Feed aggregator

President Donald Trump warned Thursday that the United States could carry out further military strikes against Iran, raising the possibility of another round of attacks as reports indicate that American and Israeli military planners have prepared options for renewed operations following the November 3 midterm elections.

Speaking with reporters outside the White House before traveling to Iowa for a campaign rally, Trump defended his decision to wage war against Iran, arguing that earlier administrations had failed to take the steps necessary to eliminate the Iranian nuclear threat.

Trump described his actions as “doing what should have been done by other presidents. There’s a price to pay, which I knew immediately when I did it.”

.@POTUS on Iran: "We've knocked the hell out of them — and we may do it a little bit further." pic.twitter.com/FP0pIsJiSk

— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) October 22, 2026

The president acknowledged that the war has prompted mixed reactions among Americans, but insisted that preventing Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons outweighs those concerns.

“But we can’t let Iran have a nuclear weapon. I mean, in one way, people probably don’t love it. But many people, many great patriots really love it.”

Trump then delivered his clearest indication that the American military campaign may not yet be finished, suggesting that Washington could order additional attacks if necessary.

“This should have been done a long time ago by other presidents, the Iran war. And we’ve knocked the hell out of them. And we may do it a little bit further.”

His comments came just one day after he told supporters at a campaign appearance in South Carolina that he believed the conflict was approaching its conclusion. Nevertheless, Trump indicated that the administration was reluctant to end its military operations without confidence that Iran’s nuclear capabilities had been sufficiently weakened to prevent the threat from resurfacing.

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

The president’s latest remarks have taken on additional significance amid reports that Washington is examining the possibility of further attacks in coordination with Israel.

According to a report published Wednesday by The New York Times, American and Israeli military officials have already prepared detailed operational plans for another round of strikes against Iranian targets.

The newspaper reported that a renewed offensive could be launched after the November 3 congressional elections, although Trump has not given authorization for such an operation.

The planning reportedly reflects ongoing discussions within the administration about how to bring the conflict to an end while ensuring that Iran is unable to rebuild or advance its nuclear weapons program.

The distinction between preparing military options and approving an attack remains significant. Although the reported plans would provide the president with the ability to order further strikes, no final decision to launch another operation has been announced.

The White House has declined to confirm the reported preparations.

Asked about the newspaper’s account, a White House official said the administration does not discuss military plans “that may or may not exist.”

The official emphasized that Trump continues to reserve the right to pursue whatever measures he considers necessary to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Taken together, the president’s remarks and the reports of military planning suggest that Washington is keeping the possibility of additional military action open even as Trump publicly expresses confidence that the war could soon conclude.

Additional reporting indicates that the preparations have advanced beyond preliminary discussions. American and Israeli forces have reportedly intensified military exercises, including flights over Iraq designed to rehearse possible attack missions against Iran.

Potential targets under consideration include Iranian nuclear installations, energy infrastructure, missile production facilities, and drone stockpiles. Some American officials believe a concentrated campaign could further damage Iran’s economy and pressure Tehran into accepting diplomatic concessions.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also traveled to Israel this week, meeting with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to discuss the possibility of renewed strikes.

Separate reporting indicated that Netanyahu had considered launching a major Israeli operation against Iran earlier this month, but Trump opposed resuming large-scale attacks before the American elections. Netanyahu subsequently disputed reports suggesting that Trump had blocked Israeli military action, calling those accounts “incorrect.”

The Pentagon has reportedly examined options for a brief but intensive operation lasting approximately three days. However, Trump has rejected previous proposals to resume major combat operations, leaving considerable uncertainty over whether the latest preparations will result in actual strikes.

Iranian officials, meanwhile, have warned that another American or Israeli offensive could trigger a broader response, potentially extending attacks beyond military targets to additional infrastructure across the region.

The prospect of renewed fighting has also heightened concerns about global energy supplies, particularly amid continued tensions surrounding the Strait of Hormuz. Oil prices climbed to their highest levels in several months Thursday as markets reacted to the possibility of further military escalation.

For now, Trump has left both possibilities open: ending the conflict in the near future or authorizing another round of attacks intended to prevent Iran from recovering its nuclear and military capabilities.

His warning that the United States may strike Iran “a little bit further” suggests that even as the administration discusses bringing the war to a close, the possibility of another major confrontation remains firmly on the table.

A Bnei Brak resident in his 30s has been indicted for allegedly setting fire to an occupied residential building in the chareidi city, causing extensive damage to several apartments and forcing residents to evacuate as flames spread through the property.

The indictment, reported Thursday, accuses the suspect of deliberately igniting a fire in the courtyard of a three-story apartment building on Rav Meshulam Roth Street, creating a dangerous situation for families living inside.

According to prosecutors, the defendant entered the building’s courtyard carrying flammable material, which he poured near a storage area before setting it alight and fleeing the scene.

The flames quickly spread from the courtyard toward the building’s upper floors, reaching balconies and threatening the apartments above.

Residents were forced to leave their homes as the fire intensified, while emergency personnel worked to prevent the blaze from spreading further.

The fire caused substantial damage to three apartments, including burned balconies and damage to portions of the building’s structure.

The indictment alleges that the defendant deliberately started the blaze despite the obvious danger to residents of the occupied building.

The case has raised particular concern because the fire was allegedly started in a shared residential area, where flames could spread rapidly to adjoining apartments and endanger families who might be unaware of the developing emergency.

Investigators examined the circumstances surrounding the blaze and gathered evidence that ultimately led prosecutors to file criminal charges against the suspect.

The precise motive for the alleged arson has not been publicly established in the available reporting.

A growing concern among immigrant communities, including Orthodox Jewish families, involves lawful permanent residents who have lived in the United States for decades but face questioning, detention, or possible deportation when returning from trips abroad, Matzav.com has learned.

The issue is particularly troubling for green card holders who have built their entire lives in America, raising families, operating businesses, paying taxes, supporting charitable organizations, and participating in their local communities, only to discover that their immigration status does not provide the same protections as American citizenship.

Matzav.com has learned of instances of frum travelers being detained at airports despite possessing valid green cards. Immigration attorneys told Matzav.com that lawful permanent residents can face serious consequences when returning to the United States if certain legal issues arise.

A green card permits a foreign national to live and work permanently in the United States. However, it does not confer citizenship, and permanent resident status can be challenged or lost under circumstances established by federal immigration law.

For travelers who have spent most of their lives in America, that distinction can come as a shock.

The danger has become more pronounced amid stepped-up immigration enforcement and a recent Supreme Court ruling that expanded the government’s authority to scrutinize certain returning permanent residents.

In June, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Blanche v. Lau that immigration officers do not need to establish by clear and convincing evidence, at the airport itself, that a returning green card holder committed a disqualifying offense before treating that individual as someone seeking admission to the country.

The ruling does not mean that every green card holder can be detained or deported at will. However, it has raised concerns among immigration attorneys that travelers with old criminal convictions, pending charges, or other immigration complications could face greater difficulties upon returning from overseas.

The case involved a Chinese national who had held a green card for nearly two decades. After facing federal charges involving counterfeit merchandise, he traveled abroad and encountered immigration problems when he returned to the United States.

The decision underscored a reality that many longtime residents may not fully appreciate: A person can have a home, family, business, and decades of history in America and still be subject to immigration laws that do not apply to U.S. citizens.

The issue is no longer merely theoretical.

An investigation published in September by the San Francisco Chronicle found that more than 400 international travelers had been held at American airports for longer than 72 hours since January, including 146 individuals with valid green cards.

At San Francisco International Airport alone, 25 people were held for more than three days through July, 19 of whom were green card holders. Eighteen of those 25 individuals were subsequently transferred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facilities.

One case involved a 67-year-old lawful permanent resident who had lived legally in the United States for approximately 50 years. After returning from Mexico, he was detained by federal officers and held at the San Francisco airport for eight days before being transferred to an ICE detention center.

The man described sleeping upright in a chair under lights that remained on throughout the night, without a change of clothing. His attorneys eventually secured his release after several months in detention.

Other cases have involved green card holders who arrived in America as young children, grew up in the United States, and established families here, only to face detention after returning from international travel because of criminal matters dating back many years.

Immigration attorneys emphasize that even an old conviction, including one for which a person served no jail time, can sometimes create serious complications under federal immigration law.

A conviction that appeared to have been resolved decades earlier may still have immigration consequences. Certain offenses involving controlled substances, fraud, theft, or other categories specified in immigration law can affect a permanent resident’s ability to return to the country.

Even travelers who have previously passed through American airports without difficulty may encounter problems on a subsequent trip.

Another concern involves permanent residents who have spent extended periods outside the United States. Immigration authorities may question whether such individuals have abandoned their American residency, although an extended absence does not automatically terminate green card status.

For members of the frum community, these issues are especially relevant for families flying to Eretz Yisroel and elsewhere for Yom Tov, family simchos, weddings, and visits to relatives.

Someone who has lived in Lakewood, Boro Park, Monsey, or another American community for 30 or 40 years may naturally regard the United States as home. His children may have been born here, his grandchildren may be American citizens, and his entire livelihood may be based in this country.

But if he never completed the naturalization process, he remains a lawful permanent resident rather than a citizen.

Paying taxes, owning a home, volunteering at a local food bank, contributing to communal institutions, and maintaining an otherwise exemplary record do not automatically provide the legal protections associated with citizenship.

Even participation in civic activities does not change immigration status. In fact, ordinary jury service is generally restricted to U.S. citizens, and a green card holder who mistakenly claims citizenship in connection with jury service or another official process could create additional immigration complications.

Immigration attorneys are therefore urging green card holders to review their circumstances carefully before traveling abroad, particularly if they have ever been arrested, charged with an offense, convicted of a crime, or spent substantial time outside the country.

They also caution permanent residents against signing documents surrendering their immigration status without first obtaining legal advice.

One particularly important document is Form I-407, which is used to voluntarily abandon lawful permanent resident status. A traveler presented with that form should understand that signing it can have serious consequences.

The American Immigration Lawyers Association advises permanent residents facing questions about their status to request legal assistance and avoid voluntarily relinquishing their green cards without understanding their rights.

Importantly, immigration officers cannot simply erase a person’s lawful permanent resident status because they question that person’s eligibility. The law provides procedures for contesting removal and abandonment allegations, although the availability and scope of those protections depend on the circumstances.

