Feed aggregator

The Israeli political system was thrown into heightened uncertainty Monday after Degel HaTorah announced that it no longer has confidence in Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, a move widely viewed as the strongest warning yet from the chareidi parties regarding the future of the coalition government.

Although the party has not yet formally decided to leave the government, its willingness to support dissolving the Knesset has accelerated internal political discussions about the possibility of early elections in the coming months.

Officials within the Likud are currently trying to contain the crisis. Sources familiar with ongoing negotiations said Netanyahu still prefers to keep the government intact through the end of its term, but acknowledged that serious conversations are already taking place regarding possible election scenarios later this year.

According to assessments within the party, the ongoing dispute surrounding the draft law is not expected to disappear and will likely continue shadowing the coalition until a final political breaking point is reached.

Attention has now turned to Shas chairman Aryeh Deri, who is increasingly being viewed as the key figure determining whether the government survives.

As long as Shas does not join Degel HaTorah in backing legislation to dissolve the Knesset, coalition leaders believe the government still has a path to survival.

Likud officials reportedly believe Netanyahu will spend the coming days attempting to prevent Deri from aligning fully with the Litvish leadership, including through renewed commitments related to the draft law.

Several possible election dates are now reportedly being discussed behind the scenes, including early September, mid-September, and late October.

Within Shas, officials reportedly favor elections during the month of Elul, believing voter turnout among chareidi and traditional voters would likely be higher during that period.

By contrast, Likud and Religious Zionism officials are said to be concerned about a campaign colliding with the Tishrei holiday season, which could create logistical and legal complications involving vote counting and election appeals.

Finance Minister Betzalel Smotrich’s political standing is also playing a role in discussions over timing.

Officials in Smotrich’s Religious Zionism party reportedly prefer postponing elections for as long as possible as polls continue placing the party near the electoral threshold.

Coalition officials said that from Smotrich’s perspective, every additional month before elections could carry major political significance.

Alongside the political calculations, officials also believe Netanyahu would prefer heading into elections only after a major military or diplomatic development, should one occur in the coming months.

For that reason, sources close to the prime minister are currently rejecting suggestions that the government’s collapse is imminent, even as tensions between the coalition and the chareidi parties have become more open and public than ever before.

New classified intelligence assessments presented to senior American officials reportedly show that Iran has restored access to most of its missile infrastructure and underground military facilities, contradicting repeated public claims by the Trump administration that Tehran’s military had been largely destroyed during the war.

According to the assessments, one of the most alarming developments for U.S. officials is Iran’s restoration of operational access to 30 of the 33 missile sites positioned along the Strait of Hormuz — a key strategic waterway through which a significant portion of the world’s oil supply passes.

Sources familiar with the intelligence said the reports indicate that, despite varying levels of damage to the sites, Iranian forces are once again able to move missiles using mobile launchers stationed inside the facilities. In certain cases, missiles can reportedly be launched directly from launchpads located within the sites themselves.

Only three missile facilities along the Strait of Hormuz are still considered completely inaccessible, according to the intelligence findings.

The assessments further conclude that Iran continues to possess approximately 70 percent of its mobile missile launchers nationwide and retains roughly 70 percent of the missile stockpile it had before the war began.

That arsenal reportedly includes both ballistic missiles capable of striking countries across the region and a smaller number of cruise missiles designed for shorter-range attacks against land and maritime targets.

U.S. military intelligence agencies also reportedly determined — based on satellite imagery and other surveillance methods — that Iran has regained access to approximately 90 percent of its underground missile storage and launch sites throughout the country.

Those facilities are now believed to be either partially or fully operational, according to officials familiar with the assessments.

The findings stand in sharp contrast to repeated statements by President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, both of whom publicly described Iran’s military as crippled and no longer a meaningful threat.

On March 9, roughly 10 days after the war began, Trump told CBS News that Iran’s “missiles are down to a scatter” and that the country had “nothing left in a military sense.”

Later, during an April 8 Pentagon press conference, Hegseth declared that Operation Epic Fury — the joint U.S.-Israeli campaign launched on Feb. 28 — had “decimated Iran’s military and rendered it combat-ineffective for years to come.”

However, officials noted that the new intelligence describing Iran’s remaining military strength was compiled less than a month after those public remarks.

When asked about the intelligence assessments, White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales reiterated the administration’s position that Iran’s military had been severely damaged.

She said Iran’s leadership understands that its “current reality is not sustainable” and argued that anyone who “thinks Iran has reconstituted its military is either delusional or a mouthpiece” for Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.

Wales also pointed to Trump’s recent social media post accusing critics of “virtual treason” for suggesting Iran’s military remained capable.

Acting Pentagon press secretary Joel Valdez also dismissed the intelligence-based criticism and accused media organizations of minimizing the military operation’s achievements.

“It is so disgraceful that The New York Times and others are acting as public relations agents for the Iranian regime in order to paint Operation Epic Fury as anything other than a historic accomplishment,” Valdez said.

The new intelligence assessments suggest that Trump and senior military advisers may have significantly overestimated the extent of damage inflicted on Iran’s missile infrastructure while underestimating Tehran’s ability to rebuild and recover.

Last month, The New York Times reported that American officials believed Iran could ultimately restore as much as 70 percent of its prewar missile arsenal. The Washington Post later reported intelligence estimates showing Iran still possessed about 75 percent of its mobile missile launchers and roughly 70 percent of its missile stockpile.

The intelligence findings also highlight the difficult strategic position facing the United States if the fragile ceasefire collapses and large-scale fighting resumes.

The U.S. military has already expended major portions of several key weapons stockpiles during the conflict, including Tomahawk cruise missiles, Patriot interceptor missiles, Precision Strike missiles, and ATACMS ground-launched missiles.

At the same time, the assessments indicate that Iran still retains substantial military capability, particularly around the Strait of Hormuz.

Roughly one-fifth of the world’s daily oil supply passes through the narrow waterway, where the U.S. Navy now maintains an almost constant military presence. U.S. Central Command said Sunday that more than 20 American warships are currently enforcing the blockade against Iran.

Should Trump order renewed military strikes aimed at eliminating Iran’s remaining capabilities, the Pentagon would likely need to further deplete already strained weapons reserves.

Officials warned that such a move could deepen concerns about American preparedness at a time when the Pentagon and major defense contractors are already struggling to replenish munitions stockpiles.

Trump and senior administration officials have repeatedly rejected suggestions that U.S. weapons inventories are approaching dangerously low levels.

Behind closed doors, Pentagon officials have reportedly offered similar reassurances to European allies, many of whom purchased large quantities of American-made munitions on behalf of Ukraine and fear future deliveries could be delayed if the U.S. military prioritizes replenishing its own reserves.

Those concerns would likely intensify if hostilities with Iran resume.

Speaking Tuesday before a House appropriations subcommittee, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine defended the Pentagon’s readiness.

