Feed aggregator

It is with great sadness that Matzav.com reports the passing of Rav Yisroel Nachman Halevi Landau zt”l, a prominent Breslover chossid, expert mechanech, and widely respected practitioner of natural healing, who was niftar this morning in the United States at the age of 76 after a serious illness.

The levayah was held at Shomrei Hadas Chapels in Boro Park and is proceeding to JFK Airport en route to Eretz Yisroel. A second levayah will take place Thursday in the early afternoon, passing through the main Breslover kloiz at 21 Rashbi Street in Modiin Illit before continuing to the cemetery in Ashdod, where he will be laid to rest in the Pittsburgh section.

Rav Landau was born on 24 Elul 5710 to his father, Rav Shmuel Halevi Landau zt”l, a distinguished talmid of Rav Yosef Buxbaum of Galanta hy”d, and a descendant of the Noda B’Yehuda. His mother, Rebbetzin Raiza a”h, was from Kaliv in Hungary, where her family merited to sew garments for the Kaliver Rebbe.

As a child, he studied in Talmud Torah Chug Chasam Sofer in Bnei Brak, and later continued in the Sanzer yeshiva in Netanya under the Shefa Chaim of Sanz. During his years as a bochur, he learned in Yeshivas Dushinsky, where he became closely connected to the rosh yeshiva, Maharim Dushinsky zt”l, who held him in high esteem. His classmates recalled his strong attachment to his family’s minhagim, both in tefillah and zemiros.

In his youth, he merited to spend time in the presence of gedolei hador in Yerushalayim, developing a particularly close relationship with the Biala Rebbe, the Chelkas Yehoshua zt”l, who guided him in his avodas Hashem and prepared him for marriage. He later married the daughter of Rav Moshe Elimelech Halevi Bornstein z”l, among the early residents of Kiryat Bobov in Bat Yam.

After his marriage, Rav Landau became a highly regarded melamed in the Sanzer cheder in Bnei Brak, where he educated generations of talmidim and earned a reputation as a dedicated and skilled mechanech, instilling strong foundations in Torah and tefillah with exceptional care.

His expertise brought requests from communities abroad seeking his help in chinuch. He eventually moved with his family to Vienna, Austria, where for approximately two years he focused not only on teaching children but also on training additional melamdim, sharing his unique approach to educating young students.

He later relocated to Antwerp, Belgium, at the request of Vizhnitzer institutions, serving there as a melamed for eight years. During that period, he became closely connected to the Pshversoker Rebbe, who showed him special closeness. Community members related that he was entrusted with sensitive missions to strengthen kedusha in Antwerp, including matters of shalom bayis.

While in Antwerp, he fell seriously ill with a severe intestinal condition that doctors were unable to cure. As his condition worsened, the Pshversoker Rebbe instructed him to pursue natural remedies. With siyata d’Shmaya, he found a specialist in natural medicine who guided him through dietary changes that ultimately restored his health.

Following his recovery, he immersed himself in the study of natural healing, including the Rambam’s teachings on health and nutrition. He also discovered an old sefer titled “Ruach Chaim,” which elaborated on natural medicine and reinforced for him that proper care of the body through nutrition is rooted in halachah.

From that point on, he accepted a personal mission, together with his wife, to help others through proper nutrition and health guidance. In 5747, during a visit by the Pittsburgher Rebbe, the Emunas Avraham zt”l, Rav Landau observed the Rebbe’s physical weakness and shared his experiences during a private meeting. The Rebbe encouraged him to return to Eretz Yisroel and use his knowledge to assist others, giving him a special brachah for success.

He returned to Eretz Yisroel and settled in Bnei Brak, where he opened a clinic focused on natural health. Many people benefited from his guidance and experienced recovery. He would daven at the Spinka beis medrash on Rechov Yehoshua.

In 5751, he became closely affiliated with Breslov and adopted its teachings as his primary path in avodas Hashem. He developed a deep connection to the teachings of Rav Nachman of Breslov and his talmid Rav Nosson, devoting himself to their seforim and encouraging others to study them. He frequently traveled to Uman and made great efforts to be there for Rosh Hashanah and Shabbos Chanukah.

Those close to him said a phrase he constantly repeated was: “Bittul meivi lidei cheit.” His life reflected that message, as he was almost always seen with a sefer in hand, urging others not to waste time and to remain engaged in Torah or meaningful pursuits.

In recent years, he lived in Brachfeld, Modiin Illit, where he continued learning as a dedicated kollel yungerman. Each morning he would leave for Shacharis with a simple sandwich and remain immersed in learning until the evening, a routine he maintained even while spending time in the United States.

Over the past six months, his health declined, and he traveled to the United States for treatment. As recently as the month of Adar, he participated in the sheva brachos of his granddaughter, the daughter of his son Rav Yitzchok. Soon afterward, he was hospitalized, surrounded constantly by family and Breslover chassidim, until this morning, when his neshamah returned to its Creator.

He is survived by a distinguished family. His eldest daughter, Mrs. Yocheved Feldman a”h, predeceased him. His sons include Rav Yitzchok of Boro Park, Rav Yechezkel Shaul of Ashdod, Rav Avrohom Dovid Shimon of Beit Shemesh, and Rav Shmuel of Beitar Illit, along with his son-in-law Rav Elazar Chaim Farkash of Modiin Illit. He leaves behind children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren who continue in the path of Torah and avodas Hashem.

Tehei nishmaso tzerurah b’tzror hachaim.

{Matzav.com}

[Video below.] A video published by a Channel 12 News reporter showing yeshiva boys being questioned in a demeaning manner while collecting donations for a wedding fund sparked widespread outrage on Wednesday, prompting a wave of public support and donations for the family involved.

The footage, released by reporter Inbar Twizer, showed her and her husband confronting yeshiva students under the age of 18 who were raising money for a hachnasas kallah fund. In the video, the boys were challenged about military service while seeking tzedakah for hachnosas kallah. Their faces were not blurred, and the clip quickly spread online, drawing sharp criticism across social media.

In an emotional interview with Avi Moskowitz on Kol Berama radio, the father of the chosson spoke publicly for the first time about the incident.

“We had no way to even begin approaching the wedding,” he said. According to the father, the painful episode led to an unexpected turn: “Thousands donated to us today. There are miracles — even if they came through embarrassment. It’s not pleasant, but Hashem led us in this way. A photographer called me and offered to photograph the entire wedding for free.”

He went on to describe the family’s difficult circumstances: “Our car was destroyed last week by a Hezbollah missile, and Hashem arranged things in the best way. We received dozens of calls of support today from across the spectrum — even from secular people and from the left. I thank Hashem that I belong to this nation. You can feel the warm embrace, and we are grateful to everyone.”

Following the publication of the video, the bank details for the hachnasas kallah fund were circulated widely, triggering a massive outpouring of donations. Screenshots of contributions flooded social media as a sign of solidarity with the boys who had been publicly humiliated.

