Feed aggregator

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}

Mass demonstrations across France erupted into widespread violence Saturday, October 17, as rioters looted luxury boutiques, set fire to government buildings and attacked police officers in several major cities. The unrest, which followed nationwide protests over the rising cost of living and deteriorating public services, reportedly left dozens of people injured and resulted in more than 1,200 arrests.

According to figures cited by Israeli news outlet Kikar HaShabbat, approximately 550,000 people participated in demonstrations across France, while protest organizers estimated attendance at as many as 800,000. The demonstrations were supported by far-left political groups, with additional participants from immigrant communities and other protest movements.

Although many participants joined organized marches to protest economic conditions and government policies, violent groups reportedly exploited the large gatherings to attack businesses, government offices and security personnel. Police faced assaults involving bricks, stones and fireworks fired directly at officers, while fires and extensive property damage were reported in numerous cities.

The French Interior Ministry reportedly counted approximately 60 injured members of the security forces during an earlier stage of the unrest, with subsequent reports placing the number closer to 150. At least two injured officers were reportedly evacuated unconscious. By late Saturday night, police had announced more than 1,200 arrests nationwide.

Among the most serious incidents was a devastating fire at the historic city hall in Limoges, central France, where masked rioters allegedly stormed the municipal building after a demonstration had ended.

The structure, constructed in 1883, sustained extensive damage after attackers reportedly set municipal police vehicles ablaze, smashed windows and forced their way into the building.

Flames spread through part of the city hall and reached the roof, prompting firefighters to undertake a major operation to prevent the blaze from consuming additional sections of the historic landmark.

Later in the evening, the prefect of Haute-Vienne reportedly announced that much of the building had been destroyed. Footage circulating from the scene showed portions of the roof collapsing as residents gathered nearby and watched firefighters battle the flames.

One municipal employee reportedly broke down in tears upon seeing the destruction. Another woman at the scene described the devastation as a catastrophe that was impossible to comprehend or accept.

Additional vehicles were reportedly burned in Limoges, while businesses in the city center were broken into and looted. Clashes also occurred near the prefecture building, where rioters allegedly threw objects and launched fireworks at police, prompting officers to deploy crowd-control measures.

The violence extended to Bordeaux, where the busy Sainte-Catherine shopping district became a focal point of looting and arson.

Groups of rioters reportedly smashed their way into commercial establishments, removed merchandise and caused extensive damage to stores along the city’s main shopping streets.

Videos shared on social media purportedly showed luxury retailers, including Dior and Louis Vuitton, being targeted, with merchandise stolen from stores during the disorder.

One of the most serious commercial incidents involved a Decathlon sporting goods store, which was reportedly ransacked and set on fire. Flames spread to the building’s exterior, while nearby streets were left littered with merchandise, debris and spent tear-gas canisters.

A separate group of rioters allegedly attacked the official residence of the prefect of Gironde, forcing open an entrance, setting a fire in the courtyard and entering the compound.

Authorities reportedly dispatched RAID, the French police’s specialized tactical intervention unit, to respond to the assault on the government property.

Officials in Bordeaux reported 23 injuries, including 15 members of the security forces and eight protesters. Police arrested 55 people in connection with the disturbances.

In Lyon, France’s third-largest city, demonstrators and police clashed as fires and vandalism spread through the city center.

The historic tourist information office at Place Bellecour was reportedly set ablaze, while windows were smashed and businesses damaged elsewhere in the city.

Police deployed tear gas, crowd-control grenades and water cannons against groups involved in the disturbances. Several protest marches broke up as confrontations intensified.

Marseille also experienced attacks on public buildings, including an assault on city hall.

According to the report, groups of demonstrators breached barriers protecting the municipal building and entered the premises, where windows were broken and property damaged.

A statue of Marianne, the female figure representing the French Republic, was reportedly knocked over during the intrusion.

Marseille Mayor Benoît Payan said the physical damage to city hall was relatively limited, although the breach of such an important government building underscored the seriousness of the unrest.

Elsewhere in Marseille, garbage containers were set on fire, and police facilities reportedly came under attack.

In the northern city of Lille, demonstrators allegedly smashed glass doors to enter city hall, vandalizing sections of the building as hundreds of protesters confronted police in surrounding streets.

Authorities also reported attempted incursions into municipal buildings in Calais and Angers, as well as attacks on police stations in Marseille and Brest.

In Paris, violent confrontations were reported around Place de la République, where masked individuals threw stones and fireworks toward police officers, set fires and damaged commercial properties.

Security forces responded with tear gas and other crowd-control equipment as they attempted to disperse the groups responsible for the violence. A food store was also reportedly broken into and merchandise stolen during the disturbances.

In Nice, on France’s Mediterranean coast, approximately a dozen businesses were reportedly vandalized or looted, including clothing retailers, electronics stores and sporting goods outlets.

Among the businesses identified as targets were JD Sports, Micromania and Decathlon, along with a Yamaha motorcycle dealership.

Rioters also reportedly damaged bus stops and three municipal police vehicles. Along the Promenade des Anglais, officers confronted groups throwing stones and other objects.

Authorities reported approximately 40 arrests in Nice and injuries to around 10 demonstrators. One individual was seriously injured by shattered glass while allegedly attempting to break a storefront window.

Another serious injury occurred in Saint-Étienne, where a teenage protester suffered severe damage to his hand during a confrontation with police.

French authorities opened an investigation involving the IGPN, the agency responsible for investigating allegations of police misconduct, to determine the circumstances surrounding the injury. Additional reporting indicated that the injury occurred after the protester picked up a grenade deployed by police.

French President Emmanuel Macron condemned the violence and promised that those responsible for attacking public institutions, businesses and security personnel would be held accountable.

In a statement issued following the unrest, Macron declared that violence had no place in the French Republic and warned that individuals responsible for vandalism, looting and attacks on government buildings would face prosecution.

He also expressed support for police and other security personnel tasked with protecting the right to demonstrate peacefully, while condemning those whose actions prevented lawful protesters from making their voices heard.

Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu issued a similarly forceful condemnation, announcing that approximately 1,200 people had been arrested and 150 police officers and gendarmes injured.

Lecornu described the scale of the violence as extraordinary and said the relatively limited number of more serious injuries was fortunate given the intensity of the confrontations.

The prime minister accused violent extremists and criminal elements of exploiting legitimate public dissatisfaction to attack government institutions. He said the administration would not allow intimidation or destruction to determine its response to the country’s political and economic challenges.

Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez also attributed responsibility for some of the disturbances to elements of the far left, while distinguishing the violent groups from the much larger number of people who participated in peaceful demonstrations.

The protests brought together a broad coalition that included students, labor unions, Yellow Vest activists, environmental campaigners and left-wing political organizations.

Their grievances centered on rising household expenses, declining purchasing power, shortages in public education and dissatisfaction with government spending priorities.

The demonstrations followed growing opposition to proposed reductions in public spending as France attempts to address its budget deficit. The government’s plans for the 2027 budget include approximately 43 billion euros in spending cuts, a proposal that has intensified criticism from unions and opposition groups.

The unrest also unfolded against the backdrop of France’s approaching 2027 presidential election, with competing political movements seeking to capitalize on public frustration over economic conditions.

Far-right leader Marine Le Pen accused the radical left of encouraging disorder, while Jean-Luc Mélenchon, a leading figure on the French left, defended the right to demonstrate and criticized aspects of the police response.

In Limoges, the destruction of the historic city hall emerged as one of the most striking symbols of the violence. Local prefect Maurice Barate said the building’s roof had collapsed onto the floors below, with the western wing among the few sections to escape the worst damage. Approximately two-thirds of the exterior had reportedly been destroyed.

The 143-year-old building, inspired architecturally by Paris City Hall, was among the most prominent public landmarks damaged during the nationwide unrest. Firefighters continued assessing the destruction as authorities began investigating those responsible for the blaze.

{Matzav.com}

A former technology official involved in Likud’s election operations has submitted a sworn affidavit to Israel’s Supreme Court alleging that a new application developed for Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s party could enable the collection of information about voters at polling stations, potentially circumventing restrictions imposed by the court.

The allegations, reported Sunday by The Times of Israel, come just nine days before Israel’s October 27 Knesset elections and raise questions about voter privacy, election monitoring and the use of digital technology by political parties.

At the center of the controversy is Victory 26, a campaign application designed to help Likud organize its election operations and mobilize supporters.

David Rechter, who previously worked on the party’s voter-mobilization technology, claims in his affidavit that the application possesses capabilities that could allow party activists to collect and transmit information about individuals arriving at polling stations.

According to Rechter, those capabilities could undermine a recent Supreme Court ruling restricting the transfer of identifying information about voters.