Attorneys also stress that detention is not the same as deportation. A person taken into immigration custody may still have substantial legal defenses and opportunities to challenge the government’s allegations.

For permanent residents who are eligible to become American citizens, the developments have renewed attention to the naturalization process.

In most cases, lawful permanent residents may apply for citizenship after five years, provided they meet the applicable requirements. Certain spouses of American citizens may qualify after three years.

Naturalization requires an application, background review, and satisfaction of other legal conditions, including residency and eligibility requirements. Individuals with complicated immigration or criminal histories should obtain qualified legal guidance before applying.

The broader warning is that possession of a green card, even one held for decades, should not be confused with citizenship.

For families whose lives are deeply rooted in America, the possibility that an ordinary overseas trip could end with a loved one in immigration detention is a concern that deserves serious attention.

{Matzav.com}

France is preparing for another potentially volatile weekend of demonstrations, with President Emmanuel Macron announcing restrictions on protests organized by groups his government considers illegitimate, authorities extending a nighttime curfew in parts of Paris, and soldiers being deployed to protect sensitive locations following violent unrest that reportedly left thousands of businesses looted and nearly 1,000 police officers injured.

The security measures follow a wave of demonstrations that erupted into widespread violence last weekend, when protests over the rising cost of living and conditions in educational institutions escalated into clashes with police, vandalism, and looting.

More than 2,700 people were reportedly arrested during the disturbances, while approximately 3,000 businesses were looted or damaged. The reported scale of the violence has prompted French authorities to prepare a substantially larger security response ahead of demonstrations planned for Saturday.

Macron announced that protests organized by what he described as “illegitimate organizations” would be prohibited, with the restrictions reportedly directed at far-left groups that government officials accuse of encouraging last weekend’s violence.

Authorities in Marseille and Lyon have announced outright bans on demonstrations within their jurisdictions on Saturday, reflecting concerns that renewed gatherings could lead to further confrontations.

In Paris, however, a court authorized a peaceful demonstration despite the government’s restrictions. Thousands of people subsequently gathered for a stationary protest, which reportedly concluded without major incidents.

Meanwhile, officials extended the nighttime curfew covering the Place de la République and Les Halles areas of central Paris. The restrictions, in effect from 11 p.m. until 6 a.m., are scheduled to remain in place through Monday morning.

The French Culture Ministry also announced the closure of several major museums over the weekend, including the Louvre and Musée d’Orsay, citing the need to protect visitors, employees, and valuable works of art.

The government has acknowledged that security forces were inadequately prepared for the previous demonstrations, which reportedly attracted approximately one million participants nationwide.

This time, officials are promising a massive deployment of police personnel, supported by soldiers assigned to Operation Sentinelle, France’s domestic counterterrorism security mission.

Under the security arrangements described by officials, soldiers will guard sensitive sites, freeing police officers to concentrate on managing demonstrations, preventing looting, and responding to outbreaks of violence.

The atmosphere of uncertainty is particularly evident among business owners in Paris, many of whom have begun boarding up storefront windows and installing additional protective barriers.

Merchants are also purchasing weapons and self-defense equipment amid fears that their businesses could again become targets.

Yves Gola, a Paris firearms dealer, said demand at his store has increased dramatically, with sales rising tenfold and his inventory of guns designed to fire rubber projectiles completely exhausted.

“They are arming themselves because they are terrified,” Gola said.

The current demonstrations are reportedly being organized by UNEF, France’s principal student union, together with participants associated with the Yellow Vest protest movement.

The unrest has also intensified political tensions ahead of France’s presidential election next year.

Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu and other government figures have accused Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the prominent far-left political leader, of contributing to the atmosphere of unrest. Those accusations remain political claims rather than established findings of responsibility for the violence.

Macron has also rejected assertions portraying the demonstrations as an attempt at an Islamist takeover of France, describing such claims as a “complete lie.”

The restrictions are aimed at particular demonstrations and organizers, rather than a nationwide prohibition on all protests. Recognized groups, including trade unions, may still hold demonstrations, although authorities can change routes or impose local restrictions to protect businesses and public safety.

France’s Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez previously acknowledged that police had lost control in several major cities during the October 17 disturbances. Macron subsequently rejected Nuñez’s offer to resign, while the government began reviewing its intelligence and policing failures.

The restrictions have drawn objections from opposition figures, who argue that the government is responding to grievances over living costs and public services with security measures rather than policy changes. Government officials maintain that peaceful protest remains permissible and that the additional restrictions are necessary to prevent further violence.

The next major demonstrations are scheduled for Saturday, October 24, with authorities preparing to deploy police, specialized security units, armored vehicles, and military personnel to prevent another round of rioting and looting.

For now, French authorities face the challenge of preventing another outbreak of violence while navigating court rulings protecting peaceful demonstrations. The coming weekend will provide an important test of whether the expanded security deployment and protest restrictions can prevent a recurrence of the widespread destruction reported during last week’s unrest.

Nearly four years after more than 100 gemachim applied for government licenses, the overwhelming majority are still awaiting final approval, raising concerns about the slow pace of regulatory oversight in a sector that handles billions of shekels in loans and deposits for Israel’s chareidi community.

New figures obtained through freedom-of-information requests reveal that just 19 of the 109 gemachim that submitted licensing applications to Israel’s Capital Market Authority in 2022 have received licenses. The remaining 90 have yet to complete the approval process.

The findings, first reported by journalist Nati Tucker of TheMarker, have drawn attention to the challenges facing regulators as they attempt to supervise a financial network that plays an essential role in the daily lives of thousands of frum families.

The gemach system, built around interest-free lending and communal assistance, provides financing for weddings, housing expenses, family emergencies and other significant needs. Many institutions also accept deposits from individuals who place money with a gemach to support its lending activities.

The combined financial activity of the sector is estimated at approximately 5 billion shekels, making the licensing delays particularly consequential.

Although the government introduced a licensing framework intended to establish clearer oversight of gemachim, the latest figures suggest that implementation has proceeded far more slowly than anticipated.

The licensing delays have been a subject of dispute between government regulators and Knesset members for years. Representatives of the gemachim have complained that the absence of licenses has complicated their relationships with banks, even when the institutions have been operating for years and have submitted the required applications.

At a Knesset Finance Committee hearing in December 2025, lawmakers pressed the Capital Market Authority over the prolonged delays. Officials explained that the necessary anti-money-laundering regulations had to be finalized before licenses could be issued.

During that hearing, a senior authority official clarified that gemachim operating before the licensing framework took effect in 2022, and which had submitted the appropriate applications, could continue operating while their applications were reviewed.

That distinction is significant. The fact that an institution has not yet received a final license does not necessarily mean it is operating unlawfully.

The regulatory process has begun moving forward in recent weeks. In September, the authority issued its first seven licenses to qualifying gemachim. By October 20, the number had increased to 19.

The authority says additional applications are undergoing review and that it intends to continue issuing licenses to institutions meeting the requirements.

The government has also formally initiated a two-year transition period for new anti-money-laundering obligations. Under the framework, licensed gemachim will eventually be required to implement procedures for identifying customers, documenting transactions, monitoring financial risks and reporting certain activities to regulators.

The transition period follows the publication of an official notice announcing the commencement of licensing, with the new requirements scheduled to take effect in October 2028.

Regulators say the rules are intended to protect depositors and borrowers while preserving the distinctive character of gemachim, which operate without charging interest and often depend heavily on donations and volunteer administrators.

The Capital Market Authority has acknowledged that gemachim occupy a unique position in Israel’s financial system, providing interest-free loans through institutions generally built around close-knit communities and longstanding relationships of trust.

Unlike conventional financial institutions, many gemachim rely on guarantors rather than interest-based lending arrangements to manage financial risk.

The authority says its supervisory framework is designed to account for those differences while introducing standards intended to protect the public and prevent financial misconduct.

At the same time, regulators have begun enforcement proceedings against institutions suspected of violating existing requirements, including issuing notices of hearings to certain operators.

The licensing issue has attracted particular attention from chareidi lawmakers, who have argued that excessive bureaucracy could interfere with a system of communal assistance that provides critical financial support to families.

During previous Knesset discussions, MK Moshe Gafni and MK Simcha Rothman urged officials to expedite the process and permit gemachim to receive licenses while the remaining regulatory requirements were being implemented.

Rothman accused regulators of creating a situation in which institutions were being denied licenses because the government had not yet completed the regulations necessary to issue them.

The latest figures underscore how much work remains. With only 19 licenses issued and 90 of the original 109 applicants still awaiting approval, the process is far from complete.

For the thousands of families who depend on gemachim to finance weddings, purchase homes or manage major expenses, the outcome of the regulatory process could have substantial consequences.

The central challenge facing Israeli authorities will be to establish meaningful financial oversight without undermining the interest-free lending institutions that have served as a cornerstone of chareidi communal life for generations.

{Matzav.com}

[Video below.] Mr. Sol Werdiger, chairman of the board of Agudath Israel of America and owner of Outerstuff, has endorsed New York Governor Kathy Hochul for reelection, adding his personal support to her campaign following her decision to participate in a federal scholarship tax credit program that could provide significant financial assistance to yeshiva families.

The endorsement comes just days after Hochul announced that New York would opt into the federal initiative, which is designed to encourage private donations to scholarship organizations through federal tax incentives. The program has drawn considerable attention in the Orthodox community because of its potential to help families struggling with the rising costs of yeshiva tuition.

Werdiger, who has worked closely with state officials on issues affecting Orthodox Jewish families and educational institutions, publicly welcomed Hochul’s decision.

“Opting in is good for all New Yorkers. We thank Governor Hochul for putting students before politics,” Werdiger said in a statement issued by Agudath Israel following the announcement.

His endorsement of Hochul’s reelection bid is a personal one and should be distinguished from any formal endorsement by Agudath Israel of America as an organization.

The development comes as Hochul has been receiving support from several Orthodox Jewish communities and institutions in the closing weeks of the gubernatorial campaign. Among those announcing their support have been leaders in New Square, Munkatch, and Crown Heights.

Hochul has also made several appearances in Orthodox communities in recent weeks, including a visit to the Bais Rochel girls’ school in Kiryas Yoel, where she was welcomed by thousands of students.

