with both parties, including by publicly opposing aspects of President Trump’s tariff policy toward Canada and calling for changes in American policy toward Iran.

In a new advertisement released Monday, the Rogers campaign featured Detroit residents criticizing El-Sayed, including one voter who said, “I voted for Barack Obama, but this year I’m voting for Mike Rogers.”

Obama’s endorsement is part of a wider round of campaign activity ahead of the midterms. On Monday, he also released a video supporting Democratic Senate candidate Scott Colom in Mississippi, where Colom is challenging Republican Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith.

The former president’s Michigan appearance later this month will bring him directly into the contest between El-Sayed and Rogers, with both campaigns continuing to focus on voter turnout, economic concerns, and sharply contrasting positions on national security.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump is renewing his promise to provide $5,000 payments to every adult American citizen if Republicans retain control of Congress in November, presenting the proposal as a major financial benefit of a Republican victory even as lawmakers within his own party question its cost and potential economic consequences.

In a campaign advertisement posted Monday on X, Trump promoted the proposed payments while warning that Democratic control of Congress would result in higher taxes and serious economic difficulties.

“I’m going to give all adult citizens of the United States of America $5,000. Democrat policies won’t allow this to happen,” Trump said in the advertisement.

“In fact, the opposite. They’re going to raise your taxes,” he continued.

“If the Democrats win, you will have an economic depression. If the Republicans win, you will each have $5,000 in your pocket and economic success for our country like we have never ever seen before.”

The renewed promise comes just weeks before the November 3 midterm elections, when Republicans will attempt to maintain their majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Trump has sought to make the proposed payments a prominent feature of the Republican campaign, arguing that continued GOP control would allow his administration to deliver direct financial benefits to American households.

However, the proposal has already encountered resistance among fiscally conservative Republicans, some of whom argue that distributing thousands of dollars to millions of Americans would significantly increase federal spending and could undermine efforts to control inflation.

The president initially introduced the $5,000 dividend proposal during the Republican National Committee’s midterm convention in Dallas on September 9.

Since that announcement, questions have persisted about how the payments would be financed, whether they would require additional federal borrowing, and how the administration would structure the program.

Representative Chip Roy, a Texas Republican known for his opposition to expanding federal spending, criticized the proposal on the grounds that direct government payments could encourage Americans to become more dependent on Washington.

“[S]ome of us think dependency is evil & soul-sucking in all its forms,” Roy wrote on X.

Representative Ralph Norman of South Carolina, another conservative Republican and a member of the House Freedom Caucus, also expressed reservations about the initiative.

Norman cited “serious concerns” involving the federal debt and what he described as “pay-to-play politics,” raising questions about the wisdom of linking a major government payment proposal to the outcome of an election.

The criticism reflects broader divisions within the Republican Party over the appropriate role of government spending and whether direct cash payments are consistent with the party’s stated commitment to fiscal restraint.

The debate has revived comparisons with the stimulus checks issued during the COVID-19 pandemic, when Congress approved several rounds of direct payments to help households cope with widespread economic disruptions.

Although those payments were initially introduced under Trump’s administration, subsequent rounds of federal assistance were enacted under President Joe Biden, contributing to a broader debate over government spending and its relationship to inflation.

One individual who previously served as a senior official in Trump’s White House argued that the pandemic-era payments ultimately produced little political benefit for Republicans while opening the door to additional federal spending.

“We all remember how that turned out,” the official said. “Didn’t help our team at all, and it set the stage for [former President Joe] Biden to do it again — and plunged us straight into inflation hell.”

Trump, however, has continued to defend his proposal as an affordable way to share what he describes as the economic gains generated by his administration’s policies.

During his September announcement, the president said the payments would be known as the Trump Dividend and compared the concept to a corporation distributing profits to its shareholders.

He also specified that recipients would be required to spend the money within the United States, an additional condition intended to ensure that the payments stimulate domestic economic activity.

The president has pointed to tariff revenue and increased investment in the American economy as reasons he believes the federal government can afford the initiative. In subsequent campaign remarks, he estimated the program’s cost at approximately $1 trillion.

Independent analyses have placed the potential cost closer to $1.2 trillion, based on the number of adult American citizens who would qualify. Fact-checkers have questioned whether tariff collections could finance the payments without additional borrowing or other sources of revenue.

Another unresolved question is how the government would enforce Trump’s requirement that the money be spent domestically. Administration officials have not publicly outlined a mechanism for tracking purchases or restricting how recipients use the funds.

The White House formally promoted the proposal in September, presenting it as a dividend tied to the administration’s economic policies and emphasizing that it would depend on Republicans maintaining control of both chambers of Congress.

The $5,000 pledge has also become part of a broader series of financial initiatives announced by the administration ahead of the midterms, including targeted payments or refunds for certain Medicare beneficiaries and Americans enrolled in federal health insurance programs.

Those measures differ from the proposed Trump Dividend because they involve specific existing programs or smaller groups of recipients, while the $5,000 initiative would extend to every adult American citizen.

For a married couple in which both spouses are adult U.S. citizens, the proposed payments would total $10,000. The president has not announced an income limit that would exclude higher-earning Americans.

Despite Trump’s repeated assurances, the dividend remains a proposal rather than an approved federal benefit. Congress would need to authorize the payments, and no legislation establishing the program has been enacted.

With the November 3 elections approaching, the president is continuing to promote the checks as a central part of his economic message, even as Republican lawmakers debate whether the federal government can afford the commitment and how it would be implemented.

{Matzav.com}

Shas chairman Aryeh Deri has acknowledged that there is no realistic solution to the ongoing dispute over drafting chareidi yeshiva students into the IDF, revealing during a closed-door gathering in Modiin Illit that the instructions he received from senior rabbonim were to prolong the political process and gain as much time as possible.

The remarks, disclosed Monday evening by Israel’s Channel 13 News, have drawn attention because they present a different picture of Shas’s strategy from the message the party has recently emphasized in its public election campaign.

According to the report, Deri told participants at the private gathering that the dispute over military conscription could not be resolved under the existing circumstances and that the rabbinic leadership had directed him to focus on delaying developments rather than expecting a comprehensive legislative settlement.

“You cannot solve the problem. The instruction from the rabbonim was to buy time,” Deri was quoted as saying, according to an English translation of the Hebrew remarks reported by Channel 13.

The disclosure comes as Shas has been working to broaden its appeal ahead of Israel’s upcoming elections, highlighting the party’s identification with the State of Israel and expressing appreciation for IDF soldiers.

That public messaging has attracted particular attention because the party’s rabbinic leadership continues to maintain strong opposition to the compulsory enlistment of yeshiva students.

The newly reported remarks suggest that Deri views the political negotiations over a draft law primarily as a means of protecting the chareidi community from immediate enforcement measures while postponing a confrontation that he believes cannot presently be resolved.

The Channel 13 report did not establish when the private gathering took place or provide the full recording and surrounding context of Deri’s remarks. It also did not identify which rabbonim issued the instructions he described.

The comments nevertheless add another dimension to the long-running struggle over military service, which has become one of the most contentious issues in Israeli politics.

For years, chareidi parties have sought legislation protecting the ability of yeshiva students to continue learning without being required to enlist in the IDF. Those efforts have repeatedly encountered legal challenges and opposition from political parties demanding a broader distribution of military obligations.

The dispute has become especially intense since the outbreak of the war following the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks, as the military has faced increased manpower requirements and reservists have been called up for extended periods.

The IDF has maintained that it urgently needs additional soldiers, while chareidi leaders insist that the preservation of full-time Torah learning is an essential religious responsibility.

Deri has previously expressed skepticism that the military genuinely wants to accommodate chareidi recruits who insist on maintaining their religious standards.

During a September interview with Kol Berama radio, the Shas chairman rejected suggestions that he should personally call upon chareidi men who are not learning full-time to enlist.

He argued that the military was capable of addressing its own recruitment difficulties and accused the IDF of failing to provide adequate frameworks for chareidi soldiers.

Deri also maintained that the army’s preference for a secular military environment was incompatible with the requirements of many chareidi recruits, although the IDF has established dedicated service frameworks, including the Chashmonaim Brigade, specifically intended to accommodate chareidi religious observance.

Those earlier comments drew criticism from political opponents, including former IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot and former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who argued that the growing burden on serving soldiers required greater participation from the chareidi population.

The latest disclosure comes against the backdrop of a change in Shas’s public campaign strategy.

Recent party messaging has placed greater emphasis on solidarity with soldiers and their families, reflecting an effort to appeal to voters who identify with the military and the broader Israeli national experience.

At the same time, senior rabbonim associated with Shas have continued to speak against the drafting of yeshiva students, with some rejecting military enlistment even for young men who are not actively studying in yeshiva.

The contrast between those positions has raised questions about how Shas intends to reconcile its public expressions of support for soldiers with its continued opposition to compulsory chareidi enlistment.

Deri’s remarks at the Modiin Illit gathering indicate that, at least in the private discussion reported Monday, he was candid about the limits of what political negotiations could accomplish.

His acknowledgment that the rabbonim had instructed him to gain time also echoes an earlier position he expressed during a visit to Rav Meir Tzvi Bergman in January 2025.

At that meeting, Deri indicated that he did not see a practical solution to the draft controversy and spoke about awaiting the arrival of Moshiach rather than expecting the political system to resolve the matter.

The current dispute has also involved repeated attempts by the governing coalition to advance legislation that would regulate the status of chareidi yeshiva students and restrict enforcement measures against those who have not reported for military service.

In July, the coalition attempted to introduce a temporary suspension of arrests of chareidi draft evaders, but the High Court intervened before the measure could take effect.

The legal proceedings have further complicated efforts to reach an agreement acceptable to both the chareidi parties and lawmakers demanding greater enlistment.

An Ethiopian Airlines cargo aircraft traveling from Addis Ababa to Ben Gurion Airport was forced to reverse course after Israeli authorities discovered that one of the pilots was an Indonesian national, prompting the airline to return the plane to Ethiopia and replace the crew member before continuing to Israel.

The unusual incident occurred overnight Monday, when the cargo flight had already departed Ethiopia and was making its way toward Israel. The problem emerged after authorities received the aircraft’s crew manifest, which reportedly had not been submitted until after the plane was airborne.

During a review of the documentation, officials discovered that one of the pilots held Indonesian citizenship. Because Indonesia does not maintain diplomatic relations with Israel, the aircraft was denied permission to proceed with that crew member aboard.

