Feed aggregator

Katie Zacharia, whose brief stint as President Donald Trump’s White House press secretary ended after just five days, personally sought the Fox News appearances that reportedly contributed to her departure, according to newly disclosed text messages that challenge suggestions that senior administration officials deliberately arranged the interviews to undermine her.

The messages indicate that Zacharia actively pursued television exposure even as she faced criticism over her first appearance behind the White House briefing room podium. Her subsequent interviews with Sean Hannity and the hosts of “Fox & Friends” drew further scrutiny of her performance and questions surrounding her legal credentials, intensifying the controversy that preceded her exit on Friday.

In a Wednesday exchange with a White House official concerning television bookings that were eventually moved back one day, Zacharia expressed her desire to appear regularly on the network.

“I’d like to do news hits morning and evening,” she wrote.

The newly revealed communications provide a different perspective on the circumstances surrounding her departure. An earlier account suggested that the Fox appearances may have been deliberately arranged by White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, who reportedly had not approved Zacharia’s appointment before Trump selected her for the position.

One person quoted in that account described the interviews as a “sanctioned hit,” raising the possibility that Zacharia had been placed in difficult television situations to expose her weaknesses.

The text messages, however, indicate that Zacharia herself was seeking the interviews. They do not establish that Wiles played any role in arranging the appearances or orchestrating the press secretary’s departure.

The correspondence also suggests that Zacharia began pursuing additional television opportunities on Tuesday, the same day she conducted her first White House press briefing. That appearance lasted approximately 14 minutes and drew criticism over her visibly nervous delivery and abrupt conclusion.

One message from a producer working on Hannity’s program indicated that arrangements were already being discussed for Zacharia to appear following a presidential rally.

“Katie said she can join us from the rally tonight,” the producer wrote Tuesday.

Zacharia eventually appeared on Hannity’s prime-time program Thursday evening and returned to Fox News the following morning for an interview on “Fox & Friends.”

Both appearances proved difficult. She faced questions about her professional background, including her unsuccessful attempts to pass the California bar examination, and struggled at times to provide answers beyond prepared administration talking points.

During Thursday’s conversation, Hannity asked Zacharia about her widely criticized first press briefing. In explaining the circumstances, she emphasized how little time she had been given to prepare after assuming the position.

“Given the fact that I’d been on the job less than maybe eight hours and had a briefing book in the morning, I feel like I did my very best, Sean, to deliver for the American people that day,” she told Hannity.

Her explanation prompted the Fox News host to question whether she was suggesting that other White House personnel had failed to prepare her adequately.

“Am I hearing that you think the staff should have prepped you better?” Hannity asked.

By Friday, Trump had publicly acknowledged that Zacharia was not suited to the demanding position, telling her “you don’t need this” as her exceptionally short tenure came to an end.

A White House official subsequently confirmed that Zacharia would not continue working at the executive mansion, saying she “will not be working at the White House anymore.”

Another administration official said there was no clear information about what position, if any, Zacharia might assume next. Although there had been suggestions that she could move into another role within the administration, no specific assignment had been publicly identified.

Despite the abrupt end to her appointment, Zacharia continued expressing admiration for Trump. She shared a complimentary social media post about the president after leaving the position and reportedly had dinner with Vice President JD Vance on Friday evening.

Asked Saturday about her professional plans, Zacharia did not provide details about a possible new assignment.

Meanwhile, questions persisted about whether Wiles had any involvement in the interviews that preceded Zacharia’s departure. Reports noted that Wiles and Hannity maintain a friendly relationship and communicate regularly, fueling speculation about the circumstances surrounding the television appearances.

The White House rejected accusations that Wiles had worked behind the scenes to damage Zacharia, dismissing the allegations as “hit jobs” and “smear.”

Fox News also disputed suggestions that senior White House officials controlled the Hannity interview, saying the host makes his own decisions about guests and questions.

Kayleigh McEnany, who served as Trump’s White House press secretary during his first administration and now works as a Fox News commentator, offered a sympathetic assessment of the difficulties Zacharia faced after being thrust into one of Washington’s most demanding communications jobs.

“You want to give grace to anyone who takes on that role … How is she doing this 24 hours in? I had about two weeks to prepare and to get thoughts together and to talk to various cabinet administration officials,” McEnany said Saturday.

“That was pretty much doomed from the start to roll out to the press.”

The controversy also unfolded amid speculation about Wiles’ own standing in the administration. Trump sought to put those rumors to rest Friday, declaring there was “zero chance” that he would replace his chief of staff and insisting that she was “going to be here for a long time.”

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump defended his decision to suspend sanctions against Russia on Sunday, arguing that additional economic pressure on Moscow could derail negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. At the same time, Trump sharply criticized Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky over continued attacks on Russian oil facilities, accusing him of undermining efforts to reach a peace agreement.

The president said his approach is intended to keep Russian President Vladimir Putin engaged in diplomatic discussions while also easing pressure on American fuel prices. The decision has drawn criticism from those who believe Moscow should face tougher penalties rather than receive sanctions relief while the war continues.

“My decision on Russia is a very simple one. I am in the process of negotiating Peace in the war between Russia and Ukraine, and don’t want to do anything that will drive, foolishly, Russia away from the bargaining table,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Trump maintained that his administration is making significant headway toward an agreement and suggested that other sensitive negotiations are also advancing.

“Great progress is being made, and that includes current hostage negotiations!” he added, without identifying the hostages or explaining which negotiations he was referencing.

The president also directed criticism at Zelensky, accusing the Ukrainian leader of resisting a settlement despite the administration’s diplomatic efforts. Trump claimed that Zelensky “doesn’t want to end this war, and probably never did.”

The remarks came as Ukraine continued its campaign against Russian energy infrastructure, including strikes reported in the Saint Petersburg area. The attacks have intensified the dispute over whether military pressure on Russia’s oil industry will help force Moscow into a settlement or complicate diplomatic efforts by escalating the conflict.

The sanctions decision follows an agreement announced earlier this month under which Russia would release large quantities of diesel into international markets. Trump said the arrangement would begin with more than 300,000 tons, followed by additional supplies in November and subsequent months, as his administration seeks to reduce fuel costs.

The administration has temporarily eased restrictions on Russian energy exports to facilitate those shipments. Supporters of the move argue that restoring diesel supplies could relieve pressure on international markets and provide an incentive for Putin to pursue negotiations. Critics contend that allowing additional Russian energy sales could provide Moscow with revenue while its military campaign in Ukraine continues.

The dispute has also widened the rift between Washington and Kyiv. Zelensky has objected to the sanctions relief, arguing that it weakens the economic pressure on Russia. Ukrainian officials maintain that strikes against Russian refineries are a legitimate response to Moscow’s continuing attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

Earlier this month, Trump announced what he described as an energy ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, but the arrangement failed to halt attacks on energy facilities. Zelensky indicated that Ukraine would suspend strikes against Russian refineries if Moscow stopped targeting Ukrainian energy infrastructure.

The latest escalation came Sunday, when Russia reported intercepting more than 1,000 Ukrainian drones during a large-scale assault that sparked fires at oil installations in the Saint Petersburg region. Russian forces also continued attacks on Ukraine’s energy network, leaving tens of thousands of people without electricity.

Trump’s handling of the conflict has drawn objections from lawmakers in both parties, particularly over the relaxation of sanctions targeting Russia’s energy sector. The administration maintains that the diesel agreement and its broader diplomatic strategy are designed to bring Putin back into serious negotiations and create an opportunity to end the war.

Vice President JD Vance is leaving open the possibility that he will not seek the Republican presidential nomination in 2028, despite emerging as the overwhelming early favorite to succeed President Donald Trump. In a candid discussion about his political future, Vance acknowledged that his responsibilities as a father and his wife’s reservations about political life could ultimately influence his decision.

Speaking Saturday at a CBS News town hall in Flat Rock, Michigan, Vance told anchor Tony Dokoupil that a presidential campaign is far from certain, even as national polling places him well ahead of other potential Republican contenders.

“Of course there’s a chance,” Vance said when asked whether he might sit out the 2028 presidential election.

“We’ve got four little kids, my wife has never loved politics. She loves public service.”

The remarks offered a glimpse into the personal considerations confronting a vice president widely regarded as the leading candidate to inherit Trump’s political movement. While Vance has become one of the administration’s most prominent public figures, he indicated that his family’s circumstances remain an important factor in determining his next move.

Recent Republican primary polling underscores the strength of Vance’s position. According to the RealClearPolling national average, the vice president commands 39% support among potential Republican presidential candidates, giving him a 15-point advantage over Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who stands at 24%.

Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest son, occupies third place with 11% support, placing him well behind both Vance and Rubio in the early contest for Republican voters.

President Trump has previously identified Vance as his “most likely” successor, further fueling speculation that the vice president could become the party’s standard-bearer when Trump’s second term concludes. Nevertheless, Vance has resisted making any formal commitment to enter the race.