The governor’s decision on the scholarship program has become a significant issue in those communities. Supporters say the initiative could provide much-needed relief to parents paying private school tuition, although the eventual benefits will depend on the program’s implementation, available contributions, and eligibility requirements.

For Werdiger, whose communal activities have included extensive involvement in education and government relations, the tuition initiative represents an important development in an issue that has long been a priority for Orthodox families.

The federal program, established under President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, allows eligible taxpayers to claim a federal tax credit of up to $1,700 for donations to approved scholarship organizations. Those organizations can then use the contributions to provide educational scholarships, including assistance with yeshiva tuition.

Scheduled to begin in 2027, the initiative could direct tens of millions of dollars in additional scholarship funding to New York families without requiring the state to finance the scholarships directly.

The endorsement comes less than two weeks before Hochul faces Republican challenger Bruce Blakeman in the November 3 gubernatorial election.

{Matzav.com}

Shas chairman Aryeh Deri has announced a new election initiative that would provide every Jewish boy in Israel with a free pair of tefillin and a tallis upon reaching his bar mitzvah, as part of a broader effort to strengthen Jewish identity among the country’s younger generation.

The proposal, unveiled ahead of Tuesday’s Knesset elections, would also require schools to designate appropriate spaces where students who wish to put on tefillin and daven could do so during the school day.

Deri presented the initiative as an answer to what he described as growing efforts to weaken the Jewish character of the State of Israel, singling out Yair Golan and his political allies for criticism.

Under the proposed program, boys reaching the age of 13 would receive a bar mitzvah package containing tefillin and a tallis, regardless of whether they attend religious or secular schools.

The initiative is intended to make these fundamental mitzvos accessible to Jewish children from all backgrounds, including families that might otherwise be unable or unlikely to purchase tefillin.

For Shas, the proposal also represents an attempt to bring questions of Jewish identity and religious tradition to the forefront of the election campaign, alongside the ongoing disputes over military conscription and the status of yeshiva students.

In a campaign video released Thursday, Deri said that recent public statements concerning religion in Israel had convinced him of the need for a new government initiative.

“Recently, we have been hearing harsh statements threatening the Jewish identity of the State of Israel,” Deri said. “They want to turn it into a country like all other nations. That will never happen.”

Deri specifically cited comments attributed to Yair Golan, chairman of the Democrats party, concerning the removal of religion from public spaces. He also criticized a Tel Aviv city council member who had objected to religious activities involving schoolchildren.

“These are harsh and shocking statements,” Deri declared. “Therefore, the Shas movement commits to passing a new program in the next government: ‘Tefillin for Every Child.'”

Explaining the proposed program, Deri said that every boy reaching the age of 13 would receive a bar mitzvah package from the Education Ministry, including a pair of tefillin and a tallis.

He added that Shas would seek to require schools to provide a designated prayer area for students who wish to put on tefillin and daven.

Deri emphasized the significance of tefillin in Jewish history and the role of the mitzvah in maintaining the connection between Jews and their heritage.

“Tefillin have been a symbol of the Jewish people throughout the generations,” he said.

The Shas chairman also invoked the posuk, “V’ra’u kol amei ha’aretz ki sheim Hashem nikra alecha veyar’u mimeka,” citing Chazal’s explanation that the reference is to the tefillin worn on the head.

Deri described tefillin as a source of spiritual strength for the Jewish people in confronting their enemies.

“The choice is clear: Either we strengthen the Jewish state, or we deteriorate into a country like all other nations, chas v’shalom,” he said.

The announcement immediately drew a sharp response from Golan, who countered with an election promise of his own focused on military conscription.

“Deri, here is our election promise: The state will distribute draft orders to every 18-year-old boy and girl. Everyone will receive a draft order. Tefillin by choice. Conscription by obligation,” Golan wrote on social media.

His response highlighted the widening political divide over religion and military service, with Shas campaigning for greater recognition of Jewish observance while Golan and his allies advocate mandatory military service across Israeli society.

The proposal has also raised questions about its financial implications. A kosher pair of tefillin can cost thousands of shekels, meaning a nationwide distribution program could require substantial government funding.

Shas has not yet presented a detailed budget, funding source or implementation timetable. Questions also remain concerning the procurement and kashrus standards of the tefillin that would be distributed.

Asked separately about girls reaching bas mitzvah age, Shas representatives told News1 that the party had considered providing them with a siddur.

For now, the initiative remains an election commitment rather than an approved government program. Its implementation would depend on the composition of the next government, the passage of the necessary measures and the allocation of funding.

The announcement comes just five days before Israelis head to the polls, as Shas seeks to rally voters around the preservation of Torah values, Jewish identity and the future of religious life in Eretz Yisroel.

The Schottenstein Edition Talmud transformed Torah learning, opening the depth of Gemara to hundreds of thousands of learners. Its Hebrew edition brought that same revolution — on an enhanced level — to those more comfortable learning in lashon kodesh. The Hebrew-language Ryzman Mishnah, Ryzman Midrash, and Zichron Asher Herzog Sefer HaChinuch further transformed Torah learning by making the depth of these foundational works accessible to that same audience. Now, that tradition is continuing with the Schottenstein Edition Rashi HaMevoar on Chumash — an all-Hebrew edition that brings the acclaimed approach of the Schottenstein Edition Elucidated Rashi to lashon kodesh learners. Its overwhelming reception is already making something clear: Learners are discovering a whole new level of understanding in the Rashi they thought they knew.

For centuries, Rashi has been the indispensable guide to understanding Chumash. His words appear concise and straightforward, yet behind virtually every comment lies a question: a difficulty in the pasuk, an unusual expression, or a subtle textual nuance. Rashi did not write a single word unnecessarily.

Rashi HaMevoar enables the learner to see what prompted every comment and how each word of Rashi resolves the underlying difficulty. Every Rashi begins with an introduction identifying the question Rashi is addressing, followed by a clear, flowing Hebrew explanation woven into Rashi’s words.

The edition also demonstrates why, when Rashi offers two or three explanations, each one is necessary. Rather than simply presenting a variety of “multiple choice” answers, Rashi’s alternate explanations often address difficulties left unresolved by the others. Rashi HaMevoar shows how they work together to account for every nuance in the text.

Drawing upon dozens of the primary commentaries on Rashi, the comprehensive notes explore Rashi’s sources, questions, alternate approaches, and variant readings. Special Insights reveal deeper lessons contained within Rashi’s words, adding a new dimension of understanding and geshmak.

The result is a work clear enough for a developing student, yet deep and comprehensive enough to enrich a seasoned talmid chacham. For students, parents, rebbeim, and accomplished learners, Rashi HaMevoar is becoming an indispensable companion to learning Chumash. The excitement lies in that experience of discovery: Familiar comments take on new depth, seemingly simple words reveal their precision, and learning Rashi becomes more rewarding with every pasuk.

The Schottenstein Edition Talmud transformed the understanding of Gemara. For those learning with the Schottenstein Edition Rashi HaMevoar, that transformation is already happening in their understanding of Rashi.

The first two volumes of Bereishis are available here or at local booksellers at an introductory price of $29.99 per volume. The two volumes of Shemos will be out in time for this year’s kerias Hatorah.

{Matzav.com}

A retired New York City police detective has been arrested and charged with murder in the fatal shooting of a 46-year-old Rockland County father on the George Washington Bridge, as investigators say an apparent road-rage confrontation turned deadly during Tuesday evening’s rush hour.

Victor Romero, 62, of Haverstraw, New York, was taken into custody Wednesday afternoon in connection with the killing of Koran Irvine, 46, of Valley Cottage, who was shot while driving home from work.

The arrest represents a major development in the investigation, which initially began when police responded to what appeared to be a single-vehicle accident on the bridge’s westbound upper level.

Investigators subsequently discovered that Irvine had suffered a gunshot wound.

He was rushed to a hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

According to authorities, the shooting occurred shortly after 7 p.m. Tuesday as both motorists were traveling from Manhattan toward New Jersey.

The circumstances leading up to the confrontation remain under investigation, but authorities believe the shooting followed a dispute between the drivers.

Romero was arrested at approximately 3:30 p.m. Wednesday and charged with murder. He is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.

Romero previously served as a narcotics detective in Brooklyn North and retired from the NYPD in 2001. During his police career, he was wounded in a 2000 shooting while intervening in an attempted robbery at his family’s Brooklyn laundromat.

Investigators believe Tuesday’s shooting involved a confrontation between Romero’s vehicle and Irvine’s Volkswagen. According to reports, a bullet entered the Volkswagen through a rear passenger-side window and struck Irvine near his right shoulder.

Irvine had recently marked 20 years of employment with Con Edison. He was married and the father of two children.

Con Edison expressed its condolences following his death.

“We are heartbroken by the tragic loss of a member of the Con Edison family in this senseless act of violence. Our deepest condolences go out to his family, friends, colleagues, and everyone who knew and loved him,” the utility said.

The shooting forced authorities to close portions of the George Washington Bridge for several hours Tuesday evening, causing extensive traffic delays. The affected lanes reopened overnight.

In a significant development Thursday, prosecutors proceeded with a manslaughter charge against Romero at his Manhattan arraignment, rather than the murder charge initially announced by police.

A judge set bail at $1 million. Members of Irvine’s family attended the hearing, where further details emerged about the confrontation and the single shot allegedly fired into his vehicle.

Newly released surveillance footage of Wednesday evening’s stabbing of a Lubavitcher chossid in Midtown Manhattan has intensified suspicions that the attack was motivated by antisemitism, as investigators examine reports that the female suspect deliberately pursued visibly Jewish pedestrians while ignoring others on the crowded street.

The victim, identified in updated reports as a 26-year-old Crown Heights resident, was attacked near Fifth Avenue and West 47th Street in Manhattan’s Diamond District shortly before 6 p.m. Wednesday. He was transported to Bellevue Hospital, where he was reported in stable condition.

The latest developments have raised additional questions about the weapon used in the assault. Although initial reports described a stabbing with a sharp object, investigators are now examining the possibility that the attacker used a syringe or needle.

According to updated reporting, the victim told police that he felt a sharp, needle-like prick in the lower right portion of his back and believed that he had been stabbed with a syringe.