The dispute centers on the distinction between legitimate election-day efforts to encourage supporters to vote and the collection of personal information about citizens participating in the democratic process.

Israeli political parties have long relied on sophisticated voter databases and election-day operations to identify supporters, track turnout and encourage registered voters to cast ballots.

However, the use of digital applications to gather information at polling stations has generated legal controversy over privacy protections and the possibility that political organizations could improperly monitor individual voters.

On September 17, Israel’s Supreme Court unanimously ruled that political party representatives stationed at polling places may not transmit information identifying individual voters who have cast ballots. The justices determined that the practice violated privacy protections and lacked a sufficient legal basis.

The ruling was considered a significant setback for Likud and the chareidi parties, which have traditionally relied on detailed turnout information to encourage supporters who had not yet voted to make their way to the polls.

Five days after the ruling, Likud distributed a message to campaign activists announcing Victory 26 and encouraging them to download the application.

Rechter, who served as a volunteer technology and voter-mobilization chief during Likud’s 2022 election campaign, claims that modern technology could enable campaign workers to bypass the court’s restrictions without manually entering prohibited information.

“The High Court ruling can easily be circumvented, whether by installing a dedicated app, opening a link, or simply exchanging ordinary WhatsApp messages, even without touching the cellphone,” Rechter wrote in his affidavit.

He explained that polling station officials are required to read aloud voters’ names and identification numbers during the verification process. A smartphone equipped with recording and artificial intelligence technology could potentially capture that information and transmit it to a campaign database.

According to Rechter, a party that knows the identity of its representative at a particular polling station could combine information obtained through a phone with existing voter records to determine precisely who had voted and when.

Such a system could provide political campaigns with real-time information about individual voters despite the court’s prohibition.

Rechter also described discussions during the 2022 election campaign about developing backup methods for collecting voter information if the widely used Elector application became unavailable.

“We were concerned that Elector would be targeted by Iranian cyberattacks on election day, so we prepared an alternative,” he said.

He explained that campaign officials considered using WhatsApp messages containing voter identification numbers to update central databases automatically.

That alternative system was never activated during the 2022 election, according to Rechter, because the existing application remained operational and there was no need to deploy the backup.

The Elector application itself had previously generated controversy over data security. In 2020, a security vulnerability exposed personal information from Israel’s voter registry, including identification numbers and telephone numbers belonging to millions of citizens.

The latest controversy has also focused on the Central Elections Committee’s decision to permit electronic devices inside polling stations for the purpose of transmitting general turnout figures.

Although the Supreme Court prohibited the transmission of information identifying individual voters, election officials have allowed parties to report numerical turnout data that does not reveal voters’ identities.

Critics argue that allowing smartphones to remain active inside polling stations could make it difficult to ensure that only permitted information is transmitted.

In correspondence concerning the matter, the Central Elections Committee’s legal adviser, Yifat Siminovsky, acknowledged that secretly recording and transcribing conversations inside polling stations without the knowledge of those involved could constitute illegal eavesdropping.

However, she previously rejected a request to prohibit smartphones entirely, concluding that the allegations presented at the time were insufficiently substantiated.

Rechter’s newly submitted affidavit is intended to provide additional evidence supporting renewed restrictions.

The document was submitted Sunday morning to the Supreme Court and the attorney general by attorney Yuval Yoaz, chairman of the Democracy Guard organization.

Federal authorities have arrested a 51-year-old Los Angeles man accused of threatening to carry out a mass-casualty attack against a Chabad-affiliated Jewish preschool and posting disturbing messages about burning synagogues, after investigators discovered materials allegedly intended for making Molotov cocktails inside his home.

The suspect, identified as Steven Carlos Duenas, a resident of the Los Feliz neighborhood of Los Angeles, was taken into custody by FBI agents during the early morning hours of October 2. The arrest followed an investigation into a series of threatening social media posts directed at Jewish institutions, including JEMS, a Jewish preschool affiliated with Chabad.

During a search of the residence Duenas shared with his mother, federal agents reportedly discovered materials that could be used to assemble incendiary devices. Among the items recovered was a glass bottle containing gasoline and fuel, which investigators believe was intended for use as a Molotov cocktail.

The investigation began after authorities became aware of several alarming messages Duenas allegedly published on X during the middle of September. The posts included explicit references to attacks on Jewish institutions, expressions of support for the Houthis and images suggesting preparations for violence.

In one particularly disturbing post, Duenas allegedly displayed a Molotov cocktail in front of a television showing footage of the destruction caused by the September 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center.

The accompanying message urged viewers, “Don’t just watch the war, take part in it.”

Investigators also examined a video he allegedly uploaded featuring music by the rock band R.E.M., accompanied by a message declaring, “I love my Houthi brothers.”

Other posts contained more direct threats against Jewish institutions. In one message, Duenas allegedly wrote, “Not enough synagogues have been burned.”

Another post reportedly referred to obtaining Tomahawk missiles through Facebook Marketplace and suggested using them to attack the preschool.

“I got some Tomahawk missiles on Facebook Marketplace, maybe I’ll bomb the preschool later,” he allegedly wrote.

The threats prompted federal investigators to examine whether Duenas was preparing to carry out an attack rather than merely posting inflammatory statements online. The discovery of materials associated with incendiary devices during the subsequent search heightened concerns about the seriousness of the alleged threats.

Following his arrest, Duenas appeared in federal court for a detention hearing. He was brought into the courtroom in handcuffs and reportedly wept during the proceedings.

His mother attended the hearing, and as Duenas was being escorted back into custody, he silently mouthed the words “I love you” in her direction.

The next hearing in his federal case has been scheduled for November 10.

Duenas’s mother, Maria Duenas, spoke with reporters about her son’s personal difficulties, describing what she characterized as a severe deterioration in his mental health.

According to his mother, Duenas has struggled with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and serious depression. She said that losing his job as a social worker for Los Angeles County, together with the breakdown of his marriage, had contributed to a profound personal crisis.

She also claimed that he developed serious problems involving alcohol and prescription medications following those setbacks.

Maria Duenas disputed the suggestion that her son harbored deeply rooted antisemitic beliefs, arguing that his threatening behavior should be understood in the context of his mental health difficulties.

She expressed hope that he would ultimately receive psychiatric treatment and rehabilitation rather than remain trapped in a worsening cycle of illness and substance abuse.

Additional reporting on the federal case indicates that prosecutors have charged Duenas in connection with threatening communications and possession of an illegal destructive device. The allegations remain before the court, and he has not been convicted.

The federal complaint reportedly identifies September 19 as a particularly significant date in the investigation, when Duenas allegedly published several posts combining antisemitic statements with references to incendiary weapons and the Chabad preschool.

One of those posts reportedly described the intended attack as a “mass incident,” language that alarmed investigators because it suggested the possibility of violence involving multiple victims.

JEMS Preschool operates under Chabad of Greater Los Feliz and serves young children, including toddlers as young as 18 months old. The institution is part of the local Chabad community’s educational programming.

The reported discovery of materials for an incendiary device during the FBI search added a physical-evidence component to the investigation, beyond the online statements that first drew attention to Duenas.

His mother also told reporters that the family had previously experienced tensions with Jewish neighbors over a shared fence, but maintained that her son had never discussed the disagreement in a manner that led her to believe he harbored antisemitic intentions.

Federal authorities have not publicly established that any attack was imminent or that Duenas had carried out violence against the preschool or another Jewish institution. The criminal proceedings are continuing, with his next court appearance scheduled for November 10.

{Matzav.com}

A 51-year-old Los Angeles man is facing serious criminal allegations after investigators reportedly uncovered evidence of a planned attack against a Jewish preschool affiliated with Chabad, including preparations involving an incendiary device and disturbing statements about carrying out a mass-casualty assault.

The suspect, Steven Carlos Duenas, was arrested on October 2 following an investigation into threats against Jewish institutions in the Los Angeles area. Details reported over the weekend have brought renewed attention to the case, particularly the alleged targeting of the JEMS preschool in the Los Feliz neighborhood.

According to prosecutors, investigators discovered materials believed to be intended for the construction of a Molotov cocktail, along with statements allegedly indicating an interest in attacking a Jewish educational institution.

The allegations have raised serious concerns because the reported target was a preschool attended by young children.

The case involves alleged preparations for violence rather than a completed attack. Authorities have not reported that an explosive or incendiary device was detonated at the school, and the allegations against Duenas have not been proven in court.

Investigators reportedly traced the threats to social media posts published in September. In one post dated September 19, Duenas allegedly displayed what appeared to be a Molotov cocktail against a television image of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center.

“Don’t simply watch the war, participate,” he wrote in a message accompanying the image.