During the Michigan appearance, Vance suggested that his reluctance to address the question is partly a reflection of his approach to major personal decisions.

“The way that I think about life, big life decisions — my wife will tell you this: I’m a procrastinator. I hate thinking about it,” Vance said.

For now, Vance and his wife, Usha, have agreed to postpone a serious discussion about the 2028 election until after the November 3 midterm elections, when the immediate political demands facing the administration will have eased.

“Whenever it comes up, it’s always let’s figure it out after the midterms,” Vance said.

The family’s circumstances have also changed in recent months. The vice president and his wife welcomed their fourth child, Alec, in July, joining their three older children, Ewan, Vivek, and Mirabel. With four young children at home, another national campaign would carry substantial personal demands for the family.

Usha Vance has previously spoken openly about her relationship with politics, including the fact that her views do not always align neatly with those of her husband or a particular political party.

“Sometimes I have thoughts that fit very comfortably into one side or another,” she told NBC News in March. “Sometimes I have views that are way more idiosyncratic.”

She has also explained that her role in her husband’s political career is primarily that of a trusted confidante rather than a formal political strategist, offering him her perspective without serving as a campaign adviser.

Although questions about 2028 attracted considerable attention, much of Saturday’s town hall centered on the administration’s current challenges. Vance fielded questions concerning higher gasoline prices, federal immigration enforcement, and the war involving Iran, defending the White House’s approach while recognizing the financial pressures that continue to affect American households.

The vice president emphasized that his immediate political focus is the upcoming midterm election, with Republicans working to maintain their congressional majorities. His efforts include campaigning in Michigan on behalf of former Rep. Mike Rogers, who is seeking a Senate seat in one of the country’s closely watched races.

Vance indicated that he has little interest in allowing speculation about the next presidential election to distract from the administration’s present responsibilities or the approaching congressional contests.

“We’re really not” discussing 2028, Vance said of conversations with his wife.

“Anything could happen, man.”

{Matzav.com}

Rav Yitzchak Yosef, the former Sephardic chief rabbi of Israel, has issued a sharp halachic ruling declaring that it is forbidden to vote for National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit party because of Ben-Gvir’s repeated visits to Har Habayis and his encouragement of other Jews to ascend the site.

In a letter released ahead of Israel’s upcoming elections, Rav Yosef warned that entering Har Habayis can involve the severe issur of kareis, and he argued that supporting a political leader who encourages such conduct constitutes a serious halachic violation.

“Anyone who supports the party of someone who ascends the Temple Mount and encourages others to ascend is considered as though he himself [has committed a transgression punishable] by kareis.

“Therefore, according to Jewish law, it is forbidden to support the party,” he claimed.

The ruling represents another escalation in Rav Yosef’s ongoing confrontation with Ben-Gvir over the minister’s public visits to Har Habayis, which Rav Yosef and numerous other prominent poskim have strongly condemned.

The longstanding position of the Israeli Chief Rabbinate prohibits Jews from entering Har Habayis because of the severe halachic concerns surrounding entry into areas where the presence of a person who is tamei meis is forbidden. Since the precise boundaries of the prohibited areas are disputed and the required purification process involving the ashes of a parah adumah is unavailable today, leading poskim have ruled that Jews must refrain from entering the site altogether.

Ben-Gvir, however, has repeatedly visited Har Habayis and publicly encouraged Jewish visits, maintaining that Jews should be permitted to exercise religious rights at the site. His position has drawn fierce criticism from chareidi rabbonim, who regard such visits as a grave violation of halacha.

Rav Yosef’s latest letter follows previous public statements in which he warned voters against supporting politicians who disregard the rulings of leading poskim on the issue.

The latest ruling comes as Shas seeks to retain its traditional Sephardic voter base amid growing competition from Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit party, which has attracted support among some younger religious and traditional voters.

At an election gathering in Akko last month, Rav Yosef delivered a similar warning, urging the public to reject candidates who do not demonstrate proper yiras Shomayim or who act contrary to the rulings of leading rabbonim.

“I call on you: Do not be tempted to vote for unworthy people. Someone who does not fear Heaven and someone who ascends the Temple Mount – it is forbidden according to halacha to vote for him.”

Rav Yosef, who serves as the spiritual leader of Shas and is the son of the late Sephardic posek Rav Ovadia Yosef, also urged voters to support representatives who remain faithful to the guidance of the Moetzet Chachmei HaTorah.

“One must vote only for those who fear Heaven and follow the path of the Torah, like our representatives.”

The dispute intensified earlier this month when Rav Yosef accused Ben-Gvir of deliberately disregarding the rulings of the Gedolei Yisroel. During a public address, he recalled having warned against entering Har Habayis during his regular shiur at the Yazdim shul, only for Ben-Gvir to visit the site the following morning.

Rav Yosef viewed the timing as a deliberate demonstration of disrespect toward the rabbonim who have consistently prohibited such visits.

He also criticized politicians who attract young voters through forceful slogans and public appearances, questioning whether their conduct reflects genuine commitment to Torah values.

{Matzav.com}

Yisrael Beytenu chairman Avigdor Lieberman has outlined a plan to remove Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu from power immediately following Israel’s October 27 election, proposing to replace the Knesset speaker and rapidly enact legislation that would prevent individuals facing criminal indictments from serving as prime minister. Lieberman declared that the strategy could bring Netanyahu’s political career to an abrupt end, even if his Likud party emerges from the election with significant parliamentary support.

The former defense minister, who has become one of Netanyahu’s most outspoken political opponents, said his initiative would begin as soon as the newly elected 26th Knesset is sworn in. His proposal centers on using a parliamentary majority to change the Knesset’s leadership before advancing legislation specifically intended to prevent Netanyahu from forming another government.

“We must get rid of Bibi,” Lieberman declared, emphasizing that removing Netanyahu remains a central objective of his party’s post-election strategy.

Under the proposed arrangement, Lieberman and his allies would first seek to oust Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana, a senior Likud figure and Netanyahu ally. Installing a new speaker would allow the incoming parliamentary majority to control the legislative agenda and accelerate consideration of the measure commonly referred to as the “Defendant Law.”

“Immediately after the 26th Knesset is sworn in, we will work to replace Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana and elect a new speaker,” Lieberman said. Once a new speaker is in place, he intends to fast-track the legislation. “After that, we will pass the ‘Defendant Law’ through all three readings, and that will be the end of it.”

The proposed legislation would prohibit a person under criminal indictment from being tasked with forming a government or serving as prime minister. Although the measure would be written in general terms, its immediate political significance concerns Netanyahu, whose ongoing corruption trial has remained a major issue in Israeli politics.

Netanyahu has repeatedly denied wrongdoing in the criminal proceedings against him, and his political allies have characterized efforts to disqualify him through legislation as an attempt to overturn the will of voters rather than defeat him at the ballot box.

Lieberman’s proposal would require sufficient parliamentary support to replace the speaker and pass the legislation through the Knesset’s three required readings. Whether such a majority could be assembled remains uncertain, particularly given the divisions among parties opposed to Netanyahu.

The proposal has also raised the possibility of another Israeli election if the parties opposing Netanyahu succeed in passing the legislation but cannot agree on a governing coalition. Such a scenario could leave Netanyahu legally barred from seeking the premiership in a subsequent election, although the legislation’s validity would likely face a challenge before Israel’s Supreme Court.

Legal experts have questioned whether a law enacted specifically to prevent Netanyahu from returning to office could survive judicial review. The Supreme Court previously ruled that Netanyahu could continue serving as prime minister despite the criminal indictments against him, and a new law targeting his eligibility could face scrutiny over its potentially personal and retroactive application.

Lieberman’s latest announcement follows his declaration Thursday that Yisrael Beytenu would refuse to participate in any minority government, even temporarily. That position placed him at odds with opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot, who has explored the possibility of forming a government without a full parliamentary majority if the parties seeking to replace Netanyahu fail to secure 61 seats.

On Thursday, Lieberman stated that his party would not accept such an arrangement under any circumstances.

“Any minority government, not even for a transitional period,” he said.

Lieberman has instead called for a coalition composed entirely of what he describes as Zionist parties, explicitly excluding the Arab parties Ra’am and the Joint List, as well as the chareidi parties Shas and United Torah Judaism.

In a social media statement explaining his position, Lieberman wrote: “Over the past few days, I have been asked several times about a national unity government. Our position is clear and unequivocal: We will establish a coalition consisting exclusively of Zionist parties. Likud without Netanyahu could be a significant partner.”

His exclusion of the chareidi parties reflects his longstanding opposition to their influence over government policy, particularly on issues involving military enlistment, religious affairs and the relationship between religion and the state.

Lieberman has repeatedly accused Netanyahu of allowing chareidi coalition partners to dictate government decisions. He recently charged that Likud lawmakers had effectively become subordinate to Shas chairman Aryeh Deri and United Torah Judaism figure Yitzchok Goldknopf.