Authorities have not established whether the object contained any substance or whether the victim was exposed to potentially harmful material.

The newly circulated security footage, released by Manhattan Shomrim, shows the woman following the chossid as he walks along the sidewalk near a parked vehicle. The victim appears to recognize that he is being followed and attempts to move away from her.

The woman continues pursuing him, eventually approaching close enough to strike him in the back before fleeing.

Witness accounts have added to suspicions that the attack was specifically directed at Jewish pedestrians. According to Crown Heights community reports, the woman was observed approaching another visibly Jewish individual while passing several non-Jewish pedestrians without attempting to harm them.

Investigators have not independently established that the victim was selected because of his Jewish identity, but the accounts have become an important part of the investigation into a possible hate crime.

Police sources cited in updated reporting also indicated that the suspect was speaking Russian while following the victim.

The NYPD’s Hate Crimes Task Force is investigating the assault, working alongside Manhattan Shomrim, whose volunteers have been collecting surveillance footage and seeking witnesses who may have observed the suspect before or after the incident.

The suspect is described as a woman in her 30s, approximately 5 feet 9 inches tall, who was wearing blue jeans and white sneakers, with a dark sweater tied around her waist.

She was last seen fleeing west toward Sixth Avenue.

The attack occurred during the busy evening rush hour in the Diamond District, an area with a substantial concentration of Jewish-owned businesses and frequent pedestrian traffic.

Manhattan Shomrim has appealed to business owners and motorists in the area to review security cameras, dashcam recordings and other footage that may help investigators identify the woman.

The organization is particularly interested in recordings from the vicinity of Fifth Avenue and West 47th Street around 5:30 to 5:45 p.m. Wednesday.

Anyone with relevant information can contact Manhattan Shomrim at 212-430-2024.

The incident has renewed concern about antisemitic violence in New York City, particularly attacks targeting Jews whose religious clothing makes them readily identifiable.

According to recent NYPD statistics cited in local reporting, hate crimes across the city have increased by nearly 13% in 2026 compared with the corresponding period last year, with anti-Jewish incidents accounting for more than half of reported hate crimes.

Community representatives have called for a thorough investigation and swift apprehension of the suspect.

As of the latest reports reviewed Thursday afternoon, no arrest had been confirmed, and investigators had not announced a determination regarding the suspect’s motive or the precise nature of the object used in the attack.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has personally signed just one bill into law during his nearly ten months in office, an unusually low figure compared with his predecessors, as current and former City Hall insiders accuse his administration of devoting excessive attention to producing social media videos while neglecting routine government responsibilities, the New York Post reports.

According to the New York Post review, Mamdani has signed only one piece of legislation approved by the City Council since taking office in January, despite nearly 100 bills having reached his desk. The sole measure to receive his signature was an August law permitting restaurants to operate outdoor dining areas on city sidewalks throughout the year.

Other legislation has become law without Mamdani’s signature through a provision of the City Charter that allows City Council-approved bills to take effect automatically if the mayor neither signs nor vetoes them within four weeks.

Although the procedure is legal, it is generally used when a mayor wishes to avoid formally endorsing legislation while allowing it to become law. Mamdani’s repeated reliance on the process has raised questions because many of the measures involved closely align with his own political priorities.

The contrast has become particularly striking given the mayor’s highly visible social media presence. Mamdani, who turned 35 on Sunday, regularly appears in carefully produced videos on TikTok and other platforms, sometimes releasing multiple clips in a single day.

One individual who frequently works with City Hall told the Post that the administration’s enthusiasm for online content has begun interfering with ordinary government operations.

“The mayor and his team are obsessed with becoming a content farm, often delaying or can-kicking boring governmental meetings so the mayor and his staff can hold pitch sessions for social media videos,” the source said.

“The mayor gets pitched comedy sketches more than Lorne Michaels,” the individual added. “There are lots of laughs, and there is very little work.”

Mamdani’s legislative record stands in sharp contrast to those of the previous three New York City mayors during comparable periods of their administrations.

Eric Adams had signed 30 laws by the same point in his mayoralty, while Bill de Blasio had approved 47 and Michael Bloomberg had signed 28.

Mamdani’s single signature is especially unusual because the legislation he has allowed to become law without his approval includes measures championed by his political allies and provisions supporting policies he has publicly endorsed.

One example involves legislation requiring notices about New York City’s sanctuary protections against federal immigration enforcement to be displayed in public schools and city-owned buildings.

The measure was introduced in February by City Councilwoman Alexa Aviles, a fellow socialist and political ally of Mamdani, and received overwhelming support from the City Council.

Nevertheless, when the legislation reached the mayor’s desk in June, Mamdani did not sign it. Instead, the measure became law automatically after the four-week period expired.

The same pattern has occurred with numerous other bills, even as Mamdani has maintained an active schedule of social media appearances.

In one recent stretch, the mayor appeared in two videos on Thursday, two more on Saturday, and another two on Monday.

Several of his online productions have attracted considerable public attention, including a July video in which he denounced Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu as a “war criminal” and discussed whether New York City authorities could arrest him.

At the time that video was released, several significant pieces of legislation were awaiting Mamdani’s signature.

Among them was a measure requiring wellness checks on elderly New Yorkers when temperatures exceed 95 degrees, along with legislation expanding free childcare programs and establishing a rental assistance initiative.

All three eventually became law without receiving the mayor’s signature.

The lack of formal approval for legislation associated with Mamdani’s own policy agenda has puzzled some former city officials, who question why the mayor would decline opportunities to publicly recognize the work of City Council members advancing his priorities.

Former City Council member Diana Ayala said the practice creates an unusual impression, particularly when the mayor has expressed no apparent disagreement with the legislation.

“It is a little bit weird. It gives the impression that enough attention is being paid or they disagree, but they don’t. I haven’t seen anything he’s disagreed,” Ayala said. “Those are his initiatives.

“It would be nice to elevate their initiatives,” she said of council members whose bills Mamdani has neglected. “It shows goodwill and that they are in alignment on specific issues.”

Other former government officials suggested that the mayor’s preference for executive orders and highly produced announcements reflects an administration particularly concerned with how its actions will appear online.

“It’s easier to govern by TikTok than to actually perform the duties of the job,” a former City Hall staffer said.

A former member of Bloomberg’s administration offered a similar explanation for the lack of traditional bill-signing ceremonies.

“They haven’t found a way to make this into compelling social media content,” the former official said.

The criticism has extended beyond the mayor’s public presentation to the internal functioning of City Hall, with one insider arguing that the failure to sign legislation reflects a broader unwillingness to devote attention to the less visible responsibilities of governing.

Calling the approach “lazy government,” the insider said the administration was avoiding both the political decisions and the administrative work associated with formally approving legislation.

“It’s lazy in two ways — one is you are not taking a stand, easier to do nothing than figure out where you stand on something,” the individual said.

“And lazy from a practical perspective — you can’t focus City Hall staff to hold the hearings, write the briefings and execute the bill signings.”

The city’s legislative rules permit bills to become law after 30 days without mayoral action, so the unsigned measures have still taken effect. The criticism directed at Mamdani concerns his lack of direct involvement in the formal approval process and allegations that his administration is prioritizing publicity over legislative work.

{Matzav.com}

Donald Trump Jr., the eldest son of President Donald Trump and one of his most prominent political allies, has privately opposed the American military campaign against Iran since its opening days, repeatedly expressing his objections directly to his father while deliberately avoiding any public criticism of the president.

The previously undisclosed disagreement was revealed in a report published this week by The Atlantic, which cited two individuals who said they had spoken directly with Trump Jr. about his position on the conflict.

According to the report, Trump Jr. objected to the military operation from its outset on February 28, when the United States and Israel launched coordinated strikes against Iran. His opposition reportedly reflects his longstanding skepticism of American military involvement in foreign conflicts, particularly prolonged engagements in the Middle East.

Despite his reservations, Trump Jr. has continued to publicly support his father and has made no effort to challenge the administration’s military policy in public.

One person close to the president’s son explained that the distinction between his private opinions and public statements is intentional.

“Don has kept his views on the matter to himself because he would never publicly go against his father on something like this,” the individual said.

The source added that those familiar with Trump Jr.’s political philosophy should not find his opposition to the war surprising.

Trump Jr. has for years been associated with the noninterventionist wing of the Republican Party, which argues that the United States should avoid becoming entangled in overseas military campaigns unless vital American national interests are directly threatened.

His views have frequently aligned with the America First movement’s criticism of previous American interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan and other parts of the Middle East.

The reported disagreement is particularly notable because of Trump Jr.’s close political relationship with the president. He has served as an influential advocate for his father’s agenda, a prominent voice among grassroots Republican voters and an important figure within the broader MAGA movement.

Unlike some conservative commentators who have openly challenged the administration over Iran, Trump Jr. has chosen to communicate his concerns privately rather than create a public confrontation with his father.

His spokesman declined to comment on the report.

The White House also did not directly address the reported disagreement between the president and his son. An administration official instead emphasized the damage inflicted on Iran during the military campaign and expressed confidence that the conflict would conclude soon.

The disclosure comes as the war approaches its eighth month and disagreements over the military campaign continue to divide influential figures within Trump’s political coalition.

Among the most outspoken critics has been conservative commentator Tucker Carlson, who has argued that the conflict contradicts the America First principles on which Trump campaigned.

Carlson and other noninterventionist conservatives contend that another prolonged Middle Eastern conflict risks consuming American military resources, increasing economic pressure on American households and diverting attention from domestic priorities.

Supporters of the administration’s military campaign, by contrast, maintain that confronting Iran is necessary to address threats posed by Tehran’s nuclear and military capabilities and its support for armed groups throughout the Middle East.

The disagreement has also reportedly extended into the administration itself.

Vice President JD Vance, who has long expressed reservations about American involvement in foreign wars, was among senior officials who raised concerns about the scope and strategy of the operation, according to published accounts.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe has also been identified in reporting about internal discussions concerning the military campaign and its objectives.

The administration has nevertheless continued to defend the operation, maintaining that American and Israeli military action has inflicted substantial damage on Iran’s military capabilities.

A White House official responding to questions about the reported disagreement involving Trump Jr. said, “Iran has been decimated, and one way or the other, the conflict in Iran will be over very soon.”