Other posts attributed to Duenas expressed support for the Houthis, the Iranian-backed terrorist organization in Yemen. He reportedly referred to the group as his “homies” and declared that “not enough synagogues have been burned down.”

Federal agents raided the home Duenas shared with his mother in Los Feliz at approximately 4:30 a.m. on October 2. During the search, investigators reportedly recovered a glass bottle containing gasoline and other components prosecutors described as intended for use in a Molotov cocktail.

The investigation centered on threats against JEMS Preschool, an early-childhood education program operated by Chabad of Greater Los Feliz. The school serves children as young as 18 months and incorporates Jewish education and traditions into its curriculum.

The reported threats have drawn particular attention because of the young ages of the children attending the institution and the possibility that an incendiary attack could have caused numerous casualties.

Duenas appeared in federal court following his arrest and was ordered detained. During one court appearance, he reportedly cried while restrained in shackles and mouthed “I love you” to his mother before being taken back into custody.

His mother, Maria Duenas, told reporters that her son had experienced significant personal difficulties in recent years, including a divorce, the loss of his position as a Los Angeles County social worker, and struggles involving alcohol and prescription medications.

She also described a history of mental-health problems and disputed the suggestion that her son had been raised with hostility toward Jews.

According to his mother, the family had previously experienced a disagreement with Jewish neighbors over a shared fence, although she said her son had never discussed the dispute with her.

She expressed hope that he would receive psychiatric treatment and rehabilitation.

Duenas is being held at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Los Angeles, according to federal prison records. His next court appearance is scheduled for November 10.

{Matzav.com}

Rahm Emanuel is stepping up his political activity ahead of the 2028 presidential election, traveling through early primary states, appearing frequently on national television and offering Democrats a strategy for regaining power that puts him at odds with the party’s increasingly influential progressive wing.

The former White House chief of staff, Chicago mayor, congressman and U.S. ambassador to Japan has been making an unusually aggressive effort to shape the Democratic Party’s direction, even though the next presidential election remains more than two years away. His activities have fueled speculation that he intends to seek the party’s nomination while positioning himself as a pragmatic alternative to candidates associated with the Democratic left.

Emanuel returned to South Carolina this past week for his second visit in recent months, spending several days attending fundraisers and campaigning for Democratic candidates ahead of November’s midterm elections. South Carolina occupies a prominent place in the party’s presidential nominating calendar, making it an important destination for politicians considering a national campaign.

His travels have also taken him to Nevada, New Hampshire and Michigan, where he has appeared alongside Democratic candidates while making little effort to conceal his broader political interests. The appearances allow him to build relationships with party officials, donors and activists while presenting his ideas about how Democrats should approach the next presidential election.

Emanuel has simultaneously undertaken an extensive media campaign, securing considerably more television and interview appearances than many other Democrats whose names have surfaced as possible presidential contenders.

In recent weeks, he has appeared on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” participated in a NewsNation town hall with Chris Cuomo, spoken on PBS’s “Overheard With Evan Smith” and sat for a two-hour conversation on Fox News personality Sean Hannity’s podcast.

Democratic strategist Eddie Vale said Emanuel’s relentless schedule reflects a politician who thrives on the constant demands of campaigning and political organizing.

“He loves the hustle, and he loves the game, and no one is likely to take more meetings or make more phone calls a day,” Vale said.

Political observers say Emanuel’s activities go well beyond the usual preliminary exploration associated with a potential presidential campaign. He is attempting to influence the Democratic Party’s national message at a time when its leadership and ideological direction remain unsettled.

One donor described Emanuel’s emerging role as “the Democratic consultant-in-chief,” reflecting his effort to provide strategic advice, advance policy proposals and establish himself as a leading voice in debates about the party’s future.

His approach, however, differs sharply from the priorities of some progressive Democrats, particularly as candidates associated with democratic socialism have gained visibility and support within portions of the party.

Emanuel has argued that Democrats should concentrate on delivering tangible policy changes rather than pursuing politically divisive confrontations with President Donald Trump.

During an interview this week on SiriusXM’s “The Briefing With Steve Scully,” Emanuel said Democrats should resist calls to impeach Trump if they gain control of the House of Representatives in November. Instead, he urged the party to advance ethics legislation and economic measures that voters could identify as concrete accomplishments.

“In 2026, in three weeks from now, the Republicans are going to lose the election. What the Democrats do in 2027 will determine whether we won the election by bringing change,” Emanuel told Scully. “An ethics package brings change. A raise in the minimum wage 20 bucks by 2030 is bringing change.

“You do impeachment, it’s just another food fight,” Emanuel added. “I’m offended by everything this president has done. He has literally turned the Oval Office into eBay on steroids. Get change. Deliver that.”

Emanuel’s comments reflect his belief that Democrats should use any congressional majority they secure to advance legislation rather than devote their political capital to an impeachment effort that could deepen partisan divisions.

Scully, who interviewed Emanuel, said the former Chicago mayor appears determined to establish his influence before the 2028 campaign formally begins.

Speaking with The Hill, Scully said Emanuel “wants to make sure his voice is heard” during the period when prospective candidates are beginning to establish their political identities.

“I think he would like to be president. I think he is trying to set the debate up for the party,” Scully said. “I think he’s trying to get ahead of the game to plant his flag in the more centrist wing of the party.”

Scully said Emanuel’s efforts extend beyond traditional Democratic strongholds. The former mayor has also traveled to Republican-leaning states, including Mississippi and Louisiana, in an apparent effort to demonstrate that Democrats can compete for voters outside their customary political base.

“He wants to lead that battle,” Scully said, adding that Emanuel isn’t just speaking to Democratic audiences but traveling to red states including Mississippi and Louisiana. “I think he’s casting a wide canvas on where he sees the party going.”

The early campaigning could also provide Emanuel with an organizational advantage while other possible contenders remain occupied with their current responsibilities or concentrate on the approaching congressional elections.

By entering the political conversation before the field begins to take shape, Scully said, “it gives Rahm a clear path right now.”

Emanuel has also sought to connect the party’s emphasis on affordability with concerns about government ethics and alleged corruption, arguing that Democrats should present those issues as closely related rather than competing priorities.

He has described economic hardship and political misconduct as “heads and tails of the same coin,” suggesting that Democrats should frame their criticism of the administration around the contrast between the financial struggles of ordinary Americans and the benefits he alleges accrue to powerful political figures.

“The president of the United States gets a $450 million gift from Qatar — Air Force One — and you’re getting $4.50 a gallon of gas,” he added.

Emanuel’s direct manner has earned him supporters among some Democratic donors who believe the party needs a forceful and experienced communicator.

John Morgan, a prominent personal injury attorney and major Democratic donor, said Emanuel’s willingness to speak plainly distinguishes him from other political figures.

Morgan said Emanuel attracts attention because “he tells it like it is.”

“I love everything about him,” Morgan added. “His positions are very well thought out and he articulates them succinctly and effectively.

“He’s very brash and direct. The question is will that sell?”

Other Democrats are considerably less enthusiastic about the possibility of Emanuel becoming a leading presidential contender.

Some party strategists believe his long career in Washington and Chicago could be a serious liability at a time when many Democratic voters are looking for a departure from the party’s established leadership.

“He is seen as part of the establishment,” one Democratic strategist said. “And that’s going to be his biggest obstacle: How does he bring people along when they largely want to move away from the past?”

Emanuel’s reputation for aggressive political tactics and confrontational leadership has also raised questions about whether he could unite the party’s different factions.

One Democratic donor, speaking anonymously to offer a candid assessment, described Emanuel as “really smart, really experienced, but abrasive [and] incredibly disliked.”

Nevertheless, the same donor acknowledged that Emanuel appears to be making an effort to change his public image, adopting a less combative style than the one that characterized much of his career in Congress and the White House.

“A lot of people are liking what they hear because he’s taking a [more] pragmatic approach than ever before,” the donor said. “He’s a sharp-elbowed, pit-bull kind of guy, but lately he’s acting in a much softer way.”

Emanuel has also attracted praise from some Republicans who oppose Trump and believe Democrats need to move toward the political center.

Veteran Republican strategist Susan Del Percio, a prominent Trump critic, said Emanuel “right now is the only Democrat I could support.”

Del Percio argued that Emanuel is providing a valuable service to Democrats by challenging the growing influence of the Democratic Socialists of America and encouraging the party to develop a message capable of appealing to voters beyond its progressive base.

“What he’s doing is doing a great service for the Democratic Party,” Del Percio said. “He’s trying to take away some of the stigmas from the DSA [Democratic Socialists of America] that keeps the party’s approval rating so low. He’s trying to start a primary in such a way that can be appealing to voters.