Despite ruling out cooperation with Netanyahu, Lieberman suggested that he would welcome Likud members into a future coalition if they were prepared to break with their party leader.

“I know several Likud MKs who understand the gravity of the moment and would be willing to provide the additional numbers needed and join a Zionist coalition,” he said.

Lieberman did not identify the lawmakers he believes might defect, and there has been no public indication that any Likud MKs have agreed to participate in his proposed arrangement.

The announcement comes amid growing disagreements among opposition leaders over how to replace Netanyahu. Eisenkot has advocated exploring alternative governing arrangements, while Lieberman and former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett have resisted proposals that would leave a new government dependent on outside parliamentary support.

Lieberman has also criticized Eisenkot personally, accusing him of pursuing an arrangement that could ultimately result in another government involving Netanyahu. The disagreements have complicated efforts to present a united opposition strategy before election day.

The political uncertainty has been heightened by opinion polls suggesting that neither Netanyahu’s existing coalition nor the opposition parties are guaranteed the 61 seats necessary to establish a stable government.

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump delivered an emphatic endorsement of Netanyahu on Sunday, praising his leadership and urging Israelis to return him to office. The endorsement provides Netanyahu with a significant political boost as Lieberman and other opposition leaders intensify their efforts to end his tenure.

{Matzav.com}

With Israel’s Knesset elections approaching on October 27, Chaim V’Chessed has been swamped with related questions. Do you need to receive a voter notification card in the mail? Can permanent residents vote? What if you recently made aliyah? And what identification do you need to bring to the polling station?

Chaim V’Chessed is pleased to share some important information to help clarify these questions.

The easiest way is to check your eligibility online, in English, at the following link:

Check Your Voter Eligibility and Find Your Polling Station

You can also call Degel HaTorah’s English language hotline for check your availability and for other voting assistance at 03-313-5280.

You should have received a postcard in the mail with information about your assigned polling station. If you didn’t receive one, don’t worry! Not receiving a postcard does not mean you are ineligible to vote. You can check your eligibility and find out where you are assigned to vote through the online service linked above or by calling the Degel HaTorah hotline listed above.

No. Permanent residents (toshvei keva), temporary residents (toshvei arai) are not Israeli citizens, and therefore cannot vote in Knesset elections, even if they hold a Teudat Zehut (Israeli identity card). The right to vote is reserved for eligible Israeli citizens who are registered in the voter registry.

Generally, Israeli citizens must be physically present in Israel to vote in Knesset elections. The only exceptions are diplomats who are stationed abroad.

Almost all Israeli citizens are eligible to vote, provided they meet the registration requirements. However, anyone who was not registered in the Pinkas HaBochrim (פנקס הבוחרים) by September 3, 2026, is not be eligible to vote in these elections. This means that someone who made aliyah after that date will not be able to vote.

You must bring an accepted form of identification to the polling station. The following documents can be used:

• Teudat Zehut (Israeli identity card): You may vote with your Teudat Zehut even if it has expired.
• Israeli passport: Must be valid.
• Israeli driver’s license: Must be valid and include your photograph.

Your voter notification postcard is not a substitute for an accepted identification document. Be sure to bring your original identification document.

Your assigned polling station is determined by your registered address with the Ministry of Interior (Misrad HaPnim).

If you have moved but have not updated your address with the Ministry of Interior, you will generally need to vote at the polling station assigned to your previous address.

The same applies if you updated your address after the voter registry (Pinkas HaBochrim) closed on September 3, 2026. In that case, your polling station will still be based on your previously registered address.

If you have moved, it is a good idea to check your assigned polling station in advance so you know exactly where to go on Election Day.

Bnei Mehagrim are Israeli citizens born or raised abroad to Israeli parents who emigrated from Israel and who generally reside outside Israel. Some Bnei Mehagrim who do not have an address registered in the Population Registry may encounter difficulties with voter registration and should check their eligibility.

As Election Day approaches, we hope this information will help clarify some of the most common questions. If you are unsure whether you are eligible, Chaim V’Chessed encourages you to check your status online rather than assume you cannot vote.

An Austrian Airlines flight traveling from Ben Gurion Airport to Vienna was forced to make an emergency landing in Sofia, Bulgaria, on Sunday after an anonymous bomb threat raised fears that an explosive device might be aboard the aircraft. The security alert prompted the flight crew to abandon its scheduled route and divert to the Bulgarian capital, where the circumstances surrounding the threat came under investigation.

The incident unfolded while the aircraft was en route from Tel Aviv to Austria. According to initial reports, concerns about a potentially suspicious object on board led to the activation of an aviation emergency code, triggering procedures intended to protect passengers and crew.

Rather than continue toward Vienna, the pilots redirected the aircraft to Sofia Airport, where the plane landed following the in-flight security alert.

Passengers were reportedly told that an “anonymous bomb threat against the aircraft” had been received, explaining the unexpected diversion and emergency precautions.

The precise nature of the threat remained unclear Sunday evening. Authorities had not established whether an actual suspicious device was present aboard the aircraft or whether the warning was a false alarm. There was also no confirmed information indicating that passengers had been exposed to an explosive device.

The incident prompted an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the warning, including what led to the emergency declaration and whether there was any credible danger to the aircraft.

Additional reporting indicated that Austrian authorities had received a telephone warning in Vienna concerning a suspicious item aboard the flight. The information was relayed to aviation officials, leading to the decision to divert the aircraft to Bulgaria rather than allow it to continue to its intended destination.

The aircraft was undergoing security inspections in Sofia following its arrival, as officials worked to determine whether the anonymous warning had any basis. No explosive device had been confirmed.

Among those aboard the flight was reportedly a delegation of young people traveling to participate in activities connected to the United Nations. Their journey was interrupted along with that of the other passengers.

The emergency came just days after a similar bomb scare involving a Delta Air Lines flight arriving in Israel from New York.

In that incident, which occurred Tuesday, October 13, an anonymous warning alleged that an explosive device had been placed aboard the American aircraft. The plane was directed to an isolated area of Ben Gurion Airport, away from the passenger terminals, as security personnel initiated emergency procedures.

All passengers were safely removed from the aircraft, allowing airport security teams to carry out an extensive inspection of the plane and its compartments.

The searches ultimately produced no evidence of an explosive device or other suspicious material, and airport authorities announced that the threat had been cleared.

“The aircraft was thoroughly searched by Ben Gurion Airport security personnel. The incident concluded with no unusual findings. Operations have returned to normal,” the authority said at the time.

The security concerns surrounding Delta flights continued later that same day, when another aircraft scheduled to depart New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport for Israel was delayed following a separate bomb warning.

That flight was prevented from departing while American security personnel conducted inspections and coordinated with Israeli authorities. Investigators reportedly examined whether the same individual might have been responsible for both warnings.

French President Emmanuel Macron expressed outrage Sunday evening over the extraordinary wave of rioting that has engulfed France, leaving more than 2,000 people under arrest, hundreds of security personnel injured, and numerous buildings and businesses damaged or destroyed. In a nationally televised address, Macron condemned the widespread arson, looting and attacks on police, promising criminal prosecutions and ordering an investigation into whether authorities had failed to anticipate the scale of the violence.

The French leader spoke after mass demonstrations against soaring living expenses and reductions in public services descended into some of the country’s worst street violence in years. Although hundreds of thousands of protesters participated peacefully, groups of rioters rampaged through Paris and other major cities, setting fires, ransacking stores and attacking government buildings.

“How can French people do this to France?” Macron asked, expressing disbelief at the scenes of destruction that had unfolded across the country.

“When we look at these images, we all ask ourselves what was going through their minds. Nothing justifies this, nothing explains it, and nothing can serve as an excuse for it. Tonight, we all feel anger and shame,” he said.

Macron declared that individuals responsible for the destruction would face legal consequences, emphasizing that the right to demonstrate cannot be used to justify violence against police officers, government institutions or private property. He warned that attempts to undermine the institutions of the French republic would be met with a firm response from the authorities.

The president also acknowledged mounting criticism of the government’s handling of the unrest, announcing a review of possible intelligence and operational failures that may have left security forces unprepared for the widespread disturbances.

Police struggled to respond to simultaneous outbreaks of violence across numerous locations, with officers confronting rioters who attacked businesses, set vehicles ablaze and damaged public facilities. The scale and geographic spread of the disorder raised serious questions about whether law enforcement agencies had sufficient personnel and resources to maintain control.

Among the most devastating incidents was the destruction of the historic city hall in Limoges, where rioters stormed the 19th-century municipal building and set it on fire. Flames spread through the structure, destroying much of its interior and roof and causing its prominent clock tower to collapse.

The building, inaugurated in 1883, had survived both world wars before suffering catastrophic damage during Saturday’s disturbances. Local officials described the destruction as a devastating blow to the city’s architectural and cultural heritage.