“We have sufficient munitions for what we’re tasked to do right now,” Caine testified.

The joint U.S.-Israeli campaign nevertheless inflicted major damage on Iran’s military infrastructure and strategic facilities, while also killing several senior Iranian officials and placing enormous pressure on the country’s economy.

Even so, analysts say Iran’s continued ability to maintain meaningful military capabilities has increased concerns among U.S. allies regarding the long-term effectiveness of the war and fueled criticism from anti-interventionist supporters of Trump who opposed entering the conflict.

The intelligence assessments also reveal details about tactical decisions made during the military campaign.

According to officials, because of limited supplies of bunker-busting weapons, American commanders often chose to seal entrances to hardened Iranian missile facilities rather than attempt to completely destroy the underground complexes themselves.

Some bunker-buster munitions were used against Iranian underground sites, but military planners reportedly sought to conserve portions of the arsenal for possible future conflicts involving China or North Korea.

The report also underscored the extraordinary scale of the American military effort.

According to previous reporting by The New York Times, the United States used approximately 1,100 long-range stealth cruise missiles during the war — nearly exhausting the remaining stockpile.

American forces also launched more than 1,000 Tomahawk missiles, roughly ten times the amount the Pentagon purchases annually, along with more than 1,300 Patriot interceptor missiles, representing more than two years of production at current manufacturing rates.

Defense industry officials reportedly warned that replenishing those weapons stockpiles could take years rather than months.

Lockheed Martin currently manufactures about 650 Patriot interceptors annually and has announced plans to increase production to 2,000 per year, though officials cautioned that rapidly expanding rocket motor production remains extremely difficult.

Sean Parnell, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, insisted the military remains fully prepared for ongoing operations.

“We have executed multiple successful operations across combatant commands while ensuring the U.S. military possesses a deep arsenal of capabilities to protect our people and our interests,” Parnell said in a statement.

Israeli officials are increasingly concerned that President Donald Trump could agree to a deal with Iran before addressing several of the central issues that led to the outbreak of war between the two countries, according to Israeli sources cited by CNN.

The concerns center on the possibility of a limited agreement that would leave significant portions of Iran’s military and nuclear capabilities intact while easing economic pressure on Tehran.

Israeli officials reportedly fear that any agreement failing to fully dismantle Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, ballistic missile program, and regional proxy network would leave the conflict unresolved from Israel’s perspective.

“The main concern is that Trump will get tired of the talks and sign a deal — any deal with last-minute concessions,” one Israeli source said.

Although American officials have reportedly reassured Israel that Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium will be addressed in negotiations, the source said excluding Iran’s ballistic missile arsenal and proxy operations from the talks “is a big issue.”

During the war, Iran launched more than 1,000 ballistic missiles and large waves of drones at Israel and several Gulf Arab states.

Israeli officials also warned that a partial agreement that eases sanctions while leaving core Iranian capabilities untouched could stabilize the Iranian regime and inject large amounts of money into its economy.

The concerns highlight what officials described as a growing gap between Trump and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. While Trump reportedly appears willing to restart military operations if necessary, Netanyahu fears the war could end without achieving its original objectives.

A White House spokeswoman insisted that Iran understands its current situation is unsustainable and emphasized Trump’s leverage in the negotiations.

“Iran knows full well that its current reality is not sustainable,” White House spokeswoman Olivia Wiles said, adding that Trump “holds all the cards” in the talks.

“Their ballistic missiles are destroyed, their production facilities dismantled, their navy is sinking, and their proxies are weakened,” Wiles said in a statement to CNN. “Now, they are being economically strangled by Operation Economic Rage and losing $500 million a day thanks to the successful United States military blockade of Iran’s ports.”

At the beginning of the war, Trump indicated that the United States sought to eliminate Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities, cut off support for regional proxy groups, and shut down Iran’s nuclear facilities permanently to prevent Tehran from ever building a nuclear weapon.

But more than two months later, negotiations have reportedly narrowed primarily to uranium enrichment — particularly weapons-grade enrichment — and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.

A source involved in the talks said Israel understands that the missile and proxy issues are “probably not on the table” because they were absent from early diplomatic drafts. As a result, Netanyahu has reportedly focused primarily on Iran’s uranium program as the most immediate threat.

Another Israeli source told CNN that Netanyahu has relied heavily on his direct communication with Trump because he does not fully trust Trump envoy Steve Witkoff or the president’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, both of whom have reportedly played central roles in negotiations with Iran.

According to the report, Netanyahu has also relied on intelligence gathered from Pakistan, Qatar, and Iran while shaping his approach to a possible agreement.

“There is real concern that Trump will reach a bad deal. Israel is trying to influence it as much as possible,” another Israeli official told CNN.

At the same time, the report said Netanyahu has been careful not to pressure Trump too aggressively out of concern that he could be blamed for pushing the president back into war.

One senior Israeli official told CNN that Israel remains on high alert in case negotiations collapse.

“We are with our hand on the pulse. We will be happy if there is no deal, we will be happy if the blockade on Hormuz continues, and we will be happy if Iran receives a few more strikes,” the official said, while acknowledging that the final decision ultimately rests with Trump.

The official added that escalation remains a realistic possibility “if the Iranians continue to play games and drag out the negotiations.”

Another source involved in the discussions said the United States and Israel have continued coordinating potential military contingency plans involving Iran if diplomacy fails.

According to the report, those plans include possible strikes on Iranian energy facilities and infrastructure, as well as targeted assassinations of senior Iranian leadership figures.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump offered surprisingly positive remarks about New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani during a conservative radio interview Tuesday, even as he cautioned the mayor against pursuing tax policies that could push wealthy residents and major businesses out of the city.

Trump’s comments came during a call-in appearance on Sid Rosenberg’s radio program after the host criticized the condition of New York City and raised concerns about antisemitism, public safety, and economic issues under Mamdani and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul.

Rosenberg asked the president about claims involving antisemitism and broader concerns about the city’s direction under Democratic leadership.

“I never knew whether or not that was real or not real — maybe it’s political,” Trump responded. “I don’t understand that political rhetoric. If anything it’s not good politics, frankly.”

The president also spoke warmly about Mamdani personally.

“I really like him. He’s a nice guy,” Trump said.

The remarks drew attention because Rosenberg recently faced criticism after posting a social media message in which he referred to Mamdani as an “America-hating, Jew-hating, Radical Islam cockroach.”

Trump’s softer tone also contrasted sharply with comments he made only weeks earlier criticizing Mamdani’s economic proposals, particularly a proposed pied-à-terre tax targeting expensive second homes in New York City.

At the time, Trump blasted the idea in a Truth Social post.

“The TAX, TAX, TAX policies are SO WRONG,” Trump wrote. “People are fleeing… THIS ‘STUFF’ JUST DOESN’T WORK.”

Although Trump praised Mamdani personally during Tuesday’s interview, he warned that policies aimed at high-income residents and investors could seriously damage the city’s future.

