Feed aggregator

During a press briefing on Thursday, President Donald Trump was asked whether he still supports the idea of the United States taking control of Gaza, a concept he introduced several months ago. In response, he emphasized concern for the local population, saying, “I want to see the people of Gaza safe, they have been through hell.”

The president also addressed the topic of Iran, expressing a willingness to reengage diplomatically. “Iran does want to speak and I think they’d like to speak to me and it’s time that they do,” Trump said. He made clear that the United States is not seeking confrontation, stating that he hopes Iran can “be a country again,” and remarked, “Iran had been beat up really bad.”

These remarks come as diplomatic efforts intensify around a potential agreement between Israel and Hamas. On Thursday night, media sources in Gaza reported that Hamas had given Qatar a favorable reply regarding the proposed framework for a ceasefire and hostage exchange.

According to these reports, Hamas is expected to release an official announcement in the near future outlining its position on the deal.

Earlier in the day, Reuters cited an Israeli official who said preparations were being made to greenlight a ceasefire agreement in Gaza. The official noted that Israel anticipates a formal response from Hamas by Friday. Should that response be affirmative, an Israeli delegation is prepared to engage in indirect negotiations to finalize the arrangement.

Fresh insights into the details of the proposed deal emerged on Wednesday. A report by The New York Times, quoting an Israeli defense official and a source close to Hamas, indicated that the agreement would include the release of ten living hostages along with the repatriation of the remains of eighteen others. Both sources, who were briefed on the plan but not authorized to speak publicly, shared the information on condition of anonymity.

One of the more notable changes in the revised proposal is the pace of the releases. Unlike the previous U.S.-backed plan from May, which called for all hostages to be released by day seven of a truce, the new plan outlines a phased approach spanning five separate rounds over a 60-day period.

In addition, the new terms reportedly contain a clause prohibiting Hamas from staging televised transfer ceremonies for hostages, a controversial practice that took place during the two-month truce earlier this year and drew widespread international criticism.

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump campaigned on keeping the United States out of foreign wars, but it didn’t take long to convince him to come to the direct aid of Israel, hitting Iranian nuclear targets with bunker-buster bombs dropped by B-2 stealth bombers and Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from a submarine. Beyond the attack’s immediate impact on helping bring the 12-day war to a close, experts say Trump’s decision to use force against another country also will certainly be reverberating in the Asia-Pacific, Washington’s priority theater. “Trump’s strikes on Iran show that he’s not afraid to use military force — this would send a clear message to North Korea, and even to China and Russia, about Trump’s style,” said Duyeon Kim, a senior analyst at the Center for a New American Security based in Seoul, South Korea. “Before the strikes, Pyongyang and Beijing might have assumed that Trump is risk averse, particularly based on his behavior his first presidency despite some tough talk,” Kim said. China, North Korea and Russia all condemn US strike Ten days into the war between Israel and Iran, Trump made the risky decision to step in, hitting three nuclear sites with American firepower on June 22 in a bid to destroy the country’s nuclear program at a time while negotiations between Washington and Tehran were still ongoing. The attacks prompted a pro forma Iranian retaliatory strike the following day on a U.S. base in nearby Qatar, which caused no casualties, and both Iran and Israel then agreed to a ceasefire on June 24. North Korea, China and Russia all were quick to condemn the American attack, with Russian President Vladimir Putin calling it “unprovoked aggression,” China’s Foreign Ministry saying it violated international law and “exacerbated tensions in the Middle East,” and North Korea’s Foreign Ministry maintaining it “trampled down the territorial integrity and security interests of a sovereign state.” While the strikes were a clear tactical success, the jury is still out on whether they will have a more broad strategic benefit to Washington’s goals in the Middle East or convince Iran it needs to work harder than ever to develop a nuclear deterrent, possibly pulling the U.S. back into a longer-term conflict. US allies could see attack as positive sign for deterrence If the attack remains a one-off strike, U.S. allies in the Asia-Pacific region likely will see the decision to become involved as a positive sign from Trump’s administration, said Euan Graham, a senior defense analyst with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. “The U.S. strike on Iran will be regarded as net plus by Pacific allies if it is seen to reinforce red lines, restore deterrence and is of limited duration, so as not to pull the administration off-course from its stated priorities in the Indo-Pacific,” he said. “China will take note that Trump is prepared to use force, at least opportunistically.” In China, many who have seen Trump as having a “no-war mentality” will reassess that in the wake of the attacks, which were partially aimed at forcing Iran’s hand in nuclear program negotiations, said Zhao Minghao, an international relations professor at China’s Fudan University in Shanghai. “The way the U.S. used power with its air attacks against Iran is something China needs to pay attention to,” he said. “How Trump used power to force negotiations has a significance for how China and the U.S. will […]