The plane had been flying for approximately an hour and was still within Ethiopian airspace when instructions were issued for it to return to its departure airport.

The aircraft subsequently landed in Addis Ababa, where Ethiopian Airlines arranged for the Indonesian pilot to be replaced.

Once the crew change was completed, the cargo plane departed Ethiopia a second time and continued to Ben Gurion Airport, where it landed without further reported complications.

Ethiopian Airlines attributed the disruption to an administrative error, explaining that the company had not realized the Indonesian pilot would be unable to participate in a flight destined for Israel.

Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim-majority country, has no formal diplomatic relations with Israel. The two countries have maintained limited unofficial contacts over the years, but Indonesia does not recognize Israel diplomatically.

The incident highlights the importance of advance crew documentation on international flights, particularly those operating between countries with complicated diplomatic relationships or heightened security requirements.

The incident occurred amid a tightening of Israel’s aviation security procedures following the recent attempted attack aboard a Flydubai flight bound for Ben Gurion Airport.

In that case, an Omani copilot allegedly attempted to seize control of the aircraft and crash it at the airport. The incident prompted Israeli authorities to review how foreign airline personnel are screened before being permitted to operate flights into the country.

Under the strengthened requirements, foreign carriers must conduct updated security background checks on flight crews and avoid assigning personnel holding citizenship, including dual citizenship, from countries without diplomatic relations with Israel.

The new procedures reportedly extend beyond pilots to other flight crew members, reflecting concerns about the potential security risks posed by personnel with access to aircraft cockpits and sensitive aviation operations.

In the Ethiopian Airlines incident, Israel’s screening system successfully identified the Indonesian crew member and prevented the aircraft from reaching Israeli airspace. However, the fact that the information was received only after departure has raised questions about whether crew manifests should be submitted earlier.

Unlike passenger information, which is generally transmitted to authorities before flights depart, crew information can sometimes reach screening systems shortly before takeoff or even after an aircraft is airborne.

Israeli aviation officials are examining the gap between the introduction of stricter screening requirements and the procedures used to enforce them before aircraft leave their departure airports.

The broader security review has also led Israeli airlines to undertake additional screening of foreign flight personnel employed on chartered aircraft.

According to Israeli reports, local carriers have begun using Israeli cybersecurity companies to examine the backgrounds of approximately 2,500 foreign pilots and flight attendants, including reviews of their publicly available social media activity and statements.

The additional scrutiny comes as investigators in the United Arab Emirates continue examining the attempted Flydubai attack. Emirati authorities have reportedly confirmed that the Omani copilot intended to carry out a suicide attack at Ben Gurion Airport.

Investigators also reported that the suspect had undergone a process of radicalization beginning in 2017 while living in Australia, despite subsequently passing the professional and security checks required when he joined the airline in January 2026.

The Ethiopian cargo flight ultimately reached Israel after the crew member was replaced, but the incident has placed renewed attention on the timing of security checks and the need for airlines to submit complete crew information before departure.

{Matzav.com}

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has directed the NYPD to undertake its first comprehensive examination of police use-of-force policies in a decade, while introducing new measures intended to prevent officers accused of serious misconduct from avoiding disciplinary proceedings by retiring before their cases are completed.

The mayor announced the changes Monday following controversy surrounding the death of Win Rozario, a 19-year-old Queens resident who was fatally shot by police in March 2024 after calling 911 during a mental health crisis. One of the two officers facing departmental charges in connection with the shooting retired before his disciplinary hearing could begin.

“When the government uses force against a New Yorker, the standard for accountability must be at its highest,” Mamdani said in a statement.

“We have an obligation to Win’s family and to every New Yorker who calls for help in a moment of crisis.”

The administration said the NYPD will spend the coming months reviewing its existing rules governing officers’ use of force, with the process including opportunities for community members to provide input.

The initiative will examine departmental procedures that have not undergone a similarly extensive review in approximately ten years, according to City Hall.

Mamdani also announced an additional $2.6 million for the Office of the Inspector General for the NYPD, an independent oversight body responsible for examining the department’s policies, practices, and operations.

The new funding is intended to triple the office’s current staffing, bringing its workforce back to the highest level it has previously maintained.

A central element of the administration’s changes involves disciplinary cases in which officers seek retirement while facing allegations of misconduct.

The NYPD has established a new notification process designed to alert relevant officials when an officer facing disciplinary proceedings is preparing to retire, allowing the department to make greater efforts to resolve the case before the officer leaves.

The department will also formalize procedures for notifying New York State criminal justice authorities when an officer retires while facing a formal misconduct accusation.

Those notifications will include the submission of records for possible decertification, a process that can prevent an officer from obtaining another law enforcement position elsewhere in New York.

The changes are intended to address concerns that officers facing serious allegations can leave the department before disciplinary findings are reached and potentially pursue employment with another police agency.

The mayor’s office also announced new requirements concerning the information provided to families and the public following serious incidents involving police officers.

Under the revised procedures, the NYPD will establish more consistent practices for releasing information after critical incidents, including providing families with final reports prepared by the department’s Force Investigation Division when those reports are requested.

The department also committed to complying with state reporting requirements concerning deaths involving police officers.

The policy announcement follows the March 27, 2024, shooting of Rozario inside his family’s apartment in Ozone Park, Queens.

Rozario had called 911 himself while experiencing a mental health emergency. Officers Salvatore Alongi and Matthew Cianfrocco were dispatched to the residence.

According to the officers’ accounts and body-camera footage, Rozario approached police while holding a pair of scissors and failed to comply with instructions to put them down.

The officers initially deployed their Tasers, but the encounter escalated and Rozario was shot five times in the presence of his mother and brother.

The New York State Attorney General’s Office subsequently investigated the shooting and declined to file criminal charges against the officers. Investigators also recommended expanding the city’s program for responding to mental health emergencies without police involvement.

Although prosecutors did not pursue criminal charges, the Civilian Complaint Review Board brought departmental disciplinary charges against both officers.

Rozario’s family has continued to demand that both officers be dismissed from the NYPD.

The recent retirement of Officer Salvatore Alongi before his disciplinary trial could proceed intensified the family’s objections and prompted questions about the department’s handling of pending misconduct cases.

The NYPD has attributed the failure to prevent the retirement to a notification error, and Commissioner Jessica Tisch has acknowledged the need for improved internal procedures.

Officer Matthew Cianfrocco remains subject to disciplinary proceedings.

The Police Benevolent Association, which represents rank-and-file NYPD officers, has disputed the allegations against the officers and criticized the administration’s response.

Union representatives argue that the officers were confronting an armed individual during a rapidly developing emergency and that the proposed changes risk placing additional burdens on officers making split-second decisions.

Police Benevolent Association President Patrick Hendry also accused Mamdani of responding to pressure from political activists rather than addressing the operational needs of law enforcement.

The announcement comes amid broader disagreements over Mamdani’s approach to policing. Progressive organizations have pressed the mayor to adopt more extensive changes to the NYPD, while police unions have warned against reforms they believe could undermine officer effectiveness and public safety.

Mamdani has retained Jessica Tisch as police commissioner despite criticism from some of his political supporters, who have called for a more substantial overhaul of the department’s leadership and operations.

The mayor’s latest initiative will now place the NYPD’s use-of-force standards under formal examination while expanding independent oversight and changing the procedures governing officer retirement, disciplinary cases, and the disclosure of investigative findings.

A 14-year-old yeshiva student injured in the deadly explosion during a school trip in northern Israel told Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu on Monday that the disaster occurred after another student began handling an unexploded munition and unscrewed part of it, triggering a blast that killed one boy and wounded 24 others.

The harrowing account was provided by Eitan Masaori, a student at ORT Ma’alot Yeshiva High School, during Netanyahu’s visit to Rambam Hospital in Haifa, where several of the injured students were receiving treatment.

Masaori, who suffered a shrapnel wound to his neck, described the terrifying moments when the explosive device detonated during the school’s outing along the Ramim Ridge in the Upper Galilee.

According to his account, one of the students had discovered an unexploded munition in the area and began playing with it. The boy reportedly attempted to unscrew a component of the device, after which it exploded.

“Guys were thrown through the air, some fell into the bushes. There were two seconds of shock,” Masaori told the prime minister.

The injured student recalled the confusion that followed the blast, as classmates struggled to understand what had happened and began searching for their wounded friends.

Despite sustaining an injury himself, Masaori said his immediate concern was helping another student who had been hurt.

“I realized I was injured. I saw that a friend was hurt, and I tried to help him,” he recounted.

Netanyahu visited the hospital together with Education Minister Yoav Kisch, meeting injured students and their families and hearing firsthand descriptions of the tragedy.

The explosion claimed the life of a boy approximately 14 years old and left 24 others injured. Two of the wounded were reported to be in serious condition, ten sustained moderate injuries, and another twelve suffered light injuries.

Israeli military officials believe the explosive device was a cluster munition fired by Hezbollah during the war that had landed in the area without detonating.

Such unexploded munitions can remain dangerous long after the fighting has ended, particularly when disturbed or handled by civilians who are unaware of the threat.

The students had been hiking in an area that had previously been exposed to rocket and missile fire from Lebanon, raising renewed concerns about unexploded ordnance remaining in open areas of northern Israel.

The deadly incident has prompted an urgent examination of how a school group came to be hiking in an area where dangerous remnants of Hezbollah rocket fire may still be present.

Preliminary findings indicate that the students were taking a break near the Mitzpe Pe’er lookout when one of them discovered the munition. Investigators believe the device was picked up and placed in a backpack before detonating several minutes later. Masaori’s testimony that a student had unscrewed part of the object provides another account of what occurred immediately before the explosion.

Military investigators believe the object was a submunition from a Hezbollah rocket. During the fighting, Hezbollah fired rockets containing smaller explosive devices designed to scatter across wide areas. Some failed to explode on impact, leaving dangerous remnants in fields, forests, and other open areas.

Following his conversations with the injured students, Netanyahu instructed the commander of the IDF Home Front Command to strengthen public warnings about unexploded ordnance and reinforce instructions prohibiting civilians from touching suspicious objects.

He also called for extensive searches in areas where additional unexploded munitions might remain, particularly in locations frequented by hikers and other civilians.

Education Minister Yoav Kisch announced that he had ordered a 48-hour suspension of school trips in the northern border region and the Golan Heights. Schools planning outings in those areas were instructed to arrange alternative routes while authorities reviewed the safety situation.

Kisch said an initial review indicated that the ORT Ma’alot trip had received the necessary approvals, that the hiking route had been inspected, and that the required safety procedures had been followed.