Limoges Mayor Guillaume Guérin accused authorities of failing to provide sufficient police protection, saying officers had been overwhelmed while attempting to contain violent groups elsewhere in the city. He claimed that rioters threatened municipal employees and elected officials as they forced their way into the building.

The destruction extended well beyond Limoges. In Marseille, masked demonstrators broke into city hall and vandalized its interior, while rioters in Lyon set fire to the city’s tourism office. Bordeaux, Lille and other cities also experienced attacks on public buildings and commercial establishments.

Paris witnessed extensive clashes between police and violent demonstrators, particularly around Place de la République, where officers deployed tear gas and water cannons. Shops were broken into and looted, vehicles were burned, and streets were left covered with shattered glass and debris.

Business organizations reported that more than 1,500 shops and commercial establishments had been damaged or ransacked, with financial losses estimated in the tens of millions of euros. Retailers and local officials began assessing the destruction as cleanup operations continued Sunday.

French Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez reported that approximately 2,000 people had been arrested in connection with the violence, while around 600 police officers, gendarmes and firefighters had sustained injuries. The figures were described as preliminary, with additional arrests and updated casualty totals expected as authorities continued their investigations.

Later reports placed the number of arrests above 2,400, illustrating the extraordinary scale of the security operation undertaken in response to the disturbances.

The unrest also left demonstrators seriously injured. Among the reported incidents was a 17-year-old boy in Saint-Étienne who lost a hand after being struck by a crowd-control grenade, intensifying criticism of police tactics during the confrontations.

The demonstrations originally centered on growing public frustration over inflation, household expenses, government spending cuts and deteriorating public services. Students, teachers, workers and other groups joined the nationwide protests, which drew an estimated 550,000 participants according to government figures. Organizers maintained that attendance was closer to 800,000.

Much of the protest activity remained peaceful, but authorities accused organized extremist groups and opportunistic criminals of exploiting the gatherings to engage in violence and destruction.

Nuñez specifically blamed several thousand far-left activists for attacks on police and government buildings, saying criminal elements had joined them in looting commercial establishments.

Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu similarly condemned the violence, insisting that legitimate public grievances could not excuse attacks on public institutions or the destruction of private businesses. The government has also discussed measures that would require convicted vandals to contribute financially toward repairing the damage they caused.

Macron announced that regional government representatives and local authorities would receive expanded powers to prohibit certain gatherings when necessary to prevent further violence. The restrictions would be aimed at locations where officials believe additional disturbances are likely.

Despite his emphasis on law enforcement, the president also acknowledged the economic and social concerns underlying the demonstrations. He instructed the government to begin consultations with representatives of students, teachers, labor unions, employers and elected officials in an effort to identify practical responses to public dissatisfaction.

“We must sit around the table and build solutions together,” Macron said.

He did not announce specific economic concessions or new spending commitments, leaving open questions about how his government intends to address the grievances that brought such large crowds into the streets.

The political fallout has been immediate, with opposition parties offering sharply different assessments of the violence and the government’s responsibility.

Marine Le Pen and other right-wing political figures criticized the breakdown in public order and called for stronger measures to restore security. Some demanded that the government consider declaring a state of emergency, although Macron stopped short of taking that step.

On the left, Jean-Luc Mélenchon and his allies accused the government of mishandling the demonstrations and failing to distinguish adequately between peaceful protesters and violent groups. They also questioned whether insufficient police preparations contributed to the escalation.

The dispute has placed Lecornu’s government under intense pressure, with mayors in several major cities demanding additional resources and explanations for the apparent inability of security forces to protect public buildings and businesses.

Officials in Limoges have called for substantial government assistance to rebuild the destroyed city hall, while municipal authorities elsewhere are seeking support for damaged infrastructure and cleanup operations.

Lecornu has pledged that the Limoges city hall will be reconstructed, with the government working to restore municipal services and coordinate insurance compensation for the extensive losses.

The turmoil comes at a particularly sensitive moment for Macron, whose second presidential term is approaching its conclusion in 2027. With approximately six months remaining before France’s next presidential election, the violence has intensified an already bitter political debate over economic hardship, public security and the direction of the country.

Macron’s address sought to establish two priorities for the weeks ahead: prosecuting those responsible for the destruction while opening discussions with representatives of the peaceful protest movement. The immediate challenge facing his government is restoring public confidence after scenes of widespread disorder exposed serious weaknesses in France’s ability to contain coordinated outbreaks of violence.

Kaplan Medical Center in Rechovot is facing another serious controversy involving its cardiology department, with hospital administrators filing a complaint against department director Prof. Kobi George over suspicions that blood was collected from patients for medical research without obtaining their informed consent. The allegations come less than two months after revelations that doctors training in the same department allegedly received specialist qualifications despite failing to complete mandatory portions of their medical training.

The latest allegations have intensified scrutiny of the hospital’s cardiology division, which was already under investigation by Israel’s Health Ministry over irregularities in its residency program. George, who has remained in his position despite the earlier controversy, now faces additional questions concerning the collection and use of patient blood samples for research.

The earlier investigation began after reports surfaced that cardiology residents at Kaplan had been permitted for years to bypass the internal medicine component of their specialist training. The arrangement allegedly operated under George’s direction and supervision, raising serious concerns about whether physicians had received the clinical experience required before being certified as cardiology specialists.

Despite the seriousness of those findings, George continued serving as head of the department while the Health Ministry established an independent investigative panel to examine the circumstances surrounding the training irregularities.

The inquiry initially focused on the responsibilities of Kaplan’s senior management and the health insurance organizations involved in the residency process. Investigators subsequently broadened their examination to include Prof. Zion Hagay, chairman of Kaplan’s residency committee and president of the Israel Medical Association.

Officials connected to the residency program were called in for questioning, including the director of the hospital’s internal medicine department, who reportedly approved training documentation that investigators suspect did not accurately reflect the education the residents had received.

The newly reported allegations involving blood samples raise a separate set of concerns about patient rights and compliance with medical research regulations. According to the suspicions, blood specimens were obtained from patients for research purposes without their knowledge or the informed consent required under established medical ethics procedures.

In Israel, medical studies involving human participants generally require authorization from an institutional Helsinki Committee, which is responsible for reviewing research proposals and ensuring that appropriate ethical safeguards are in place. Such approval does not eliminate the requirement to obtain informed consent from individual participants when consent is legally required.

The distinction is particularly important in cases involving the collection of biological material, since patients must ordinarily be informed about the nature and purpose of research participation before agreeing to provide samples. The allegations against George have raised questions about whether those protections were properly observed in the research activities under examination.

Additional information indicates that the hospital’s response has gone beyond submitting a complaint. George has been suspended from his position as director of cardiology, and the matter has been referred to the Israel Police for investigation.

The complaint was reportedly filed last week after a member of the medical staff approached hospital administrators and requested that the circumstances surrounding the research be examined. Preliminary findings subsequently raised concerns that blood samples had been collected or used for laboratory research without the necessary patient authorization.

The police complaint, originally submitted in Rehovot, has reportedly been transferred to the Central District Police fraud investigation unit. The Health Ministry has also confirmed receiving information from hospital management concerning the allegations and the steps taken in response.

Authorities have not publicly established how many patients may have been affected, how long the suspected practices continued, or the precise circumstances under which the samples were collected. Those questions remain part of the investigation.

The hospital, which operates under Clalit Health Services, has emphasized that the cardiology department continues providing medical treatment despite the suspension of its director. Administrators said measures have been implemented to protect patients and ensure that necessary cardiac services remain available.

The separate residency controversy has also produced consequences for the department. Following the earlier disclosures, the Israel Medical Association reportedly withdrew Kaplan’s authorization to train cardiology residents while George remained part of the department’s medical staff.

The previous allegations centered on documentation indicating that residents had completed required rotations in internal medicine when, according to the reports, those rotations had not actually taken place. The discrepancies raised concerns that physicians had obtained specialist certification without fulfilling all the requirements of their training programs.

Investigators are examining how the records were approved, who was responsible for verifying the training, and whether hospital officials or supervising physicians were aware of the discrepancies.

The Health Ministry and Clalit have both initiated reviews of the residency affair, while the new allegations concerning patient blood samples have brought police investigators into the picture.

The hospital has also established a dedicated service for patients seeking information about the suspected research irregularities.

George has disputed the characterization of the allegations against him. In comments provided through his representatives, he maintained that the matter involved, at most, alleged improper conduct, rather than the more serious wrongdoing suggested by the accusations.

Both controversies remain under investigation, and no final findings establishing criminal wrongdoing have been announced.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump on Sunday delivered an emphatic endorsement of Israeli Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu, throwing his full support behind the Likud leader just nine days before Israel’s October 27 election and warning that replacing him could leave the United States confronting Iran without the same level of Israeli cooperation.

In a lengthy message published on Truth Social and addressed directly to the Israeli public, Trump praised Netanyahu’s leadership during Israel’s military confrontations with Iran, describing him as an indispensable American ally who has demonstrated extraordinary strength under pressure. The president concluded his message with an unmistakable declaration of support for Netanyahu’s reelection.