The political controversy surrounding the war has intensified as the November 3 congressional midterm elections approach.

A Pew Research Center survey conducted from September 28 through October 4 found that 65% of American adults disapproved of President Trump’s handling of military operations against Iran, while 33% approved.

The findings reflected a decline in public support since March, shortly after the conflict began, when 61% disapproved and 37% approved.

The survey also found that Republican support for the president’s handling of the conflict had weakened, falling from 69% in March to 63% in October.

Among Republicans and Republican-leaning independents, 65% said the initial decision to use military force against Iran was justified, compared with 71% in March.

Americans also expressed considerable uncertainty about the administration’s ability to achieve its objectives. According to the survey, 52% had little or no confidence that the administration would accomplish its goals in the conflict.

The duration of the war has become another major concern. Nearly half of respondents, 47%, said they expected American military operations against Iran to continue for more than another year.

Those findings underscore the broader political environment in which Trump Jr.’s private objections have emerged.

In April 2024, before his father’s return to the White House, Trump Jr. publicly celebrated what he viewed as Trump’s ability to avoid a major military confrontation with Iran.

“Remember when they said Trump would get us into a full-blown war with Iran?” he wrote at the time, following an Iranian attack on Israel.

His earlier remarks are consistent with the skepticism of foreign military intervention that sources now attribute to him privately.

The reported disagreement also raises questions about the extent to which Trump Jr. has attempted to influence his father’s decisions concerning Iran.

It remains unclear whether the president considered his son’s objections when determining the administration’s military strategy or whether their private conversations had any effect on subsequent decisions.

There has also been no public account of how President Trump responded when his son expressed opposition to the war.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has rejected a report claiming that President Donald Trump prevented Israel from launching a major new military offensive against Iran earlier this month, disputing allegations that Washington intervened to stop an Israeli bombing campaign targeting Iranian military and nuclear infrastructure.

The denial follows a Financial Times report alleging that Netanyahu had instructed Israeli defense officials to prepare for several days of airstrikes against Iran around October 10, only to encounter opposition from the Trump administration.

According to the original report, Israeli officials had been considering a substantial operation against Iranian targets, but the White House was reluctant to support another major escalation in the region ahead of the November 3 American midterm elections.

Netanyahu, however, dismissed the account in comments to Israel National News, challenging the suggestion that Trump had vetoed an Israeli military operation.

The prime minister’s response adds to conflicting accounts from Israeli and international sources about the extent of Israel’s military preparations and whether any actual strike had been scheduled.

Israeli defense officials cited in subsequent reporting have also disputed the original account, saying that no operation had been ordered for October 10 and that there was consequently no planned attack for Trump to cancel.

In an interview with Arutz Sheva on Thursday, Netanyahu directly challenged the Financial Times account.

“This report is not true. I’m not going to get into correcting this biased report,” Netanyahu said.

He declined to disclose the substance of his recent conversations with Trump concerning Iran, leaving unanswered questions about the military options discussed between the two leaders.

The Financial Times based its account on three people familiar with the alleged preparations. According to those sources, the IDF had been preparing for an offensive more extensive than the joint American-Israeli campaign carried out earlier this year.

The proposed targets reportedly included nuclear installations, power plants, facilities associated with the Iranian regime and other infrastructure.

The newspaper said it remained unclear whether the United States would have participated directly in the operation or whether Israel intended to act independently.

A separate investigation published Wednesday by The Jerusalem Post, however, cited Israeli defense sources who said that the IDF had received no orders to prepare an October 10 offensive.

Those sources acknowledged that Israel had maintained heightened military readiness on several occasions in recent months, particularly amid concerns that Iran might initiate another confrontation around the anniversary of October 7.

They maintained, however, that heightened readiness should not be confused with preparations for an approved offensive.

The distinction is central to the disagreement. If no strike had been scheduled, the sources argued, there was no operation for Trump to cancel.

Nevertheless, the possibility of renewed military action against Iran remains under discussion.

The Financial Times quoted one person familiar with the situation as saying, “There will either be a deal or an attack.”

Another source said, “Everything is on the table.”

The dispute comes amid continuing tensions between Washington and Tehran over Iran’s nuclear program, ballistic missile capabilities and regional military activities.

Diplomatic efforts have made little progress, with the Trump administration demanding substantial restrictions on Iran’s nuclear activities while Tehran continues to resist American conditions.

The controversy has also attracted attention because of its timing. Israel is scheduled to hold its Knesset elections on October 27, while American voters will go to the polls for the midterm elections on November 3.

Trump has publicly indicated that he does not intend to launch another military offensive against Iran before the American elections.

Meanwhile, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth recently visited Israel for discussions with Netanyahu and other senior officials concerning regional security threats, further fueling speculation about possible joint military action.

Iranian officials have responded to the reports with threats of retaliation.

Ebrahim Azizi, chairman of the Iranian parliament’s national security commission, warned Israel against undertaking another offensive, while Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi maintained that Tehran remains open to diplomacy but is prepared to defend itself.

For now, Netanyahu’s denial leaves the central allegation unresolved. The Financial Times maintains, based on its sources, that a major offensive was prepared and blocked by Washington. Israeli defense sources dispute that any such operation had been scheduled, and Netanyahu has publicly rejected the report.

What remains clear is that the possibility of another confrontation with Iran continues to loom over the region as both Israel and the United States approach their respective elections.

Former Sephardic Chief Rabbi Rav Yitzchak Yosef delivered a forceful address at an election gathering in Yerushalayim, warning that a left-wing government could impose far more severe restrictions on the Torah community than those currently being experienced, while sharply criticizing National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir over his conduct regarding Har Habayis and the treatment of chareidim by police.

Speaking at the Bnei HaYeshivos Bais Medrash in the Shmuel Hanavi neighborhood, the Rishon Letzion described the political situation as one involving pikuach nefesh ruchani, or spiritual danger, and expressed concern over the consequences he believes would follow a change in government.

Rav Yosef argued that the challenges presently facing the yeshiva world could become considerably more serious if left-wing parties return to power.

“If the left comes to power, it will create difficulties. What we have now is nothing compared to what they are planning to do. If they come to power, it will be many times worse. It is impossible to describe what decrees there will be,” he warned.

He pointed to statements he attributed to a prominent figure on the political left concerning the possibility of extending military conscription requirements to women.

“One of the leaders of the left said, ‘We are not finished. Now we will also draft girls, not only yeshiva bochurim, but girls into the army as well,’ regarding which the Chazon Ish said one must be killed rather than transgress,” Rav Yosef declared.

The Rishon Letzion also cited election polling as a source of concern, warning that opposition parties might seek to form a coalition with Arab political factions and pursue changes to the relationship between religion and the state.

“Look at the polls. There is reason for concern. This is not just fear. According to the polls, they will form a government with the Arabs, and they will do everything to come to power. They will destroy all religion in the country and separate religion from the state,” he said.

These remarks reflected Rav Yosef’s assessment of the political stakes rather than any established policy program shared by all opposition parties.

Rav Yosef subsequently addressed the importance of political participation, invoking the teachings of his father, Maran Rav Ovadia Yosef zt”l, and the responsibility he believed members of the community carried during the election period.

“We must not stand on the sidelines, rabosai. Whoever stands on the sidelines, what did Maran always say? ‘Curse Meroz, because they did not come to the aid of Hashem among the mighty.’ Chas veshalom. This is an extremely serious matter. Do not play with fire. This is very serious. Everyone must vote,” he declared.

The Rishon Letzion emphasized that his concern extended beyond ordinary political considerations, describing the situation in explicitly religious terms.

“Rabosai, the situation is very difficult. It is spiritual pikuach nefesh, literally. I am not just trying to frighten you. I receive many reports from different places. The situation is in danger, chas veshalom, if the left comes to power,” he said.

He also spoke about individuals who had previously been critical of Shas, saying that their past disagreements should not prevent them from reconsidering their positions in light of the current political circumstances.

“There were avreichim here who were always speaking against, against, against. Let them do teshuvah and speak the opposite way. Now they should speak and persuade their families, their relatives and their talmidim to go out and vote, because this is spiritual pikuach nefesh,” he said.

Rav Yosef also invoked the memory of his father, Rav Ovadia Yosef, the founder and longtime spiritual leader of Shas, saying that the responsibility to strengthen Torah observance and communal life remained central to his father’s legacy.

“Maran is above in Shomayim, beneath the wings of the Shechinah, enjoying the radiance of the Shechinah. Maran sees from Shomayim what we are doing. In Maseches Brachos it says that the dead know what happens among the living, so he sees everything happening here,” Rav Yosef said.

He continued by expressing his belief that his father would recognize and bless those working on behalf of the Torah community.

The most pointed portion of the address was directed at Ben-Gvir, whom Rav Yosef criticized both for his visits to Har Habayis and for his handling of the police amid the recent arrests of yeshiva bochurim.

“It is forbidden to vote for him. Whoever votes for him is considered as though he himself ascended Har Habayis. A person’s agent is considered like himself,” Rav Yosef declared.

He then turned to the conduct of police officers during confrontations with chareidim, questioning why Ben-Gvir had not intervened more forcefully.

“And that’s not all. Look at how the police beat chareidim. He is the police minister. Has he said a word? … He is happy that this will make people angry at our representatives and that he will rise. And another thing: Has he established a single Talmud Torah? A mikvah? A shul? The bochurim, particularly Sephardic bochurim who are thinking of voting for him, what is even the hava amina?” he said.

The criticism follows several earlier statements by Rav Yosef concerning Ben-Gvir’s visits to Har Habayis. On October 18, the Rishon Letzion issued a written halachic ruling prohibiting support for political parties whose representatives ascend Har Habayis and encourage others to do so.

In that letter, Rav Yosef warned that such conduct carries severe halachic consequences and maintained that supporting politicians who promote it raises serious religious concerns.

The dispute has also centered on the ongoing arrests of yeshiva bochurim classified by the military as draft avoiders.

Earlier this month, Rav Yosef publicly accused Ben-Gvir of bearing responsibility for the arrests, rejecting the minister’s attempts to place blame on Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara.