“Once they leave, they’re gone — and you won’t have a city left. You won’t have a state left,” Trump said.

The president specifically addressed Mamdani’s recent public dispute with Citadel CEO Ken Griffin. Griffin had suggested he could move jobs to Miami after Mamdani filmed a video promoting the tax proposal outside Griffin’s $238 million penthouse residence.

Trump argued that New York could not afford to lose influential business leaders like Griffin.

Losing people such as Griffin, Trump said, “would be a big loss for New York” and “not recoverable.”

The controversy expanded after Citadel Chief Operating Officer Gerald Beeson indicated the company could reconsider plans for a massive $6 billion office tower project in Midtown Manhattan following Mamdani’s public criticism.

Trump seized on that threat during the interview and said city leaders should work to retain major employers and investors rather than alienate them.

“You’ve got to do the opposite — you’ve got to cherish them, … bring them to the office, … have dinner with them,” the president said. “You have to convince them not to leave.”

The exchange highlighted the unusual relationship that has developed between Trump and Mamdani despite their major ideological differences.

Since Mamdani’s election victory in November, the Democratic socialist mayor and the Republican president have reportedly held two friendly meetings at the White House, a dynamic that has frustrated some Trump allies, including Rosenberg, who have encouraged the president to adopt a tougher stance.

Mamdani, for his part, has also largely avoided personal attacks against Trump in public remarks.

“The president and I disagree on many things,” Mamdani told POLITICO in an interview last month. “We do, however, agree on one thing, which is a love for New York City.”

{Matzav.com}

Spain’s foreign minister said his country will not back away from its commitment to international law despite escalating pressure from Washington over Madrid’s refusal to allow American forces to use Spanish military bases during the war with Iran.

In remarks to POLITICO, Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares defended his government’s decision and insisted Spain would continue acting according to its principles, even as tensions with the United States intensify.

“We were one of the very few countries that sent troops to help the United States to become a nation and to get independence,” Albares said. “We want the relationship [with the U.S.] to move forward in the same way, but we won’t renounce our principles.”

Speaking from Viana Palace, the official residence of Spain’s foreign minister, Albares emphasized that protecting Spain’s national interests and values remains his government’s top priority.

“We stick to our values and we defend the interests of our citizens. That’s the only thing that really guides me,” he said.

Relations between Madrid and Washington have become increasingly strained after Spain blocked the use of American-operated bases at Morón and Rota for military operations tied to the Iran conflict. In response, the United States reportedly threatened economic retaliation, reductions in troop deployments, and even possible moves affecting Spain’s NATO status.

President Donald Trump criticized Spain’s position earlier this year, saying the country “has been terrible” for refusing to cooperate with American military operations involving Iran.

Trump also said “we don’t want anything to do with Spain” after Madrid denied the use of the two bases.

Albares argued that Spain’s position is rooted in the legal framework governing the bilateral military agreement between the two countries.

“The use of those bases comes from an agreement, a treaty between both countries,” Albares said. “And it’s very clearly stated very early in the treaty that it must be in compliance with international law and the United Nations Charter.”

The Spanish foreign minister also criticized the Iran war itself, describing it as an operation launched without consultation among NATO allies.

“This is a unilateral war,” Albares went on. “None of the [NATO] allies were consulted or informed. We don’t know what’s going on. Neither Spain nor any other country. Even more reason to act and defend the interests of our citizens.”

White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly responded sharply to Spain’s stance, saying President Trump has repeatedly voiced frustration with NATO allies that benefit from American military protection while refusing to assist U.S. strategic objectives.

“President Trump has made his disappointment with NATO and other allies clear,” Kelly told POLITICO.

“Europe benefits tremendously from the tens of thousands of United States troops stationed in Europe — yet requests to use military bases in order to defend American interests were denied. The President has effectively restored America’s standing on the world stage and strengthened relationships abroad — but he simultaneously will never allow the United States to be treated unfairly and taken advantage of by so-called ‘allies,’” she said.

Kelly also defended the administration’s hardline posture toward Iran.

“The President will not allow the world’s number one state sponsor of terror to have a nuclear weapon with which to threaten the United States and the world,” she added.

Spain, led by Socialist Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, has increasingly separated itself from many European allies on Middle East policy. Sánchez’s government has consistently urged the European Union to take a tougher line against Israel and has openly criticized the joint U.S.-Israeli campaign against Iran.

Albares, however, argued that Spain’s positions are gradually being embraced more broadly across Europe.

“It’s true to say we have been the first to take that approach. On Iran, and on everything that is going on in the Middle East,” he said. “We seem to stand alone, only at first. A few days later, some others start to say the same things. A month later, everyone in Europe says exactly what we say.”

“Why? Because it’s what makes sense to the interest of our citizens, European citizens, not only Spanish citizens, and to our values, European values.”

The foreign minister also said Europe has reached a critical moment and must begin charting a more independent course as instability spreads globally and the alliance with the United States becomes less predictable.

“It’s time for European sovereignty and independence,” Albares said. “It’s existential for us and also for millions of people around the world.”

As part of that vision, Albares called for the European Union to build its own military capability and strengthen collective defense structures independent of Washington.

“We need a military, a common defense capacity,” Albares said, while insisting that such a move would not weaken NATO.

“The United States has been making its army stronger and stronger and no one thinks that that weakens NATO,” he said.

{Matzav.com}

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez sparked renewed speculation about a possible White House campaign after remarks at a Chicago event suggested she is keeping the door open to a future presidential bid, The Hill reports.

Appearing alongside Democratic strategist David Axelrod, the New York congresswoman pushed back against the idea that her goals revolve around climbing the political ladder or securing higher office.

“My ambition is to change the country,” the representative known as AOC told Axelrod. “Presidents come and go … elected officials come and go. But single-payer healthcare is forever.”

Her comments quickly ignited discussion among Democratic strategists and activists about whether Ocasio-Cortez could emerge as a serious contender in the party’s 2028 presidential primary field.

Ocasio-Cortez also dismissed the suggestion that her long-term political goals are centered on obtaining a particular office or title.

People “assume my ambition is a title or a seat,” she said, arguing instead that her “ambition is way bigger than that.”

Democratic strategist Joel Payne said the congresswoman appeared comfortable discussing the possibility of a national campaign and projected confidence during the conversation with Axelrod.

“She spoke with the confidence of someone who understood the power of their voice nationally and the knowledge that she has the option to mount a national campaign should she ever choose to do that,” Payne said. “What is impressive is that she was able to assess her value beyond the office she holds.”

Payne added that while Ocasio-Cortez does not appear eager to make immediate decisions about her future, she would likely begin a presidential campaign with a significant share of Democratic voters already behind her.

“She’s going to walk into a presidential race, if she chooses to, with 20 percent of the base of the Democratic Party feeling good about her,” he said.

Another Democratic strategist agreed, saying Ocasio-Cortez would likely enter the race with advantages many other potential candidates lack.