He added that the students had been specifically warned about unexploded ordnance during the safety briefing preceding the outing.

“This will probably be with us for a long time to come,” Kisch said, referring to the danger posed by explosive remnants of the fighting.

Separate reporting raised questions about the route’s accessibility. Warning signs prohibiting entry had reportedly been posted at one approach to the area, although the school group entered from another direction where no such sign was present. Authorities are examining the circumstances surrounding the route’s approval and the warnings available to hikers.

The IDF dispatched bomb-disposal specialists from its elite Yahalom combat engineering unit to examine the explosion site and search the surrounding terrain for additional explosive devices.

Military helicopters and emergency medical teams were also deployed to evacuate the wounded, with casualties transported to Rambam Hospital in Haifa, Ziv Medical Center in Tzefas, and the Galilee Medical Center in Nahariya.

Emergency responders described finding injured students scattered across the trail, with some children attempting to assist their classmates before professional medical personnel reached them.

Medical teams treated shrapnel wounds of varying severity, while rescue personnel worked to stabilize the seriously injured and evacuate them from the mountainous area.

The explosion occurred during an annual outing involving students and teachers from ORT Ma’alot Yeshiva High School. Other groups from the same school were hiking along separate routes nearby and were evacuated as a precaution after the blast.

[COMMUNICATED]

👑 WIN $65,000 ROLEX PRESIDENTIAL 👑

DAY-DATE – 18K EVEROSE GOLD

Every entry helps build Mikvah Yona, giving Toms River families a dignified local Mikvah Taharah.

CLCIK HERE!!

⌚ Chocolate Dial – Most Wanted Color

⌚ Full President Bracelet 

⌚ 18K Everose Gold

⌚ Ref. 228235

🎟️ TICKETS STARTS AT JUST $1!!!

For $1 you could be wearing a $65K Rolex…

Every entry helps build Mikvah Yona, giving Toms River families a dignified local Mikvah Taharah.

CLCIK HERE!!

👑 WIN $65,000 ROLEX PRESIDENTIAL 👑

DAY-DATE – 18K EVEROSE GOLD

Every entry helps build Mikvah Yona, giving Toms River families a dignified local Mikvah Taharah.

CLCIK HERE!!

⌚ Chocolate Dial – Most Wanted Color

⌚ Full President Bracelet 

⌚ 18K Everose Gold

⌚ Ref. 228235

🎟️ TICKETS STARTS AT JUST $1!!!

For $1 you could be wearing a $65K Rolex…

Every entry helps build Mikvah Yona, giving Toms River families a dignified local Mikvah Taharah.

CLCIK HERE!!

👑 WIN $65,000 ROLEX PRESIDENTIAL 👑

DAY-DATE – 18K EVEROSE GOLD

Every entry helps build Mikvah Yona, giving Toms River families a dignified local Mikvah Taharah.

CLCIK HERE!!

⌚ Chocolate Dial – Most Wanted Color

⌚ Full President Bracelet 

⌚ 18K Everose Gold

⌚ Ref. 228235

🎟️ TICKETS STARTS AT JUST $1!!!

For $1 you could be wearing a $65K Rolex…

Every entry helps build Mikvah Yona, giving Toms River families a dignified local Mikvah Taharah.

CLCIK HERE!!

Israeli Defense Minister Yisroel Katz declared Monday that he will not permit the High Court of Justice to interfere with the IDF’s continued deployment in three Palestinian refugee camps in northern Shomron, warning that he is prepared to pursue special legislation in the Knesset if necessary to preserve the military’s presence.

Katz’s forceful response followed a High Court ruling directing the government to prepare a plan and timetable for the possible return of displaced Palestinian residents to the Jenin, Tulkarm, and Nur Shams refugee camps. The defense minister insisted that allowing residents to return under current conditions would jeopardize the security gains achieved by Israeli forces and potentially expose soldiers and civilians to renewed terrorist attacks.

The ruling came in response to a petition submitted by Palestinian residents against the IDF’s Central Command chief, the defense minister, and the national security minister. The petitioners sought a framework that would enable them to return to their homes after being displaced during Israeli military operations.

The court instructed the state to formulate a plan addressing the residents’ return, taking into account operational requirements and the prevailing security situation. The directive did not require an immediate, unconditional withdrawal of Israeli forces or an immediate return of all displaced residents.

Nevertheless, the decision prompted a sharp response from Katz, who argued that questions concerning the IDF’s deployment in active security zones should remain under the authority of Israel’s military and political leadership.

“The High Court must refrain from involving itself in IDF operational activities in Judea and Samaria that are intended to protect the lives of soldiers and civilians,” Katz declared.

The case was considered by a three-justice panel consisting of Supreme Court President Isaac Amit and Justices Alex Stein and Khaled Kabub.

Katz explained that the prolonged Israeli military deployment in the camps was the result of a deliberate change in security policy that he developed with Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu after becoming defense minister.

Under the previous approach, Israeli forces would enter terrorist strongholds to conduct arrests and counterterrorism operations before withdrawing, leaving open the possibility that armed groups could reestablish themselves.

The revised policy replaced those recurring incursions with an extended military presence intended to prevent terrorist organizations from rebuilding their operational networks.

As part of that strategy, the IDF established control over the Jenin, Tulkarm, and Nur Shams camps, which Katz described as major centers of terrorist activity supported by Iran.

“The Jenin, Tulkarm, and Nur Shams refugee camps had become terrorist strongholds, where Iran-backed jihadist terrorist battalions operated and launched attacks throughout Judea and Samaria and inside Israel,” he said.

According to the defense minister, approximately 40,000 residents left the three camps during the operations, while Israeli troops carried out extensive efforts to dismantle terrorist organizations and destroy infrastructure used to prepare and launch attacks.

Katz said the military eliminated terrorists, demolished terrorist facilities, and removed explosives concealed in residential structures and narrow passageways.

He emphasized that numerous buildings and streets had been converted into dangerous operational environments through the placement of explosive devices, requiring substantial military engineering work to neutralize the threats.

Rather than withdraw once those operations were completed, Israeli forces remained deployed in the camps to prevent armed groups from returning.

Katz credited the policy with a dramatic improvement in the security situation, asserting that terrorist activity in Yehuda and Shomron had declined by approximately 80%, reaching what he described as its lowest level.

He also maintained that the ability of terrorist organizations operating in the region to carry out attacks inside Israel had been significantly weakened.

“Many lives have been saved and many injuries prevented – but the challenges remain considerable,” Katz said.

The defense minister said the IDF’s continued deployment was essential because terrorist organizations remained interested in reestablishing their presence in the camps, including groups receiving assistance from Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood.

He warned that Israel could not afford to allow the area to become a staging ground for attacks resembling the Hamas massacre of October 7.

Katz described the military’s presence as “not a legal matter, but an operational and security necessity” and argued that the courts should not substitute their judgment for that of commanders responsible for protecting Israeli lives.

“It is not the High Court’s place to intervene in security considerations of this kind, just as it is not its place to intervene in operational activities in Gaza, Syria, Lebanon, or Iran,” he added.

The confrontation centers on Operation Iron Wall, the large-scale counterterrorism campaign launched in northern Shomron in January 2025. Israeli forces entered the three camps, dismantled armed infrastructure, and maintained positions in areas from which tens of thousands of Palestinians had fled.

Additional reporting on the court proceedings indicates that the petition was brought by six displaced Palestinian residents together with the Association for Civil Rights in Israel. The petitioners sought permission to return to their homes, a mechanism for other displaced families to return, and measures addressing their humanitarian needs while they remain unable to do so.

The court’s directive, issued Sunday, also requires the government to explain whether preparations for the residents’ return can be accelerated and to address complaints about inadequate humanitarian assistance.

The state has been given until November 23, 2026, to submit its response. The judges did not order an immediate return of residents or require the IDF to withdraw from the camps.

The justices acknowledged that security conditions were not yet suitable for the residents’ return, but sought a clearer account of the measures necessary to make that possible and the timetable for completing them.

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich also denounced the court’s intervention, accusing the justices of jeopardizing Israel’s security.

Smotrich called on Prime Minister Netanyahu and Katz to direct the IDF not to cooperate with the court’s order, arguing that allowing residents back prematurely could enable terrorist organizations to rebuild their infrastructure.

His position went further than Katz’s public statement by explicitly urging the government to disregard the judicial directive.

The dispute has brought renewed attention to the tension between the judiciary’s responsibility to examine government actions and the defense establishment’s authority to make operational decisions during ongoing counterterrorism operations.

For the displaced Palestinian residents, the proceedings concern their ability to return to homes they have been unable to occupy since the military campaign began. For Katz, the central issue is preserving the security arrangements he credits with preventing further terrorist attacks.

The defense minister concluded by making clear that he would seek legislative intervention if necessary to prevent a judicial decision from undermining the military’s long-term deployment.

“I do not intend to compromise on this matter, even if it requires special legislative procedures in the Knesset. This is our duty to our soldiers and citizens, and we will fulfill it,” Katz declared.

Comedian Jerry Seinfeld turned the tables on an anti-Israel protester who interrupted his stand-up performance in Chicago over the weekend, announcing that he would donate the price of her ticket to Israel after she accused him of supporting the war in Gaza.

The confrontation unfolded when a woman in the audience stood up during Seinfeld’s performance and began shouting accusations about Israel, Palestinian casualties, and American taxpayer funding. Rather than engage in a prolonged argument, the Jewish-American comedian responded with a pointed remark that drew attention to the protester’s decision to purchase a ticket to his show.

“I’m going to find out how much your ticket was. I’m sending it to Israel,” Seinfeld told the woman.

WATCH:

מהומה בהופעתו של ג'רי סיינפלד: מפגינה פרו-פלסטינית קטעה את המופע שקיים הקומיקאי בסוף השבוע בשיקגו והטיחה בו האשמות בנוגע למלחמה בעזה. סיינפלד השיב כי יתרום לישראל את עלות הכרטיס שרכשה, והיא הוצאה מהאולם על ידי המאבטחים@alon_fruchter (צילום: USPCN) pic.twitter.com/3vJjJrXh8X

— כאן חדשות (@kann_news) October 12, 2026

The exchange took place as the heckler repeatedly attempted to disrupt the performance, accusing Seinfeld of making jokes while Palestinians were being killed in Gaza.

“74,000 Palestinians have been killed with our taxpayer money,” the woman shouted.

“You are genocide apologists,” she declared.

The woman continued yelling despite Seinfeld’s response, directing further accusations at both the comedian and Israel.