At a separate gathering in the Ramot neighborhood of Yerushalayim on October 7, Rav Yosef alleged that Ben-Gvir was allowing tensions surrounding the arrests to intensify because the resulting anger toward Shas could benefit his own party politically.

Those allegations have not been independently established, and responsibility for military conscription enforcement involves several government and security authorities.

Rav Yosef concluded his latest address by emphasizing that his political involvement was motivated, he said, by a desire to preserve his father’s religious legacy rather than by personal financial or institutional considerations.

“We do everything l’shem Shomayim. I have received nothing since Shas was established. For 42 years, I have not received a single penny, nothing, neither I nor the yeshiva. So should I be bitter? No! I am not bitter!” he said.

He explained that he regarded his efforts as part of the responsibility to continue Rav Ovadia Yosef’s work of strengthening Torah observance among the wider Jewish public.

“Because we do everything l’shem Shomayim. We don’t vote in order to receive some salary or position. I do everything l’shem Shomayim, to continue Maran’s legacy. That is Maran’s legacy, to bring merit to the masses, not to be like Noach, concerned only for himself, a tzaddik in a fur coat. One must be a tzaddik who brings merit to the masses,” Rav Yosef declared.

{Matzav.com}

A deadly shooting aboard a Manhattan subway train has renewed demands for New York City to restrict face coverings on public transportation, with transit-safety advocates arguing that criminals are exploiting masks and other disguises to conceal their identities while committing violent offenses.

The latest calls follow a fatal shooting in Midtown Manhattan that has intensified concerns about passenger safety and the ability of police to identify suspects captured by subway surveillance cameras.

Supporters of tougher restrictions say that individuals who deliberately conceal their faces while committing crimes create additional obstacles for investigators, particularly in a transit system that relies heavily on video footage to identify and track suspects.

The debate has revived a controversial proposal that would prohibit certain face coverings on subway trains and at transit stations while allowing exceptions for medical, religious and other legitimate purposes.

New York’s subway system has long struggled with concerns about violent crime, even as police and transit officials have pointed to periods of declining overall crime statistics.

High-profile assaults, shootings and other attacks have continued to generate anxiety among riders, particularly when incidents occur aboard crowded trains or in heavily traveled Manhattan stations.

The latest shooting has prompted advocates to argue that existing surveillance systems and increased police patrols are insufficient if suspects can easily obscure their faces.

The shooting occurred shortly after 12:20 p.m. on Saturday, October 17, at the Seventh Avenue subway station near West 53rd Street in Midtown Manhattan.

Police identified the victim as Darrel Rodriguez, 26, of the Bronx. Investigators said Rodriguez had been involved in an argument with another man on the northbound E train platform when the confrontation turned deadly.

Rodriguez was shot in the chest and rushed to Bellevue Hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

The gunman fled the station, setting off a manhunt. Police released surveillance photographs of a person wanted in connection with the killing, describing him as wearing a red tracksuit, black vest, backpack and black face covering.

As of the latest reports reviewed, authorities had not announced an arrest.

The suspect’s concealed face became a central issue for Passengers United, a transit advocacy organization whose members gathered outside the station the following day to demand stronger safety measures.

Charlton D’Souza, the organization’s founder and president, proposed requiring riders to briefly uncover their faces when entering stations and while waiting on platforms.

“If they are entering the station at the point of sale with the OMNY, they should have to pull down their mask, and at the platform they should have to do the same,” D’Souza said.

He argued that the concern involves face coverings intended to conceal a person’s identity, rather than ordinary protective masks worn for health reasons.

The proposal would create a new security requirement at subway entrances, where millions of passengers pass through turnstiles using OMNY fare-payment systems.

Supporters contend that requiring passengers to reveal their faces at entry points would allow surveillance cameras to capture clearer images that could assist police if a crime occurs later.

However, the proposal has not been adopted by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, and transit officials have not announced plans to impose a general mask ban.

New York law already makes wearing a mask while committing certain serious offenses a separate misdemeanor, but that provision does not establish a blanket prohibition on face coverings throughout the transit system.

The shooting also prompted the NYPD to increase patrols in Midtown subway stations, including the Seventh Avenue station where Rodriguez was killed.

MTA Chief Security Officer Michael Kemper said the agency was cooperating with investigators and examining footage from station and train-car surveillance cameras.

“Guns have no place in transit which is why we’ve strongly supported New York State’s legal fight to make sure it’s illegal to carry them in the subway system,” Kemper said.

“It is fortunate nobody outside the fight was hurt.”

The MTA has also supported state efforts to prohibit concealed firearms in subway stations, train cars and buses.

The latest killing comes despite an increase in gun arrests within the transit system.

According to NYPD figures reported this week, six people have been killed in the subway system so far this year, compared with four during the corresponding period last year.

Overall subway crime has increased slightly, although police officials maintain that the system remains among the safest it has been in the past 15 years, excluding the pandemic period.

The incident has also entered New York’s gubernatorial campaign.

Republican candidate Bruce Blakeman visited the station Monday and criticized Gov. Kathy Hochul over subway safety, accusing her administration of failing to provide sufficient police protection.

Blakeman called for additional officers on subway platforms and improvements to station lighting.

Hochul’s campaign responded by pointing to state funding provided for NYPD overtime patrols throughout the transit system.

The shooting has unsettled commuters who use the station regularly, including passengers traveling between Midtown Manhattan, Queens and JFK Airport.

Witnesses described hearing gunfire and seeing frightened passengers duck for cover.

“I heard the gunshots, so everyone just threw themselves on the floor. We sat for a while and someone said get off the train. We got off and saw the police working on the gentleman that was shot,” witness Paul Sampson told CBS New York.

Investigators have urged anyone who recognizes the suspect or has information about the shooting to contact the NYPD Crime Stoppers hotline at 1-800-577-TIPS.

The suspect’s face covering has complicated the public identification effort and intensified demands for changes to subway security, although officials have not established that a mask restriction would have prevented the killing.

For now, the proposed ban remains an advocacy group’s demand rather than an official MTA policy, as police continue their effort to identify and apprehend the gunman.

{Matzav.com}

Security surrounding former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett has reportedly been increased amid concerns about threats to his life as Israel approaches its November 3 elections, reflecting growing fears over political violence during an increasingly contentious campaign.

According to Israeli media reports, Bennett’s security arrangements have been upgraded to a level comparable to those provided to a sitting defense minister, an unusual degree of protection for a politician who is no longer serving as prime minister.

The heightened precautions reportedly follow threatening messages and concerns about possible attempts to physically attack Bennett, who is seeking a return to national leadership.

Bennett, who served as prime minister from June 2021 until June 2022, has emerged as a prominent challenger to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. His political comeback has placed him at the center of an increasingly heated election campaign.

The reported security upgrade comes against the backdrop of heightened political tensions, with disputes over the Gaza war, Iran, military conscription and the future composition of Israel’s government dominating the campaign.

Israeli security authorities routinely assess threats against senior public officials and adjust protective measures according to intelligence, public exposure and other risk factors.

Bennett’s previous service as prime minister also makes him eligible for certain security arrangements following his departure from office. The latest reports, however, indicate that his protection has been strengthened beyond those ordinary arrangements.

The exact nature of the threats has not been publicly detailed, and it remains unclear whether investigators have identified individuals preparing a specific attack.

The latest reporting provides further details about the danger facing Bennett, including an actual assault during a campaign appearance in Bnei Brak.

During the visit, two glass salt shakers were thrown toward Bennett, striking two members of his staff. One required medical treatment. Police subsequently indicted 26-year-old Bnei Brak resident Eliya Azard on charges of simple assault and conduct liable to disrupt public order.

Israeli media have also reported that the Shin Bet thwarted several plots by foreign operatives to harm Bennett during the past year. The alleged plots were reportedly connected to actions Bennett took against Iran while serving as prime minister. The security service has not publicly disclosed the full details of those operations.

Bennett’s B’Yachad party confirmed that his security detail had been doubled.

The threats have not been limited to Bennett. On Wednesday, Avigdor Liberman’s Yisrael Beytenu party announced that it had submitted another formal complaint to the Knesset sergeant-at-arms after its chairman received a series of explicit death threats.

One message warned Liberman, “Only when you get a bullet in your head will you shut your mouth, you Nazi bastard who hates Judaism.”

Another declared, “To the gallows today.”

The party said the threats required immediate intervention by law enforcement and security officials.

“We must not wait for words to turn into actions,” Yisrael Beytenu said in a statement, demanding “immediate and decisive action” against those responsible.

“No threat will silence Liberman or intimidate us. We will continue to speak the truth and work for Israel’s security and universal conscription,” the party added.

Liberman had already been the subject of a police complaint filed by his party last month after receiving a separate message threatening his execution.

Another opposition politician, Democrats party chairman Yair Golan, has also been targeted by threatening messages and vandalism.

A campaign billboard featuring Golan was defaced with the words “Wanted dead or alive” across his face, along with other threatening graffiti.

Golan’s party previously petitioned the High Court of Justice to require the Shin Bet and government to provide him with state-funded security, citing numerous threats against his life.

The court declined to intervene in the professional security assessment process and asked Golan to withdraw the petition.

President Isaac Herzog has repeatedly warned about the possibility of political violence as the campaign intensifies, telling Israelis that “elections are not a civil war.”

The security concerns come as Bennett has been campaigning in areas traditionally considered Likud strongholds, attempting to attract voters who previously supported Netanyahu.

His appearances have drawn significant attention because of his past political alliance with parties opposed to Netanyahu and his current effort to establish himself as an alternative leader.

{Matzav.com}

Political appointees in President Donald Trump’s administration secretly sought to have a federal cybersecurity agency acquire and hack a voting machine, with the findings to be forwarded to the White House, according to an investigation published Monday by ProPublica.

The unusual request, made several months into Trump’s second term, reportedly alarmed career officials at the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), who feared that the proposed operation could be used for political purposes rather than legitimate election-security research.

According to two former administration officials familiar with the matter, political appointees at the Department of Homeland Security directed CISA to obtain a voting machine, examine its security vulnerabilities and report the results to senior administration officials.

The request included a particularly controversial instruction: CISA personnel were reportedly told not to inform the voting-machine manufacturer if they discovered security flaws, a departure from the agency’s established procedures for identifying and addressing vulnerabilities.