Among the many donors was Shas chairman Aryeh Deri, who posted on X: “The Jewish people have always been characterized by special traits: compassion, modesty, and acts of kindness. The severe incident that occurred today does not represent the Jewish people, and therefore דווקא today we must do the opposite — be compassionate and kind. I am donating 1,000 shekels to this needy family for hachnasas kallah, and I call on all my friends and all of Israel to do the same. Am Yisrael Chai.”

He was joined by journalists Chaim Levinson and Yanki Farber, MK Moshe Arbel, television presenter Nataly Dadon, and many other public figures, all of whom expressed strong disapproval of the reporter’s conduct.

WATCH:

{Matzav.com}

President Donald Trump indicated Wednesday that renewed negotiations between Washington and Tehran could resume within days, even as behind-the-scenes diplomatic efforts continue to gain traction through Pakistani intermediaries.

Sources in Islamabad told the New York Post that encouraging developments in talks with Iranian officials could lead to an announcement within the next “36 to 72 hours,” describing the current atmosphere as one of cautious optimism driven by active diplomatic engagement.

When asked directly about the possibility of a breakthrough, Trump replied in a message to the outlet, “It’s possible! President DJT.”

The potential for renewed talks comes as the administration has given Iran a limited timeframe to resolve internal disagreements and present a unified negotiating position, according to U.S. officials who spoke with Axios. Without such cohesion, the ceasefire Trump extended earlier this week could unravel.

American negotiators remain hopeful that a broader agreement addressing both the conflict and Iran’s nuclear ambitions can still be reached. At the same time, officials are increasingly concerned that divisions within Iran’s leadership may prevent any binding agreement from being finalized.

“We saw that there is an absolute fracture inside Iran between the negotiators and the military — with neither side having access to the supreme leader, who is not responsive,” a U.S. official said.

According to U.S. officials, these internal rifts became evident following earlier discussions held in Islamabad, when senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps figures, including Gen. Ahmad Vahidi, rejected key points that had been tentatively accepted by Iran’s civilian negotiating team.

Those divisions later played out publicly when Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi declared that the Strait of Hormuz would reopen, only to have IRGC leadership refuse to follow through and openly criticize the announcement.

In the aftermath, Iran did not provide a meaningful reply to the most recent U.S. proposal and avoided committing to another round of negotiations in Pakistan.

The situation has been further complicated by instability at the top levels of Iran’s leadership following the assassination of former national security figure Ali Larijani, who had previously served as a central coordinator in the country’s decision-making process, U.S. officials said.

His replacement, Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, has reportedly struggled to unify the competing factions within Iran’s military and political leadership, as well as maintain coordination with the supreme leader.

Plans for Vice President JD Vance to travel to Islamabad for the next phase of negotiations were ultimately abandoned after Iran failed to confirm its participation.

Air Force Two remained stationed for hours at Joint Base Andrews before the mission was called off. Meanwhile, senior envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner adjusted their schedules and returned to Washington.

Following consultations with his national security team—including Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, War Department Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine—Trump chose to prolong the ceasefire rather than pursue additional military action.

“The degree of the fracture became clear in the last few days, and the question was: does it make any sense to go to Islamabad like that?” a U.S. official said. “So the decision was to give the diplomatic efforts a little bit more time.”

Officials in Washington and allied governments say Trump now appears more inclined to bring the conflict to a close after achieving significant military objectives, though the option of renewed strikes remains on the table if talks collapse.

“It certainly looks like Trump doesn’t want to use military force anymore and has made a decision to end the war,” one U.S. source close to Trump said.

The latest developments follow Trump’s announcement Tuesday that the ceasefire would remain in place as the U.S. waits for a consolidated response from Tehran.

“I have therefore directed our Military to continue the Blockade and, in all other respects, remain ready and able, and will therefore extend the Ceasefire until such time as their proposal is submitted, and discussions are concluded, one way or the other,” he said in a post on Truth Social.

In another post, Trump highlighted the growing financial strain on Iran.

“Iran is collapsing financially! They want the Strait of Hormuz opened immediately – Starving for cash! Losing 500 Million Dollars a day. Military and Police complaining that they are not getting paid. SOS!!!” he wrote.

He also pointed to the blockade as a central pressure point in negotiations.

“Iran doesn’t want the Strait of Hormuz closed, they want it open so they can make $500 Million Dollars a day,” Trump wrote. “They only say they want it closed because I have it totally BLOCKADED (CLOSED!), so they merely want to save face.”

Meanwhile, Pakistani officials have continued quiet diplomatic outreach to Iranian counterparts as part of an ongoing effort to facilitate another round of talks, according to a source familiar with the discussions.

“The ceasefire is holding despite heightened rhetoric, indicating positive intent on both sides,” the source said. “No military escalation from either side.”

“Pakistan remains the key mediator,” the person added, noting that Islamabad is actively coordinating with both Washington and Tehran in an attempt to bring the sides back to the negotiating table.

{Matzav.com}

Kamala Harris is holding a narrow lead in a new poll of potential 2028 Democratic presidential contenders, even as a widely shared video clip of her remarks this week fueled fresh discussion about her political messaging and public persona.

According to a survey conducted by Echelon Insights between April 17 and April 20, Harris tops the field among 467 likely Democratic primary voters with 22 percent support.

Close behind is California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who registered 21 percent, while former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg came in third with 12 percent. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez followed with 10 percent support.

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro received five percent, while Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey drew four percent backing in the poll.

Further down the list, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly each received three percent. Sen. Jon Ossoff of Georgia, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, and Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer each earned two percent.

Several other figures—including Sen. Raphael Warnock of Georgia, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, and Rep. Ro Khanna of California—each recorded one percent support.

At the bottom of the survey, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman, and former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel did not register any support.

The latest poll shows modest changes compared to Echelon’s previous survey, with Harris gaining one point, Newsom rising by two points, Buttigieg increasing by three points, and Ocasio-Cortez slipping by one point.

Separately, attention has centered on a video clip of Harris that spread rapidly on X, in which she appeared to shift her speaking style while addressing a group of black women.

In the video, Harris told the audience, “I think it’s okay for us to be a bit transactional too, and to say, ‘Imma get mine also.’ And so don’t count on me to be a voter and be the backbone of the Democratic Party, because it is my value system and my ethics and my sense of civic duty and responsibility, so that you look at me and say, ‘Oh, they’re gonna vote.’”

Social media users contrasted those remarks with a well-known line from President John F. Kennedy: “Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.”

Earlier this month, during an April 10 appearance at Rev. Al Sharpton’s National Action Network convention in New York, Harris indicated she “might” enter the 2028 presidential race. According to Politico, the crowd responded with repeated chants of, “Run again! Run again!”

As speculation about a potential Harris campaign continues, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani was asked Sunday on NBC’s Meet the Press whether he would support her candidacy. He replied, “I have to be honest, I haven’t thought about the candidacies for president this time. My focus is 2026,” before adding that he has no intention of running for president himself.

Harris also drew attention last week after releasing a video from Charlotte, North Carolina, in which she argued that Americans are paying $15 more per fill-up at the pump since the start of what she described as Trump’s “war of choice,” and accused President Donald Trump of prioritizing his own “political interest” over the needs of working Americans.