“74,000 Palestinians have been killed by the racist state of Israel,” she shouted.

She then personally challenged Seinfeld, accusing him of supporting the killing of Palestinian children.

“You support genocide, Jerry? Shame on you. Shame on you.”

Security personnel eventually intervened and escorted the protester from the venue, bringing the disruption to an end. Seinfeld resumed his performance after the woman was removed.

The incident was the latest in a series of confrontations between Seinfeld and anti-Israel activists who have targeted his public appearances because of his outspoken support for Israel.

Seinfeld has repeatedly expressed solidarity with Israel since the Hamas terrorist attacks of October 7, 2023, and has faced protests at comedy performances and other public events.

His response in Chicago reflected an approach he has taken during previous disruptions, using humor to address hecklers while refusing to allow their demonstrations to derail his shows.

Additional footage of the confrontation showed that several activists were involved in disrupting the performance at the Chicago Theatre on Friday night. The demonstrators were associated with the Chicago branches of the US Palestinian Community Network and the Anti-War Committee, which subsequently circulated footage of the incident on social media.

At one point, a male protester accused Seinfeld of racism and repeated allegations about Palestinian casualties. Seinfeld responded sarcastically, “I am a racist,” prompting a reaction from the audience.

The comedian also made a mocking dance-like gesture onstage as security personnel moved to remove one of the demonstrators. In another exchange, he sarcastically embraced the accusations being directed at him, making clear through his tone and gestures that he was ridiculing the hecklers rather than agreeing with their claims.

Video of the confrontation showed audience members cheering Seinfeld’s response and calling for the protesters to leave the theater.

Following his remark about sending the ticket proceeds to Israel, Seinfeld added another joke, saying, “No, I won’t, I’m keeping it.”

Tickets for the Chicago performances reportedly ranged from approximately $103 to $157, meaning the protesters had paid to attend the very show they intended to disrupt.

Seinfeld’s support for Israel has been particularly visible since the Hamas massacre of October 7, 2023. In December of that year, he traveled to Israel with his family, visiting Kibbutz Be’eri, one of the communities devastated in the attacks, and meeting survivors and relatives of hostages.

His public position has repeatedly made him a target of anti-Israel demonstrators, including protesters who have interrupted his comedy performances.

During a June 2024 show, protesters began chanting, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”

Seinfeld responded by treating the interruption as another opportunity for comedy.

“Oh, you’re back. The protesters are back! I missed you,” he told them.

He then mocked the demonstrators for spending money on tickets to attend a performance by a Jewish comedian.

“I think you need to go back and tell whoever is running your organization, ‘We just gave more money to a Jew.’ That cannot be a good plan for you. You’ve got to come up with a better plan.”

{Matzav.com}

Hundreds of young children from Breslover chadorim across Eretz Yisroel gathered Monday outside Military Prison 10 at Beit Lid for a large tefillah gathering protesting the imprisonment of yeshiva bochurim and avreichim arrested in connection with Israel’s military draft laws. The gathering, attended by the elderly Breslov mashpia Rav Yaakov Meir Shechter, brought together children from numerous communities to daven for the release of those being held.

The gathering was organized following a wave of arrests involving Breslov chassidim who had attempted to travel to Uman for Rosh Hashanah or were detained upon returning to Israel. Organizers said more than 250 bochurim and avreichim had been arrested during Elul and Tishrei, although that figure includes arrests over the broader period rather than the number currently imprisoned.

Children arrived aboard organized buses from Yerushalayim, Tzefas, Beit Shemesh, Beitar Illit, Modiin Illit, Tel Aviv and other communities. In several locations, the children reported to their regular chadorim in the morning before boarding buses with their rebbeim and school staff for the trip to the military prison.

The event, publicized under the Hebrew title “Tzaakas Halev,” was intended to strengthen the imprisoned bochurim and avreichim while bringing together tinokos shel bais rabban for a public gathering of tefillah and chizuk.

Outside the prison, organizers arranged hundreds of chairs and distributed refreshments to the children. Loudspeakers were set up for tefillos, divrei Torah and singing.

During the gathering, Rav Yoel Fuchs, a Breslov educational administrator, read aloud the names of imprisoned bochurim. After each name, the assembled children repeated it and called out, “Chizku v’imtzu!” — Be strong and courageous.

The gathering included emotional tefillos for the release of the prisoners and for the ability of bnei yeshivos throughout Eretz Yisroel to continue learning Torah without interference.

Nachman Koenig, the director of a Breslov cheder in the Brachfeld neighborhood of Modiin Illit, explained that the children had come primarily to daven for the yeshiva bochurim.

He said the purpose of the gathering was to ask that the bochurim be permitted to continue their Torah learning and that the chareidi community be allowed to maintain its longstanding way of life.

Koenig described the gathering as an organized expression of tefillah and unity, bringing children together to call out to the Ribbono Shel Olam on behalf of those imprisoned.

Attorney Nosson Rosenblatt, a Breslov chossid involved in assisting detained bochurim, said approximately 30 to 40 young men connected to the Uman travel arrests were currently being held in the military prison.

He emphasized that the event was intended as a gathering of prayer rather than a conventional political demonstration.

According to Rosenblatt, the children had come to daven for the prisoners’ release and to express concern over the incarceration of young men whose desire, he said, was to continue learning Torah.

He also questioned the effectiveness of the arrests, arguing that the military was devoting considerable personnel and resources to detaining bochurim who had no intention of enlisting.

Rosenblatt maintained that the arrests had failed to persuade those detained to join the military and were instead deepening the confrontation between the authorities and the chareidi community.

The event also drew attention from Israel’s Education Ministry, which criticized the participation of schoolchildren in demonstrations during regular school hours.

In a statement, the ministry said that involving students in political protests as part of school activities was improper and prohibited under ministry regulations.

Officials said instructions had been issued to the chareidi education district to investigate the circumstances surrounding the children’s participation and take appropriate action if violations of the regulations were established.

The ministry’s response came after reports that administrators and teachers from participating chadorim had organized transportation and accompanied the children to the prison.

The gathering followed a series of demonstrations across Eretz Yisroel protesting the arrest of bnei yeshivos over military service requirements, including recent protests that disrupted traffic in Yerushalayim and along Highway 4.

According to figures submitted to Israel’s Supreme Court last week by Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, 64 chareidi men were arrested at Ben Gurion Airport after returning from overseas during the Yom Tov period, many of them Breslov chassidim returning from Uman. Additional arrests occurred among those attempting to depart Israel before Rosh Hashanah.

Monday’s gathering outside Prison 10 was accompanied by extensive singing and tefillos, with the children joining their rebbeim in calling for the release of the imprisoned bochurim.

מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי

מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי מחאה של ילדי ברסלב מול כלא 10צילום: שמואל דריי

{Matzav.com}

Former Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit acknowledged Monday that investigators pursued certain investigative steps connected to the corruption case against Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu without his knowledge, as a heated courtroom confrontation raised new questions about whether authorities exceeded their authorization while building Case 4000.

The dramatic exchanges unfolded during Mandelblit’s second day of testimony at the Yerushalayim District Court, where Netanyahu’s attorney, Amit Hadad, challenged the former attorney general over investigative actions taken in 2017, months before formal authorization was granted to investigate the prime minister in the Bezeq-Walla affair.

Hadad presented documents, correspondence and investigative records that he argued demonstrated that Securities Authority investigators were already pursuing allegations involving Netanyahu while operating under the authority of a separate investigation into the Bezeq telecommunications company.

According to the defense, investigators used the Bezeq inquiry to gather evidence concerning Netanyahu before receiving the legally required approval to investigate a sitting prime minister.

Hadad confronted Mandelblit with a memorandum indicating that the relevant authorization process began in October 2017, several months after investigators had already collected materials that would later become central to Case 4000.

When asked whether authorization had been granted to investigate Netanyahu in June 2017, Mandelblit acknowledged that the memorandum suggested it had not.

Hadad argued that investigators had effectively developed the case without informing the official whose approval was required.

The defense attorney also questioned Mandelblit about a 2015 newspaper article alleging that Netanyahu had received favorable coverage from the Walla news website in exchange for regulatory benefits benefiting businessman Shaul Elovitch, who controlled Bezeq and Walla.

Mandelblit said he was aware of the article but could not recall whether he had read it when it was published. He acknowledged learning later that the article had helped prompt investigative interest in the allegations.

Hadad then presented records indicating that investigators had collected Walla articles and other materials connected to the allegations during the summer of 2017.

Mandelblit said he had not been informed of several of those actions and explained that an attorney general does not personally authorize every individual document collection or investigative step.

However, he emphasized that any deliberate investigation targeting a sitting prime minister would have required his approval.

The questioning also focused on emails involving former Walla CEO Ilan Yeshua and Ze’ev Rubinstein, an associate of Netanyahu and Elovitch, which investigators had reportedly obtained during the Bezeq investigation.

Hadad argued that the correspondence concerned allegations involving Netanyahu rather than the original Bezeq investigation and therefore should not have been collected without additional authorization.

Mandelblit responded that he had not approved an investigation of Netanyahu at that stage, although he stressed that he did not personally supervise the collection of every email.

The former attorney general also acknowledged that he had not been aware of certain search warrants and investigative materials presented by the defense.

Hadad questioned him about a search involving Iris Elovitch’s telephone and whether investigators had exceeded the scope of the original Bezeq inquiry.

Mandelblit said he did not recall the particular warrant and explained that the underlying Bezeq investigation did not initially fall into the category of investigations requiring his personal authorization.

Prosecutor Yehudit Tirosh strongly objected to Hadad’s interpretation, arguing that the materials were obtained as part of a legitimate investigation into Bezeq and its controlling shareholder.

She disputed the defense’s assertion that the collection of those materials constituted an unauthorized investigation of Netanyahu.

The defense also raised questions about the dates on which certain documents had been collected and subsequently entered into investigative records.

Hadad alleged that materials gathered in July 2017 were formally marked as evidence only in November, creating what the defense described as a misleading impression about when the information had actually been obtained.

Tirosh rejected the allegation that the documents had been deliberately misdated or concealed.

Another significant exchange concerned instructions reportedly issued to investigators in July 2017 directing them to avoid asking specific questions about Netanyahu or then-minister Tzachi Hanegbi.

Hadad argued that investigators nevertheless pursued information concerning Netanyahu indirectly, without explicitly mentioning his name.

Mandelblit said he had not been familiar with the particular instructions and indicated that deliberately circumventing restrictions in that manner, if established, would be problematic.