“When you look at his tour, if you will, it’s all about setting up an agenda of what Dems are for, and also how they can appeal to the swing states that it will take to win a general election in 2028,” she said.

Del Percio pointed specifically to Emanuel’s criticism of the Democratic Socialists of America, whose political priorities and organizational identity have become a source of tension within the broader Democratic coalition.

She said Emanuel has been drawing attention to the contradiction between Democrats’ traditional emphasis on maintaining a broad ideological coalition and the desire among some democratic socialists to pursue a more narrowly defined political movement.

“The Dems are all talking about having this big tent,” she said. “But the DSA doesn’t want the rest of the party in their tent. They want their own tent.

“He’s waving this big neon sign saying pay attention to this,” Del Percio added.

Emanuel’s national campaign-style activities began well before his latest appearances in South Carolina. In January, during a visit to Mississippi, he publicly described the ideological contest he believed was developing within the Democratic Party, distinguishing between those primarily focused on opposing Trump and those seeking to rebuild the party around a new domestic agenda.

He has since advanced proposals addressing education, tax policy, children’s access to social media and the age of elected officials. Among his ideas is a mandatory retirement age of 75 for public officeholders, a restriction that would also affect his own ability to seek a second presidential term if elected.

In June, Emanuel spent three days bicycling more than 117 miles across New Hampshire on a trip he called the “Spin-Free Tour.” The visit included meetings with union members, small gatherings with voters and discussions about economic pressures facing middle-class families.

His efforts have not yet translated into substantial support in early presidential polling. Surveys conducted earlier this year placed him well behind several better-known prospective Democratic candidates, illustrating the difficulty he faces in turning extensive political experience and media exposure into a national constituency.

Emanuel has nevertheless continued to emphasize his experience in government, arguing that his years in Congress, the Obama administration, Chicago City Hall and the diplomatic service would allow him to assume presidential responsibilities without a lengthy adjustment period.

During a September appearance at the Texas Tribune Festival, he pointed to his record and governing experience while discussing what he believes distinguishes him from other Democrats considering the 2028 race.

Despite the increasingly visible preparations, Emanuel has stopped short of formally declaring his candidacy. During an October 8 appearance in Chicago, he said he would not decide whether to enter the presidential race until after the November midterm elections.

That timetable allows him to continue campaigning for Democratic candidates and participating in the party’s internal debates without immediately becoming an announced presidential contender.

{Matzav.com}

A shul in Paris was broken into and ransacked overnight, with Sifrei Torah, seforim, tefillin and other religious articles found scattered across the floor, leaving members of the local Jewish community shaken as France struggles with widespread rioting and violent demonstrations.

The attack took place at a temporary beis medrash used by the Ohalei Yaakov congregation in Paris’s 19th arrondissement. Members arriving Sunday morning discovered overturned furniture, emptied cabinets, religious books strewn across the premises and extensive damage to the room and its contents.

Video footage circulated on social media showed the disturbing aftermath, including an opened aron kodesh, displaced Sifrei Torah, scattered talleisim and tefillin, and shelves and other furnishings overturned.

The congregation has been using the temporary location while its regular shul on Rue Henri Murger undergoes construction work. The incident occurred at its temporary premises on Rue Burnouf.

Members of the congregation contacted police after discovering the destruction and avoided disturbing the scene so investigators could examine the premises and collect evidence.

No injuries were reported, and authorities had not announced any arrests in connection with the break-in.

The incident occurred during a weekend of extraordinary unrest across France, where demonstrations over rising living costs, deteriorating public services and education-related grievances deteriorated into violent clashes, looting and arson.

Hundreds of thousands of demonstrators participated in protests across the country on Shabbos, with French authorities estimating attendance at approximately 550,000. Organizers placed the figure substantially higher.

The demonstrations turned violent in several major cities, including Paris, Marseille, Lyon, Bordeaux and Strasbourg, where masked rioters attacked police, vandalized public buildings and looted businesses.

French authorities reported approximately 1,800 arrests nationwide, including 855 in the Paris region. More than 500 police officers and emergency personnel were injured, while one demonstrator died after suffering cardiac arrest during the unrest.

In Limoges, rioters set fire to the historic 19th-century city hall, causing extensive damage and the collapse of its roof.

The destruction prompted French President Emmanuel Macron to schedule an emergency meeting with senior government officials Sunday, followed by a nationally televised address.

French Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu condemned the violence and pledged government assistance to businesses and residents whose property had been destroyed.

The attack on the Paris shul has generated particular alarm among Jewish residents, who have already been grappling with heightened concerns about antisemitism and the security of Jewish institutions.

Sacha Roytman, chief executive of the Combat Antisemitism Movement, warned that the incident illustrated the dangers facing Jewish communities when public disorder escalates.

“When chaos and violence take over the streets, synagogues are the first to be targeted,” Roytman said in remarks translated from Hebrew. “The desecration of the synagogue in Paris is a clear warning sign. What begins against Jews never stops there.”

The incident has renewed concerns about the vulnerability of shuls and other Jewish institutions during periods of civil unrest, particularly in neighborhoods with substantial Jewish populations.

However, a more detailed account from the congregation itself has raised questions about the initial reports describing the incident as a deliberate antisemitic attack connected to the riots.

Raphaël, a member of the Ohalei Yaakov synagogue committee, told the French Jewish publication IsraJ that the scene appeared consistent with an attempted theft rather than an ideologically motivated assault. He said the Sifrei Torah had not been touched and that the objects found on the floor had been removed from cabinets and storage compartments.

He also reported that there had been no rioting near the shul over Shabbos.

In a message to congregants, the shul committee said that nothing had been stolen or deliberately vandalized and that investigators had found no signs of forced entry.

The committee nevertheless acknowledged concerns about why the location had been targeted, particularly because the temporary shul has no exterior signage identifying it as a Jewish place of worship.

{Matzav.com}

Sports commentator Stephen A. Smith said he was astonished by the amount of time President Donald Trump spent entertaining him, comedian Bill Maher and musician Kid Rock at the White House on Thursday evening, revealing that the unusual gathering lasted more than four hours and included candid exchanges about the economy, the upcoming midterm elections and several contentious political issues.

Smith, an ESPN personality who has increasingly weighed in on national politics, described the dinner as an unexpectedly lengthy and open conversation with a president who was willing to engage with guests holding sharply different political views.

During an appearance Friday evening on CNN with Laura Coates, Smith said Trump made no effort to avoid difficult questions, even when the discussion turned to subjects on which his guests disagreed with him.

“It was shocking. I certainly didn’t expect that amount of time,” Smith told CNN’s Laura Coates Friday night. “I give him all the credit in the world because he didn’t run from any questions. Anything we asked him, he kept coming back at us with the things that he had to say.”

The gathering brought together an unusual combination of public figures. Smith has described himself as politically independent, Maher is known for his criticism of both political parties and particularly his opposition to Trump on numerous issues, and Kid Rock has been one of the president’s most outspoken celebrity supporters.

Kid Rock, whose legal name is Robert Ritchie, discussed the dinner during an appearance Friday on Fox News’ “Fox & Friends.” He said he had previously shared a meal with Trump and Maher, although he did not explain how the latest gathering of guests with such different political outlooks had been arranged.

Smith said his primary motivation for accepting the White House invitation was to raise concerns about federal financial support for Historically Black Colleges and Universities, commonly known as HBCUs.

The conversation, however, extended well beyond education funding. According to Smith, the guests discussed the political environment heading into November’s congressional elections, the condition of the American economy and individual candidates facing competitive races.

Kid Rock offered a similar account of the evening, acknowledging that the participants did not agree on everything but saying they found common ground on certain political and economic principles.

According to the musician, those at the table agreed that “socialism and communism have no place to have a foothold in our government.”

The dinner took place at a politically sensitive moment for Trump and congressional Republicans, who are preparing for the midterm elections amid voter dissatisfaction over several major issues, particularly economic conditions and the cost of living.

Recent polling has reflected challenges for the administration, including concerns among voters about whether Trump has delivered the economic improvements he promised during his 2024 presidential campaign.

Smith said he confronted the president about those concerns and pressed him on the Republican Party’s political difficulties. Trump, he recalled, remained confident that the economic situation would improve and that his administration’s policies would ultimately produce favorable results.

“As it pertains to the economy, no, he says what he always says, and he firmly believes in himself,” Smith said. “Obviously everything gets better. That’s his mentality.”

Smith also told Trump that public opinion surveys showed his popularity had declined. The president, according to Smith, responded by emphasizing that he continued to enjoy strong support among Republican voters.