That message revived scrutiny of Harris’s tenure as vice president under President Joe Biden, when national average gas prices reached record highs in June 2022, hitting $5.016 per gallon for regular gasoline and $5.816 for diesel.

Joan, a 64-year-old patient, came into my office frustrated. She was walking every day, staying active and taking care of herself. But she still felt stiff, tired and not nearly as strong as she used to be.

“I thought I was doing enough,” she told me.

It’s something I hear all the time.

For decades, we’ve told people that moving more is the key to better health. And that’s true – but it’s only part of the story. Increasingly, research shows that how you move matters nearly as much as how often. In particular, brief bursts of higher-intensity activity can have an outsize impact on health, fitness and even longevity.

A recent study in the European Heart Journal looked at people who didn’t engage in formal exercise and found that just one to two minutes a day of vigorous activity, accumulated in short bursts, was associated with a significantly lower risk of chronic disease and death.

Not a workout class. Not a training plan. Just everyday life, done with a bit more intensity.

Exercise physiologists call this vigorous physical activity, or VPA. Sometimes referred to as vigorous intermittent lifestyle physical activity (VILPA), it includes things most people don’t think of as exercise: climbing stairs quickly, carrying heavy groceries, walking uphill with purpose or hurrying to catch a train.

These moments are brief, but they matter. Huffing and puffing, even for short periods, can shape long-term health.

This is not the same as high-intensity interval training, or HIIT. HIIT is structured and deliberate, performed in an exercise setting. VPA is opportunistic. One builds fitness and the other reinforces it throughout the day.

Two minutes can sound almost too simple. But physiologically, it makes sense. When you push your body harder, even briefly, you activate systems that don’t get challenged during lower-intensity movement. Your heart rate climbs, your muscles recruit more fibers, your mitochondria (which are like the battery packs to your cells) proliferate and your metabolism shifts. These adaptations drive improvements in cardiovascular fitness, strength and resilience.

Think of it this way: A leisurely walk is good for you, but add a few short bursts of speed or hills, and that same walk becomes far more impactful.

The challenge is that many people, especially as they get older, shy away from intensity. There is a widespread belief that aging means slowing down, taking it easy and avoiding anything that feels too demanding. Some of that instinct is understandable. People worry about injury or overdoing it.

But avoiding intensity altogether can accelerate the very declines people fear.

As we age, we need more intensity, not less. We lose muscle mass, power and cardiovascular capacity over time. Those losses are not just about performance; they affect balance, independence and quality of life. The ability to climb stairs without getting winded, react quickly if you trip, and carry groceries without strain all depend on having a higher capacity for intensity.

The good news is that you don’t need long workouts or extreme training to tap into these benefits. Even small, manageable doses of intense movement can help counter the effects of aging. That could mean burpees at the gym, if that’s your thing. But even if it’s not, short bursts of effort in everyday life still make a difference.

For Joan, we made a simple adjustment. She kept her daily walks but added short intervals. Every few minutes, she picked up the pace for 20 to 30 seconds – not a sprint, but a brisk effort that made it harder to speak in full sentences. Then she recovered and repeated.

At first, it felt uncomfortable. That’s the point. Intensity should feel like work. But within a few weeks, she noticed a difference. She felt stronger. Her energy improved. Even her regular walking pace became easier.

As I tell my patients, “Pushing yourself means getting comfortable being uncomfortable. It’s the only way to grow. Mentally, physically and physiologically.”

One important point to remember is that intensity is relative. What feels vigorous to one person may feel different to another. The goal is not to compare yourself with others, but to safely push your own limits.

Intensity should be approached thoughtfully. If you have underlying medical conditions or have been inactive, it’s worth discussing a plan with your physician. The aim is to challenge the body, not overwhelm it.

We often think of health as something that requires major time commitments or dramatic lifestyle overhauls. But some of the most effective interventions are surprisingly small.

Two minutes of effort, layered into the fabric of your day, can begin to shift your physiology in meaningful ways.

For many of my patients, that realization is empowering. It lowers the psychological barrier to getting started and reframes exercise from something that requires an hour at the gym to something that can happen in the margins of everyday life. Lowering the cost to act, or making the desired outcome easier, is an important step toward unleashing one’s motivation.

Joan still walks every day. But now she walks with purpose. She has embraced those short bursts of effort and, in doing so, rediscovered a sense of strength and confidence in her body.

“I feel a lot closer to myself again,” she told me at her last visit.

That’s the real goal: not only adding years to life, but life to years.

And sometimes, it starts with just two minutes.

Jordan D. Metzl, MD, is a sports medicine physician at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York City and the founder of the IronStrength fitness community. His newest book, “Push: Unlock the Science of Fitness Motivation to Embrace Health and Longevity,” examines the science of fitness motivation and muscle maintenance for health.

Rabbi Weinberg responds:

I appreciate the responses to my article that have been numerous, varied, and, as expected, passionate. This in itself is an accomplishment, since the goal to engender public debate on this important topic has finally been achieved. As always, when there is public knowledge and discourse, and not just collective behavior running on inertia, there is potential for innovation and improvement.

In this brief reply, I will try to answer some of the more important questions and comments.

First, however, I wish to clarify something which seemed to have bothered a few readers.

The intention of my article was not Chas V’Shalom to belittle any Gadol B’Yisroel, Rosh Yeshiva or Rebbe. I do not doubt for a moment that most of the Roshei Yeshivos who opened those new Yeshivos had anything else in mind besides a desire for Harbotzas HaTorah. They have earned my respect and I am personally close to some of them. If this was understood otherwise, I sincerely regret that and ask Mechila of those who were offended. The purpose of my piece was only to explain how we got to the current situation and, my censure was rather with a specific action of theirs, that is, their insistence that Mesivtos begin on Rosh Chodesh Elul in mid August.

While this too is mostly the result of their L’Shem Shomaym zealous idealism, and  certainly without any malicious intent, (as I implied when I wrote that “they were unaware…. that a result…”),  the outcome nevertheless remains sadly the same. Our once great institution, the boys camps, have been broken forever.

My article was pertinent only to children of the communities of Brooklyn, Queens, Far Rockaway, Staten Island, Passaic and perhaps a few others that have a 10 month school year. Monsey and Lakewood, however, which were founded decades ago in conjunction with a Yeshiva and operate on a one Month of Av Bain Hazmanim, are not relevant to this conversation.

To those who questioned my motives, no, I do not own a camp, nor am I a learning director or Rebbi or Head counselor in any camp. My children too, are all older and out of the camps for many years.

Some of the commenters wondered why can’t we make our camps and vacations during Tamuz and Av and just forget about the old July August season. I thought that I had already explained that sufficiently. Yes, in a perfect world it would be optimal. Unfortunately there are many reasons why in New York that is not yet feasible, chiefly amongst them is because we are subordinate more or less to a NYC Board of Education school calendar. Yeshivos and Bais Yaakovs receive funding, tutoring, regents accreditation and bus service from the B.O.E. and it is they who determine the school year.

Why don’t I take it up with the Gedolim?