“Please let this Letter serve to represent my Complete and Total Endorsement of Bibi Netanyahu in his upcoming Race for Re-Election as Prime Minister of Israel. BIBI NETANYAHU WILL NEVER LET YOU DOWN! Thank you for your attention to this matter,” Trump wrote.

The endorsement represents a significant political development for Netanyahu, who has made his close relationship with Trump a central element of his campaign while struggling to secure enough parliamentary support to form another government.

Trump began his statement by describing Netanyahu as “a Great Warrior Prime Minister, and an even greater Partner for Peace in combating the Islamic Republic of Iran,” emphasizing their cooperation against Tehran and its longstanding threats to Israel and the United States.

The president argued that Iran’s repeated declarations of hostility toward both countries justified the military campaign undertaken by Washington and Yerushalayim. He pointed to the Iranian regime’s longstanding threats to destroy what it calls the “Little Satan” and the “Big Satan,” references to Israel and America.

Trump asserted that Iran has suffered devastating military and economic damage during the conflict, while warning that additional American action remains possible if Tehran refuses to change its policies.

According to Trump, Iran has been “systematically destroyed, both Militarily and Financially, and unless they change their ways, rapidly, we will soon finish the job.”

The president then issued one of the most consequential warnings of his statement, suggesting that Netanyahu’s defeat could complicate American efforts to confront the Iranian regime.

“If Israel has the wrong Leader, which would be anyone other than Bibi, America will have to do this work ourselves, and I am not inclined to do so,” Trump declared.

The remarks linked Netanyahu’s political future directly to the broader American-Israeli campaign against Iran, with Trump presenting the prime minister as the leader best equipped to maintain the strategic partnership between the two countries.

Trump also offered an unusually personal assessment of Netanyahu’s character, praising his ability to withstand political opposition and the pressures of war.

“Bibi Netanyahu has been Strong, Brave, and Brilliant in the face of tremendous opposition, including that coming from even Israel, itself,” Trump wrote.

He continued by describing Netanyahu’s resilience during periods of intense political and military pressure.

“Despite all of that, he has endured and, in fact, he has thrived! I have watched Bibi under the most trying of times. Normal men or women in such situations would have wilted under the pressure — But Bibi did not wilt, he actually got stronger, and maintains that same Strength today.”

Trump characterized Netanyahu as the kind of leader Washington needs in Yerushalayim, particularly given the challenges facing Israel and the wider Middle East.

“This is the kind of Partner that the United States of America is demanding of Israel, a Country for which it has done so much,” the president wrote.

Netanyahu quickly welcomed the endorsement, thanking Trump publicly and emphasizing their continued cooperation.

“Thank you, President Trump, for the tremendous support and the joint work. Together we will complete the mission!” Netanyahu wrote on X.

The prime minister also circulated Trump’s endorsement in Hebrew and shared a video highlighting previous occasions on which the American president had praised him, underscoring the political importance of the announcement during the final days of the campaign.

Trump’s intervention comes after months in which he had declined to explicitly endorse Netanyahu, despite their longstanding political alliance. The two leaders have experienced disagreements over the conduct of the war against Iran, the possibility of renewed diplomatic negotiations with Tehran, and American proposals concerning Gaza.

Those differences became particularly apparent during the months following the joint American-Israeli military offensive against Iran in February. Trump publicly criticized certain Israeli military decisions and indicated that Washington would determine the terms of any eventual agreement with Tehran.

In an interview published earlier this month, Trump had again avoided committing himself to Netanyahu’s reelection campaign, making Sunday’s unequivocal endorsement especially noteworthy.

The timing could prove important for Netanyahu, whose Likud party faces a closely contested election. Recent polling has indicated that the prime minister’s existing political bloc may fall short of the 61 Knesset seats required to form a governing majority.

Israel’s October 27 election will be the first national vote since the October 7, 2023, Hamas massacre and the subsequent wars that have transformed the country’s security and political landscape.

Netanyahu has campaigned heavily on his experience in national security and his ability to maintain close relations with Washington. His opponents, meanwhile, have criticized his handling of the October 7 security failures, the prolonged military conflicts, and the controversy surrounding chareidi military enlistment.

The endorsement also drew a response from Gadi Eisenkot, the former IDF chief of staff and leader of the Yashar party, who is among Netanyahu’s principal political challengers.

Eisenkot acknowledged his respect for the American president but insisted that Israel’s next government must be determined by Israeli voters rather than outside leaders.

“I have very great respect for President Trump, but the only ones who will decide [the election] are the citizens of Israel, and I will continue to stand by that,” Eisenkot said.

Trump’s popularity among Israelis could make his endorsement a valuable campaign asset. A Pew Research Center survey conducted earlier this year found that more than 66% of Israelis viewed Trump favorably, placing Israel among the countries with the most positive attitudes toward the American president.

Trump has supported Netanyahu in previous Israeli elections, including a public endorsement in 2013, years before entering the White House. He has also intervened on Netanyahu’s behalf in other matters, including a letter sent to Israeli President Isaac Herzog urging a pardon for the prime minister in his ongoing corruption case.

{Matzav.com}

Pre-Order & join the 2nd print!

Thanks to a generous donor – Order a Hardcover Set of 26 seforim of Tosfos in English for only $190! $750

That’s over $550 off!
Only $7 per volume!

FREE shipping in the U.S. Only $48 to ship to Israel!

Offer is until the 25th of Cheshvan

Included: Tosfos translated & explained, covering the Perakim most frequently learned in Shas.

To learn more & order your set of 26 seforim click here: https://tosfosinenglish.shop/home?am_id=pmatzav8801

To receive a FREE Tosfos in English mini E-Book click here: https://tosfosinenglish.shop/free-sample?am_id=fmatzav5420

Israeli Prime Minister Binyomin Netanyahu declared Sunday that chareidim who categorically refuse military service should be imprisoned, taking a particularly aggressive position on the draft controversy as Israel’s election campaign approaches its conclusion. Netanyahu also pledged to advance legislation requiring 23,000 chareidi men to enlist over a three-and-a-half-year period, while maintaining that full-time Torah learners should be treated differently from those who are not actually learning.

The prime minister made the remarks during an interview Sunday morning with Benny Teitelbaum on Kan Moreshet, where he outlined his proposed approach to chareidi enlistment and addressed the political difficulties that prevented his government from passing a draft law during its previous term.

Netanyahu insisted that his proposal would bring substantially more chareidim into the military than alternative plans advanced by his political opponents. He portrayed the legislation as a significant step toward resolving one of the most contentious issues facing Israeli society.

“We introduced a law, and I will pass it, to enlist 23,000 haredim over three and a half years. They proposed 5,000; that was their proposal,” Netanyahu said.

Pressed to explain why the legislation had not been enacted despite his government having spent four years in power, Netanyahu blamed the failure on an insufficient parliamentary majority, suggesting that a stronger Likud showing in the upcoming election would enable him to complete the effort.

“We almost succeeded. In the end, we were really just one Knesset seat short. I assume that if we receive more seats, we will be able to pass it this time, and that will truly be an important correction.”

Netanyahu also sought to distinguish between yeshiva bochurim and avreichim who genuinely dedicate their time to learning and those who are registered within the Torah education system but are not actually studying. His remarks indicated that the proposed framework would continue to recognize the importance of Torah learning while requiring enlistment from individuals who do not meet that standard.

“Someone who is not going to enlist, or someone who says, ‘I have respect for the world of Torah study’-but anyone who does not study must enlist.”

The prime minister reserved his strongest language for chareidi groups that reject military enlistment under any circumstances, specifically addressing those who invoke the slogan of preferring death over enlistment.

“And anyone who says, ‘We will die rather than enlist,’ let him go to prison.”

The statement represented a particularly forceful warning from Netanyahu amid continuing tensions surrounding the arrest of yeshiva bochurim accused of failing to comply with military summonses. The issue has prompted repeated demonstrations in chareidi communities, with protesters condemning attempts to draft Torah learners and demanding an end to enforcement measures against them.

The renewed controversy comes just nine days before Israel’s October 27 election, with the chareidi draft issue emerging as a major point of contention between Netanyahu and opposition leaders. Naftali Bennett, Avigdor Lieberman, and Gadi Eisenkot have been among those challenging the prime minister’s handling of the matter, while Netanyahu has accused his political opponents of exploiting tensions surrounding the chareidi community for electoral advantage.

The prime minister’s latest position also follows months of political disputes over legislation intended to regulate the status of yeshiva students. Earlier efforts to prevent the arrest of chareidi draft evaders encountered legal obstacles, including intervention by Israel’s Supreme Court, while disagreements over enlistment targets and penalties complicated attempts to secure a lasting legislative arrangement.