The discussion also turned to the closely watched U.S. Senate race in Texas, where Republican nominee and state Attorney General Ken Paxton is facing Democrat James Talarico.

Trump supported Paxton during the Republican primary, but the attorney general has encountered difficulties in the general election campaign, with several surveys showing a close contest and Talarico holding a narrow advantage in some polls.

Smith said he directly criticized Paxton’s unwillingness to participate in a debate with his Democratic opponent, arguing that a candidate seeking a seat in the United States Senate should be prepared to defend his positions publicly.

“I said to him, the real problem is Ken Paxton. It’s a damn shame that [Paxton] … is sitting around scared to debate,” Smith said. “That is a disgrace to me. He should be unqualified for the job.”

Paxton has declined invitations from Talarico to participate in a debate, despite calls from some fellow Republicans for him to agree to a public confrontation with his opponent.

Among those urging Paxton to debate has been Republican Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas, who has argued that voters deserve an opportunity to hear directly from both candidates.

According to Smith, Trump appeared receptive to his criticism of Paxton’s refusal to debate, telling him he had “a good point.”

Smith said the evening was particularly meaningful because it marked his first face-to-face encounter with Trump in more than 15 years, despite their longstanding acquaintance.

He explained that although the two men had known each other for many years, they had communicated only sparingly since Trump first entered the White House. Smith viewed the dinner as an opportunity to present his concerns directly rather than simply discuss them through television appearances.

“This is the first time I’ve seen him face to face in over a decade and a half, and I saw it as an opportunity to make my case,” Smith said. “Obviously we’ve known each other for many, many years, even though we’ve never spoken outside of one interview since he became president of the United States.”

Trump also addressed the gathering when speaking with reporters outside the White House on Friday, describing the evening as “great” and saying that “they had a good time.”

The president praised the guests and spoke warmly about Maher, whose political commentary has frequently included sharp criticism of Trump.

“It was a very informative dinner,” the president added. “Smart people. Stephen A. is great. Bill Maher — I will tell you what. He likes me a lot more than people understand, and I actually like him. It was a good dinner.”

Additional accounts of the dinner revealed that the four men discussed an even wider range of subjects than Smith initially described, including the war in Iran, the treatment of Afghans who assisted American forces and the impact of the administration’s diversity policies on financial support for historically Black colleges.

Kid Rock said Smith was particularly concerned that the administration’s opposition to diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives could discourage corporations from contributing to HBCUs, even if the federal government continued supporting those institutions.

The musician said he believed the administration wanted private companies to continue providing financial assistance to historically Black colleges and universities, despite its broader opposition to DEI programs.

Kid Rock also said Maher raised the situation of Afghan interpreters and other individuals who assisted American forces during the war in Afghanistan, bringing another foreign policy issue into the discussion.

According to Smith’s more detailed account on CNN, the evening included a tour of several areas of the White House, including the West Wing, the Rose Garden and the presidential portrait display.

Smith said he noticed that the display featured an image of an autopen in place of a conventional portrait of Joe Biden. When Smith objected to the joke at Biden’s expense, Trump defended it and laughed, according to the commentator.

The gathering also included a visit to the White House ballroom construction project, where Trump showed his guests the ongoing work.

The meeting marked another chapter in the unusual relationship between Trump and Maher, who previously attended a White House dinner with the president and Kid Rock in 2025. Despite their longstanding political disagreements, Maher has defended his willingness to speak directly with Trump rather than avoid contact because of their differences.

Maher had publicly disclosed plans for another White House dinner earlier in the week, explaining that Trump had unexpectedly invited him back after their previous meeting.

Kid Rock described Thursday’s gathering as “epic,” saying the participants were able to share a meal, laugh together and debate difficult political questions despite their differing views.

For Smith, the most surprising aspect remained the president’s willingness to devote more than four hours to the gathering and personally engage with the concerns raised by his guests.

{Matzav.com}

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky warned Saturday that President Donald Trump’s decision to suspend major sanctions against Russia could embolden Vladimir Putin and lead to further concessions to Moscow, even as Russian forces intensify attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure ahead of winter.

Zelensky expressed concern that the administration’s decision to relax restrictions targeting Russian energy revenues represents the beginning of a broader rollback of American economic pressure on the Kremlin. He argued that easing sanctions while Russian attacks continue would weaken efforts to bring the war to an end.

The dispute escalated Friday when Trump signed an executive order temporarily waiving extensive American sanctions affecting Russia’s energy industry. The move followed an agreement between Washington and Moscow allowing Russian diesel exports in exchange for sanctions relief.

The decision comes during the fifth year of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, a conflict that has left hundreds of thousands dead and forced millions of people from their homes. Russian forces have continued launching strikes across Ukraine despite diplomatic efforts to negotiate an end to the fighting.

Zelensky said he feared the diesel arrangement would be followed by additional American concessions to Russia.

“Unfortunately, the lifting of sanctions will continue. I believe the ‘diesel deal’ is just the first step,” Zelensky told reporters.

The Ukrainian president emphasized that he still hoped Trump would use American influence to compel Putin to end the war. However, he insisted that reducing economic pressure on Russia while limiting Ukraine’s ability to retaliate would make a negotiated settlement more difficult.

Zelensky said he still “personally” hoped that Trump will do “everything in his power” to make Putin end the war but added: “You cannot achieve this by limiting Ukraine’s responses to Russia for killing our people. And certainly not by lifting sanctions.”

His remarks followed another wave of Russian airstrikes that Ukrainian officials said killed at least two people Saturday and injured numerous others.

Authorities in the southern city of Kherson reported that one person was killed and 22 others wounded, including two children, in a Russian attack. A separate strike in the northeastern city of Sumy killed another person, according to local officials.

Zelensky said the timing of Washington’s sanctions decision was especially troubling because it coincided with a major Russian assault on Ukraine’s electricity infrastructure.

According to the Ukrainian president, Russian forces targeted 15 critical power-generation facilities Friday in what he described as “one of the largest” attacks on the country’s energy network.

The strikes heightened concerns about Ukraine’s ability to maintain electricity and heating supplies as colder weather approaches, particularly after repeated Russian attacks on power stations and other essential infrastructure during previous winters.

Zelensky argued that the United States should be increasing economic pressure on Moscow rather than offering relief while Russia continues attacking Ukrainian cities and civilian infrastructure.

The suspended sanctions were imposed under the Lindsey Graham Act, legislation named for the late American senator who sponsored the measure. The law targeted important sectors of the Russian economy, including energy and defense, as well as Putin personally and the network of vessels used to transport Russian oil and other products despite Western restrictions.

That network, commonly known as Russia’s “shadow fleet,” has played a significant role in Moscow’s efforts to maintain energy exports and generate revenue despite international sanctions.

Zelensky maintained that the legislation had the potential to significantly weaken Russia’s ability to finance its military campaign and pressure Putin into meaningful negotiations.

“It is important that everyone in America also sees what is really happening,” Zelensky wrote on social media.

Referring to the sanctions legislation, he said it was “supposed to impose truly effective pressure on Russia to bring this war to an end” and argued that the measure “could have helped enormously — and still can!”.

The Ukrainian leader warned that relaxing sanctions would send the wrong message to Moscow by reducing the economic consequences of continuing the war.

“A U.S. sanctions blackout, easing pressure on the aggressor, financial rewards for Putin — all of this only encourages him to keep attacking,” he warned.

Zelensky also accused Russia of deliberately attempting to cripple Ukraine’s electricity supply before winter, warning that continued attacks could leave large numbers of civilians without basic utilities.

He said Moscow was seeking to produce a nationwide “blackout” by systematically striking the infrastructure needed to generate and distribute electricity.

“Russia is trying to leave millions of our people without electricity and heating,” Zelensky said.

He urged Ukraine’s international partners to intensify pressure on Russia to halt its attacks, particularly those targeting facilities essential to civilian life.

Ukraine has already experienced severe energy shortages during previous winters, when Russian bombardments damaged power plants and transmission systems, leaving hundreds of thousands of residents without reliable heating or electricity during periods of freezing weather.

The latest strikes have renewed fears that Moscow intends to repeat that strategy as temperatures fall, increasing the humanitarian pressure on Ukraine while the war continues.

Russian officials, meanwhile, welcomed the Trump administration’s decision as a significant diplomatic and economic development.

Although neither Putin nor the Kremlin had issued an official response to the sanctions suspension, several prominent Russian figures publicly celebrated the announcement.

Kirill Dmitriev, a Russian presidential envoy who has been involved in diplomatic contacts with Washington, described the move as a major achievement.

“The Trump administration’s suspension of the Graham Act is an important and truly historic moment,” Dmitriev wrote on social media.