One former official expressed concern that the administration could use the findings to challenge election results.

“My thought was they could keep it in their back pocket to invalidate any [election] results they don’t like,” the former official told ProPublica. “This goes against everything CISA represents.”

The operation was never carried out. According to the investigation, career agency personnel repeatedly informed the political appointees that they could not fulfill the request, and the officials eventually abandoned the effort.

One reason cited by CISA employees was that specialists with the technical expertise necessary to perform such an operation had recently lost their jobs during the federal workforce reductions carried out under Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency.

The report did not establish that President Trump personally ordered the operation or that the officials involved intended to manipulate election results. The concerns about possible political misuse were expressed by agency personnel familiar with the request.

Nevertheless, the disclosure has raised questions about the administration’s approach to federal election security, particularly as the country prepares for the November 3 midterm elections.

CISA was established in 2018, during Trump’s first administration, to strengthen the nation’s defenses against cyberattacks and other threats to critical infrastructure.

Among its responsibilities is assisting state and local election officials in protecting voting systems, identifying cybersecurity weaknesses and responding to potential foreign or domestic interference.

The agency traditionally works with voting-equipment manufacturers to identify vulnerabilities and ensure that security problems are addressed before they can be exploited.

Secretly acquiring a machine for testing would not necessarily be improper if conducted through authorized security procedures. However, the reported instruction to conceal any discovered vulnerabilities from the manufacturer troubled agency personnel because it departed from their usual approach to coordinated security disclosures.

The controversy comes amid sweeping changes to CISA’s staffing, funding and responsibilities during Trump’s second term.

According to ProPublica, more than 1,000 agency employees have been dismissed or have departed since the administration took office, reducing the workforce by approximately one-third.

The administration’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2027 would cut another $700 million from CISA, potentially resulting in approximately 900 additional job losses.

Those reductions have prompted concerns among election officials and cybersecurity specialists about whether the federal government retains sufficient personnel and resources to assist states in protecting their election systems.

Several state election authorities told ProPublica that they received little or no assistance from CISA during critical preparations for the midterms, leaving them to address potential cybersecurity threats largely on their own.

Ryan Macias, an election technology and cybersecurity specialist who previously consulted for CISA, said the agency’s reduced involvement was particularly noticeable during 2025 and the first nine months of 2026.

“There is a difference between deprioritizing and being nonexistent,” Macias said.

Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes was similarly critical of the changes, saying his office had lost access to federal support that had previously helped states identify and respond to cybersecurity threats.

“I don’t pay attention to what the president says. I pay attention to what his administration does,” Fontes said. “And what they’ve done is basically cut us off and left us on our own.”

Some states have responded by purchasing their own cybersecurity monitoring equipment, including systems designed to detect suspicious activity on election-related networks.

However, election officials say that certain federal capabilities, particularly intelligence concerning foreign cyber threats, cannot easily be replaced by individual states.

The investigation also revealed that officials in one large voting jurisdiction had privately discussed contingency plans with voting-machine manufacturers in case federal authorities attempted to seize election equipment or declare existing machines unsuitable for use.

Those discussions were precautionary, and the report did not establish that the federal government had ordered such seizures in connection with the upcoming midterms.

The controversy has also revived longstanding tensions between President Trump and CISA, an agency he established during his first term.

In 2020, CISA publicly defended the integrity of that year’s presidential election and rejected allegations of widespread voting-system manipulation. Trump subsequently dismissed the agency’s director, Christopher Krebs, after Krebs challenged claims about election irregularities.

Since returning to office in January 2025, Trump has continued questioning aspects of the 2020 election while his administration has substantially reduced CISA’s operations.

The agency’s previous election-security activities included conducting simulated cyberattacks against voting systems, helping states identify technical vulnerabilities, coordinating security exercises and sharing classified intelligence about potential threats.

Those programs depended heavily on cooperation between federal officials, state election administrators and private voting-equipment manufacturers.

According to the investigation, that relationship has deteriorated as some state officials have become reluctant to share sensitive information with federal authorities.

One source of tension involved the administration’s publication of previously restricted records related to the 2020 election, including information that state authorities had supplied to CISA with an expectation of confidentiality.

White House spokeswoman Lauren Bis disputed criticism of the administration’s election-security policies.

“President Trump has done more than any other President to ensure we have free and fair elections,” Bis said in a statement to ProPublica.

She also defended the release of election-related records, describing it as a transparency measure rather than a breach of the government’s obligations to state election officials.

The Department of Homeland Security and CISA did not respond to the publication’s requests for interviews or its detailed questions concerning the reported voting-machine operation.

CISA did issue a new election-security plan on September 24, outlining its intended cooperation with state and local authorities ahead of the midterms.

The document emphasized the agency’s continued responsibility to protect critical election infrastructure and strengthen partnerships with state officials.

However, several election administrators questioned whether the initiative had arrived early enough to provide meaningful assistance before November 3.

Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows said the announcement came after states had already completed much of their election preparation.

“For CISA to promise election officials now, at this point in time, that they are going to be a resource for the 2026 election is too little, too late,” Bellows said.

Democratic lawmakers have called for an examination of CISA’s diminished capabilities and questioned why funding approved by Congress for election-security activities has not been fully deployed.

The latest disclosures have intensified the debate over the federal government’s role in election security, with critics warning that staffing reductions and deteriorating relations with state officials could weaken defenses against cyberattacks.

The detention of 42 Chabad yeshiva bochurim at Ben Gurion Airport this week has raised fresh concerns that additional yeshiva students returning to Israel from overseas could face arrest over unresolved military draft status, as Israeli authorities intensify enforcement at the country’s international border crossings.

The incident on Tuesday, October 20, revealed that military police had received advance information about the students’ arrival from New York and had positioned additional officers at the airport to intercept them. The operation was part of a broader enforcement effort targeting individuals classified by the IDF as draft avoiders.

The 42 bochurim were returning from their kevutzah year at 770 Eastern Parkway in Crown Heights, where they had spent the previous year immersed in Torah and Chassidus. Instead of being reunited with their families, they were detained by military police after passing through passport control.

The operation was coordinated in advance, with military authorities preparing transportation to transfer the students to an induction facility for disciplinary proceedings.

According to an IDF statement issued after the arrests, 27 of the 42 students were released after signing commitments before a military judge to enlist. They received suspended prison sentences and were expected to begin the military enlistment process.

Another 13 students initially refused to enlist and were sentenced to military imprisonment, while two others, whose absence from required military service reportedly exceeded 540 days, were transferred directly to military prison.

Subsequent reporting indicated that additional students were released following intervention by Chabad representatives and political officials, although the exact final disposition of all 42 cases was not independently established.

The arrests have drawn attention to a significant legal complication affecting Chabad bochurim who spend extended periods studying abroad.

For years, Chabad students followed an established educational arrangement under which they completed their studies in Israel, traveled to the United States for a year at the Lubavitcher Rebbe’s bais medrash, and subsequently returned to Israel, with military obligations addressed through an arrangement involving the IDF.

However, changes to the legal framework governing yeshiva students’ military deferments have undermined the basis for some of those arrangements.

As a result, bochurim who previously expected to resolve their military status after returning from their year abroad may now discover that they are subject to outstanding enlistment orders.

The situation has created uncertainty for other Israeli yeshiva students studying outside the country, particularly those who have not obtained formal confirmation of their military status.

The enforcement measures at Ben Gurion Airport also appear to extend beyond the Chabad students involved in Tuesday’s incident.

Israeli television reporting has described increased cooperation between military police, the Population and Immigration Authority, and airport personnel to identify individuals with outstanding military service obligations.

Authorities have reportedly strengthened checks at passport-control points and increased the presence of military police at border crossings.

Those measures were introduced following concerns among security officials that individuals wanted for military service violations were traveling internationally without being apprehended.

The IDF has maintained that its enforcement activities are conducted in accordance with Israeli law and apply to all individuals legally required to enlist.

In a statement addressing the Chabad detentions, the military said that individuals passing through Ben Gurion Airport who are subject to military service requirements must fulfill those obligations and may face disciplinary proceedings if they fail to comply.

The military also confirmed that it routinely works with civilian border authorities to enforce the Defense Service Law.

The controversy has prompted criticism from senior political figures, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who described the arrests as unacceptable and argued that coercive enforcement could undermine efforts to encourage chareidi enlistment.

Netanyahu emphasized the importance of preserving the Torah world while distinguishing between full-time yeshiva students and those who are not engaged in learning.

MK Meir Porush, who has previously worked on arrangements concerning the military status of Chabad students, said he was in contact with defense officials in an effort to assist those detained.

Chabad rabbonim also became involved, with the Chabad Rabbinical Court confirming that representatives had been working with the relevant authorities before the students arrived.

The rabbonim said their efforts were focused on ensuring humane treatment for the bochurim and securing their release after their military status was addressed.

The arrests have also become a political controversy ahead of Israel’s November 3 elections.

Shas and United Torah Judaism officials have accused authorities of deliberately escalating enforcement during the election period, although no evidence has been publicly established demonstrating that the timing was politically motivated.

For families with sons currently studying abroad, the incident has highlighted the importance of determining whether outstanding military orders could result in detention upon their return.

The IDF has not announced a blanket policy of arresting all returning yeshiva students, and the Chabad incident does not establish that every bochur studying overseas faces detention. Enforcement depends on an individual’s legal status and any outstanding military obligations.

Nevertheless, the coordinated operation at Ben Gurion Airport, together with the military’s stated intention to continue enforcing conscription requirements at border crossings, indicates that students whose status remains unresolved could encounter similar difficulties.

The immediate question for the yeshiva community is whether Tuesday’s mass detention was an isolated operation involving a known group of students or an indication of further enforcement actions against returning bochurim in the weeks ahead.

{Matzav.com}

Hamas has delivered an alarming warning to Israel through a senior United Nations official, threatening to carry out another large-scale attack resembling the October 7, 2023 massacre, with the terrorist organization declaring that it is prepared to strike inside Israel, in Yehuda and Shomron, and even overseas.

The unusually explicit threat was conveyed by senior Hamas figures in the Gaza Strip during a meeting with Dr. Ramiz Alakbarov, the United Nations’ senior humanitarian coordinator. Hamas leaders reportedly instructed him to deliver their warning directly to Israeli authorities.