In a separate interview on Friday, Netanyahu defended the chareidi community against what he described as politically motivated hostility, arguing that chareidim are an integral part of Israeli society. At the same time, he reiterated his position that those who are not engaged in full-time Torah study should be required to serve in the military.

The issue has become especially sensitive for Netanyahu because of his longstanding political relationship with Shas and United Torah Judaism, whose support has been crucial to his governing coalitions. Chareidi representatives have repeatedly insisted that the status of yeshiva students must be protected, while opposition parties have demanded stricter enlistment requirements and meaningful penalties for those who refuse to serve.

Netanyahu also used Sunday’s interview to warn right-wing voters against supporting smaller political parties that might fail to secure enough votes to enter the Knesset. He argued that such a development could weaken the right-wing bloc and enable his opponents to establish a government.

He characterized certain competing parties as the “fake right,” accusing them of jeopardizing the prospects of another right-wing government. Netanyahu warned that votes cast for parties that fail to cross the electoral threshold could ultimately help produce a left-wing coalition dependent on Arab political parties.

{Matzav.com}

Iran’s newly appointed defense minister, Mehrdad Ahlaghki, has issued a threatening warning to President Donald Trump, declaring that American military personnel could be killed if Washington launches another attack against Iran. The 68-year-old Iranian official, who assumed his position following the killing of his predecessor earlier this year, also claimed that he has spent 35 years on an assassination list and has no intention of being intimidated by threats against his life.

Ahlaghki, a longtime figure in Iran’s military establishment with extensive experience in the country’s missile and aerospace industries, delivered his warning amid continued tensions between Tehran, Washington, and Yerushalayim. He insisted that Iran has taken extensive precautions against potential American attacks and is prepared to retaliate on a large scale if hostilities resume.

Addressing the possibility of becoming the target of an assassination, Ahlaghki dismissed the danger as something he has lived with for decades. “I’ve been on the hit list for 35 years,” he declared.

His appointment follows the death of former Iranian Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh, who was killed in February. The circumstances surrounding his predecessor’s death have added particular significance to Ahlaghki’s public remarks, especially as he now occupies a position that has already proven dangerous for senior members of Iran’s military leadership.

One of Ahlaghki’s most pointed warnings concerned the possibility of an American strike using the powerful conventional weapon commonly known as the “Mother of All Bombs.” The massive munition, designed to devastate large targets, was raised as a potential weapon that Washington could deploy against Iranian military installations.

The Iranian minister maintained that Tehran had already developed defensive measures to address such a possibility. “We have taken the necessary measures to deal with such an action, and we continue our work with confidence,” he declared.

Ahlaghki followed that assertion with a direct threat against American forces stationed throughout the Middle East, suggesting that any attempt to employ the weapon against Iran would result in American fatalities.

“If he drops one bomb, he should check how many of his forces he will have to remove from the region lying down,” Ahlaghki said.

The statement was an unmistakable reference to the possibility of American servicemen being killed and their bodies being transported out of the region. Ahlaghki further contended that Iran’s military preparations have contributed to Washington’s decision not to use the weapon against Iranian targets.

His warnings extended beyond a potential American bombing campaign. Speaking before members of Iran’s parliament, Ahlaghki threatened an extensive Iranian military response if the United States and Israel launch additional operations against the Islamic Republic.

“If the American-Zionist enemy miscalculates again, the response of the Iranian people and the Islamic fighters will be surprising and widespread,” he said.

The defense minister also warned that Washington and its regional partners would be held accountable for any escalation resulting from renewed military action, including consequences extending beyond the immediate battlefield.

Ahlaghki’s statements come as Iran seeks to restore and expand its military capabilities following attacks on its defense infrastructure and the loss of senior military officials. His agenda includes increasing weapons production, strengthening domestic defense manufacturing, accelerating military research, and expanding cooperation with private-sector companies involved in developing advanced technologies.

A major component of his plans involves restructuring and modernizing the Defense Ministry to address evolving military threats. Iran has placed particular emphasis on its missile capabilities, which remain central to its strategy for confronting Israel and deterring American military intervention.

Before becoming defense minister, Ahlaghki headed Iran’s Aerospace Industries Organization, an institution closely associated with the development and production of the country’s missile systems. His involvement in Iran’s weapons programs has resulted in sanctions imposed by the United States and European authorities.

Ahlaghki has also promised to maintain Iranian support for the network of terrorist organizations and allied armed groups that Tehran describes as the “Axis of Resistance.” The network has long served as a central component of Iran’s regional strategy, allowing the Islamic Republic to project military influence beyond its borders and threaten Israel and American interests through allied forces.

Iranian lawmakers formally approved Ahlaghki’s appointment on Sunday by a vote of 237 to 15, following his nomination by President Masoud Pezeshkian on October 5. The confirmation ended months of temporary leadership under Majid Ebn al-Reza, who had overseen the ministry since Nasirzadeh was killed in the opening American-Israeli strikes on February 28.

During the confirmation proceedings, Pezeshkian himself raised concerns about the new minister’s personal safety, claiming that Ahlaghki was on an American assassination list. The Iranian president expressed hope that his nominee would remain alive long enough to carry out his responsibilities and further develop the country’s military capabilities.

The confrontation has intensified following reports that American military planners have prepared options for using the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb against Iranian targets. The weapon is considered the largest non-nuclear bomb in the American arsenal, and potential targets reportedly include Iranian nuclear facilities, military installations, and energy infrastructure.

President Trump also recently discussed the possibility of striking Iran’s heavily fortified Pickaxe Mountain nuclear complex, emphasizing his determination to prevent Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons. While ruling out the use of nuclear weapons and the deployment of American ground troops, Trump did not exclude the possibility of employing the powerful conventional bomb.

Ahlaghki’s military ambitions extend to improving the range, precision, and destructive capabilities of Iran’s ballistic and cruise missiles. His proposed initiatives also include developing advanced drones, strengthening air defenses, expanding counter-drone capabilities, and advancing military satellite technology.

The new defense minister’s record has attracted international scrutiny for nearly two decades. The United Nations imposed sanctions on him in 2007 over his association with Iran’s ballistic missile industry, including the Shahid Bagheri Industrial Group, which has been involved in producing solid-fuel missiles. He has also faced American and European sanctions for his activities in Iran’s defense sector.

{Matzav.com}

The Ziditchover chassidus in Bnei Brak has yet to issue an endorsement of United Torah Judaism ahead of the upcoming Israeli elections, amid lingering anger over the imprisonment of the Ziditchover Rebbe’s grandson, who recently served a 20-day sentence in an IDF military prison despite extensive efforts to secure his release.

The Ziditchover Rebbe, whose bais medrash is located on Ravina Street in Bnei Brak, has remained silent regarding the elections. No formal instructions have been issued to chassidim concerning which party to support, whether to participate in organized election activities, or even whether to cast their ballots.

The unusual silence has drawn attention within chareidi political circles, particularly because chassidishe communities traditionally receive clear instructions from their Rebbes ahead of elections, accompanied by organized efforts to encourage voter participation.

While some speculation had suggested that Ziditchov’s position was connected to financial demands or disagreements over government funding, sources indicate that the underlying issue is the recent imprisonment of the Rebbe’s grandson, Shmuel Shmelka Pinter.

Pinter, a yeshiva bochur, was sentenced to 20 days in Military Prison 10 amid the ongoing controversy surrounding the enlistment of chareidi yeshiva students.

The incident prompted considerable distress within the chassidus, particularly after repeated attempts by the Rebbe to intervene on his grandson’s behalf failed to produce results.

According to the sources, the Rebbe personally appealed to relevant officials in an effort to obtain Pinter’s release, but his requests were unsuccessful.

The imprisonment also sparked demonstrations outside Military Prison 10, with Ziditchover chassidim and supporters participating in protests against the incarceration of yeshiva bochurim.

The Ziditchover Rebbe himself attended demonstrations held outside the military prison together with members of the Sanz and Ger chassiduses, publicly expressing his opposition to the imprisonment.

Despite the protests, the appeals and the Rebbe’s personal involvement, Pinter was required to serve his full 20-day sentence.

The episode reportedly left deep resentment within the chassidus, with members questioning the effectiveness of chareidi political representation in protecting yeshiva bochurim from military prosecution.

A senior figure within Ziditchov expressed that frustration in pointed remarks, questioning why political representatives were now seeking the community’s electoral support after failing to secure the young man’s release.

“Now they are looking for us? Suddenly they need our votes?” the official said.

He went on to describe the chassidus’s position as a form of silent protest.

“We are hereby joining Ger’s silent protest. We, too, will not work or mobilize others, and who even knows whether we will go out to vote,” he declared.

The remarks were made before Ger’s subsequent public endorsement of United Torah Judaism. Ger has since instructed its chassidim to support the party.

{Matzav.com}

Maran Rav Dov Landau, Rosh Yeshiva of Slabodka, traveled to Tel Aviv on Friday for a special gathering with dozens of neighborhood rabbonim and community leaders, delivering an impassioned address about the challenges facing the Torah world and the importance of participating in the upcoming Israeli elections.