I believe that it is too late for that. The die has already been cast. But I ask the same question of those Roshei Yeshivos. Before you decided to deviate from the traditional schedule to begin in mid August on Rosh Chodesh Elul, and put an ax to the camps founded by Gedolim, why didn’t you consult the Gedolim of the Moetzes or of Torah U’Mesorah to see if they agree to this drastic move? Something tells me that back then, if asked, the Gedolim may have advised differently.

If, as one writer suggested, that the time is now finally ripe to emulate Slabodka, Kletzk and Mir, hence the justification for beginning on Elul, then by all means let us be consistent and go all the way. For one, we  should stop our ridiculous dating system, including sharing resumes and photos, and the outrageous demands and expectations of prospective in-laws, that have become so prevalent in our communities. This certainly was not the way back in Kletzk and Brisk. It is the height of hypocrisy to only embrace the Elul Zman which is not even a Minhag and can be done in camp if wanted, but ignore the truly pressing issues that should be foreign to authentic Bnei Torah, and now contribute in no small measure to our devastating shidduch crisis.

Of course I never suggested that camps are perfect, and a fair amount of justifiable criticism has been directed by the readers at  camp owners, namely the exorbitant price of camp and simultaneously about the minimal pay to the Rebbes that lead to a deficiency in the quality of learning. As stated before, I am not in the camp business and don’t speak for the camp owners. Neither am I familiar enough with these particular problems, therefore I cannot judge. Nevertheless, if this is the case in the privately owned camps, it is not clear how much can be done about it. They are, after all, private businesses, and businesses as we know, do what they do to generate maximum revenue while keeping overhead to a minimum…. Still, since they do advertise themselves as Torah / Chinuch oriented camps etc, it could be expected of them to comply with certain standards. Perhaps the Yeshivos that recommend and send a bulk of their Talmidim to specific private camps, should organize and conduct meetings with those camp owners to see if these difficulties can be resolved.

To summarize:

All in all some excellent points were made in the remarks. I myself have also gained from the feedback and acquired new insights into the public’s level of appreciation of camp.  Surprisingly to me, I am discovering that the younger generation of parents seem less enthusiastic about camp than the older generation, and are more ready perhaps to forgo it entirely. Due to demographics and other changes within the Yeshivishe community, boys camps are becoming less practicable and less affordable. Looking towards the future, whether we like it or not, the sun seems to be setting for the Yeshivishe children’s 8 weeks overnight camps. Some of these camps have already been sold to Chassidishe Kehilos (who have no Bein Hazmanim, and thus no Elul, and subsidize their campers ). Others, for the right price will probably soon be sold as well.

This is not necessarily catastrophic, if we acknowledge it, and work towards an appropriate alternative that would still provide our children with healthy outlets and recreation albeit not in a sleep away camp setting.

Times are indeed changing.

 Rabbi Elchonon Weinberg

To submit a letter to appear on Matzav.com, email MatzavInbox@gmail.com

DON’T MISS OUT! Join the Matzav Status by CLICKING HERE. Join the Matzav WhatsApp Groups by CLICKING HERE.

The opinions expressed in letters on Matzav.com do not necessarily reflect the stance of the Matzav Media Network.

Israel’s Chief Rabbi Rav Kalman Meir Ber revealed powerful exchanges with senior security officials, including the head of the Shin Bet and Israeli Air Force personnel, describing what he framed as extraordinary nissim surrounding recent military operations.

Speaking during an opening address for Yom Ha’atzmaut at the Great Synagogue in Netanya, Rav Ber shared details of conversations that left a deep impression on him regarding both the scale of the threats and the outcomes that followed.

“Today, at Har Herzl, the head of the Shin Bet, Dovid Zini, approached me and asked: why doesn’t the Chief Rabbinate hold a day of thanksgiving for what happened in Operation ‘Shaagas HaAri’?”

“I answered him: ‘But the story isn’t over yet.’

“He said to me: True, but if you had seen, if you had known what is happening here and in Nisan — he even pointed out the Hebrew date — do you know how many thousands of missiles were launched? The public has no idea, and also doesn’t know where they landed.”

Rav Ber went on to recount a visit to the IDF’s Kirya headquarters shortly before Pesach, where he met with a senior base commander.

“On Erev Pesach I was at the General Staff base. The base commander, a colonel, a secular individual, sat with me for a long time in his office and even invited me to speak to the soldiers.

“He told me about approximately 4,500 soldiers sitting in the ‘bor,’ alongside additional personnel working with them.

“He said to me: We were sitting at minus four, but if we had gone down a few more levels and you had seen the screens — I tell you, as a person without a kippah, it’s simply miracles what is happening here.”

He added that similar sentiments were expressed by pilots during a visit to an air force base.

“Also at the air force base, the pilots told me: In the current operation, according to our statistics, at least every seventh plane should not return, at most the eighth. And yet look at the miracle — all of them returned safely. And among the Americans, seven planes fell.

“Are these not open miracles, what we are seeing and what we have seen? Are we not meant to be among those who ‘see the chasdei Hashem and reflect upon them’? Should we not understand that everything taking place here, in Eretz Yisroel, moves between open miracles and hidden miracles?”

Rav Ber also pointed to Israel’s broader advancements, noting that even those directly involved in developing them express amazement.

“After all, you see what kind of advanced country we are — in medicine, that the entire world relies on; in our military technology. One of the individuals who is considered almost the primary developer of the ‘Arrow’ system sat with me — and he too speaks about it with wonder,” he said.

{Matzav.com}

During a visit to the newly rebuilt beis medrash in Kerestir marking the 101st yahrtzeit of Reb Shayele of Kerestir, several prominent negidim announced significant support for the ongoing rebuilding efforts.

Among those present was American philanthropist Yoeli Landau, who arrived shortly after landing nearby by private helicopter and toured the reconstructed beis medrash together with descendants of the tzaddik from “Reb Shayale’s Hoiz.”

During the visit, Landau was deeply moved as he stood in the very spot where his grandfather, Reb Mordechai Leib Deitch ז”ל, had once davened. His grandfather had served as a close meshamesh to the tzaddik. At that moment, Landau informed the descendants, including Rav Menachem Mendel Rubin and Rav Dovid Gross, that he is taking upon himself the full cost of building a second room and an ezras nashim in the beis medrash, l’ilui nishmas his grandfather.

Also participating in the visit were Avraham Yehuda Goldberger and David Gefner, who, inspired by Landau’s generosity, likewise committed to the project and acquired zechuyos in the new shul.

These contributions come as the historic beis medrash is reopened to the public for the first time in decades, following years of neglect and desolation. This past Shabbos, large crowds flocked to the site and davened in the very daled amos where the tzaddik once stood, after construction was temporarily paused to allow public access.

The beis medrash, rebuilt as a precise reconstruction of the original structure, is being led by descendants of the tzaddik, including Rav Menachem Mendel Rubin and Rav Yissachar Berish Rubin, who head the Reb Shayale’s Hoiz organization. For years, they worked to return the property to Jewish hands and restore it down to the smallest detail.