“You start with ‘who’s more likely to roll into some of these states and have folks ready to go door to door? Who’s lining up to fundraise?’ There’s an excitement around a potential candidacy that most don’t have. And she starts there.”

The growing attention surrounding Ocasio-Cortez comes as Democrats continue struggling to redefine themselves after major losses in the 2024 elections left the party divided over its future direction and leadership.

Some establishment figures within the party have argued that Ocasio-Cortez could be too divisive to win a national election and believe Democrats should instead rally behind a more moderate candidate in 2028.

At the same time, many Democrats increasingly view her as one of the party’s strongest public messengers, especially among younger and frustrated voters dissatisfied with Democratic leadership and the party’s broader messaging.

Her exchange with Axelrod also drew praise from Democrats who viewed her answer as politically skillful and carefully calibrated.

“Probably the best answer anyone’s given to this question in … in a very, very long time,” MS NOW host Jen Psaki wrote on the social platform X.

The progressive group Our Revolution also amplified the clip online, writing: “The future is bright.”

Praise for Ocasio-Cortez’s comments extended beyond social media.

“Regardless of what anyone thinks about her politics, it was one of the best answers anyone has given to what should be an easy question that too many candidates whiff on off the bat,” Democratic strategist Eddie Vale said in an interview.

Vale warned, however, against trying to settle the party’s 2028 nomination battle years in advance, arguing Democrats should allow the process to unfold naturally.

Democrats need “to let go of what they think will make the best candidate, let everyone who wants to run, run, and let the crucible of the campaign trail and voters figure out who rises to the top,” he said.

Although Ocasio-Cortez is not leading early Democratic primary polling, several recent surveys indicate she has become a competitive figure in the developing field.

A poll conducted last month by Echelon Insights found former Vice President Kamala Harris leading likely Democratic voters with 47 percent support. California Gov. Gavin Newsom and former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg each received 37 percent, while Ocasio-Cortez was close behind at 36 percent.

She has also shown strength among younger voters.

A Yale Youth poll released last month found Harris and Newsom virtually tied overall, but among voters between the ages of 18 and 34, Ocasio-Cortez outperformed both candidates. Older voters, particularly those 65 and above, favored Newsom.

Democratic strategist Rodell Mollineau said Ocasio-Cortez would likely enter a presidential race with an established grassroots network and a loyal progressive base already in place.

“She certainly has a lane,” Mollineau said, adding that she’ll inherit some supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) but also has her own following.

Mollineau also pointed to the intense media attention Ocasio-Cortez consistently attracts as a major political advantage.

“She is a media curiosity,” he said.

“The amount of earned media that she is going to get by running is going to triple that of many other candidates,” he added.

[Video below.] FBI Director Kash Patel and Sen. Chris Van Hollen engaged in a fiery confrontation during a Senate hearing after the Maryland Democrat questioned Patel about allegations of excessive drinking, prompting the FBI chief to challenge the senator to take an alcohol screening test alongside him.

Patel said he would agree to undergo the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, known as the AUDIT test, but only if Van Hollen participated as well.

“Side by side,” Patel said during the contentious exchange.

Van Hollen raised the issue by referencing a report published by The Atlantic, which Patel has strongly denied, that alleged the FBI director had drinking-related problems that interfered with his duties.

“When your private actions make it impossible for you to perform your public duties, we have a big problem. You cannot perform those public duties if you’re incapacitated,” Van Hollen told Patel during the hearing.

The senator then escalated his criticism by citing allegations that Patel had allegedly become so intoxicated that aides were forced to enter his residence.

“And Director Patel, these reports about your conduct, including reports of your being so drunk and hungover that your staff had to force entry into your home are extremely alarming. If true, they demonstrate a gross dereliction of your duty and a betrayal of public trust,” Van Hollen continued.

Later in the hearing, Van Hollen asked Patel and other top law enforcement officials how they would handle an employee suspected of drinking excessively while serving in a sensitive role.

“I really don’t care about your personal life, so long as you are able to perform your public and official responsibilities, which are awesome responsibilities. Multiple reports, including reporting by The Atlantic, have alleged episodes of excessive drinking, unexplained absences and behavior that concern current and former FBI and DOJ officials,” Van Hollen said.

Patel, who has filed a defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic over the report, flatly rejected the allegations before turning his criticism toward the senator, accusing Van Hollen of drinking margaritas during a trip to El Salvador to meet Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a deported man who was imprisoned there at the time.

“The only person who was slinging margaritas in El Salvador on the taxpayer dollar with a convicted gang banging rapist was you,” Patel fired back.

Van Hollen immediately rejected the accusation and said Patel’s remarks showed he was misinformed.

“The fact that you mentioned that indicates you don’t know what you are talking about,” the senator responded.

Van Hollen later accused Patel of spreading false claims during sworn testimony.

“In the process, you made these provably false statements that I know are sort of like urban legend in right wing media about margaritas in El Salvador, which is provably false,” Van Hollen said.

“And so coming from the mouth of an FBI director to make provably false statements in a hearing like this is extremely troubling, and it leads me to ask whether or not the other things you’ve been saying are false statements,” he added.

During the closing moments of their exchange, Van Hollen repeatedly pressed Patel on whether he understood that lying to Congress is a criminal offense. Patel responded each time by insisting he had not committed perjury during the hearing.

Van Hollen has previously argued that the margarita controversy was staged by Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele.

Speaking at a press conference after returning from El Salvador in April of last year, Van Hollen said a Salvadoran official “deposited two other glasses on the table.”

The senator said one of the drinks appeared deliberately altered to make it seem as though Abrego Garcia had consumed some of it.

“Let me just be very clear: Neither of us touched the drinks that were in front of us,” he said at the time.

“Nobody drank any margaritas or sugar water or whatever it is. But this is the lesson in the lengths that President Bukele will do to deceive people about what’s going on,” Van Hollen added, noting that the salt lining the rim of the glass had not been disturbed.

Claims by the Trump administration linking Abrego Garcia to gang activity have largely stemmed from information provided by a confidential source. Although Abrego Garcia was returned to the United States to face human trafficking charges, he has not faced sexual assault charges and has not been convicted of any crime, contrary to Patel’s characterization.

Patel also suggested during the hearing that Van Hollen had accumulated a $7,000 bar bill during his travels. He later posted a Federal Election Commission filing from the senator’s campaign showing a catering expense at Lobby Bar totaling that amount.

The alcohol screening test at the center of the dispute had previously been proposed by House Judiciary Democrats, who called on Patel to complete the 10-question assessment.

Van Hollen accepted Patel’s challenge after the FBI director said he would only participate if the senator agreed as well.

“Let’s go,” Patel said. “Side by side.”

Other Democrats on the committee also challenged Patel during the hearing.