The gathering, organized in support of United Torah Judaism, brought together rabbonim from across Tel Aviv as part of the party’s election preparations. Rav Landau emphasized the significance of demonstrating public support for Torah and its lomdim, particularly in a city where the chareidi population constitutes a relatively small portion of the general public.

Opening his remarks, Rav Landau addressed the difficulties confronting the chareidi community in Eretz Yisroel, describing the treatment of Torah learners as a source of deep anguish.

“With the permission of the rabbonim, we are all aware of the situation facing the chareidi community in Eretz Yisroel, and everyone feels the pain of the great chillul Hashem caused by the persecution of Torah and those who study it throughout recent years,” he said.

Turning to the rabbonim in attendance, the Rosh Yeshiva praised their efforts to spread Torah and strengthen Yiddishkeit among Jews of varying backgrounds and levels of observance.

“Each of you, in your respective positions, has merited to influence people who are more distant and those who are less distant, bringing them closer to Torah and Yiddishkeit. And with siyata diShmaya, the awakening toward Torah study and mitzvah observance exists everywhere, even in the most unexpected places,” Rav Landau said.

He then addressed the particular importance of the gathering taking place in Tel Aviv, noting that a public demonstration of commitment to Torah in such a setting carries significance extending far beyond the immediate participants.

“We are here in Tel Aviv, and there is no need to explain what kind of city this is. When we increase kiddush Hashem in this city, it has tremendous significance, both in Shomayim and, lehavdil, in the eyes of the authorities, the media, and the general public,” he declared.

Rav Landau pointed out that even in Tel Aviv, there are residents who support United Torah Judaism and identify with the message of the Torah community.

“Here in Tel Aviv as well, people vote for the letter Gimmel and join the declaration of those who fear Hashem: We have nothing remaining except this Torah!” he said.

One of the central moments of the address came when Rav Landau offered a striking comparison to illustrate what he described as the urgency of the present situation.

He invoked the image of a Sefer Torah falling to the ground, explaining that when such an incident occurs, nobody pauses to calculate whether responding is convenient or whether someone else might take responsibility.

“Work to explain, in a pleasant manner, to those who are receptive to your influence and to all your acquaintances, that when, chas veshalom, a Sefer Torah falls to the ground, nobody makes calculations. Everyone runs to lift it up,” Rav Landau said.

He then applied the comparison to the difficulties facing the Torah community, arguing that the current circumstances demand a similarly immediate response from those concerned about the honor of Torah.

“The situation is that the Torah and those who follow its path are being trampled in a manner that pains every Jewish heart. Everyone must elevate the honor of Torah and those who study it. And when one votes for the letter Gimmel, one proclaims loudly: Moshe is true, his Torah is true, and the Torah endures forever,” he declared.

The gathering was part of a broader series of meetings being held by leading roshei yeshiva with rabbonim and community representatives in cities throughout Eretz Yisroel ahead of the elections.

In recent days, senior Torah leaders have been stressing the importance they attach to participation in the elections, particularly against the backdrop of the military draft controversy and the difficulties experienced by yeshiva bochurim and avreichim.

Earlier in the week, Rav Landau issued a directive to shochtim instructing them not to travel abroad for shechitah assignments if doing so would prevent them from voting. The instruction was issued despite the potential loss of income involved, underscoring the importance he attaches to participation in the election.

Concluding his remarks in Tel Aviv, Rav Landau offered a bracha to those gathered.

“May everyone merit siyata diShmaya in all good matters, and may we merit that the will of Hashem succeed through our hands,” he said.

{Matzav.com}

A young child from Netivot desperately needs life-saving surgery.

His family cannot afford the enormous medical expenses and is turning to Acheinu Bnei Yisrael for help.

Whoever saves one Jewish life is considered to have saved an entire world.

CLICK HERE TO DONATE.

A formal announcement was delivered in the Belzer chassidus on Motzoei Shabbos, conveying the Belzer Rebbe’s directive that chassidim participate in the upcoming Israeli elections and support the United Torah Judaism party.

The announcement was read by the Rebbe’s longtime gabbai, Rav Shimon Wolf Klein, in the presence of the Rebbe. Deputy Minister Yisroel Eichler and Knesset candidate Elyakim Stark stood nearby as the message was delivered to the assembled chassidim.

The declaration emphasized the importance of the approaching elections for the chareidi community, particularly in light of the ongoing challenges facing yeshivos, kollelim and bochurim amid the controversy surrounding military enlistment.

At the outset, Rav Klein reiterated the Rebbe’s longstanding position regarding participation in the elections.

“It is known to everyone that the Rebbe has instructed us to participate in the elections,” he declared.

The announcement stressed that the outcome of the elections would have significant consequences for the future of Torah institutions and the ability of chareidi representatives to defend the community’s interests.

“With Election Day approaching, and with the knowledge that the institutions of Yiddishkeit depend on this, the chareidi representatives stand guard to protect the Torah world from those who seek to uproot religion and to strengthen all the foundations of Yiddishkeit, particularly to support the bochurim and avreichim in light of everything they have endured recently,” the declaration stated.

The message then called upon Belzer chassidim to make an exceptional effort to ensure the success of United Torah Judaism, encouraging them to become actively involved in election-related activities and inspire members of other communities to participate as well.

“Therefore, each and every individual is asked to strengthen their efforts and to work beyond their usual capabilities to influence others through this holy activity, setting an example for other communities so that they, too, will do everything possible to vote and increase their efforts for the success of the United Torah Judaism list, letter Gimmel, thereby sanctifying Hashem’s Name publicly and elevating the honor of holiness,” the announcement continued.

The declaration concluded with a blessing for those who heed the Rebbe’s instructions and devote themselves to the effort.

“Through this, each and every individual should merit salvation through all the blessings bestowed by the Rebbe: long life, blessed children, abundant livelihood, and a good and blessed year, with all good things.”

{Matzav.com}

A two-year-old chareidi boy was rushed to Sheba Medical Center at Tel Hashomer in serious condition on Shabbos after apparently drowning in a bathtub at his family’s home in the Kiryat Vizhnitz neighborhood of Bnei Brak.

Emergency personnel from United Hatzalah and Magen David Adom were dispatched to the residence after receiving reports that the toddler had been found unconscious. Responders immediately began administering lifesaving treatment, including assisted ventilation, before transporting him to the hospital in a mobile intensive care unit.

United Hatzalah medic Eliyahu Lintop, who was among the first responders, said family members told him that the child had lost consciousness after drowning in the bathtub.

“His family told me that the child drowned in the bathtub and lost consciousness. I provided medical treatment, including respiratory assistance, after which he was evacuated in a mobile intensive care unit to Sheba Hospital at Tel Hashomer in serious condition,” Lintop said.

Magen David Adom’s Dan District emergency dispatch center also received a report of an unconscious toddler inside a Bnei Brak residence, prompting the immediate deployment of additional medical personnel.

MDA medic Menachem Indig and motorcycle emergency responder Yehuda Londner, who treated the child at the scene, described finding him unconscious and requiring urgent medical intervention.

“We saw the toddler unconscious after he was found unresponsive at a home in Bnei Brak. We provided lifesaving medical treatment, including assisted ventilation, and evacuated him in an MDA mobile intensive care unit to the hospital in serious condition,” the responders said.

The child was transported to Sheba Medical Center for continued emergency treatment. The precise circumstances surrounding the incident have not yet been established.

{Matzav.com}

An Israeli court has ordered the man accused of murdering avreich Yishai Por inside Kollel Chazon Ish in Bnei Brak to undergo 25 years of compulsory psychiatric hospitalization, after determining that he was suffering from a severe mental illness at the time of the killing and is currently unfit to stand trial.

The ruling brings a significant development in the case that shocked the Bnei Brak Torah community in May, when Por was fatally stabbed while learning in the kollel with his son.

The accused, Guy Achtelinger, had been facing criminal proceedings in connection with the killing. However, a psychiatric evaluation submitted to the court concluded that he was experiencing a severe psychotic episode at the time of the incident and that his mental condition prevents him from participating meaningfully in legal proceedings.

Based on those findings, the court ordered that the criminal proceedings be halted and that Achtelinger be transferred to a psychiatric facility under a compulsory hospitalization order.

The hospitalization period was set at 25 years, the maximum permitted under the applicable legal provisions.

The decision means that Achtelinger will not presently face a criminal trial or receive a conventional prison sentence for the killing. Instead, he will remain under psychiatric supervision, subject to the legal procedures governing compulsory hospitalization and any future review of his condition.

The murder occurred inside the well-known Kollel Chazon Ish, a prominent Torah institution in Bnei Brak, where Por had been sitting and learning with his son.

According to accounts of the incident, Achtelinger entered the building and attacked Por with a knife, inflicting fatal injuries.