The former attorney general also faced questions about discussions involving investigators and prosecutors concerning the possibility of securing the cooperation of Shlomo Filber, a former senior Communications Ministry official who later became a state witness.

Hadad presented material concerning discussions about the potential terms of Filber’s cooperation, suggesting that investigators had considered what benefits might be offered in exchange for information.

Mandelblit said he was unfamiliar with some of the specific conversations but explained that discussions about possible cooperation agreements could involve assessing the value of information a witness might provide.

Throughout the questioning, Mandelblit repeatedly distinguished between investigative actions requiring his approval and routine investigative procedures handled by police, prosecutors and other authorized officials.

He maintained that although certain actions had not been brought to his attention, that did not necessarily establish that investigators had acted unlawfully.

Mandelblit also rejected the suggestion that prosecutors had deliberately concealed information from him, saying he would be very surprised if such conduct had occurred.

The courtroom proceedings became increasingly tense as Hadad pressed the former attorney general over discrepancies between his recollection and the investigative records.

At one point, Mandelblit complained about remarks directed toward him from individuals attending the hearing, prompting a sharp exchange with Hadad.

The confrontation eventually became heated enough that the proceedings were briefly interrupted.

Monday’s testimony followed Mandelblit’s appearance Sunday, when he acknowledged that investigators had undertaken certain serious actions without his personal approval.

The defense has sought to establish that the investigations leading to Netanyahu’s indictment were compromised by procedural irregularities and unauthorized investigative activity.

Prosecutors maintain that the investigations were conducted lawfully and that the defense is mischaracterizing investigative procedures and the scope of the approvals that were required.

Case 4000 concerns allegations that Netanyahu provided regulatory benefits to Bezeq’s controlling shareholder in exchange for favorable coverage on the Walla news website. Netanyahu has denied wrongdoing and maintains that the charges against him are unfounded.

Mandelblit, who served as attorney general from 2016 until 2022, authorized the investigations that ultimately led to Netanyahu’s indictment in Cases 1000, 2000 and 4000.

His testimony is particularly significant because he was called as a witness by Netanyahu’s defense, which is attempting to establish that critical investigative decisions were made without the knowledge or approval of the official legally responsible for authorizing investigations of a sitting prime minister.

The court has not determined that the disputed investigative actions were unlawful, and the legal significance of the evidence presented during the cross-examination remains contested.

President Donald Trump is reportedly having second thoughts about allowing the execution of convicted Fort Hood mass murderer Nidal Hasan to be broadcast live, following criticism from Republican and Democratic lawmakers and concerns raised by members of his own administration.

Hasan, a former U.S. Army major who murdered 13 people and wounded 32 others in a 2009 shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, is scheduled to be executed by firing squad on December 3. Although Trump initially supported making the execution available for public viewing, he has since indicated that he may reverse course.

According to a report published Monday by Axios, four individuals who have spoken with the president said he has privately expressed reservations about the proposed broadcast. A senior administration official indicated that Trump has received considerable “negative input” about the idea.

During a private conversation with someone outside the administration, Trump reportedly acknowledged that the livestream “might not happen.”

“He didn’t sound particularly enthusiastic” about moving forward with the broadcast, the individual said.

The controversy began Thursday when War Secretary Pete Hegseth announced that Hasan’s execution would be livestreamed, arguing that the public should witness the consequences of carrying out a mass-casualty attack against American military personnel.

Hegseth maintained that allowing Americans to watch the execution would send a powerful warning to anyone contemplating similar violence.

“We’ll make sure that people are able to watch it — that it’s public — because people need to understand that there’s serious consequences for these types of things,” Hegseth said.

Trump initially embraced the proposal when questioned by reporters Friday, offering an unequivocal endorsement.

“Absolutely, I approve,” the president said.

By Saturday, however, his position had become less definite. Speaking with reporters, Trump acknowledged that competing arguments were being presented to him and indicated that he would personally determine whether the execution should be televised.

“There are two thoughts: Don’t show it and show it,” Trump said. “By showing it, maybe other people won’t be doing what he did.”

The president’s remarks suggested that he was weighing the possible deterrent effect of a public execution against concerns about broadcasting the death of a condemned prisoner.

Vice President JD Vance also expressed uncertainty about whether the proposed livestream would ultimately take place.

“I don’t know if that’s actually going to happen,” Vance said Friday, adding that he had no intention of watching the execution himself.

The proposal has generated criticism from Republican lawmakers who support Hasan’s death sentence but question whether turning the execution into a public broadcast would serve the interests of justice.

Rep. Austin Scott of Georgia argued that the United States should not adopt practices associated with terrorist organizations.

“livestreaming executions is what jihadists do. America is better than that,” Scott said.

Rep. Rob Bresnahan of Pennsylvania similarly warned against allowing the execution to become a spectacle, emphasizing that the focus should remain on the victims and their families rather than on creating a widely viewed event.

Other Republicans defended the administration’s emphasis on accountability. Rep. Matt Van Epps of Tennessee was among those who expressed support for ensuring that Hasan faces the consequences of his actions.

The dispute has also attracted attention from religious leaders and human rights organizations, some of whom have warned that a publicly broadcast execution could undermine the dignity traditionally associated with the administration of capital punishment.

Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina called the proposed livestream “beyond disgusting,” despite supporting Hasan’s execution. Sen. John Curtis of Utah likewise argued that broadcasting a person’s death would diminish the country rather than provide an effective deterrent.

The proposal has even drawn international objections. Australian officials and lawmakers have raised concerns that footage of the execution could circulate on social media and become accessible to children. Questions have also emerged about whether major technology platforms would permit such a broadcast.

Hasan, now 56, was an Army psychiatrist stationed at Fort Hood when he carried out one of the deadliest attacks on an American military installation.

On November 5, 2009, he opened fire inside the base’s Soldier Readiness Processing Center, killing 13 people, including a pregnant woman, and wounding 32 others.

The attack shocked the military community and prompted investigations into how Hasan’s increasingly extremist views had escaped intervention before the shooting.

A subsequent Senate investigation criticized military officials for failing to adequately respond to warning signs of Hasan’s Islamist radicalization.

Hasan was convicted by a military court in 2013 of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted murder and was sentenced to death.

His execution is scheduled to take place at Fort Hood, now officially known as Fort Cavazos, on December 3.

If carried out, it would be the first execution conducted by the United States military since 1961, when Army Private John Bennett was hanged following his conviction for rape and attempted murder.

The Pentagon has confirmed that Hasan is scheduled to die by firing squad, a method approved by Trump following a recommendation from Hegseth.

Military officials have said the execution will proceed regardless of whether the administration ultimately permits the public to watch it.

The planned livestream would represent an extraordinary departure from established American execution procedures, under which attendance is generally limited to designated witnesses, including representatives of victims’ families, officials, and selected journalists.

Legal experts have also noted that Hasan could potentially seek additional judicial intervention before the scheduled execution, although the Pentagon has continued preparing for the December date.

The decision about broadcasting the execution remains unresolved, with Trump reportedly consulting advisers and weighing the objections raised by lawmakers and other officials.

A senior administration official told Axios that the president had been receiving considerable criticism of the plan, while another person familiar with his thinking said he appeared increasingly reluctant to proceed with the livestream.

The president has not publicly withdrawn his earlier approval, but his latest comments indicate that the final decision will be his.

Administration officials stressed that the debate over public access should not be confused with the decision to carry out Hasan’s sentence.

“Hasan will be executed for his crimes,” one official told Axios, “and that’s what matters.”

Afrah lepumei.

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich ignited a storm of criticism in the chareidi community on Monday after declaring that he davens for Maran Hagaon Rav Dov Landau, Rosh Yeshivas Slabodka.

The disgusting remark came during an interview at an Arutz Sheva conference in Ofra, where Smotrich, chairman of the Religious Zionist Party, discussed the ideological differences between the national-religious and chareidi communities, the controversy surrounding military conscription, and recent statements attributed to Rav Landau concerning Zionism and religious soldiers.

Asked why he had refrained from publicly responding to Rav Landau’s remarks, Smotrich explained that his silence should not be interpreted as agreement. Rather, he said, he was reluctant to enter into a public confrontation with a talmid chochom.

Smotrich invoked the warning of Chazal to exercise caution when dealing with Torah scholars, explaining that he did not believe publicly challenging Rav Landau would accomplish anything constructive.

He then added that the Rosh Yeshiva’s views caused him considerable pain and that he was praying for a change in his outlook.

“It pains me, and I pray to Hashem that He brings him, too, to repentance,” Smotrich said, referring to Rav Landau.

The statement immediately drew sharp criticism in chareidi media, where commentators expressed outrage that a government minister would speak about one of the generation’s leading gedolei Torah in such terms.

The controversy followed the release last week of recordings in which Rav Landau, 96, was heard expressing fierce opposition to Zionism and the religious Zionist worldview.

The recordings, broadcast by Channel 12 on October 5, reportedly originated from a private discussion held at the Rosh Yeshiva’s home approximately a year and a half earlier.

In the conversation, Rav Landau criticized the establishment of the State of Israel, argued that Zionism had brought serious difficulties upon the Jewish people, and rejected the religious Zionist understanding of the state’s establishment as part of the process of geulah.

The recordings also included sharp criticism of religious Zionist rabbonim and their approach to military service, particularly the participation of religious soldiers in Israel’s wars.

Those comments provoked condemnation from several Israeli politicians, including figures who accused the chareidi leadership of failing to recognize the sacrifices of religious soldiers.

Smotrich, however, initially avoided directly criticizing Rav Landau, citing his respect for Torah scholars despite his fundamental disagreement with the Rosh Yeshiva’s views.

During Monday’s interview, journalist Chagai Segal pressed Smotrich on the matter, pointing out that Rav Landau had characterized the state and its founders in exceptionally harsh terms.

Smotrich responded by distinguishing between the views of individual figures and the broader communities they represent, arguing that an entire population should not necessarily be judged by the statements or conduct of particular individuals.

When Segal emphasized that Rav Landau was a leading figure in the chareidi world, Smotrich acknowledged his distress over the remarks but reiterated that he would not engage in a direct public confrontation with the Rosh Yeshiva.

His subsequent reference to praying for Rav Landau to do teshuvah became the central focus of the controversy.

Smotrich also used the interview to level broader criticism at the chareidi community’s longstanding opposition to Zionism.

He argued that the success of the Zionist movement and the development of the State of Israel should be understood as evidence of Divine intervention in Jewish history.