Originally built during the lifetime of the tzaddik after it burned down in 1919 and was reconstructed under his supervision, the beis medrash was later abandoned after the Holocaust and used for other purposes. It was eventually reclaimed through a complex process, paving the way for the current restoration, which included uncovering the original foundations and rebuilding accordingly.

In the coming days, workers are expected to return to complete the remaining construction, ahead of a full reopening planned for the upcoming Yomim Noraim, b’ezras Hashem.

A devastating loss has struck the community in Flatbush, as 25-year-old Yossi Loriner z”l was killed in a serious car accident in Pennsylvania.

Yossi, the son of R’ Yitzchok Loriner of Flatbush, was studying law in Pennsylvania and was on his way home to visit his parents when the fatal crash occurred.

Authorities reported that the accident took place shortly before 8:15 p.m. in the northbound lanes of a Pennsylvania highway. Yossi sustained fatal injuries at the scene and was pronounced dead there.

Pennsylvania State Police have opened an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the crash, which involved a truck. Volunteers from Chesed Shel Emes remained at the scene throughout the night to ensure kavod hameis and handle the necessary arrangements.

Yehi zichro boruch.

{Matzav.com}

Donald Trump said Tuesday that Washington could step in to assist Spirit Airlines as the budget airline confronts the prospect of shutting down operations.

Speaking on Squawk Box on CNBC, Trump said: “I don’t mind mergers. I think I’d love somebody to buy Spirit, as an example. You know, Spirit’s in trouble. … Maybe the federal government should help that one out.″

According to individuals familiar with the situation, the airline has recently approached the administration for financial support, though they were not authorized to speak publicly about the discussions. The request was initially reported by The Air Current.

Spirit has been grappling with ongoing financial instability after seeking bankruptcy protection in August for the second time within a year.

The carrier had planned to exit bankruptcy proceedings by mid-2026, in part by offloading aircraft and concentrating service on a smaller group of core markets. However, rising fuel costs following U.S. and Israeli military strikes on Iran in February have intensified the strain. Fuel remains the second-largest expense for airlines after labor.

Prices for jet fuel have climbed sharply this year in the wake of the Iran conflict, nearly doubling overall. Data from Airlines for America, based on figures from Argus, showed that as of Monday, a gallon averaged $3.87 in cities including Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and New York—roughly 55% higher than before the war began on Feb. 28.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy is scheduled to meet later Tuesday with several low-cost airlines to review how higher fuel costs are affecting their operations. People briefed on the plans said carriers are expected to raise the possibility of tax relief during the talks, speaking on condition of anonymity because the discussions had not yet been publicly disclosed.

It remains uncertain whether the administration will extend direct assistance to the Florida-based airline. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government provided billions of dollars in relief to the aviation sector, though the funds were distributed broadly across the industry rather than directed to a single company.

{Matzav.com}

When researcher Nicholas Tiller began to feed health questions into chatbots as a test, he expected some imperfections – but not this level of failure.

Five AIs, 250 questions and a total score of just over 50 percent correct responses.

And 1 in 5 of the ones that were wrong were, in Tiller’s estimation, dangerous.

“It would more than likely cause somebody harm if they were to follow the advice,” he said. “It was a bit of a shock.”

Millions of Americans regularly use AI tools like ChatGPT and Gemini as a first stop for health questions related to colds, cancer and beyond. Two studies published this month suggest that may not be such a good idea – at least without a lot of skepticism.

Tiller, a research associate at the Lundquist Institute for Biomedical Innovation at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, published his study in BMJ Open. A separate team from Mass General Brigham approached the question in an entirely different way, and the study appeared in JAMA Network Open.

Both studies were designed as real-world tests, with humans posing open-ended questions as well as more structured, closed questions that push for brief, discrete responses – often just a few words – or yes-or-no answers. Tiller’s study focused on subjects frequently distorted by misinformation, posing questions such as: Does 5G cause cancer? How much raw milk should I drink for health benefits?

In the JAMA Network Open paper, testers gave 21 models realistic medical situations involving patients and asked them to “play doctor.” That paper also gave the AI tools failing grades.

The findings echo a recent experiment that tested how easily falsehoods can seep into AI systems. In 2024, a team of researchers invented a condition -“bixonimania”- and seeded the internet with fabricated studies describing it as a disorder marked by red, irritated eyes from too much screen time. They didn’t exactly try to hide the ruse.

The papers included conspicuous tells: a nonexistent university, a made-up city, even a line stating, “this entire paper is made up.” It didn’t matter. Within weeks, chatbots were citing the condition as if it were real, invoking it in response to users describing their symptoms. A study published in January in the Lancet suggests the problem is not an isolated quirk. The most reliable chatbot the researchers tested still treated more than 10 percent of fabricated claims as true with the worst accepting more than half.

The tests were conducted using general purpose AI tools. Several companies have since been working to enhance their health capabilities or roll out more specialized AI apps, and many of the models evaluated have been updated since the study period, which may improve their performance.

One in 4 people are using chatbots for health information, and younger people are more likely to have used AI for health-related information or advice in the 30 days prior, according to research released this month from a third source, the West Health-Gallup Center on Healthcare in America, which surveyed a nationally representative sample of about 5,600 adults. And a not insignificant portion of them – 14 percent, or about 14 million people – report not seeing a provider they otherwise would have because of information or advice they received from AI.

“Obviously it’s deeply concerning that people are relying on unvalidated chatbots for their health care,” said Tim Lash, president of the West Health Policy Center, a nonprofit and nonpartisan group focused on aging and health care affordability. But he also sees hopeful signs in the data. He said respondents were split in thirds from a trust perspective: a third were using AI and trusted it, a third used it and didn’t trust it and the rest were unsure.

“It tells you there’s a healthy amount of concerns about guardrails and protecting the quality of information,” Lash said.

Why chatbots struggle to think like doctors
Many popular chatbots today are trained on large language models (LLMs), vast amounts of text to understand, and their original purpose was to generate humanlike language. The models can pull from well established authorities in medicine such as journals and pages set up by Harvard Medical School or the Cleveland Clinic, but they also look at things like social media and Q&A forums.

The physician’s task, on the other hand, has been more or less unchanged for centuries: to treat and manage illness, with a central challenge being to determine what, exactly, ails the patient – what medicine came to call a differential diagnosis. It is a process of gathering symptoms, weighing evidence from tests and narrowing the field to the most likely cause based on scientific literature – with some human instinct thrown in.

Aligning the design of AI chatbots with the complex reasoning required of doctors has been a challenge.

In the JAMA Network Open study, conducted January 2025 to December 2025, researchers presented 29 case vignettes based on cases in the professional version of the Merck Manual, a widely used medical reference, in a similar way they might have been posed to medical students or residents in training. An example might be telling the chatbot that there’s a female patient, 30 years of age, with abdominal pain and asking what to do.

The AIs – which included different updates of ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, DeepSeek and Grok – were prone to draw premature conclusions, and got it wrong 80 percent of the time.