Emergency personnel were summoned to the scene, but Por’s injuries proved fatal.

The killing sent shock waves throughout Bnei Brak, particularly because it occurred inside a beis medrash, a place ordinarily associated with Torah learning and tranquility.

The fact that Por’s son was present during the attack added to the anguish surrounding the tragedy.

Investigators subsequently examined the suspect’s background and mental condition, with psychiatric assessments becoming a central issue in the proceedings.

Under Israeli law, criminal defendants who are determined to have been legally insane at the time of an offense may be exempt from criminal responsibility. Separately, individuals who are mentally incapable of understanding or participating in their trial may have proceedings suspended until they are considered fit.

In this case, the court’s decision was based on the psychiatric findings concerning Achtelinger’s condition at the time of the alleged murder and his present ability to stand trial.

The 25-year hospitalization order is a compulsory treatment measure rather than a criminal prison sentence. Such orders are governed by mental-health legislation and may be subject to periodic medical and legal review.

{Matzav.com}

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has declared that Itamar Ben Gvir will neither become Israel’s next defense minister nor retain his current position as national security minister if Likud forms the next government, triggering an angry confrontation with Otzma Yehudit just days before Israel’s October 27 Knesset elections.

Netanyahu’s announcement represents a significant blow to Ben Gvir, who has made securing the Defense Ministry a central demand in his negotiations over a future coalition. It also raises questions about whether Otzma Yehudit, currently a key partner in Netanyahu’s governing bloc, will have a place in the next government.

The prime minister first addressed Ben Gvir’s demands during an interview with Army Radio on Wednesday, October 14, when he insisted that the Defense Ministry would remain under Likud control regardless of the national security minister’s ambitions.

“I know he wants it, but he doesn’t decide,” Netanyahu said, making clear that Ben Gvir would not determine the distribution of senior cabinet positions.

Netanyahu went further during a campaign appearance in Acre on Thursday, announcing that Likud would retain control of the Defense Ministry, the National Security Ministry and the Education Ministry in any government he establishes following the election.

The declaration was especially significant because Ben Gvir currently heads the National Security Ministry, which oversees the Israel Police and other internal security responsibilities. Netanyahu’s remarks effectively ruled out allowing him to continue in that position while also rejecting his demand for the defense portfolio.

Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Yechiel Leiter, subsequently reiterated the prime minister’s position during an interview with CNN, reinforcing the message that Netanyahu intends to keep the country’s principal security ministries in Likud hands.

Ben Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit party responded with an unusually sharp statement, accusing Netanyahu of preparing to abandon his existing right-wing coalition partners in favor of an agreement with former IDF chief of staff Gadi Eisenkot, who heads the opposition Yashar party.

“The cat is out of the bag,” Otzma Yehudit declared, arguing that Netanyahu’s announcement revealed a broader political strategy to exclude Ben Gvir from the next government.

The party said the prime minister’s statements strengthened its suspicion that “a decision has been made to exclude Ben Gvir and Otzma Yehudit from the next coalition, bring in Eisenkot instead, and hand these portfolios over to the left.”

Otzma Yehudit also issued a direct warning to Netanyahu that the composition of the next government would ultimately be determined by the election results rather than by his campaign declarations.

“Dear Prime Minister, only the people will decide,” the party said. “Strong Ben Gvir, strong Israel!”

The accusation that Netanyahu is preparing a coalition agreement with Eisenkot has not been substantiated. Both Netanyahu and Eisenkot have publicly denied that they are seeking to establish a unity government together.

Nevertheless, Ben Gvir has repeatedly suggested that Netanyahu is considering such an arrangement, warning that it would betray the expectations of right-wing voters who want the next government to maintain the policies of the existing coalition.

The dispute intensified after Ben Gvir announced in September that he would demand the Defense Ministry as a condition for joining another Netanyahu-led government.

He argued that Israel’s military leadership required a fundamental change in its strategic approach and said he wanted to introduce a more aggressive security doctrine focused on achieving decisive victories against the country’s enemies.

Ben Gvir also proposed appointing former Likud lawmaker Tally Gotliv, who joined Otzma Yehudit ahead of the election and occupies the second position on its candidate list, as justice minister.

Under his proposed arrangement, Otzma Yehudit MK Yitzhak Wasserlauf would succeed him as national security minister, allowing the party to retain control of that portfolio while expanding its influence into the Defense and Justice ministries.

Gotliv has said that, if appointed justice minister, she would seek the removal of Israel’s attorney general and pursue changes to the authority of the State Attorney’s Office.

Ben Gvir, meanwhile, has outlined a defense agenda that includes changes to the IDF’s rules of engagement, increased compensation for combat soldiers and revisions to the military’s ethical guidelines.

He has also called for expanded measures against Palestinian terrorist organizations, including disarming the Palestinian Authority and pursuing the arrest of senior figures accused of supporting terrorism.

During an interview with Walla on Thursday, Ben Gvir dismissed Netanyahu’s insistence that the Defense Ministry would remain with Likud, suggesting that the prime minister had made similar declarations in the past only to reverse course.

“He also said in the past that I won’t be a minister, and we saw what happened. I will get more seats, and I will be defense minister,” Ben Gvir said.

His remarks reflected his belief that a strong election showing for Otzma Yehudit would give him sufficient bargaining power to demand a senior ministry despite Netanyahu’s public objections.

Ben Gvir has also invoked his role in previous security cabinet deliberations to argue that his positions have influenced major Israeli military decisions.

He claimed that following the September 2024 elimination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, Netanyahu personally thanked him for pressing the government to approve the operation.

According to Ben Gvir, the prime minister told him, “Thank you for insisting in the limited cabinet that this would go ahead.”

The confrontation comes amid broader tensions between Netanyahu and his right-wing coalition partners over the distribution of votes within their political bloc.

Earlier this month, Netanyahu appeared alongside Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich at a conference in Yerushalayim aimed at mobilizing religious Zionist voters ahead of the election.

The gathering, held October 8 under the banner of strengthening the right-wing camp, brought together prominent rabbonim, yeshiva leaders and political activists.

Ben Gvir was not invited to participate, a decision that intensified suspicions within Otzma Yehudit that Netanyahu was favoring Smotrich’s Religious Zionist Party at its expense.

Likud and Smotrich’s party also signed a surplus-vote agreement, an electoral arrangement that can help parties maximize their representation in the Knesset.

Otzma Yehudit complained that Likud had declined to enter a similar agreement with Ben Gvir’s party.

The political disagreements have become increasingly public as the election approaches, with Ben Gvir accusing Netanyahu of trying to attract voters away from Otzma Yehudit rather than focusing on expanding the right-wing bloc.

Speaking earlier in the week at a political conference organized by Ynet and Yedioth Ahronoth, Ben Gvir urged Netanyahu to seek additional support from voters currently backing Eisenkot rather than competing with his existing coalition allies.

“Instead of taking votes from me, go take votes from Eisenkot,” Ben Gvir said. “Don’t make that mistake. The bloc must be a fully right-wing bloc.”

He continued by warning Netanyahu against undermining Otzma Yehudit while simultaneously exploring potential arrangements with parties outside the existing coalition.

“Prime minister, do you want to form a right-wing government? Do you want to form a government that belongs to us? Go bring votes from outside the bloc, from Eisenkot. Don’t fight me. Don’t take votes from me.”

The approaching election has increased the importance of these disputes because neither Netanyahu’s political allies nor the principal opposition parties have demonstrated a clear path to securing the 61 Knesset seats required for a governing majority.

Recent surveys have indicated that both blocs could fall short of an outright majority, leaving smaller parties and post-election negotiations with a potentially decisive role in determining the next government.

That uncertainty could give Ben Gvir leverage if Netanyahu requires Otzma Yehudit’s support to assemble a coalition, even after publicly ruling out granting him the ministries he wants.

At the same time, Netanyahu’s insistence that Likud retain the major security portfolios suggests that he intends to limit the influence of coalition partners over defense and internal security policy.

The confrontation has also created an opening for Eisenkot, whose Yashar party has emerged as a significant force in the opposition.

Eisenkot, who previously served as IDF chief of staff, has presented himself as an experienced security figure capable of replacing Netanyahu and has sharply criticized the government’s handling of the war against Hamas.

During a campaign appearance near the Gaza border on Thursday, Eisenkot pledged that, if elected prime minister, he would dismantle Hamas’s military capabilities and remove the terrorist organization from power in Gaza within 18 months.

Netanyahu’s Likud party responded by questioning whether Eisenkot could implement such a policy while relying on the support of Arab political parties.

Despite their public disagreements, speculation about a possible post-election arrangement between Netanyahu and Eisenkot has continued, particularly because of the difficulty both political blocs may face in assembling a majority.

For Ben Gvir, the immediate challenge is to demonstrate that Otzma Yehudit will emerge from the October 27 election with enough seats to force Netanyahu to reconsider his position.

{Matzav.com}