“I think the chareidim are ungrateful to Hashem, and we have a sharp disagreement with them over their attitude toward the state and the process of redemption,” Smotrich said.

He went further, questioning how the chareidi worldview could remain unchanged in light of Israel’s achievements.

“I don’t understand how it is possible to be chareidi today. The Zionist enterprise has succeeded. Is there greater proof of redemption than that?” he asked.

Those statements highlighted the longstanding ideological divide between the religious Zionist movement, which generally regards the modern State of Israel as possessing religious significance, and the chareidi worldview, which rejects the identification of the secular Zionist movement with the promised geulah.

Smotrich insisted that his own ideological position was firmly grounded in Torah and would not change because of criticism from chareidi leaders.

He described the religious Zionist approach as one that combines Torah learning with participation in the practical responsibilities of national life, including military service.

Turning to the contentious issue of drafting chareidi men into the IDF, Smotrich argued that the government’s failure to advance proposed conscription legislation approximately two years ago had been a serious mistake.

According to the finance minister, the legislation could have created a framework under which thousands of chareidi men would already have entered the military with the approval of their communal leadership.

He maintained that such a framework would have allowed the government to develop a broader national program for increasing chareidi enlistment while reducing resistance within the community.

Smotrich nevertheless acknowledged that compulsory enlistment could not succeed through coercion alone.

He argued that meaningful change would require persuasion, cooperation, and an approach that recognizes the particular concerns of the chareidi population.

He also expressed appreciation for positive qualities within the chareidi community and praised those individuals who have already taken steps toward military service.

The minister’s comments come amid an increasingly heated national debate over the draft, with chareidi leaders maintaining their opposition to compulsory military service for yeshiva bochurim and government officials facing pressure to address the burden carried by serving soldiers and reservists.

The issue has become a major point of contention ahead of Israel’s November 3 Knesset elections, with parties across the political spectrum attempting to define their positions on military service, Torah learning, and the relationship between religion and the state.

The dispute surrounding Rav Landau has also drawn attention because of his central role in the leadership of Degel HaTorah and his considerable influence over the chareidi political establishment.

Earlier criticism of Rav Landau’s recorded statements prompted explanations from those close to the Rosh Yeshiva that his remarks concerning military operations were being interpreted outside their original halachic context.

Smotrich had previously addressed similar remarks by Rav Landau in July, saying at the time that he faced a difficult dilemma between the need to respond to statements he found objectionable and the obligation to show respect toward talmidei chachomim.

A federal judge in New York has ordered the Trump administration to immediately stop airing television advertisements featuring President Donald Trump that were financed with taxpayer money, handing a victory to organizations challenging the use of federal funds for what they contend amounts to political campaigning ahead of the November midterm elections.

U.S. District Judge Jennifer Rochon issued the temporary restraining order Sunday evening, directing the administration to cancel any remaining advertisements and prohibiting further government spending on the disputed campaign for the next two weeks.

The advertisements, which began appearing on television in late September, were funded through approximately $20 million allocated by the Department of Homeland Security. They featured Trump discussing his administration’s policies and accomplishments, prompting allegations that government resources were being used to promote his political agenda.

The ruling came in response to a lawsuit brought by Common Cause, a government watchdog organization, together with the Service Employees International Union Local 32BJ, its political action committee and Robert Hunter, a Democratic candidate for the Alabama state legislature.

The plaintiffs argued that the advertisements violated federal restrictions against using congressionally appropriated money for unauthorized publicity or propaganda. They also maintained that the campaign improperly blurred the distinction between official government communications and political advertising.

In granting the emergency order, Rochon prohibited the administration from entering into new agreements or extending existing arrangements connected to the advertisements.

“Defendants shall not enter into, renew, or expand any agreement authorizing the development, creation, dissemination, placement, or airing of the challenged advertisements,” the judge wrote.

The restrictions will remain in effect for 14 days while the litigation proceeds. The order does not constitute a final determination that the administration violated federal law.

The administration had argued that judicial intervention was unnecessary because the advertising campaign was already scheduled to conclude.

In a court filing submitted Saturday, Justice Department attorneys maintained that the challenged activity would end the following day, making an emergency restraining order unnecessary.

President Trump had previously defended the advertisements as a legitimate means of informing Americans about his administration’s work.

In an October 5 social media statement, Trump described the advertisements as “rather standard” and indicated that future advertising of this kind could be financed through political fundraising rather than taxpayer money.

The White House referred reporters seeking comment on the ruling to that earlier statement.

The advertisements have generated controversy because of their timing, appearing just weeks before the November 3 congressional elections, when control of Congress will be decided.

Critics contend that the commercials resemble campaign advertisements and were designed to benefit Republicans politically. The administration has maintained that the broadcasts were legitimate government communications highlighting its policies.

The dispute also concerns the source of the funding. The Department of Homeland Security used money made available for government purposes, raising questions about whether those appropriations could legally be used to produce and distribute advertisements prominently featuring the president.

The plaintiffs welcomed Sunday’s ruling, arguing that it would prevent additional taxpayer funds from being spent on what they characterize as political messaging.

“We are pleased the court acted swiftly to prevent more taxpayer dollars from being used for such blatantly unlawful political propaganda,” the organizations said in a joint statement.

The legal challenge is one of several disputes arising from the advertising campaign. The Democratic National Committee has also filed a separate lawsuit challenging the administration’s use of government resources for the commercials.

The controversy has attracted attention from both Democrats and some Republicans, with questions raised about the propriety of taxpayer-financed advertisements that closely resemble political promotions.

It remains unclear how much of the original $20 million allocation has already been spent and whether the administration will ultimately be required to account for or reimburse any of the money used.

For now, the court’s order prevents the administration from continuing the disputed advertising campaign with federal funds while the legal challenge moves forward.

Approximately 1,000 residents of Yerushalayim’s Har Nof neighborhood have signed an urgent petition demanding that Mayor Moshe Lion intervene in a massive road construction project that has turned one of the neighborhood’s busiest streets into a daily traffic nightmare, with residents warning of dangerous conditions, disappearing parking spaces and serious disruptions to thousands of frum families.

The growing protest centers on Shaulzon Street, a major thoroughfare running through the heavily populated chareidi neighborhood, where prolonged infrastructure work has created severe congestion, restricted pedestrian access and caused mounting frustration among residents and local business owners.

The situation has become particularly contentious following plans to eliminate approximately 50 parking spaces along the street to accommodate a new bicycle lane, despite an existing parking shortage in the neighborhood.

Residents argue that the decision demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of Har Nof’s needs, particularly given the neighborhood’s steep terrain, large families and heavy dependence on private vehicles.

In their petition to Mayor Lion, residents warn that removing dozens of parking spaces in an already congested commercial district would cause substantial harm to local businesses and visitors.

They maintain that the municipality is prioritizing a bicycle path that they believe is poorly suited to the neighborhood while overlooking the transportation needs of thousands of families who use the street daily.

The parking controversy is only one part of a much broader list of complaints.

Residents describe lengthy traffic jams, sidewalks closed without adequate alternative pedestrian routes, persistent dust and noise, and construction delays that have made ordinary activities increasingly difficult.

Parents navigating the area with children and strollers have expressed particular concern about pedestrian safety, while drivers say that routine trips through the neighborhood have become unpredictable and time-consuming.

Another major concern involves access for emergency vehicles. Residents fear that the severe congestion and narrowed roadways could delay ambulances, fire trucks and other emergency responders attempting to reach homes and businesses.

Local merchants have also complained that the construction is discouraging customers from visiting their establishments, particularly as parking becomes increasingly difficult and access to storefronts is disrupted.

The petition reflects growing frustration with municipal officials and neighborhood representatives, whom residents accuse of failing to adequately protect the community’s interests during the planning and implementation of the project.

The construction is part of a major infrastructure improvement initiative extending approximately 1.5 kilometers along Shaulzon Street. The project includes replacing underground infrastructure, upgrading sidewalks and street lighting, installing new street furnishings and constructing a designated bicycle lane.

Municipal planning records from earlier this year indicate that the broader Shaulzon Street bicycle path and roadway improvement initiative involves tens of millions of shekels in public spending. An April municipal document listed an estimated overall project cost exceeding 41 million shekels, with an additional allocation of approximately 11 million shekels sought for work on the western section.

The Yerushalayim municipality, responding to the complaints, defended the project as an important long-term investment in the neighborhood’s infrastructure and public safety.

City officials said the construction has been divided into six separate phases specifically to minimize inconvenience to residents and businesses.

However, the municipality confirmed that the work is not expected to be completed until September 2027, meaning residents could face nearly another year of construction-related disruptions.

The city disputed claims that parking spaces in the commercial center have already been eliminated, stating that no such spaces have been removed at this stage and that officials are continually reviewing the plans to preserve as much parking as possible.

Municipal officials also insisted that safe, accessible pedestrian routes are being maintained throughout construction and that complaints about specific hazards are addressed as they arise.

Regarding dust and noise, the city said contractors are required to follow strict procedures to reduce disturbances and remove construction debris. Nighttime work, officials added, is conducted only with authorization and may continue no later than 11 p.m.

The municipality said the project is being coordinated with the Har Nof community administration and encouraged residents to report problems through the city’s 106 municipal hotline.

The dispute has already prompted some adjustments. Following earlier complaints about transportation difficulties, the upper portion of Shaulzon Street was reopened to two-way traffic, and officials announced plans for bus route 55 to resume its regular route through the area.

Representatives of the municipality and the Moriah Jerusalem Development Corporation have also been examining residents’ complaints about the project’s impact on the neighborhood.

Nevertheless, the latest petition indicates that those measures have done little to resolve the broader dissatisfaction, particularly regarding the planned bicycle lane, the threatened loss of parking and the extended construction timetable.

For Har Nof residents, the municipality’s promise of improved infrastructure upon completion offers limited comfort as they face another year of traffic congestion, construction noise and uncertainty over the future of parking along one of the neighborhood’s central streets.

New York authorities have declined to honor more than 16,000 federal immigration detainer requests since President Donald Trump returned to the White House, involving individuals whose criminal records collectively include more than 52,000 charges or convictions, according to newly released Department of Homeland Security figures.

The statistics have intensified the confrontation between the Trump administration and New York’s Democratic leadership over sanctuary policies, with federal officials accusing state and local governments of obstructing efforts to apprehend illegal immigrants with serious criminal histories.