The sanctions package had been signed into law by Trump on September 18 and was scheduled to take effect Sunday, October 18. His executive order suspending the measures came just two days before their implementation deadline, with the president informing Congress that the waiver was justified by American national interests.

The legislation authorized penalties against Russian government officials, financial institutions and energy companies, along with tariffs of up to 100 percent on major purchasers of Russian oil and natural gas. The restrictions were designed to reduce the revenues available to Moscow for financing its military operations in Ukraine.

Trump’s decision followed mounting concerns about rising fuel prices in the United States, particularly diesel costs, which have become a major economic issue ahead of the November midterm elections.

Earlier this month, Trump announced that he had reached an arrangement with Putin under which Russia would release substantial additional quantities of diesel onto international markets. The administration has presented the agreement as a means of increasing fuel supplies and easing pressure on American consumers and businesses.

Under the arrangement described by Trump, Russia would initially supply more than 300,000 tons of diesel, followed by another 500,000 tons in November and an additional 1 million tons shortly afterward. The president also indicated that Russia could provide another 3 million tons once refinery conditions permitted.

The agreement has drawn criticism from American lawmakers who argue that purchasing Russian fuel or relaxing sanctions could provide Moscow with additional financial resources while its military campaign against Ukraine continues.

The sanctions suspension has generated objections from members of both parties in Congress, including lawmakers who supported the original legislation.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, who worked with the late Sen. Lindsey Graham on the sanctions measure, criticized the administration’s decision, arguing that it undermined the legislation’s central purpose of increasing economic pressure on Russia.

Rep. Don Beyer of Virginia also condemned the waiver, contending that it weakened Washington’s position toward Moscow at a time when Russian forces were continuing their attacks.

Other lawmakers have questioned whether the administration should suspend sanctions approved by Congress without first demonstrating that Russia has taken meaningful steps toward ending the war.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has indicated that the administration will review the broader economic implications of the sanctions over a 60-day period before determining whether additional measures should be implemented.

The decision has also complicated Washington’s relationship with Kyiv. Zelensky has been meeting with European leaders in Brussels to seek additional financial and military assistance as Ukraine faces continued Russian bombardment and uncertainty about future American support.

European governments have been discussing how to sustain Ukraine’s military and civilian needs during the coming year, including the substantial costs of defending the country and repairing infrastructure repeatedly damaged by Russian attacks.

For Ukraine, the immediate concern remains the destruction of its energy facilities. Russian strikes have repeatedly damaged power stations, substations and transmission equipment, forcing emergency repairs and electricity restrictions in affected areas.

Zelensky has warned that Ukraine’s air defenses are under increasing strain because of the frequency and scale of Russian drone and missile attacks. He has urged allied governments to provide additional defensive systems and ammunition to protect civilian infrastructure.

Meanwhile, Dmitriev argued that suspending the American sanctions would help avert serious economic consequences for both the United States and international markets. The Russian envoy has portrayed the administration’s decision as an opportunity to move toward improved economic relations between Washington and Moscow.

Trump has maintained that his approach is intended to advance American economic interests while seeking an end to the war, but negotiations between Russia and Ukraine have yet to produce a lasting agreement.

{Matzav.com}

Four yeshiva bochurim have been taken into military custody in separate incidents in Israel, with two already sentenced to 20 days in military prison, triggering a major protest Sunday morning that brought traffic on Highway 4 to a standstill and led to confrontations between demonstrators, motorists and police.

The latest arrests took place over the weekend near Eilat, where two bochurim were stopped by civilian police on suspicion of traffic violations. According to sources, the officers initially detained the pair over allegations of speeding, running a red light and driving without a license. However, a subsequent examination of their records revealed that they were classified by the military as draft evaders, prompting police to transfer them to military authorities.

The incident followed the arrests of two other bochurim, Yedidya Mizrachi and Yonatan Mostakis, students at Yeshivas Ohr Hachaim, headed by Rav Reuven Elbaz. The two were detained Thursday at a beach in Rishon Letzion and subsequently handed over to military police.

According to reports in the Israeli chareidi media, the bochurim had been in an area where several youths were burning a small fire. Police officers who arrived at the location requested identification from those present. Upon discovering the bochurim’s military status, officers transferred them to military custody.

Both were subsequently sentenced to 20 days in military prison for failing to report for military service.

Their imprisonment sparked outrage among activists opposed to the drafting of yeshiva students, particularly followers of Rav Tzvi Friedman, a faction associated with the Peleg Yerushalmi movement.

On Sunday morning, dozens of protesters unexpectedly converged on Highway 4 near the Yavne interchange, blocking traffic in both directions during the busy morning commute.

The demonstration had initially been planned for the Bnei Brak area, but organizers reportedly changed the location at the last moment in an effort to prevent police from preparing for the blockade.

The protest quickly caused extensive traffic disruptions, with motorists finding themselves trapped as demonstrators occupied the roadway. Confrontations erupted between some drivers and protesters, with footage from the scene showing physical altercations as motorists attempted to clear a path for their vehicles.

Police dispatched substantial forces to the area, including a water-cannon vehicle, and used stun grenades and other crowd-control measures to disperse the demonstrators.

According to reports from the scene, some motorists became involved in efforts to remove protesters from the road, resulting in additional confrontations. Chareidi media reports accused police of failing to intervene adequately when demonstrators were attacked by members of the public.

Police Commissioner Danny Levy instructed officers to take firm action against road blockades and disturbances that interfere with public safety and daily life.

“Anyone who chooses to disrupt public order and block roads will face a firm response and zero tolerance from the Israel Police,” Levy declared.

In a statement issued during the demonstration, police confirmed that Highway 4 had been closed in both directions near the Yavne interchange and urged motorists to avoid the area, use alternative routes and follow officers’ instructions.

Authorities emphasized that while the right to demonstrate is protected, protesters would not be permitted to obstruct major transportation arteries or endanger the public.

After approximately 90 minutes, police succeeded in dispersing the demonstrators and reopening the highway to traffic.

The arrests and subsequent protest come amid growing tensions surrounding the Israeli government’s enforcement of military enlistment requirements against chareidi yeshiva students.

Although military police have reportedly conducted relatively few proactive arrests of chareidi draft evaders in recent weeks, bochurim whose military status is flagged during routine police encounters continue to face the possibility of being transferred into military custody.

The latest incidents illustrate how even an ordinary encounter with civilian police can lead to imprisonment for a yeshiva student whose military status remains unresolved.

The confrontation also comes against the backdrop of reports that the IDF had planned a broader operation to arrest chareidi draft evaders, only for the initiative to be postponed following disagreements with civilian police over the manpower and security arrangements necessary to carry it out.

Sunday’s demonstration drew criticism from opposition politicians, including Yair Lapid and Gadi Eisenkot, who used the highway blockade to attack the chareidi community and the government’s handling of the draft controversy.

Lapid accused the demonstrators of refusing to serve while disrupting the lives of working Israelis and criticized Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his coalition partners for what he characterized as their failure to confront the protesters.

Eisenkot similarly condemned the blockade and accused the government of enabling the ongoing confrontation over military service.

{Matzav.com}

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence could soon make it virtually impossible to determine whether photographs and videos are genuine or computer-generated, representatives of OpenAI and Meta warned federal judges Thursday, raising serious questions about the future reliability of visual evidence in American courtrooms.

The warnings were delivered during a meeting in Boston of the U.S. Judicial Conference’s Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules, which is examining whether existing courtroom procedures are sufficient to address increasingly sophisticated AI-generated fabrications, commonly known as deepfakes.

The committee has been studying the issue since 2023, amid growing concern that artificial intelligence could allow litigants, witnesses or other individuals to introduce fabricated photographs, recordings and videos that appear authentic. The technology is advancing so quickly that even experts may struggle to distinguish genuine material from convincing digital imitations.

Shira Anderson, policy counsel for OpenAI, told the judges that advances in image-generation technology could eventually eliminate the possibility of reliably identifying AI-created content through scientific analysis alone.

“AI images are only getting better, and I do not think that there will be a scientific way going forward to detect them,” Anderson said.

Meta offered a similarly troubling assessment, warning that the newest artificial intelligence systems can already produce visual material that ordinary viewers cannot distinguish from authentic photographs or recordings.

Devin Norder, Meta’s director of product management, said the sophistication of the technology has reached a point where human observation can no longer be counted on to establish whether a piece of media is genuine.

“Media generated from frontier models, at least in the last few generations, are indistinguishable by humans from authentic or AI-generated media,” Norder said.

The ease with which such material can now be manufactured makes the problem even more significant. Creating realistic fake images and videos once required specialized technical expertise and substantial resources, but modern AI systems have dramatically reduced those barriers.