Sen. Patty Murray of Washington questioned the FBI director about reports that more than 2,000 FBI personnel had been reassigned to immigration-related work, citing figures attributed to the CATO Institute. She also pressed Patel over reports that the bureau had investigated journalists who reported on him, allegations Patel denied.

Among the reports referenced was an MSNOW story claiming the FBI had looked into Atlantic reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick, who first wrote about Patel. The Atlantic later published another article reporting that Patel had distributed custom bourbon bottles.

“We need serious leadership at the FBI that the American people can trust. And I am deeply concerned about the reports that your leadership has not been serious. We need somebody at this agency who’s focused on solving criminal cases, not passing out branded bourbon, or jetting around the globe. Your job is to be reachable,” Murray said.

“And I know Sen. Van Hollen asked you about this, but I have got to say, if you want to pass out liquor, or pop bottles in a locker room: stick to podcasting. Leave law and order to people who really do care about justice.”

WATCH:

{Matzav.com}

WATCH:

LISTEN:

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

LISTEN:

The office of the former chief rabbi, Rav Yitzchok Yosef, released an unusual public statement following a wave of rumors and false reports circulating online regarding the Rav’s health condition.

In the statement, the Rav’s office clarified that Rav Yosef’s condition is “completely stable” and stressed that there is no cause for concern.

According to the announcement, the Rishon Letzion underwent a brief and simple procedural medical treatment that had been scheduled well in advance and did not involve any significant risk. The statement added that the Rav is expected to return home following the procedure.

Officials in Rav Yosef’s office also criticized the spread of unverified reports on social media, saying that “it is regrettable that irresponsible publications were circulated.”

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump today sharply criticized media coverage of the conflict with Iran, accusing news organizations of undermining the United States by suggesting that Tehran’s military was performing effectively against American forces.

In a post published on Truth Social, Trump blasted what he described as “Fake News” reporting on the war and claimed such coverage was helping Iran.

“When the Fake News says that the Iranian enemy is doing well, Militarily, against us, it’s virtual TREASON in that it is such a false, and even preposterous, statement,” Trump wrote. “They are aiding and abetting the enemy!”

Trump argued that reports portraying Iran as resilient were giving Tehran “false hope” and accused critics of rooting against America.

“These are American cowards that are rooting against our Country,” he wrote.

The president also claimed that Iran’s military infrastructure had been effectively wiped out during the conflict.

“Iran had 159 ships in their Navy — Every single ship is now resting at the bottom of the sea,” Trump stated. “They have no Navy, their Air Force is gone, all Technology is gone, their ‘leaders’ are no longer with us, and the Country is an Economic Disaster.”

Trump concluded the post with another broadside against his detractors, writing: “Only Losers, Ingrates, and Fools are able to make a case against America!”

President Donald Trump has proposed pausing the federal gas tax as a form of relief for American consumers as energy prices soar as a result of the war in Iran.

The move – which requires congressional approval to pass – would mark the latest in a string of government interventions to address fallout from the war, which is weighing on Trump’s popularity.

Since the war began in late February, the price of a barrel of Brent crude oil, an international benchmark, has skyrocketed from about $70 to more than $107. U.S. gas prices – now an average of $4.50 a gallon – have reached levels not seen since 2022 and contributed to Trump’s falling approval ratings ahead of the November midterms.

So is a pause on the federal gas tax likely to happen, and would it make a difference to the price you pay at the pump? Here’s what to know.

1. Why have prices surged?
Energy prices have spiked since the U.S. and Israel launched joint strikes on Iran on Feb. 28, leading Iran to block oil tankers from leaving the Persian Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz.

The critical waterway had previously carried about a fifth of the world’s oil and gas supplies, with the reduced flows causing prices to spike. The U.S. has enforced its own blockade of Iranian ports in retaliation, and the issue remains a key sticking point in negotiations to end the war. This week, Trump said the ceasefire between the two nations is on “life support.”

The U.S., as a major oil producer, is less energy-dependent than many countries, but oil is priced globally. “A disruption anywhere turns into a price increase everywhere,” Samantha Gross, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, told The Washington Post.

2. How is gas taxed, and what is Trump proposing?
Prices at the pump incorporate a mixture of federal and state taxes, meaning they can vary sharply between states. The federal tax is 18.3 cents per gallon on gasoline and 24.3 cents per gallon on diesel fuel, as well as a “leaking underground storage tank” fee of 0.1 cents per gallon on both fuels, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

State taxes vary, with a national average of 32.6 cents on gasoline and 34.8 cents on diesel, according to the EIA. Factors such as the type of taxes added, where the gas comes from and the ingredients in it can also affect prices, which change daily. The Gulf Coast and southeastern states had the lowest prices in 2024, The Post has reported, partially because of their proximity to refineries.

On Monday, Trump proposed suspending the federal tax for an unspecified period, saying prices would “drop like a rock” once the war ended. Also that day, the Energy Department said it would release 53 million barrels of crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The Trump administration had agreed to release a total of 172 million barrels as part of a contribution to the International Energy Agency’s effort to stabilize oil prices, the Energy Department said.

The administration has also lifted restrictions on ships moving fuel between U.S. ports, eased pollution rules regarding ethanol and temporarily waived sanctions on Russian oil. Some states, including Georgia, Utah, Kentucky and Indiana, have moved to suspend or reduce gas taxes in response to rising costs, as have countries such as Canada, Australia and India, according to the IEA.

3. How would it work?
Trump cannot suspend the federal tax on his own; he needs Congress to approve it. The only time that’s happened was in 1934, when Congress cut half a cent off the gas tax when Prohibition ended, The Post reported.

The money from the tax goes into the Highway Trust Fund, which pays for road and public transport improvements. A five-month suspension of federal taxes would reduce revenue by $17 billion, the Bipartisan Policy Center has said, about 46 percent of the annual total.

In 2022, then-President Joe Biden asked Congress to suspend the gas tax for three months as gas shot to $5 a gallon in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The idea was met with skepticism by economists and lawmakers in both parties, with many unconvinced it would help bring prices down for consumers. No action was taken.

4. What has the reaction been?
Though the idea has previously been dismissed by some a gimmick that would create a hole in the transportation budget, this time both Republicans and some Democrats have expressed support.

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Missouri) said he would introduce legislation to suspend the gas tax in a post on social media Monday. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Florida) said she would also introduce a bill in the House to suspend the federal gas tax in light of Trump’s comments. “American families need this relief on gas prices,” she said in a post on X.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he has not “been a fan” of suspending the federal tax in the past but would hear out colleagues in favor of it. “Obviously, any time you suspend the gas tax, that leaves a big hole in the highway trust fund, which also has implications down the road,” he said in comments reported by the Associated Press.

Democratic Sens. Richard Blumenthal and Mark Kelly had previously pushed the idea in March, introducing the Gas Prices Relief Act to temporarily suspend federal taxes through Oct. 1. “Families need help now,” Kelly said Monday in a post on X, adding, “Let’s get it done.”