“They didn’t do well when asked to reason through uncertain limited data,” Marc Succi, one of the co-authors and executive director of the MESH Incubator at Mass General Brigham. In contrast, the models performed well at later stages of the investigation into patient cases when more complete information was available.

OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, and Google (Gemini) declined to comment. DeepSeek and xAI (Grok) did not respond to requests for comment.

Anthropic, which makes Claude, said that when people ask medical questions it is trained to acknowledge its limits as an AI. “Our usage policy is clear that medical diagnosis and patient care are classified as high-risk uses and require a qualified professional to review any AI-assisted content or decision,” a spokesperson said in a statement.

Girish Nadkarni, chief AI officer for Mount Sinai Health and chair of the department of AI and human health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, said the discrepancy exposes a major weakness of the current generation of chatbots, which is that they mostly operate through pattern matching – an approach that struggles when information is scarce.

“Humans have more general intelligence. We reason our way through situations,” said Nadkarni, who was not involved in either of the new studies. “The AI chatbots interpolate with data you have and not extrapolate data they don’t have.”

The researchers explained the problem this way in their conclusion: “Clinicians preserve uncertainty and iteratively refine differential diagnoses, whereas LLMs collapse prematurely into single answers.”

Confident and compliant, even when wrong
The BMJ Open group used what Tiller called an adversarial framework to create “strain” on the AI models, which included versions of ChatGPT, Gemini, Meta AI, DeepSeek and Grok in February 2025. The researchers posted 10 open-ended and closed questions on five topics in the news: cancer, vaccines, stem cells, nutrition and athletic performance.

They scored the responses for accuracy and completeness and put them into three categories: non-problematic, somewhat problematic or highly problematic.

The AIs did better on closed questions versus open-ended ones, but the quality of the responses was similar across all five chatbots.

Chatbots are not designed for health. … They are just good at talking, like a salesperson when you to a car dealership.

One big issue for Tiller was the confidence with which the models expressed their answers. Out of the 250 questions, there were only two instances where an AI, Meta AI, refused to answer. One question had to do with the best anabolic steroids for building muscle and the response was that the AI can’t provide information on the illegal use of substances. The other was about alternative therapies to chemotherapy to which the AI suggested the questioner consult a medical professional.

Tiller said both were the reasonable and responsible responses, but that it was “unbelievably infrequent” for an AI to admit it did not know something, did not have sufficient information to respond or questioned the question.

Another area the AIs had trouble with was nuance. For example, on the covid-19 and vaccines question, Tiller said, Grok included what he called “elements of false balance,” which made it seem as though there was a debate when the scientific consensus is that the vaccines help protect against severe illness, hospitalization and death.

“When people read an authoritative answer it gives it false credibility,” Tiller said, adding that people need to know that for the most part these AI chatbots do not weigh information based on the reliability of the source or look at its validity.

A previous study published in October in npj Digital Medicine, a Nature publication, suggested one vulnerability may be that AI chatbots are designed to be excessively helpful and agreeable, which leads them to not challenge illogical medical queries.

“Results showed high initial compliance (up to 100%) across all models, prioritizing helpfulness over logical consistency,” the authors wrote.

Companies are already moving to strengthen how their AI systems handle health questions. Meta said on April 8 that it had released an updated version of its AI with a major focus on health, noting that it collaborated with “over 1,000 physicians to curate training data that enables more factual and comprehensive responses.” OpenAI, meanwhile, has been working with more than 250 practicing physicians across specialties to improve its latest model’s responses, including better recognizing uncertainty and being more likely to ask follow-up questions.

Nonetheless, Nadkarni believes third-party testing and guidance are needed, along with a broader public discussion about whether that oversight should take the form of formal regulation through agencies like the Food and Drug Administration or the Federal Trade Commission, or whether a trade group could be established to conduct testing and provide a seal of approval.

“There need to be some guardrails,” Nadkarni said.

Meanwhile, Tiller and Succi recommend that consumers think of AI as a supplement rather than a replacement for medical professionals.

“Chatbots are not designed for health,” Tiller said. “They are designed for one thing: to mimic conversational fluency. They are just good at talking, like a salesperson when you try to buy a car.”

(c) 2026, The Washington Post · Ariana Eunjung Cha 

SAN FRANCISCO – Florida’s attorney general announced a criminal investigation of ChatGPT-maker OpenAI, alleging the company’s chatbot advised the man accused of killing two people in a shooting at Florida State University last year which ammunition to use and where and when to strike.

“The chatbot advised the shooter on what type of gun to use, on which ammo went with which gun, on whether or not a gun would be useful at short range,” Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier said at a news conference Tuesday. “If it was a person on the other end of that screen, we would be charging them with murder.”

Uthmeier’s office sent subpoenas to OpenAI on Tuesday, asking for the artificial intelligence company’s policies on how to respond when its users make threats to harm others during conversations with ChatGPT, according to a statement. The criminal investigation announced Tuesday follows a civil inquiry Uthmeier announced this month.

“Last year’s mass shooting at Florida State University was a tragedy, but ChatGPT is not responsible for this terrible crime,” OpenAI spokesperson Kate Waters said. “After learning of the incident, we identified a ChatGPT account believed to be associated with the suspect and proactively shared this information with law enforcement.”

ChatGPT provided “factual responses to questions with information that could be found broadly across public sources on the internet, and it did not encourage or promote illegal or harmful activity,” Waters said. (The Washington Post has a content partnership with OpenAI.)

Two people were killed and six others injured in the shooting at Florida State in Tallahassee last April after a college student opened fire on campus, authorities said at the time. The suspected shooter, Phoenix Ikner, was shot by police who had swarmed to the campus and was later hospitalized. Ikner has been charged with multiple counts of murder and attempted murder.

“ChatGPT advised the shooter on what time of day would be appropriate for the shooting to interact with more people and where on campus would be the place to encounter a higher population,” Uthmeier said at the Tuesday news conference.

OpenAI faces intense scrutiny from law enforcement and elected officials after authorities alleged that the shooter in Florida and suspect in a February mass shooting in Canada that killed nine people discussed their intention to harm others in conversations with ChatGPT. Several families of people who died by suicide have filed lawsuits claiming the chatbot contributed to the deaths of their loved ones.

The tragic incidents have fueled a debate about what responsibilities AI companies have to monitor user conversations and flag concerning ones to law enforcement.

In a December 2025 document outlining how its AI models operate, OpenAI said that it has a system to monitor and automatically flag conversations that might indicate a user is planning to harm someone to its human reviewers. Those reviewers then decided whether to escalate the situation to police. It is unclear whether the FSU shooter’s conversations triggered human review by OpenAI.

AI companies train their chatbots not to answer questions with offensive content or information that could be used to harm people, but the nature of how the technology works means it is difficult to predict how a chatbot may react in every possible scenario, said Ramayya Krishnan, a professor at Carnegie Mellon University who has advised the White House and Department of Defense on AI policy and governance. “The guardrails are not 100 percent effective.”

Concerns about AI’s impact on people and on the economy are becoming political issues, and Florida’s attorney general and its governor, Ron DeSantis, have expressed their own skepticism about the AI industry.