“And the cost and the time it takes to create this media really are quite trivial at this point,” Norder added.

Both OpenAI and Meta have developed technologies intended to help identify or authenticate digital material. Such systems can include embedded information indicating how an image was produced, where it originated or whether artificial intelligence was involved in its creation.

Governments have also begun responding to the problem. California and the European Union have adopted requirements involving the labeling or watermarking of certain AI-generated content, reflecting growing concern that fabricated digital media could be used to mislead the public or interfere with legal proceedings.

However, Anderson cautioned that authentication systems have significant limitations, particularly because different technology companies use different methods that may not be compatible with one another.

Even as detection and verification tools improve, she suggested, no available approach is likely to provide an absolute guarantee that fabricated content will always be identified.

“My guess is that this absolutely will continue to get better. I do not think it’ll ever be bulletproof,” Anderson said.

The warnings have created a difficult question for federal judges: Should the courts establish special evidentiary rules for artificial intelligence before deepfakes become a widespread problem, or should they continue relying on existing procedures for challenging questionable evidence?

Despite the alarming predictions from technology companies, the committee has found relatively few documented instances in which deepfake allegations have become an issue in federal court proceedings.

A survey released in March by the Federal Judicial Center, the research and education arm of the federal judiciary, questioned 931 judges about their experiences with potentially fabricated AI evidence.

Only 15 respondents reported having presided over a case in which a party challenged evidence on the grounds that it was a deepfake.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman of Manhattan, who chairs the advisory committee, pointed to the difference between the widespread concern surrounding the technology and the limited number of cases in which the issue has actually arisen.

“There’s a lot of academic commentary and other commentary predicting that courts will be dealing with deepfakes, but we haven’t actually seen a whole lot of that yet,” Furman said.

The relatively small number of reported cases has contributed to disagreement among committee members about whether a new rule specifically addressing AI-generated evidence is necessary.

Some participants believe the technology presents sufficiently unusual challenges to justify additional protections, particularly because highly realistic fabrications could be difficult for judges, jurors and attorneys to recognize.

Others maintain that courts already possess procedures for evaluating authenticity, examining witnesses, challenging unreliable evidence and imposing penalties when parties attempt to deceive the judicial system.

U.S. District Judge Valerie Caproni of Manhattan argued that the fundamental problem of fabricated evidence is hardly new and that existing legal safeguards may be capable of addressing AI-generated material without creating an entirely separate set of rules.

“We’ve dealt with bad actors presenting fake evidence since Cain and Abel. That’s a longstanding problem,” Caproni said.

The issue extends far beyond courtrooms. Artificial intelligence is also providing criminals with increasingly powerful tools for impersonation, deception and financial fraud, allowing scammers to create convincing simulations of real people using photographs, videos and recordings obtained online.

Wynton Hall, author of the book Code Red: The Left, the Right, China, and the Race to Control AI, has warned that fraudsters can exploit information available on social media to build detailed profiles of potential victims before using AI to impersonate people they know and trust.

During an appearance on Newsmax, Hall described how criminals can combine personal information with sophisticated voice and image-generation technology to create highly persuasive scams.

“They can now mine your social media and then they build a detailed dossier on your life, and then they use the AI to mimic a loved one so convincingly that your instincts will tell you that it’s real,” the author said.

The growing availability of these capabilities means that criminals no longer need substantial financial resources or advanced programming skills to deploy them.

“These tools are now becoming democratized so that they’re cheap, they’re easy to use, and that means they’re accessible at a mass scale,” Hall added.

Federal law enforcement statistics illustrate the financial consequences of AI-assisted fraud. According to the FBI, scams involving artificial intelligence generated more than 22,000 complaints during 2025, with reported losses approaching $893 million.

The committee has also considered a possible amendment to Federal Rule of Evidence 901, which governs how parties establish that evidence is authentic before it can be admitted in court.

Under a proposal discussed by the judiciary, a party challenging a photograph, video or recording as an AI-generated fabrication would first need to present a credible basis for suspecting that the material was falsified. If that threshold were met, the party seeking to introduce the evidence could face a greater burden of demonstrating its authenticity.

The proposal remains under consideration, and the committee has not reached a final decision on whether an AI-specific rule should be adopted.

The Federal Judicial Center’s research also illustrates the difficulty facing judges. Although only 15 of the 931 surveyed judges reported encountering challenges involving alleged deepfakes, the survey was designed to assess both their experiences and their views on whether existing evidentiary standards are adequate.

The judiciary has acknowledged that the speed of AI development creates an additional complication: A rule designed to address the technology as it exists today could become outdated before the lengthy federal rulemaking process is completed.

For now, federal courts continue to rely on existing authentication requirements while the advisory committee examines whether additional protections are necessary. The committee has assigned further study of the issue as judges weigh the risk of increasingly convincing fabricated evidence against the limited number of documented courtroom incidents.

The White House has formally launched a 120-day review of advanced artificial intelligence, establishing a timetable for recommendations on federal oversight of increasingly powerful AI systems as President Donald Trump’s administration seeks to preserve America’s technological advantage over China while addressing emerging national security and public safety concerns.

The administration’s artificial intelligence task force approved its governing charter Thursday following its inaugural official meeting, setting in motion a broad examination of how Washington should regulate, monitor and coordinate with companies developing the most sophisticated AI technology.

Among its first decisions, the panel authorized the President’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology to prepare an assessment of the potential dangers associated with advanced AI. The report will examine cybersecurity vulnerabilities, threats to essential infrastructure, biological security risks, technologies with both civilian and military applications, and questions surrounding the ability to control and hold AI systems accountable.

The task force is expected to consult extensively with technology companies, government agencies and outside organizations before developing its recommendations. A White House official said the process would incorporate perspectives from developers of cutting-edge AI models, consumer advocates, civil liberties organizations, industry representatives and law enforcement authorities at both the state and federal levels.

The panel also established a separate working group responsible for carrying out the White House Accord on Super Intelligence, a voluntary agreement signed earlier this month by executives from several leading AI companies.

That effort will be directed by Director of National Intelligence Jay Clayton, who chairs the task force, together with National Cyber Director Sean Cairncross. Their responsibilities include coordinating the administration’s approach to implementing commitments made under the agreement.

Clayton, who previously served as chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, was appointed to lead the initiative as the administration increased its focus on the national security implications of advanced AI development.

Defense Undersecretary Emil Michael, one of the task force’s vice chairs, has been assigned responsibility for establishing procedures through which AI laboratories would report security breaches, hacking incidents and other cybersecurity threats to federal authorities.

Michael will also serve as a principal liaison between the Pentagon and companies developing frontier AI models, with an emphasis on building longer-term cooperation across federal agencies.

Federal Trade Commission Chairman Andrew Ferguson will oversee a committee focused on law enforcement and consumer protection. The Justice Department will participate in that group, which is expected to examine legal and regulatory concerns arising from the deployment of increasingly capable AI systems.

Office of Personnel Management Director Scott Kupor will lead efforts involving critical infrastructure and the potential consequences of artificial intelligence for American workers. His work will include coordination with the Labor Department to assess how the technology could affect employment and the broader workforce.

The task force includes several of the administration’s most senior officials, reflecting the importance the White House has attached to the initiative.

Vice President JD Vance, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director Michael Kratsios are among its members. White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and Deputy Chief of Staff Richard Walters are also participating.

The administration is considering a range of possible tools for addressing AI-related concerns, including restrictions on the export of advanced technology.

A White House official identified export controls as one potential mechanism available to the government, pointing to temporary restrictions imposed by the Commerce Department on AI developer Anthropic after the company declined to provide federal authorities with unrestricted access to its models.

The episode illustrates the potential tensions between the administration’s national security objectives and technology companies seeking to retain control over access to their proprietary systems.

The new task force follows a September 29 executive order in which Trump directed federal agencies to adopt the term “super intelligence” in place of “artificial intelligence,” reflecting the administration’s emphasis on the rapidly advancing capabilities of the technology.

That same day, approximately two dozen technology executives attended a White House luncheon, while six companies developing advanced AI models signed the voluntary White House Accord on Super Intelligence.

Trump described the agreement as “morally binding,” underscoring the administration’s expectation that participating companies would adhere to its commitments even though the accord was not presented as a conventional federal regulation.

The initiative comes as American technology companies compete to develop increasingly sophisticated AI systems capable of performing complex tasks, conducting research and assisting with work that previously required substantial human expertise.

For the administration, that technological race carries significant economic and national security implications, particularly as China invests heavily in its own artificial intelligence capabilities.

Clayton, who was confirmed to his intelligence position during the summer, has identified maintaining American leadership over China as a central objective of the White House effort.