Rep. Chris Pappas (D-New Hampshire) also called for it to happen quickly. “This should have happened months ago,” he wrote on X. “Let’s pass it this week.”

5. What happens next?
Whether Congress approves the decision remains to be seen, along with how any potential relief would be passed on to consumers.

When the idea was raised by Democratic presidential contenders in 2008 and by Biden in 2022, it was dismissed as a gift to oil companies. Federal taxes on gasoline are levied at the terminal or refinery, or when it’s imported to the United States, rather than at a gas station, according to the Congressional Research Service. This would make it difficult for the government to ensure the savings would be passed onto consumers, it said.

Any potential savings could also be offset by further increases in global oil prices. In the months after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, U.S. gas prices surpassed $5 a gallon.

A reduction in revenue to the Highway Trust Fund could bring its own predicaments. The federal gas tax is a “critical source of revenue for financing federal transportation,” the Bipartisan Policy Center has noted, meaning any interruption to this could leave a hole in the transportation budget that would need to be filled. It already faces declining revenue from inflation and improved fuel efficiency, and Congress has been outspending the fund’s growth.

The Congressional Budget Office predicts the fund will run out of money by 2028.

(c) 2026, The Washington Post · Victoria Craw 

Leo Terrell, chair of the U.S. Justice Department’s task force on Jew-hatred, called on New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani to take action following a protest outside the Young Israel of Midwood in Brooklyn on Monday night that led to four arrests.

Terrell criticized city leadership over what he described as insufficient enforcement following incidents targeting Jewish New Yorkers.

“Let me be clear, I am sick and tired of Jews being harassed in New York City,” Terrell said. “Did you see what happened in Brooklyn? Where is the mayor? Where is the district attorney? Where are the hate crime charges?”

“Jewish Americans are allowed the religious freedoms given by this country,” he said. “Jewish Americans are not being protected in New York City.”

“What happened last night in Brooklyn was outrageous, insulting,” Terrell said. “Mayor, district attorney, do your job. Protect Jewish Americans now.”

The New York Police Department said officers responded to a “scheduled demonstration” outside 1694 Ocean Avenue in the 70th Precinct, where four individuals were taken into custody.

“Jew-haters marched towards a Jewish house of worship, through a heavily Jewish neighborhood, past Jewish homes, Jewish families, Jewish businesses and Jewish communal spaces, chanting for ‘intifada,’ waving a Hezbollah flag and screaming abuse at Jews in the street,” Brooke Goldstein, founder of EndJewHatred, said.

“New York’s leaders, especially Zohran Mamdani, must stop pretending this is normal protest activity,” she said. “Mr. Mayor, you are on notice. The inevitable violence this will lead to falls squarely on your shoulders. You must act to stop this now.”

The protest was organized by PAL-AWDA, the group behind several anti-Israel protests in the city, including one outside Park East Synagogue in Manhattan on May 5. It is set to protest again in Brooklyn on Shabbos, on the corner of 72nd Street and 5th Ave in Bay Ridge, “to dismantle the genocidal Zionist entity.” JNS

A scheduled Howell, NJ Township council meeting Tuesday night was abruptly canceled after such a large crowd packed the municipal building that officials declared the gathering an overcrowding and fire hazard.

The meeting, held at the Howell Township municipal building on the second floor, was expected to include votes on three proposed ordinances that had sparked significant concern among local residents.

The proposed measures would have limited the allowable size of paved driveways on residential properties, restricted the size and scope of detached structures permitted on private property, and prohibited homeowners from converting garages into living space.

Residents across the township expressed concern that the ordinances would negatively affect homeowners – particularly frum residents – and significantly limit how they are able to use and improve their properties.

In recent days, discussions took place between Howell rabbanim and local askanim, after which community members were urged to make a strong effort to attend the council meeting and demonstrate opposition to the proposals.

Several individuals had also been selected in advance to address the council and formally present residents’ concerns regarding the ordinances.

However, before the meeting could proceed, the large turnout overwhelmed the available space inside the building. According to a Matzav.com reporter at the scene, township officials announced that the crowd size created overcrowding conditions and posed a fire safety concern, forcing the meeting to be canceled before any discussion or vote could take place.

As a result, no action was taken tonight on any of the three ordinances.

Residents opposed to the proposals viewed the postponement as an opportunity to continue organizing and lobbying township officials against the measures before the ordinances are brought back for consideration at a future meeting.

{Matzav.com}

A practical and highly relevant financial and halachic question surrounding the cancellation of the hilula of Rashbi in Meron on Lag Ba’Omer this year was discussed on the “HaShtaygenists” program on Israel’s Radio Kol Chai, as disputes continue between passengers, organizers, and transportation companies over refunds for canceled trips.

The issue was raised during the program hosted by Rabbi Roi Moskowitz together with media personality Chevron Gernovitz.

Gernovitz outlined the situation facing many groups that had arranged transportation to Meron weeks in advance before the hilula was ultimately canceled.

“Large groups wanted to travel to Meron. They reserved transportation ahead of time. In the end, the hilula was canceled. A dispute developed between the organizers, the passengers, and the transportation companies,” Gernovitz explained.

Rav Moskowitz responded that the first step in resolving the matter is properly defining the role and status of each party involved.

“We want to understand the definitions — the transportation company, the organizers, and the passengers. Once we define them properly, we can understand why the ruling is what it is,” he said.

According to Rav Moskowitz, when a bus company sells tickets directly to passengers, the arrangement is considered a straightforward commercial transaction.

“If I did not receive what I paid for, then the money must be returned,” he explained.

The Rav stressed that because this year there ultimately was no trip at all, transportation companies are obligated to refund customers.

“This year there was no departure whatsoever. The bus company must return the money,” he said.

However, Rav Moskowitz explained that the situation becomes more complicated when dealing with private or communal organizers who reserved large numbers of buses in advance.

“The organizer is essentially a buyer — he purchases the service and then resells it. Some people reserved dozens of buses,” he noted.

As for disputes between organizers and the transportation companies themselves, Rav Moskowitz clarified that those questions depend entirely on the contractual agreements between the sides.

“If there was a condition that advance payments are forfeited, then they are forfeited,” he explained.

Still, he emphasized that those arrangements do not necessarily determine the obligations between organizers and passengers.

The central distinction, according to Rav Moskowitz, depends on the nature of the trip arrangement itself.

In cases where tickets were sold commercially to the general public, organizers would generally be required to issue refunds.

But when the transportation was organized communally — such as through a chassidus, shul, or local community framework — the Rav indicated that organizers may not be obligated to reimburse participants if they themselves suffered losses.

“In such a case, it would be difficult to extract money from the organizers,” Rav Moskowitz ruled. “They created the opportunity for people to travel… and if they themselves incurred losses, they may not have to return the money to the passengers.”

{Matzav.com}

New York City is pouring unprecedented amounts of money into its public school system, even as student enrollment continues to drop and academic performance remains average compared to other major urban districts, according to budget analysts and education experts, the NY Post reports.