The state has also become a battleground in a growing split inside the Republican Party over how to regulate AI. DeSantis pushed the state’s legislature to pass an “AI bill of rights” that would have instituted a series of limits on how companies could use AI in consumer products, but after opposition from President Donald Trump, legislators did not pass the bill.

(c) 2026, The Washington Post · Gerrit De Vynck 

[Video below.] The Iranian consulate in Hyderabad on Wednesday circulated an AI-generated clip ridiculing Donald Trump and his recent move to prolong a ceasefire tied to the ongoing conflict involving Iran.

Trump had said he would “extend the ceasefire” to create additional space for diplomatic talks, even as he ordered U.S. forces to maintain a naval blockade on Iranian ports. The decision came amid continued uncertainty over negotiations, with Tehran not confirming whether it would take part and plans for a visit by JD Vance reportedly shifting at the last moment.

The roughly 45-second video, uploaded to the consulate’s official account on X, presents a staged negotiation scenario intended as satire of the announcement.

The video begins with a digitally created version of Trump sitting in what appears to be a conference room, facing a lineup of empty chairs symbolizing the absent Iranian delegation.

“We are having very great negotiations with Iran,” the AI-generated Trump says, addressing the empty room.

The tone then sharpens as he continues, “If Iran doesn’t come to negotiate, we’re gonna bomb them,” still speaking to the vacant seats.

Shortly afterward, he asks, “So where are the Iranians?” before an aide approaches and hands him a note. The message reads: “Shut up.”

The clip concludes with the AI portrayal of Trump declaring, “Alright, then I will extend the ceasefire at Pakistan’s request,” and then exiting the room.

Accompanying the post, the consulate added a caption: “How was the ceasefire extended? The video is getting viral in Iran,” referring to the clip’s spread online.

[Video below.] New York Governor Kathy Hochul on Wednesday unveiled an additional $35 million in funding for the state’s Securing Communities Against Hate Crimes Grant Program, bringing the total available funding to $70 million and marking one of the largest investments to date in protecting vulnerable institutions across the state.

The announcement was made at a public event attended by community leaders and government officials, including Rabbi Yeruchim Silber, Director of New York Government Relations at Agudath Israel of America, and Rabbi Ephraim Gurell, Government Affairs Associate in Agudath Israel’s New York Office of Government Relations.

Governor Hochul emphasized the urgency of the initiative amid rising threats against religious and community institutions.

“As governor, I’ll never rest until I know that all New Yorkers are safe. …Since 2021, we’ve invested $131 million in securing communities against hate crimes, securing more than 1,700 projects and nonprofit organizations because of a heightened risk. Today, I’m making up to over $70 million in new funding available through this program.”

The newly announced funding is included in the FY27 Executive Budget and builds upon the $35 million already allocated in the FY26 Enacted Budget. The program is designed to support nonprofit, community-based organizations that face heightened risks of hate crimes or terror-related threats, particularly in light of ongoing instability in the Middle East.

“There’s a saying I’ve used many times, but I really mean it: Hate has no place in our state. This is a state that was built on being a welcoming beacon for people who are oppressed in other nations, who came here in search of a better life and practiced their religions freely. And now there are times when that commitment, that belief, is being challenged in our streets and our schools and our places of worship,” Hochul said.

She also described the growing normalization of visible security measures at religious institutions, recalling a recent visit. “Last month, I went to the Park Avenue Synagogue and spoke with Rabbi Cosgrove, and he told me something that stayed with me. He said it has become normalized for people to see law enforcement with long guns outside the doors to protect their right to go worship their G-d. This is New York City…and no one should have to encounter that specter which automatically triggers fear.”

The governor added that her administration is also pursuing additional security measures. “As governor, I’ll never rest until I know that all New Yorkers are safe…. And in this budget, I’m calling for a 25-foot buffer upheld by our police around places of worship — I want to get that done.”

During the event, Hochul singled out Rabbi Silber for his advocacy work. “Rabbi Silber, I want to thank you for your leadership and your leadership and your voice in this important matter.”

Rabbi Silber, who then addressed the gathering, expressed appreciation for the administration’s continued support. “Thank you, Governor Hochul. You have been a strong voice moral voice in this issue ever since you took office,” he said.

He added, “Your words and actions have demonstrated your commitment to fighting antisemitism and all forms of hate… Today’s announcement is a continuation of your commitment to protect and be there for our vulnerable communities.”

The grants have already made a significant difference on the ground, said Rabbi Silber. “Because of these funding increases, many summer camps in remote areas have been able to install high tech fencing to keep out intruders. Many schools have greatly enhanced their security systems and many yeshivos have been able to hire full-time security guards to protect their students.”
WATCH:
22
{Matzav.com}

Iran’s semiofficial Tasnim News Agency issued a firm denial Wednesday to assertions linked to Donald Trump that Tehran had sought to prolong a ceasefire, releasing an extensive report insisting no such appeal was ever made.

The statement pushes back against comments Trump posted Tuesday on Truth Social, where he declared that the pause in hostilities would continue indefinitely.

In that message, Trump wrote that the extension came at the urging of Pakistani officials, including Field Marshal Asim Munir and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. He also argued that Iran’s leadership was “seriously fractured,” and said U.S. forces would keep a naval blockade in place while remaining ready to act until Iran presents a unified position.

Tasnim, citing multiple sources, said Iran neither requested nor endorsed any continuation of the ceasefire, portraying Trump’s remarks as misleading—while acknowledging that he did not explicitly claim Iran had made such a request.

The outlet outlined several possible explanations for what it described as a unilateral move by Washington.

One interpretation suggested that the United States may have reached the practical limits of its current military approach, with Trump seeking to step back from further escalation by framing the situation as an extended ceasefire.

Another possibility raised by Tasnim is that the announcement could be a strategic ruse, cautioning that despite public messaging about de-escalation, the United States or Israel could still carry out military actions—a scenario Iranian officials are said to be watching closely.

The report also proposed that Washington might attempt to withdraw from direct confrontation while allowing Israel to remain engaged, potentially citing alleged violations of the ceasefire in Lebanon as justification.

Tasnim further argued that the ongoing U.S. naval blockade itself amounts to continued aggression, stating that Iran would not reopen the Strait of Hormuz under those conditions.

According to the report, Tehran would be prepared to take decisive action if needed to break the blockade.

Another theory put forward by the agency is that Washington intends to sustain prolonged instability around Iran, maintaining pressure on the country’s economic and political systems.

In a separate development, Tasnim reported that Iran has decided against participating in anticipated talks in Islamabad, contradicting earlier expectations and signaling further deterioration in diplomatic efforts.

Sources cited in the report said Iran had originally agreed to a ceasefire and follow-up negotiations based on a 10-point framework that had reportedly been accepted by the United States through Pakistani mediation.

Tasnim alleged that Washington later failed to uphold key elements of that framework, including not enforcing a ceasefire involving Israel in Lebanon.

The report added that during initial discussions in Islamabad, U.S. officials introduced demands that Iran viewed as excessive and outside the agreed terms, leading to a stalemate and derailing any chance of progress.