Alakbarov subsequently met on Wednesday with Maj. Gen. Yoram Halevi, Israel’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories, and relayed the message.

Israeli officials considered the language sufficiently serious to prepare an urgent intelligence and security briefing, which was distributed to senior political and defense officials in Yerushalayim. According to the report, the warning was viewed as unprecedented in its bluntness.

Hamas leaders reportedly declared that they were prepared to launch another attack on the scale of October 7 wherever operational opportunities presented themselves, whether within Israel’s pre-1967 borders, in Yehuda and Shomron, or against Israeli targets abroad.

The threat comes amid growing military and financial pressure on Hamas, which has been struggling to preserve its authority in Gaza while confronting continued Israeli operations, severe financial difficulties and demands from international mediators that it surrender its weapons.

During their meeting with the UN representative, Hamas officials reportedly identified several developments that they claimed were pushing the organization toward renewed confrontation.

Among them were the expansion of Israeli military operations inside Gaza, adjustments to the so-called “yellow line” separating areas under Israeli military control from other parts of the territory, and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s decision to cancel elections that had been scheduled for November 28.

According to the account of the meeting, Hamas officials argued that these developments were steadily weakening their ability to exercise authority in Gaza and warned that they would not accept the continued erosion of their control.

The warning represents a significant escalation in the organization’s rhetoric, particularly because it explicitly invoked the October 7 massacre, when Hamas-led terrorists invaded southern Israel, murdered approximately 1,200 people and abducted 251 hostages into Gaza.

By threatening another attack of that nature, Hamas was signaling that its ambitions extend beyond maintaining control of Gaza and could include operations against Israeli targets elsewhere.

The reported message did not identify a specific date, location or operational plan for an attack. Israeli officials nevertheless treated the statements seriously because of their direct reference to October 7 and the possibility of attacks outside Gaza.

Israeli security assessments indicate that Hamas is experiencing increasingly severe financial difficulties, complicating its efforts to maintain its armed forces and administrative structure in Gaza.

According to Israeli defense estimates, the organization requires approximately 90 million shekels each month merely to meet its payroll obligations.

Hamas is believed to have approximately 30,000 personnel in Gaza, including members of its military wing, lower-ranking operatives and administrative employees. Each receives an estimated monthly salary of 3,000 shekels.

Maintaining those payments has become a significant challenge as Israeli military operations and other restrictions place additional pressure on the organization’s financial resources.

Israel has recently intensified targeted operations against Hamas commanders and members of the Nukhba force, the elite terrorist units that spearheaded the October 7 attacks.

The continued elimination of Hamas personnel has further complicated the organization’s efforts to rebuild its military capabilities and maintain control over territory and residents in Gaza.

The financial pressure extends beyond Gaza. Earlier this month, the United States Treasury Department announced sanctions targeting a Hamas military operative and a France-based fundraising network accused of using fraudulent charities and cryptocurrency transactions to raise nearly $2 million for the terrorist organization.

American authorities said the operation formed part of broader efforts to dismantle Hamas’s international financial infrastructure and prevent funds from reaching its military apparatus.

At the diplomatic level, Hamas faces mounting demands from the Board of Peace and countries involved in mediating arrangements for Gaza to surrender its weapons.

Israeli officials believe Hamas has no intention of voluntarily disarming and will instead attempt to prolong negotiations through procedural delays and other maneuvers.

The dispute over disarmament has become a central obstacle to implementing proposed arrangements for Gaza’s future administration.

Israel has so far refused to authorize the entry into Gaza of a proposed Palestinian technocratic committee that would assume administrative responsibilities in the territory. It has also withheld permission for a Palestinian policing force to deploy there.

These disagreements have left the future governing structure of Gaza unresolved, while Hamas continues attempting to preserve its remaining military and political influence.

The Palestinian Authority’s cancellation of the November 28 elections has added another source of friction. Hamas officials reportedly view the decision as another development undermining their political position and limiting their ability to influence Palestinian governance.

Against this backdrop, the organization’s warning to Israel appears to be an attempt to exert pressure on Israeli decision-makers and international mediators as its military, financial and political difficulties deepen.

The fact that Hamas chose to communicate the threat through a senior UN representative, rather than through a public statement alone, has added to its significance in the eyes of Israeli security officials.

The message was delivered directly to Israel’s military liaison responsible for coordination with the Palestinian territories and subsequently circulated among senior officials responsible for national security.

There has been no public confirmation that Hamas possesses the operational capability to carry out another attack on the scale of October 7. Nevertheless, the explicit threat to strike inside Israel, in Yehuda and Shomron, and overseas has raised renewed concerns about the organization’s intentions.

{Matzav.com}

New York City’s iconic horse-drawn carriages are facing extinction after more than 150 years, as Mayor Zohran Mamdani and City Council leaders move forward with legislation that would permanently eliminate the popular Central Park attraction by June 2028, following a fatal accident that claimed the life of an 18-year-old tourist earlier this year.

The proposal, scheduled for a City Council vote today, would bring an end to one of Manhattan’s oldest tourist traditions, potentially putting more than 150 carriage drivers out of work and forcing the retirement or relocation of the horses that have transported generations of visitors through Central Park.

The legislation, known as Romanch’s Law, is named in memory of Romanch Mahajan, an 18-year-old tourist from India who was killed in June when the horse pulling his family’s carriage suddenly bolted, causing the carriage to overturn.

Mahajan was visiting New York with his family when the accident occurred on June 17. According to authorities, the carriage driver had stepped away to take a photograph of the passengers when the horse unexpectedly took off.

The runaway horse raced through the park, and the carriage struck another vehicle before overturning. Mahajan suffered fatal injuries, while other family members escaped without serious injuries.

His death, believed to be the first human fatality involving a Central Park horse-drawn carriage in the industry’s history, reignited a longstanding campaign by animal welfare organizations and public safety advocates to outlaw the rides.

Mayor Mamdani announced his support for the ban last week, declaring that the city was preparing to bring the industry to an end.

“The horse carriage industry is coming to an end in New York City,” Mamdani wrote on social media. “Our administration will make sure workers and owners are protected and the horses are safe.”

City Council Speaker Julie Menin has also endorsed the legislation, which has attracted support from a majority of Council members.

Under the proposal, existing carriage licenses would expire on May 31, 2028, and the city would stop issuing new licenses beginning June 1 of that year.

The legislation would also prohibit the sale or transfer of carriage horses for slaughter or other inhumane purposes, requiring owners to make arrangements for the animals’ retirement or placement in suitable facilities.

The Mamdani administration would be required to develop a transition plan by April 1, 2027, outlining how the city intends to assist carriage drivers, stable workers and business owners who stand to lose their livelihoods.

That plan would include employment assistance, potential retraining opportunities and consideration of compensation for carriage owners whose businesses and licenses would become worthless under the ban.

The legislation has triggered fierce opposition from carriage drivers, many of whom have spent decades working in Central Park and invested substantial sums in licenses, horses, equipment and stables.

There are currently 68 carriage licenses in New York City, some of which have been passed down through generations and carry values reaching hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Industry representatives argue that eliminating the entire business because of a single fatal accident is an excessive response that unfairly punishes workers who have complied with city regulations.

The Transport Workers Union, which represents carriage drivers, has warned that the proposal could devastate families who depend on the industry for their income.

Drivers have also questioned whether the city’s promises of employment assistance and possible compensation will provide meaningful protection against the financial losses they face.

Some workers say their livelihoods are inseparable from the horses they own and care for, making the prospect of losing their businesses particularly painful.

At a protest outside Central Park last week, carriage drivers called on Mamdani and Council members to reconsider the legislation, accusing city officials of failing to adequately account for the economic consequences.

One driver questioned how Mamdani, who previously supported New York City taxi drivers during their battle over declining medallion values, could now endorse legislation that could similarly destroy the value of carriage licenses.

“How can you fight for one group of medallion owners while allowing another group to face financial devastation?” the driver asked.

The union has indicated that it intends to challenge the ban in court if the legislation is enacted.

Supporters of the prohibition maintain that the industry’s longstanding presence in Central Park does not justify continuing a practice they consider dangerous to both animals and people.

They point to several incidents involving carriage horses in recent years, including horses collapsing on city streets, runaway carriages and accidents involving pedestrians or passengers.

In June, just days before Mahajan’s death, a carriage horse named Deniz collapsed and died in Central Park, further intensifying criticism of the industry.

Animal welfare organizations have argued that horses should not be required to work amid Manhattan’s traffic, noise and crowded streets, where sudden disturbances can cause them to panic.

The Central Park Conservancy, which oversees the park, has also endorsed eliminating horse-drawn carriages, citing concerns about the growing number of pedestrians, cyclists, runners and other users sharing the park’s roads.

Conservancy officials contend that Central Park has changed dramatically since the carriage industry first emerged in the nineteenth century, making the continued operation of horse-drawn vehicles increasingly difficult to accommodate safely.

Mahajan’s family has become among the most prominent supporters of the proposed ban.

His father, Deepak Mahajan, addressed City Council members during a hearing earlier this year, describing the devastating impact of losing his son during what was supposed to be a family vacation.

“The pain does not go away,” he told lawmakers. “Every morning we wake up and think of nothing but the loss of our son.”

The family has also filed a $50 million claim against New York City in connection with the fatal accident.

Previous efforts to outlaw Central Park’s carriage industry have repeatedly failed, despite support from animal welfare groups and some elected officials.

Former Mayor Bill de Blasio promised to eliminate horse-drawn carriages during his administration but ultimately abandoned the effort amid opposition from labor unions, carriage operators and political leaders.

The latest proposal, however, appears to have significantly stronger political backing, with Mamdani and Menin united behind the legislation.

If approved, the ban would mark one of the most consequential changes to Central Park’s tourist landscape in generations, ending a tradition that dates to the 1850s and has become closely associated with New York City’s identity.

For the carriage drivers, the immediate concern is what happens to their families, businesses and horses once the final licenses expire.

For Mahajan’s family and supporters of the ban, the legislation represents an effort to prevent another fatal accident in a park visited by millions of people every year.

The City Council’s scheduled vote will determine whether the famous sight of horses pulling carriages through Central Park is about to become part of New York City’s history.

{Matzav.com}