The city’s education budget has reached roughly $43 billion, with per-student spending climbing to about $44,000. Observers warn that costs could climb even higher as Mayor Zohran Mamdani prepares his first budget proposal, raising concerns about long-term sustainability.

Experts say the level of spending is difficult to justify given that student outcomes in math and English remain in the middle range among large city districts.

“Despite the City spending $44,000 per student, too many of its schools are delivering middling results, and some parents are increasingly choosing charters over traditional public schools,” said Andrew Rein, executive director of the Citizens Budget Commission.

“The City should focus its effort and dollars on student learning and shrink spending that’s not delivering results. This includes adjusting school funding when enrollment shrinks and combining schools that have shrunk so much that they are no longer cost-effective to run.”

Efforts to streamline the system could face added challenges due to a new state mandate requiring smaller class sizes, even as enrollment declines, critics noted.

Gov. Kathy Hochul and legislative Democrats are weighing whether to give the city additional time to comply with the requirement, which has been strongly supported by teachers’ unions, as part of ongoing budget negotiations.

“The law is unworkable law. It’s impossible to implement,” said Daniela Souza, an education researcher with the Manhattan Institute.

Over the past decade, the city’s public school system has lost 157,900 students, yet it now operates 39 more schools than it did previously.

Data also show that 249 out of roughly 1,600 schools—about 15%—are operating at less than half capacity.

Enrollment trends reveal that nearly half of all public schools now serve fewer than 400 students, including 134 schools with fewer than 150 students.

Projections indicate the downward trend will continue, according to a report by the City School Construction Authority.

Enrollment in traditional public schools is expected to drop by another 153,000 students by the 2034–35 school year, reaching about 721,251 students.

“The New York City’s Department of Education budget keeps going up while the number of students they’re educating continues to decline,” Souza said.

“School closings and mergers are inevitable.”

Federal data show that New York City spends about 50% more per student than other large urban districts, including Los Angeles and Chicago.

However, results have not kept pace with the investment, based on findings from the 2024 National Assessment of Educational Progress.

Only about one-third of fourth-grade students reached proficiency in math, while 28% were proficient in reading.

Among eighth graders, 23% were proficient in math and 29% in reading.

While declining enrollment is a nationwide issue tied to lower birth rates and immigration patterns, analysts say New York City is also seeing families leave the system in search of alternatives.

Charter schools now educate approximately 150,500 students across 285 campuses—nearly one out of every six public school students in the city.

In many cases, charter school students outperform those in nearby traditional public schools on state math and English exams.

Spending patterns also differ from other cities. In 2023, New York City allocated 61% of its education budget to teacher compensation, compared to 52% in Los Angeles and 43% in Miami, according to analysis cited by The Atlantic.

A breakdown of city education spending shows $35.3 billion allocated to K-12 schools, including $13 billion for salaries, $8.1 billion for pensions, benefits, and debt obligations, $3.5 billion for charter school payments, $3.1 billion for early childhood programs, and $1.5 billion for special education-related legal cases and private tuition.

Transportation costs have risen to $1.9 billion, up from $1.4 billion in 2019, while spending on facilities and maintenance has increased to $1.3 billion from $1 billion.

The city also spends roughly $700 million on contracts, including consulting services.

Special education costs have grown sharply, according to City Comptroller Mark Levine.

Expenses tied to “due process” cases—where families seek private school placements for special education needs—have climbed from $500 million in 2019 to $1.5 billion today.

These cases often involve legal fees and reimbursements to families.

Officials from the Department of Education said the Mamdani administration is aware of the financial pressures but has not yet outlined major structural changes.

“There is no better investment than one in our children,” said DOE spokesperson Nicole Brownstein.

“New York City Public Schools always works to ensure that every student has access to a world-class education while spending every dollar thoughtfully and finding savings where possible, and as Mayor Mamdani works to make our city more affordable for families, we are working in tandem to meet the class size law, cut excess spending, and build a school system that sets every child up for lifelong success.”

“Enrollment trends reflect broader demographic trends, including changes in birth rates and population patterns,” Brownstein went on.

“As our city contends with these national trends, we will continue to look for solutions that deliver a robust and diverse education to all students while making sure every school has room to comply with the class size law — community and family driven school utilization changes are an important part of that work.”

{Matzav.com}

Google revealed Monday that cybercriminals recently deployed a zero-day vulnerability that researchers believe may have been generated with the assistance of artificial intelligence, marking a significant escalation in the use of advanced technology for cyberattacks.

The disclosure comes as leading AI developers, including Anthropic and OpenAI, are actively testing increasingly sophisticated systems capable of identifying and exploiting software weaknesses at a level that rivals—or exceeds—human experts.

Details of the incident were outlined in a report published by Google’s Threat Intelligence Group. Zero-day vulnerabilities are among the most dangerous types of cyber threats because they are unknown to security teams and lack existing fixes at the time they are exploited.

According to the report, this marks the first documented instance in which Google has identified signs that artificial intelligence may have been used to create such a vulnerability.

Investigators said it is unlikely that Anthropic’s Claude Mythos model—known for uncovering thousands of security flaws across major operating systems and web browsers—was responsible for developing the exploit.

The issue has drawn attention within the Trump administration, which is currently holding discussions with industry leaders about possible oversight and safety measures for next-generation AI systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos and OpenAI’s newly introduced GPT-5.5-Cyber model.

Google notified the affected company about the vulnerability before making its findings public, allowing the firm to issue a patch to address the flaw.

John Hultquist, chief analyst at Google Threat Intelligence Group, said the discovery underscores how rapidly AI is being integrated into cyber operations.

“For every zero-day we can trace back to AI, there are probably many more out there,” Hultquist said. “Threat actors are using AI to boost the speed, scale, and sophistication of their attacks.”

Security experts have increasingly observed hackers turning to AI tools to strengthen their capabilities. In November, Anthropic reported that China-linked cyber groups had used AI to fully automate attacks for the first time.

The Google report also describes how Russian-affiliated hacking groups have leveraged AI systems to deploy malware against Ukrainian networks, while a North Korean group known as APT45 has used AI to enhance and expand its cyber operations.

The rapid advancement of high-powered AI models has raised growing concerns that such tools could soon enable cyberattacks on an unprecedented scale. For now, access to these cutting-edge systems remains restricted to a limited group of researchers, companies, and government entities.

“The staged release was actually to create what we call defenders’ advantage, and we believe that window is somewhere in the months timeframe — not years,” said Rob Bair, head of cyber policy at Anthropic, speaking last week at the AI+Expo in Washington.

The Swedish government has decided to stop using the term “Islamophobia,” arguing that the phrase has increasingly been applied in ways that stifle legitimate criticism of Islamist ideology rather than addressing real discrimination against Muslims.

Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard said officials will instead use language such as “anti-Muslim racism” or “anti-Muslim hatred,” emphasizing the need to protect open discussion and freedom of expression.