WATCH:

LISTEN:

https://matzav.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Bitachon4Life-Shiur-1534-Tocheles-Part-54-Keep-Pushing.mp3

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

LISTEN:

https://matzav.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Tefila4Life-Shiur-965-Focus.mp3

TRUMP: “165 days into the Trump administration, America is on a winning streak like, frankly, nobody has ever seen before.”

The president of the University of California this week reiterated that student governments are prohibited from financial boycotts of companies associated with any particular country, including Israel, as the Trump administration continues its probe of alleged antisemitism on college campuses. Michael Drake did not mention Israel by name, but he did single out student governments in a letter he sent to chancellors of the university system. He said that while freedom of speech and inquiry are core commitments of the university, its policies also require that financial decisions be grounded in sound business practices, such as competitive bidding. “This principle also applies to student governments,” he wrote. “Actions by University entities to implement boycotts of companies based on their association with a particular country would not align with these sound business practices.” UC spokesperson Rachel Zaentz said in a statement that the letter is in keeping with the university’s opposition to financial boycotts of companies associated with a particular country. “While our community members have the right to express their viewpoints, financial boycotts are inconsistent with UC’s commitment to sound business practices, academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas,” she said. College campuses exploded with pro-Palestinian protests in the wake of the war in Gaza, including a particularly brutal clash involving police at the University of California, Los Angeles last year. At the start of his term this year, President Donald Trump launched antisemitism probes at several universities, including the University of California, Berkeley. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and National Science Foundation are requiring research grantees to certify they will not engage in boycotts of Israel or promote diversity, inclusion and equity or risk federal funding. The California chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations said Drake’s letter is an example of the university system’s attempts to silence student and faculty support of Palestinian human rights. “It sends a chilling message that financial interests and political pressure outweigh free expression and moral responsibility to take a stand against a foreign nation committing a genocide,” said Oussama Mokeddem, the group’s government affairs director. The UC Student Association, which represents students across the campuses, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But its president, Aditi Hariharan, told the Los Angeles Times that she disagreed with the ban. “Students already have little influence on how the university works, and student government is one of the few places where they can really get involved and have their voices heard,” she said in an interview before the letter was released. (AP)

A Syrian source has outlined two potential frameworks for a political settlement between Israel and Syria over the Golan Heights, according to details shared with i24News. The first scenario envisions Israel retaining control over approximately one-third of the Golan Heights while returning another third directly to Syrian sovereignty. The final third would be leased by Israel from Syria for 25 years, allowing for a continued but non-sovereign Israeli presence in that portion. In the second proposed framework, Israel would maintain authority over two-thirds of the Golan Heights, while the remaining third would be handed back to Syria, potentially with a lease arrangement. Under this proposal, Syria could also receive administrative control over the Lebanese city of Tripoli, additional northern Lebanese territories, and parts of the Beqaa Valley. The Syrian source, described as close to President Ahmed al-Sharaa, indicated that Syria’s new leadership has shown an “unprecedented openness” and has established direct communication channels with Israel, focused on security and military coordination in southern Syria. The source suggested that returning specific portions of the Golan Heights—particularly areas beyond what Israel captured following the collapse of the Assad regime—would be critical to securing domestic support for any future peace agreement. Failure to include such concessions, the source warned, could generate substantial internal resistance to a deal. At the same time, the source clarified that removing U.S. sanctions on Syria should be regarded as a separate diplomatic matter and not as a form of “Israeli payment” for a peace agreement. Syrian state media, however, recently characterized talk of a peace accord as premature. An unidentified official quoted by Syrian state television stated that negotiations would not be possible until Israel complies fully with the 1974 disengagement agreement and withdraws from areas it has entered since the Assad regime’s fall. These developments come against the backdrop of major regional changes, including the overthrow of former Syrian ruler Bashar al-Assad in December and the weakening of Hezbollah after its most recent clash with Israel. Syria’s new Islamist government has confirmed indirect talks with Israel to ease tensions, while the London-based Arabic outlet Al-Sharq Al-Awsat reported this week that direct negotiations are taking place in Jordan on security issues and a phased withdrawal of IDF forces from southern Syria. Senior Syrian officials, including the country’s defense minister, are reportedly taking part in these discussions, which also cover possible security arrangements to stabilize Israel’s northern border. Despite this engagement, sources close to the Syrian leadership have maintained that President al-Sharaa is not ready to sign a formal peace treaty with Israel at this time. Syria’s primary demand continues to be a complete Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied after Assad’s fall, along with a rejection of expanding any buffer zones in the south. Axios recently reported that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed interest in pursuing U.S.-mediated negotiations with the new Syrian authorities. Netanyahu reportedly conveyed this during a meeting with U.S. Envoy to Syria Tom Barrack, seeking a revised security agreement that could eventually lead to a full peace treaty — the first such direct diplomatic effort between Israel and Syria since 2011. This Israeli initiative came after President Donald Trump met with President al-Sharaa in Saudi Arabia and subsequently lifted U.S. sanctions on Syria, despite Jerusalem’s initial reservations about al-Sharaa’s links to Turkey. (YWN World Headquarters […]