According to DHS, law enforcement agencies throughout New York State have refused to comply with 16,070 immigration detainer requests since January 2025. The individuals associated with those requests had accumulated 52,503 criminal charges or convictions, including allegations involving homicide, immoral offenses, kidnapping, robbery, and violent assault.

The figures represent charges and convictions rather than 52,503 separate convicted criminals, and the department did not provide a breakdown showing how many of the offenses resulted in guilty verdicts.

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin sharply criticized New York officials, arguing that restrictions on cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement have made communities less safe and forced federal agents to undertake more dangerous operations.

“While sanctuary politicians continue to release dangerous criminals onto their streets, our brave law enforcement officers will continue to risk their lives to arrest these heinous criminals and make America safe again. Illegal aliens have no sanctuary in America,” Mullin told the New York Post.

“We enforce these laws with no help from Mayor [Zohran] Mamdani and Governor [Kathy] Hochul.

“The Trump Administration is committed to protecting the American people in every city and every state, and we won’t let sanctuary politicians stand in our way,” Mullin said.

ICE detainers are requests issued to state or local authorities asking them to notify federal immigration officers before releasing an individual and to maintain custody for up to an additional 48 hours, allowing federal agents time to assume responsibility for that person.

Such requests are administrative immigration measures rather than criminal arrest warrants signed by a judge, a distinction that has become central to disputes between federal authorities and jurisdictions that limit immigration enforcement cooperation.

New York allows municipalities to establish their own policies governing cooperation with ICE, and New York City has adopted restrictions that generally prevent local law enforcement agencies from honoring many federal civil immigration detainers.

The Trump administration has designated New York a sanctuary state because of policies it argues interfere with federal immigration enforcement.

The dispute escalated further in August when Gov. Kathy Hochul signed the Local Cops, Local Crimes Act, placing additional limits on certain forms of cooperation between state law enforcement agencies and federal immigration authorities in civil immigration matters.

Supporters of the restrictions maintain that local police should concentrate on enforcing state criminal laws rather than carrying out federal immigration duties. Federal officials counter that the policies can result in individuals with serious criminal histories being released before ICE can take them into custody.

The newly disclosed DHS statistics provide a detailed picture of the criminal allegations associated with the rejected detainers.

According to the department, the records included 131 homicide offenses and 132 kidnapping offenses, along with 1,017 immoral offenses.

The figures also identified 1,561 driving-under-the-influence offenses, 1,631 burglaries, 1,776 robberies, and 2,198 weapons-related offenses.

Assault represented one of the largest categories, with 9,502 associated charges or convictions, while offenses involving dangerous drugs accounted for another 4,324.

The department did not specify whether each detainer corresponded to a different individual or whether some people were the subjects of multiple requests. Nor did the figures establish that every person associated with a detainer was ultimately released into the community.

Nonetheless, federal officials pointed to the totals as evidence that New York’s sanctuary restrictions are interfering with efforts to remove individuals accused or convicted of serious crimes.

Hochul’s administration disputed the suggestion that New York provides protection from federal immigration enforcement to individuals convicted of violent crimes.

“Governor Hochul has been clear: New York State is not and never will be a sanctuary for violent criminals,” the governor’s spokeswoman, Alexia Nizhny, said in response to the federal allegations.

“By law, New York State always notifies federal immigration enforcement of any non-citizen serving a State prison sentence,” she added.

The governor’s office argued that the Trump administration was misrepresenting the state’s record of cooperation with federal authorities.

“Any assertion otherwise is a blatant mischaracterization of the facts meant to distract from the cruelty and violence we saw from Secretary Mullin’s ICE agents earlier this week.”

According to Hochul’s office, approximately 2,000 individuals held in New York State correctional facilities have been transferred to federal immigration authorities during Trump’s current administration.

That figure, state officials contend, demonstrates that New York continues to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement in circumstances involving individuals serving state prison sentences.

The dispute concerns the distinction between those transfers and immigration detainers issued to local law enforcement agencies, particularly when an individual is otherwise eligible for release from custody.

The latest federal figures cover the period from January 20, 2025, through October 8, 2026, according to the DHS announcement released Monday. That amounts to an average of approximately 26 detainer requests going unfulfilled each day across the state.

The federal agency has not released a case-by-case accounting that would allow an independent determination of how many of the 16,070 requests involved individuals convicted of violent offenses, how many involved pending allegations, or how many people were subsequently apprehended by ICE.

The announcement follows a particularly contentious week in New York City after federal immigration officers shot Oscar Belgal, a 28-year-old Dominican migrant, during an attempted arrest in the Bronx.

ICE officials said Belgal refused instructions to leave his vehicle and attempted to escape, striking two government vehicles before accelerating toward federal agents.

An officer opened fire, striking Belgal in the neck.

Belgal’s five-year-old son was sitting in the backseat of the SUV during the encounter but escaped physical injury.

The shooting prompted demonstrations and strong criticism from Mamdani and Hochul, who questioned the conduct of the federal agents and the danger posed to the child.

Federal authorities defended the operation, pointing to Belgal’s criminal history and alleging that he had attempted to use his vehicle against officers.

Belgal survived the shooting and was subsequently taken into federal custody.

The circumstances of the confrontation remain under investigation, with competing accounts of the events preceding the gunfire.

In a separate statement Monday, Mullin accused Hochul of allowing dangerous individuals to remain on the streets despite federal efforts to take them into immigration custody.

He argued that New York’s policies had contributed to violent crimes against innocent residents and called on state officials to change their approach.

The Department of Homeland Security also pointed to its recent Operation Rotten Apple enforcement initiative, reporting that ICE arrested 2,197 individuals in New York between July 27 and August 29, including suspects accused or convicted of serious offenses.

The mayor of the Israeli city of Kfar Saba and his wife were ordered held in custody until October 19 after being arrested Monday in a sweeping corruption investigation involving allegations of cash bribes, rigged municipal contracts, organized crime figures and threats against competing businesses.

Mayor Rafi Saar and his wife, Meital, were among 17 suspects arrested during an early-morning operation by Israel Police’s Lahav 433 anti-corruption unit. Seven additional individuals were detained for questioning as investigators carried out searches at approximately 30 locations, including municipal offices, private residences and businesses.

The investigation, which had been conducted secretly for approximately a year and a half, centers on suspicions that Saar and other officials manipulated municipal tenders worth tens of millions of shekels in exchange for substantial payments from contractors and businessmen.

Police say Saar’s wife, despite holding no official municipal position, allegedly played a central role in the operation, serving as an intermediary between businessmen seeking government contracts and officials capable of awarding them.

Investigators believe contractors delivered packages containing large amounts of cash to Meital Saar, who allegedly used her influence over her husband and other municipal officials to ensure that the businessmen received lucrative contracts.

The suspected corruption extended across numerous municipal departments and projects, including sanitation services, school renovations, infrastructure improvements, urban redevelopment and the operation of food trucks.

According to investigators, when obstacles arose in awarding contracts to favored businessmen, certain projects were allegedly transferred to the municipality’s economic development corporation, whose director-general is also among those arrested.

Police suspect that the corporation’s management cooperated in directing contracts toward predetermined winners while making it more difficult for competing companies to participate.

The investigation has also uncovered suspected involvement by organized crime figures operating in central Israel. Authorities believe individuals connected to criminal organizations were used to intimidate competing contractors, including allegedly threatening businessmen to discourage them from submitting bids.

A senior police official described the alleged scheme as an extraordinary case of municipal corruption, declaring, “This is a city that was sold.”

Brigadier General Eli Makmel, who heads the National Fraud Investigations Unit, said investigators believe the mayor’s wife exercised substantial influence over municipal affairs, including appointments, dismissals and budgetary matters.

Police also suspect that some businessmen involved in the alleged bribery operation had previously assisted Saar politically, including helping mobilize support for his election campaigns.

During Monday’s raids, investigators confiscated large quantities of cash, expensive jewelry, designer handbags, luxury watches and vehicles.

Among the items reportedly seized were Rolex and Cartier watches and Prada handbags. Investigators discovered cash stored in closets, bags and vehicles, according to Israeli media reports.

Authorities are examining whether the couple’s reported lavish lifestyle, including expensive vacations and luxury purchases, was financed in part through illicit payments.

The case took a significant turn later Monday when the Rishon Lezion Magistrate’s Court ordered Saar and his wife held for eight additional days, until October 19, rejecting requests to release them while the investigation continues.

Judge Yuval Kedar determined that the evidence presented by police established substantial grounds for suspicion and justified continued detention.

According to details presented in court, investigators believe Meital Saar received money through several channels and that her husband was aware of the payments and took actions in his official capacity to benefit those providing them.

The allegations against the mayor include bribery, fraud, breach of trust, money laundering, tax offenses and conspiracy to commit a crime.

His wife faces suspicions of bribery, acting as an intermediary in bribery transactions, money laundering, tax offenses, extortion through threats and obstruction of justice.

Police told the court that approximately 135 investigative steps remain to be completed, including 85 that could potentially be compromised if suspects were released.

Prosecutors argued that Saar’s position as mayor, his relationships with other suspects and his familiarity with municipal operations created a substantial risk of interference with the investigation.

A major issue during Monday’s hearing was whether the mayor knew about the large amounts of money allegedly received by his wife.

Saar’s attorney, Micha Fettman, argued that the couple maintained separate financial arrangements and that his client was unaware of the source of certain funds held by his wife.

The defense pointed to an earlier incident involving the couple’s return from overseas, during which Meital reportedly told customs authorities that her husband did not know about money in her possession.

Investigators rejected that explanation, arguing that the supposed financial separation may have been deliberately established to distance the mayor from his wife’s activities.

Police maintained that Saar knew about the money and was aware of the explanation his wife intended to provide to customs officials.

The defense insisted that the mayor’s routine involvement in municipal contracts, committees and meetings with residents was part of his official responsibilities and did not, by itself, constitute evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

Fettman told the court that his client denied any improper conduct and was cooperating with investigators.

The judge nevertheless ruled that the evidence presented supported suspicions that the mayor and his wife had worked together, with Meital allegedly receiving improper payments and Saar taking official actions to advance the interests of those providing the money.

The court also extended the detention of several other suspects.

Eliran Dostan, who is suspected of serving as an intermediary in bribery transactions and transferring money to Meital Saar, was ordered held for an additional week. The judge said investigators had presented particularly strong evidence concerning alleged transfers of funds that would require explanation.

Two other suspects, Yanir Sudai and Ephraim Kahlon, had their detentions extended by two and three days, respectively, in connection with suspected bribery and related financial offenses.