“The risk of not being first is high,” Clayton told the Wall Street Journal.

The White House initiative is also drawing attention from lawmakers and researchers who want stronger safeguards for advanced AI systems. Ahead of the task force’s first meeting, Senators Mike Rounds of South Dakota and Maria Cantwell of Washington urged the administration to strengthen federal AI testing capabilities, including work conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the Energy Department’s national laboratories.

Americans for Responsible Innovation, an organization advocating greater AI safety oversight, has likewise pressed the panel to consider recommending enforceable federal safety standards and greater public transparency. The group argues that voluntary commitments from technology companies may be insufficient to address the risks posed by increasingly capable systems.

The White House Accord signed September 29 outlines several responsibilities for participating companies, including internal monitoring of AI models for cybersecurity, biological and chemical risks, as well as independent evaluations and procedures for identifying and addressing dangerous capabilities. Those commitments will now form part of the task force’s implementation work.

The administration’s September executive order also requires the White House science and technology adviser to submit proposed legislative language within 60 days establishing a federal definition of “Super Intelligence.” The proposal is supposed to examine whether existing legal references to artificial intelligence should be updated and whether additional presidential action is necessary.

The task force’s work is taking place amid growing public concern over the rapid expansion of artificial intelligence. A recent Reuters/Ipsos survey found substantial concern among American voters about whether the federal government is doing enough to address the technology’s risks, with many respondents favoring additional regulatory safeguards.

For now, the task force has established its initial assignments and review process, but the precise enforcement mechanisms it may ultimately recommend remain undecided. Its findings, expected within 120 days of the charter’s adoption, will help determine how the Trump administration intends to balance technological innovation, national security, consumer protection and federal oversight.

President Donald Trump has warned California election officials that they could face lengthy prison sentences if they knowingly count ballots cast by noncitizens in the upcoming midterm elections, escalating a confrontation between his administration and Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom over voter eligibility and election integrity.

The warning followed a Justice Department demand that California authorities examine federal data identifying thousands of registered voters as potential noncitizens and prevent ballots from ineligible individuals from being included in the November election results. California officials have challenged the administration’s actions, accusing the federal government of attempting to interfere with voting just weeks before Election Day.

“They will all go to jail for a long period of time!!!” Trump wrote Friday on Truth Social.

The president accompanied his warning with a Justice Department letter addressed to the Los Angeles County Counsel’s Office. Federal officials cautioned that election administrators could face “significant” consequences if they were found to be “facilitating or ignoring” the “federal crime” of unlawful voting in a federal election.

The dispute intensified Thursday when the Justice Department filed a lawsuit against California after giving state and local election authorities a USB drive containing federal citizenship information. The material reportedly included approximately 20,000 names identified by the Department of Homeland Security as belonging to people who were not United States citizens.

Federal officials gave California 48 hours to compare those names against its voter registration records. The administration sought to determine whether individuals identified in the federal data remained registered to vote and whether any ballots submitted by those individuals should be withheld pending verification of their eligibility.

Earlier in the week, the Justice Department had separately provided election administrators with a letter containing the password needed to access the information stored on the drive.

The lawsuit described the federal government’s request as a measure intended to prevent potentially unlawful votes from being counted while allowing individuals whose citizenship could be verified to have their ballots included.

“If California was unable to independently confirm the citizenship of people on that list, the Federal Government asked that California set aside ballots received from them until the person’s citizenship was confirmed,” the lawsuit stated.

The Justice Department made its legal filing publicly available, describing the release as a “courtesy to the public.”

Newsom responded angrily to the lawsuit, rejecting the administration’s allegations and portraying the federal action as an effort to intimidate California election officials ahead of the midterms.

In a written statement Thursday, the governor described the lawsuit as a “sad, desperate attempt by Trump to use his politicized Justice Department to try to suppress California voters just three weeks before Election Day.”

Newsom also argued that the federal government was overstepping its authority by attempting to direct how California conducts its elections.

“The courts have made clear that the federal government has no role in how a state carries out its election process, and now, in the middle of Californians voting, they have asked local officials — who do a damn good job defending democracy — to violate federal law,” Newsom also said in the statement.

The administration’s voter registration initiative has already generated separate legal challenges from voting rights organizations questioning both the reliability of the federal citizenship data and the legality of using that information to alter voter rolls so close to an election.

In September, the UCLA Voting Rights Project filed a lawsuit against the Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security, challenging the methodology used to identify registered voters as noncitizens. The organization questioned whether the government had adequately established that the individuals flagged in its records were actually ineligible to vote.

Attorneys representing the group subsequently warned that they could seek an emergency court order if the administration continued pursuing criminal enforcement measures against California election officials.

The group has argued that federal election laws prohibit certain systematic efforts to remove voters from registration lists shortly before an election, and that the administration’s proposed procedures could improperly affect eligible voters.

“Your clients’ actions in compiling the list violates established law; your efforts to employ this list to systematically purge voters, less than a month before the election, further violates the National Voter Registration Act, among other laws,” attorneys for the group wrote in its most recent letter to the DOJ.

The confrontation is part of a broader disagreement over the accuracy of state voter registration records and the federal government’s role in ensuring that only eligible citizens participate in national elections.

Earlier this year, Trump alleged that California and three other states had a combined 250,000 noncitizens listed on their voter rolls. His political opponents disputed the figure, questioning the evidence underlying the administration’s claims.

The latest dispute has also produced differing figures in public accounts. The Justice Department’s immediate request reportedly involved approximately 20,000 individuals identified in federal citizenship data, while broader allegations concerning potentially ineligible registrations have referenced much larger numbers. Those figures do not, by themselves, establish that the individuals involved cast ballots illegally.

Federal law prohibits noncitizens from voting in federal elections, but the central disagreement in California concerns how the government determines citizenship status, whether its records are sufficiently accurate to justify withholding ballots, and what authority federal officials have to compel state election administrators to act on that information.

With voting already underway in California and the November midterms approaching, the dispute has placed state election officials between competing legal demands from Washington and Sacramento, raising the prospect of further emergency litigation over which ballots can be counted.

In announcing the lawsuit, Attorney General Todd Blanche accused California of undermining the safeguards intended to protect federal elections and said the Justice Department would continue pursuing suspected violations.

“State-facilitated voter fraud is unacceptable in the United States of America,” Blanche said. “If found responsible in a court of law, the State of California will have seriously undermined confidence in our electoral system and violated laws that protect our nation’s representative system of government. The Department of Justice will continue working to uncover cases of voter fraud, hold fraudsters accountable, and restore trust in American elections.”

First Assistant U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli, whose office is involved in the litigation, said California had been offered an opportunity to investigate the flagged registrations before the government went to court.

“California election officials were given an opportunity to remove noncitizens from their voter rolls and to sequester ballots returned from suspected ineligible voters. They refused,” Essayli said. “We are taking California to federal court to demand that the votes of American citizens not be diluted by noncitizens.”

According to the Justice Department, investigators from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and Homeland Security Investigations examined voter registration information alongside federal citizenship records. The government maintains that the resulting review identified approximately 20,000 people whose records suggested they were likely noncitizens registered to participate in California’s federal election.

California election officials have challenged the reliability of those findings. They argue that federal databases can contain outdated or incomplete information, potentially causing naturalized American citizens to be incorrectly classified as noncitizens.

The dispute has also raised concerns about the handling of sensitive voter information. Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder Dean Logan objected to the method used to transmit the federal list, including security concerns surrounding the USB drive provided to election administrators.

California Secretary of State Shirley Weber has separately disputed the administration’s allegations, maintaining that the federal government has not produced adequate evidence establishing that the individuals identified are ineligible to vote.

The administration’s legal complaint seeks to require California to separate ballots associated with the disputed registrations and verify the voters’ citizenship before including those ballots in the election totals. It does not establish that all individuals on the federal list are noncitizens or that any particular number of illegal votes has already been cast.

The larger figure referenced in some reports stems from separate allegations about California’s voter rolls. Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin has suggested that more than 190,000 noncitizens may be registered in the state, but that broader estimate is distinct from the approximately 20,000 registrations at issue in the current lawsuit.

The Justice Department’s action comes as California has already begun distributing mail-in ballots for the November 3 election. Under state law, registered voters automatically receive ballots by mail, making the timing of any court-ordered review especially significant.

The federal lawsuit asks the court to intervene before those ballots are tabulated. California officials and voting rights advocates maintain that the administration has not demonstrated that its citizenship data are sufficiently reliable to justify withholding votes from registered individuals.

The escalating dispute now places the administration’s allegations of widespread voter registration irregularities before a federal judge, with the election approaching and the question of how California must handle the disputed ballots still unresolved.

{Matzav.com}