TRUMP: “There could be no better birthday present for America” than the One Big Beautiful Bill… With this bill, every major promise I made to the people of Iowa in 2024 became a promise kept.”

President Trump has arrived in Iowa for the America 250 anniversary celebration.

“USA!” chants from the crowd at the America250 kick-off celebration event in Des Moines, Iowa

Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu is accelerating efforts to pass the contentious chareidi draft law, pressing ahead despite growing backlash from reservist groups, public criticism, and mounting opposition within the security establishment.

Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Chairman MK Yuli Edelstein is spearheading a rapid legislative campaign aimed at passing the draft bill before the Knesset’s summer session concludes in three weeks. Edelstein is expected to present the proposed legislation to chareidi party representatives within hours and to the general public early next week. Simultaneously, the committee will begin intensive discussions in an effort to meet the tight timeline.

Reservist organizations are voicing strong opposition, warning that the proposed law undermines the IDF’s combat readiness. Critics argue that the bill offers benefits and exemptions long before a single chareidi soldier is drafted. “Either promote a fair and equitable law—or don’t promote any law at all,” they say.

Tensions boiled over during Defense Minister Yisroel Katz’s recent visit to the Gaza border, where a senior reservist officer confronted him directly: “Don’t count on us being able to show up for another 500 days.”

Dissent is also mounting within the defense establishment. A senior official warned, “The chareidim are trying to demoralize the system. We cannot allow a situation where the state incentivizes yeshiva study instead of military service.”

Meanwhile, the chareidi factions have reinstated their boycott on private-member legislation, vowing not to participate in votes until a mutually agreed-upon draft bill is presented.

{Matzav.com Israel}

In a high-level consultation held Thursday morning, Degel HaTorah chairman MK Moshe Gafni met with Rashbi Rosh Yeshivah Rav Meir Tzvi Bergman at the latter’s home on Rechov Admor MiGur in Bnei Brak. The two discussed pressing national issues, including the war in Gaza, efforts to secure the release of hostages, and the crisis surrounding the draft law.

During the extended meeting, Rav Bergman voiced strong support for Gafni’s recent calls to end the war in Gaza. Addressing criticism leveled at Gafni from elements within the right, the Rosh Yeshivah remarked, “You are in the right. All the criticism directed at you, coming from those who have sanctified a false lust for victory while endangering real lives—these are empty words.”

Turning to the looming battle over the draft bill, Rav Bergman condemned the religious Zionist lawmakers, stating bluntly, “They are ungrateful. We supported their efforts, even when they had no direct connection to us—and instead of showing appreciation, they repay us with harm when it comes to the decree to draft bnei yeshivah.”

According to a report by journalist Akiva Weiss in Makor Rishon, Rav Bergman warned Gafni not to show any sign of weakness on the issue: “Not only must we not compromise on the matter of yeshivah students being drafted, we must also ensure that the other side doesn’t detect even the slightest hint of weakness. We must stand firm and not be afraid of anyone. And remember—there is a Borei Olam watching over us.”

{Matzav.com Israel}

SEE IT: Dramatic video shows the moment an Amazon truck driver in Iowa lost control and swerved off the road into some trees. While there was some property damage, nobody was hurt in the accident, police said.

The Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for the deportation of several immigrants who were put on a flight in May bound for South Sudan, a war-ravaged country where they have no ties. The decision comes after the court’s conservative majority found that immigration officials can quickly deport people to third countries. The majority halted an order that had allowed immigrants to challenge any removals to countries outside their homeland where they could be in danger. The court’s latest decision makes clear that the South Sudan flight can complete the trip, weeks after it was detoured to a naval base in Djibouti. There, the migrants who had previously been convicted of serious crimes were held in a converted shipping container. It reverses findings from federal Judge Brian Murphy in Massachusetts, who said his order on those migrants still stands even after the high court lifted his broader decision. Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said federal authorities would complete the trip to South Sudan by the next day. The Supreme Court majority wrote that their decision on June 23 completely halted Murphy’s ruling and also rendered his decision on the South Sudan flight “unenforceable.” The court did not fully detail its legal reasoning on the underlying case, as is common on its emergency docket. Two liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented, saying the ruling gives the government special treatment. “Other litigants must follow the rules, but the administration has the Supreme Court on speed dial,” Sotomayor wrote. Justice Elena Kagan wrote that while she disagreed with the original order, it does countermand Murphy’s findings on the South Sudan flight. The eight migrants could face “imprisonment, torture and even death” in South Sudan, where escalating political tensions have threatened to devolve into another civil war. “We know they’ll face perilous conditions, and potentially immediate detention, upon arrival,” Trina Realmuto, executive director of the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, said Thursday. The push comes amid a sweeping immigration crackdown by Trump’s Republican administration, which has pledged to deport millions of people who are living in the United States illegally. The Trump administration has called Murphy’s finding “a lawless act of defiance.” McLaughlin said the Supreme Court’s intervention is “a win for the rule of law, safety and security of the American people.” Attorney General Pam Bondi called Murphy a “rogue district court judge” and said the justices had rebuked him. Authorities have reached agreements with other countries to house immigrants if authorities can’t quickly send them back to their homelands. The eight men sent to South Sudan in May had been convicted of crimes in the U.S. and had final orders of removal, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have said. Murphy, who was nominated by Democratic President Joe Biden, didn’t prohibit deportations to third countries. But he found migrants must have a real chance to argue they could be in danger of torture if sent to another country, even if they’ve already exhausted their legal appeals. The men and their guards have faced rough conditions on the naval base in Djibouti, where authorities detoured the flight after Murphy found the administration had violated his order by failing to allow them a chance to challenge the removal. They have since said they’re afraid of being sent to South […]

President Trump celebrates the passage of his landmark “big, beautiful bill” in the House of Representatives

Trump on his call with Putin: “We also talked about the war with Ukraine, and I’m not happy about that … I didn’t make any progress with him today at all.”

POTUS: “I think when you go over the bill, it was very easy to get them to a ‘Yes.’ … Biggest tax cut in history, great for security, great on the southern border … we covered just about everything. Again, it’s the biggest bill ever signed of its kind.”

President Trump on the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill: “The biggest bill of its kind ever signed — and it’s going to make this country into a rocket ship. It’s going to be really great.”

Starting this Shabbos, a new guideline will go into effect at the main Belzer beis medrash in Yerushalayim, restricting the number of pekelach (candy bags) thrown during a chassan’s aliyah l’Torah. The regulation aims to minimize noise and disorder during krias haTorah in the massive bais medrash, which often hosts multiple aufrufs each week.

Initiated by the leadership of the Belzer beis medrash, and issued with the blessing and support of the Belzer Rebbe, the Vaad HaRabbanim announced the following takanah regarding the long-standing custom of tossing sweets when a chosson is called to the Torah:

A. Only 20 small, specially prepared pekelach—containing a modest amount of nuts and almonds—may be thrown during the aliyah. These will be sold exclusively through an appointed coordinator.

B. To ensure that children are not left out, each family celebrating a simchah is required to provide enough pekelach for all the children in the beis medrash. These will be distributed in an orderly fashion by a designated gabbai, with full coordination. In cases where there are multiple aufrufen on the same Shabbos, each family must supply a smaller number of pekelach, to be pooled and divided accordingly.

Similar policies have already been in place for over two decades in other kehillos, including Vizhnitz, where efforts were made early on to reduce disturbances during aliyos.

{Matzav.com Israel}