Saar, who was first elected mayor in 2018 and is currently serving his second term, issued a public statement following his arrest, pledging to cooperate with investigators and asking residents not to reach conclusions before the facts are established.

He also announced that Deputy Mayor Dani Harosh would temporarily assume his responsibilities to ensure the municipality continues operating.

Tens of thousands of yeshiva bochurim across Eretz Yisroel returned to their yeshivos on Monday for the opening of the winter zeman, beginning an unusually long stretch of uninterrupted learning as the olam haTorah continues to grapple with the ongoing controversy surrounding the military draft of bnei yeshivos.

This year’s winter zeman will be particularly lengthy because 5787 is a Jewish leap year, with an additional month of Adar extending the period of learning until shortly before Pesach. For many bochurim, the coming months will provide one of the longest continuous periods of intensive Torah study in the yeshiva calendar.

The return to the yeshivos follows the conclusion of the Tishrei Yomim Tovim and the traditional bein hazemanim break, during which bochurim spent time with their families before returning to their regular sedorim.

Throughout the country, yeshivos have been preparing for the extended zeman, with roshei yeshiva and mashgichim emphasizing the opportunity presented by six months of sustained learning, particularly during the long winter evenings.

The winter zeman has traditionally been regarded as a particularly productive period in the yeshiva world, when the absence of major Yomim Tovim allows talmidim to devote themselves to their learning with relatively few interruptions. The additional month this year offers an even greater opportunity for growth and advancement in learning.

The beginning of the winter zeman also comes at a difficult time for the yeshiva world in Eretz Yisroel, as the unresolved military draft issue continues to cast uncertainty over thousands of bochurim and their families. Arrests of bnei yeshivos during bein hazemanim have heightened concern, with the question of military service exemptions remaining one of the most contentious issues in Israeli public life.

The return to regular learning takes place as Israel prepares for another Knesset election, with the draft controversy expected to remain a central concern for the chareidi parties. Gedolei Yisroel and roshei yeshiva have repeatedly emphasized the importance of maintaining uninterrupted Torah learning despite the political and legal uncertainty.

In many yeshivos, the extended winter zeman will include additional learning opportunities during the evenings and on Shabbosos, with particular attention devoted to strengthening hasmadah and ensuring that the momentum established at the beginning of the zeman continues through the coming months.

{Matzav.com}

Nearly two weeks after passengers aboard Flydubai Flight FZ1073 survived a terrifying attempt by a co-pilot to hijack their aircraft and crash it into Ben Gurion Airport, the airline has finally contacted those who were on board, offering psychological support and a dedicated assistance desk while making no mention of financial compensation.

The email, sent Monday to passengers who experienced the September 30 attack, has drawn criticism from survivors who question why the airline waited so long to reach out and whether its response is intended to limit its exposure to potential lawsuits.

According to a report by Israel’s Channel 12, the airline acknowledged the distress experienced by passengers and assured them that their welfare remains a priority.

“We are writing to you directly because you were on board flight FZ 1073,” the airline stated in its message. “We understand that the events surrounding the flight were distressing for passengers.”

The company continued, “While we are relieved that we were able to ensure your safe arrival on our replacement aircraft to Tel Aviv, we understand that you may have questions or concerns following the events surrounding the flight. We want to assure you that Flydubai is fully committed to providing you with support.”

Passengers were informed that the airline had established a dedicated support desk through which they could submit questions and requests for assistance.

Flydubai also offered to help passengers obtain professional psychological services if they were having difficulty accessing such assistance through their regular healthcare providers.

However, the correspondence contained no indication that the airline intends to compensate passengers for the ordeal, which began when the aircraft’s Omani co-pilot allegedly attacked the captain with an emergency axe while attempting to seize control of the plane.

One passenger who received the email told Channel 12 that its timing and contents raised serious questions about the company’s intentions.

“Flydubai’s outreach nearly two weeks after the difficult incident is surprising, and not in a good way. The feeling is that Flydubai initiated this move in a desperate attempt to limit damage from a future lawsuit, and not out of a genuine and sincere desire to help treat the passengers.”

The airline’s outreach comes as approximately 100 passengers have authorized a committee to coordinate potential legal claims arising from the attempted hijacking.

The committee, headed by Tzvika Manes, an Israeli businessman who helped overpower the attacker, has been consulting with legal professionals in Israel and is expected to explore additional representation internationally.

The passengers are considering claims against Flydubai and potentially government authorities responsible for aviation oversight. Reports have indicated that the compensation being sought could collectively reach hundreds of millions of dollars, although no final legal action or award has been announced.

The attempted hijacking occurred aboard a flight traveling from Dubai to Tel Aviv, when the co-pilot, identified as 29-year-old Omani national Hamam al-Hamami, allegedly launched a premeditated attack intended to bring down the aircraft at Ben Gurion Airport.

According to findings released Friday by the United Arab Emirates attorney general, the suspect had developed extremist beliefs years earlier and had used two previous flights to Tel Aviv to familiarize himself with the route and airport.

Investigators said the co-pilot attacked the captain with an emergency axe, inflicting serious head injuries as the captain struggled to resist and summon assistance.

Another pilot traveling aboard the aircraft noticed suspicious activity around the cockpit door and intervened with the assistance of a crew member and passengers. Together, they managed to restrain the attacker, allowing other pilots to regain control of the aircraft.

The plane was diverted to Tabuk Airport in Saudi Arabia, where it landed safely before passengers were eventually transported to Israel aboard replacement aircraft.

Emirati investigators have said the suspect confessed to planning the attack and claimed to have acted alone. Authorities are continuing to investigate whether other individuals were involved and whether additional security failures contributed to the incident.

Rep. Ilhan Omar has accused President Donald Trump of using federal law enforcement to intimidate his political opponents after Homeland Security investigators raided her Washington, D.C., residence Monday morning as part of a reported investigation into her immigration history.

The Minnesota Democrat, a prominent member of the progressive congressional group known as the “Squad,” issued a defiant statement following the search, insisting that she had done nothing wrong and accusing the 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,” Omar wrote on X. “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.”

“I will not be silenced,” the congresswoman added.

The raid took place early Monday at Omar’s home in Northeast Washington, where agents from Homeland Security Investigations, the principal investigative division of the Department of Homeland Security, executed a search warrant.

Photographs from the scene showed federal personnel entering and leaving the residence, with investigators carrying boxes of materials out of the property.

The operation reportedly began before dawn, startling residents of the surrounding neighborhood.

One neighbor described hearing a “loud banging” at the congresswoman’s door at approximately 4 or 5 a.m., followed by “a man screaming, ‘Open the door, open the door.”

The early-morning operation immediately drew attention on Capitol Hill, where Democratic lawmakers denounced the search and questioned the circumstances surrounding the federal investigation.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, another member of the Squad and a close political ally of Omar, condemned the action in a social media statement.

“DHS raiding a member of congress’s home is exactly what a fascist police state does,” Tlaib wrote on X.

Omar’s office similarly rejected any suggestion of wrongdoing, portraying the investigation as an extension of the president’s longstanding political conflict with the congresswoman.

Her spokesperson, Jacklyn Rogers, said Omar had “done nothing wrong.”

“For a decade, Donald Trump has relentlessly targeted Congresswoman Ilhan Omar with inflammatory rhetoric, repeatedly putting a target on her back,” Rogers said. “Now, those attacks have escalated to a pointless federal raid.”

The search comes amid reports that federal investigators have been examining questions surrounding Omar’s immigration records for several years, including whether inaccurate information may have appeared in documents associated with her family’s entry into the United States.

People familiar with the investigation indicated that the inquiry may involve statements allegedly made by Omar’s father during the immigration process.

The precise nature of the suspected discrepancies has not been publicly established, and authorities have not announced criminal charges against Omar.

The Justice Department has confirmed that the search was conducted under a warrant authorized by a judge, but officials have declined to disclose the precise allegations being investigated.

“Today in the Washington, D.C. area, Homeland Security Investigations executed a judicially authorized search warrant secured by the Department of Justice,” a department spokesperson said. “This enforcement action is part of an ongoing federal criminal investigation.”

The investigation reportedly focuses on immigration documents completed by Omar’s late father when she was a child. Federal authorities are examining whether those records contained false statements, although no public finding of fraud has been announced.

Questions surrounding Omar’s immigration history have been raised repeatedly by President Trump and other Republican officials, including allegations that she entered into a fraudulent marriage with her brother to obtain immigration benefits.

Omar has consistently denied those accusations, and she has never been charged with an immigration-related offense.

In September, White House border czar Tom Homan publicly acknowledged that immigration authorities were conducting an investigation involving the congresswoman.

“I’m confirming that ICE is, yeah — look, I said months ago that there’s something that’s been reported and needs to be looked at,” Homan told Fox News at the time.

Omar previously said that federal investigators had not contacted her about the matter.

Vice President JD Vance has also publicly discussed allegations concerning Omar’s immigration history, adding to the political attention surrounding the investigation.

One potential consequence being discussed is denaturalization, the legal process through which the government can seek to revoke citizenship obtained through fraud or material misrepresentation.

Such proceedings would require the government to meet demanding legal standards and would almost certainly face extensive litigation if pursued against a sitting member of Congress.

Omar, 44, was born in Somalia and came to the United States as a child after her family fled the country’s civil war. She became a naturalized American citizen in 2000, when she was 17.

She was first elected to the House of Representatives in 2018, becoming one of the first two Muslim women elected to Congress and the first Somali American to serve in the chamber.

Representing Minnesota’s Fifth Congressional District, which includes Minneapolis, Omar has become one of the most outspoken progressive Democrats in Washington and a frequent critic of Trump’s immigration and foreign policies.

The timing of Monday’s search has generated additional controversy because it occurred just three weeks before the November 3 midterm elections, in which Omar is seeking a fifth term.

The Justice Department has traditionally maintained guidelines discouraging overt investigative actions involving political candidates close to an election when such steps could influence the outcome. Those guidelines do not constitute an absolute prohibition, however, and exceptions may apply depending on the circumstances.

The department has not publicly explained why investigators considered it necessary to execute the search warrant at this particular time.

Federal officials have also declined to identify the documents removed from Omar’s residence or indicate whether additional searches, interviews, or legal proceedings are planned.

No criminal charges against Omar had been announced as of Monday afternoon, and the existence of a search warrant does not establish that the congresswoman committed a crime.

The investigation now places one of Trump’s most prominent congressional opponents under direct federal scrutiny as the country approaches the midterm elections, with Omar insisting that she will continue speaking out despite the raid.