The policy shift comes after years of contentious debate across Europe on issues including immigration, integration, and the role of Islamist groups. Critics of the term “Islamophobia” contend that it often blurs the line between opposing extremist ideologies and expressing prejudice toward Muslims as individuals.

A 2025 report by the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy, titled “The Muslim Brotherhood’s Strategic Entryism Into the United States: A Systemic Analysis,” argued that the phrase has been “weaponized” by certain Islamist organizations to deflect scrutiny of their political agendas.

“On the one hand, there are people who suffer genuine anti-Muslim hatred, bigotry, and discrimination based on their faith or perceived identity,” the report stated. “This must always be challenged and addressed, as it undermines pluralism and social cohesion.”

“At the same time,” the report continued, “Islamist organizations have deliberately weaponized the term Islamophobia to shut down scrutiny of their ideology and political activities.”

Debate over the issue intensified following a May 2025 report by France’s Interior Ministry, titled “Muslim Brotherhood and Political Islamism in France,” which pointed to what it described as an active presence of the Muslim Brotherhood in Sweden.

According to the French findings, the Swedish branch of the movement, though relatively small, plays a significant role in influencing the Brotherhood’s wider European network. The report linked this influence to financial support from Qatar, Sweden’s multicultural framework, and connections with domestic political actors, particularly the Social Democratic Party.

In response to the report, Swedish authorities launched an investigation in October 2025 into the potential influence of Islamist movements within the country.

Education and Integration Minister Simona Mohamsson warned in an interview with Expressen that “political Islam has gained a foothold” in Sweden.

“We see that political Islam has gained a foothold and is being allowed to take over neighborhoods, schools, welfare, and even risks taking over political parties,” Mohamsson said. “Islamism does not want constitutions but Sharia law. It does not want integration but segregation.”

Sweden has also indicated it will urge international bodies, including the European Union and the United Nations, to reconsider their use of the term “Islamophobia.”

The concept has become increasingly embedded in global institutions in recent years. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation operates an “Islamophobia Observatory,” while the UN General Assembly has established an annual “International Day to Combat Islamophobia,” observed on March 15.

Supporters of Sweden’s new approach argue that distinguishing between hostility toward Muslims and criticism of Islamist ideology is essential to maintaining open dialogue on immigration and integration challenges facing Europe.

The issue carries particular weight in Sweden, which has taken in one of the highest numbers of Muslim migrants per capita in Europe over the past two decades. In recent years, the country has faced rising concerns over gang violence, bombings, social segregation, and the development of parallel communities in major urban areas.

For years, parties such as the Sweden Democrats were often labeled as racist or Islamophobic for raising concerns about immigration and integration policies.

Observers say Sweden’s decision represents a notable shift in the European conversation and could shape broader discussions across the continent on immigration, Islamist movements, and free speech.

{Matzav.com}

New details have emerged surrounding the mysterious sinking of a Russian cargo vessel in the Mediterranean Sea, with investigators now examining claims that the ship may have been transporting two nuclear reactors intended for North Korea when it went down following a series of explosions late in 2024.

According to a CNN report, growing speculation has centered on possible Western involvement in the destruction of the vessel, the Ursa Major, which sank roughly 60 miles off the coast of Spain on Dec. 23, 2024.

Spanish investigators reportedly believe the ship — also referred to as Sparta 3 — may have been struck by an advanced torpedo capable of piercing the hull and sending the vessel to the bottom of the Mediterranean.

Investigators concluded that the damage was consistent with a Barracuda supercavitating torpedo, an uncommon and highly sophisticated weapon believed to be possessed only by the United States, several NATO nations, Russia, and Iran.

Following the sinking, the ship’s Russian captain allegedly informed Spanish authorities that the vessel had been carrying “components for two nuclear reactors similar to those used in submarines,” though he reportedly said he did not know whether the reactors contained nuclear fuel, CNN reported.

The captain, Igor Anisimov, reportedly told investigators he believed the shipment was ultimately destined for the North Korean port city of Rason.

The vessel had departed Russia on Dec. 11, 2024. Despite being licensed to transport radioactive material, the ship’s publicly filed cargo manifest reportedly listed only empty containers, two oversized cranes, and two large “manhole covers,” making no mention of nuclear-related equipment.

The voyage took place shortly after North Korean leader Kim Jong Un agreed to dispatch thousands of troops to assist Russia in regaining control of the Kursk region after Ukraine’s unexpected incursion embarrassed the Kremlin and Vladimir Putin.

For years, analysts have suspected that Russia has been supplying North Korea with military and nuclear expertise in exchange for support, particularly as Kim has openly pursued the development of a nuclear-powered submarine program.

European militaries had reportedly been monitoring the Ursa Major during its journey. The Portuguese navy even sent aircraft to track the ship and accompanying Russian military escort vessels as they traveled through the Mediterranean.

Portuguese officials later said surveillance of the vessel ended on the morning of Dec. 22, after which the cargo ship was observed slowing near the Spanish coast.

Spanish rescue authorities reportedly contacted the ship after noticing its unusual behavior, but the Russian crew allegedly responded that there was no emergency.

Roughly a day later, however, the Ursa Major transmitted a distress signal after three explosions erupted aboard the vessel, apparently near the engine room. Two crew members were reportedly killed in the blasts.

The situation escalated further when one of the Russian escort ships, the Ivan Gren, arrived and instructed nearby vessels to remain at least two nautical miles from the damaged cargo ship. The Russian military vessel also reportedly demanded that Spain immediately hand over the rescued sailors.

CNN reported that footage from the rescue operation showed Spanish crews unable to gain access to the ship’s engine room because it had been completely sealed.

Although the vessel initially appeared stable, it later plunged to the seabed shortly after the Ivan Gren launched several flares into the sky. Investigators reportedly detected four additional explosions resembling underwater mine detonations soon afterward.

Four days after the sinking, the vessel’s owner, Oboronlogistics, declared that the Ursa Major had been the victim of a “targeted terrorist attack,” claiming the ship sustained a 20-inch-by-20-inch breach in its hull.

Further questions arose when the Russian research vessel Yantar arrived above the wreck site approximately one week later. Authorities reportedly detected another four explosions in the area around the seabed after its arrival.

Spanish officials later informed lawmakers that investigating the wreckage would be extremely dangerous because the ship rests at a depth of 8,202 feet and would require major technical resources to examine safely.

The mystery intensified further after records showed the US military twice flew its WC135-R “nuke sniffer” aircraft over the area — once on Aug. 28, 2025, and again on Feb. 6 this year.

American officials have not publicly explained the purpose of those flights or whether the aircraft detected any radioactive material near the wreckage.

With Russia, the United States, and other governments offering little public explanation about the incident, major questions remain unanswered about what exactly the Ursa Major was carrying — and what caused the vessel to sink beneath the Mediterranean.