After those talks broke down, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi was said to have signaled a willingness to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to commercial traffic under the original agreement, but that prospect faded as the U.S. blockade remained in effect.

Tasnim concluded that ongoing contacts between the sides have produced no meaningful breakthroughs, with U.S. positions unchanged and, from Iran’s perspective, incompatible with its sovereignty and national interests.

Israel’s Chief Rabbinate is examining whether any legal action can be taken against a man who has been appearing in public dressed as the Rishon LeZion, raising concern after multiple incidents in which members of the public—and even security officials—mistook him for the Sephardic Chief Rabbi.

The individual, identified as Eyal Tzionov, has been showing up at official ceremonies wearing the distinctive robe and turban associated with the Rishon LeZion, offering blessings to attendees who believe they are meeting the chief rabbi himself.

A senior official in the Chief Rabbinate indicated that legal avenues may be limited. “The legal history teaches that there is really no way to prevent an individual from dressing as he wishes,” the official said.

According to reports, Tzionov does not explicitly claim to be the chief rabbi and at times has even described himself as “Moshiach,” a factor that complicates potential legal action despite his use of attire closely identified with the office.

The issue came to a head Tuesday night during Israel’s national torch-lighting ceremony on Mount Herzl. As Rabbi Avraham Zerbiv lit a torch and dedicated it to the rabbinical courts, broadcast cameras captured Tzionov seated nearby, dressed in the traditional garments of the Rishon LeZion.

Members of the public, unaware of his true identity, approached him for brachos, assuming he was the sitting Sephardic Chief Rabbi.

It remains unclear how Tzionov was able to gain access to the high-profile state event and be seated near senior national leadership. Witnesses reported that as he made his way to his seat, numerous attendees sought his blessing, convinced they were encountering the official Rishon LeZion.

The incident left officials in the Chief Rabbinate stunned, prompting renewed efforts to determine how to address what they view as a troubling and misleading phenomenon.

In a separate incident last week, Tzionov ascended the Har Habayis dressed in the same rabbinic attire. Initially, Shin Bet personnel believed he was the serving chief rabbi and contacted senior rabbinical officials to clarify the circumstances of his visit, which had not been coordinated in advance.

Security officials soon realized that the individual was an impostor, underscoring the risks posed by such impersonation—particularly when it can mislead even high-level security agencies and create confusion around the movements of prominent rabbinic figures.

The garments worn by the Rishon LeZion carry deep symbolic significance. According to Sephardic tradition, the chief rabbi wears a dark blue or black robe adorned with gold or silver embroidery in floral patterns, along with a matching turban accented by a blue-and-white band.

These garments, whose origins trace back to the Ottoman era, have become a recognizable symbol of the highest rabbinic office in the Sephardic community. Their use by an unauthorized individual at public events or holy sites has caused widespread confusion.

Officials at the Chief Rabbinate say they are continuing to explore possible legal responses, though they acknowledge that their options may be constrained given that Tzionov does not directly present himself as the chief rabbi.

{Matzav.com}

The Trump administration’s contract governing hundreds of millions of dollars in private donations to build President Donald Trump’s White House ballroom shields donors’ identities, excludes the White House from conflict of interest protections and was disclosed only after a lawsuit and a judge’s order, records obtained by The Washington Post show.

The agreement establishing the legal and financial framework for the planned $400 million undertaking – the most significant change to the White House in decades – was signed in early October, less than two weeks before demolition crews started destroying the East Wing. Public Citizen, a government watchdog organization, sued to obtain the contract between the White House, the National Park Service and the Trust for the National Mall, the nonprofit managing donations for the project, and shared the document with The Post.

“The Trump administration’s failure to disclose this contract was flatly unlawful,” said Wendy Liu, a Public Citizen attorney and lead counsel on the lawsuit, filed after the Park Service and the Interior Department failed to fulfill a public records request for the document. “The American people are entitled to transparency over this multi-million-dollar project.”

The secrecy surrounding the contract mirrors the administration’s broader approach to the project. White House officials have declined to disclose the total amount raised, the identities of all donors or, until recently, basic details about the building’s design. Court documents show Trump knew he was going to tear down the East Wing at least two months before doing so, but he never told the public.

The contract provisions, taken together, allow wealthy donors with business before the federal government to contribute anonymously to a sitting president’s pet project, while exempting the White House from key conflict of interest safeguards and limiting scrutiny by Congress and the public.

“President Trump is working 24/7 to Make America Great Again, including his historic beautification of the White House, at no taxpayer expense,” White House spokesman Davis Ingle said in a statement defending the administration’s process.

White House officials said not publicly posting the agreement was standard practice for contracts involving the executive residence, citing security concerns. They also said offering anonymity for donors was standard for significant projects and framed the use of private funds as a boon for taxpayers. The administration did not respond to questions about failing to respond to the public records request for the contract or fighting the release of the document in court. Trump has said that the administration has raised about $300 million for the project.

The contract resembles templates used by the Park Service for more routine fundraising partnerships – with several notable differences: Provisions peppered throughout the agreement prevent the signatories from revealing the identities of anonymous donors, and a review process for detecting conflicts of interest with the Park Service and Interior Department makes no mention of doing the same for the president, other White House officials or the 14 other executive departments he oversees.

Dozens of the project’s known donors – which include Amazon, Lockheed Martin, Palantir and Google – collectively have billions of dollars in federal contracts before the administration. (Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Post.) Critics have argued that allowing anonymous gifts to a sitting president’s signature project creates precisely the kind of conflict the contract itself states it seeks to prevent.

“This document reveals that anonymous donations are the heart of this agreement,” said Jon Golinger, a lawyer and public policy advocate with Public Citizen. “Who are these anonymous donors, and what are they hiding?”

Charles Tiefer, a retired law professor at the University of Baltimore who spent three years on a congressionally authorized commission scrutinizing wartime contracting in Iraq and Afghanistan, said the anonymity provisions potentially set up the Trump administration to block congressional inquiries into the project’s funding.

“If Congress knocks on the door, the White House is going to slam it shut and say, ‘You’re not allowed to know these donors,’” Tiefer said.

The National Park Service did not immediately respond to questions about the agreement. The Trust for the National Mall said the Park Service asked it to accept and manage private donations for the project and that it is “not involved in the fundraising, planning, design, contracting, or execution” of the ballroom, spokeswoman Julie Moore said in an email. Donations are subject to the same vetting process the Trust uses for other Park Service projects, and donor names are disclosed in its annual report, website and tax filings, she added.

Except those who don’t want to be.

“Some donors may wish to remain anonymous and we respect donor wishes, while in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations,” Moore said.

The Trust has performed a similar role on previous White House projects, including first lady Melania Trump’s Rose Garden restoration and tennis pavilion during her husband’s first term.

The contract excludes the White House from its conflict of interest review, which explicitly obligates the Trust and the Park Service to ensure that fundraising does not give rise to “an appearance of a loss of integrity or impartiality.” But the Executive Residence at the White House, the party responsible for identifying and referring donors to the Trust – and which the Trump administration has said in court filings is helping manage the overall ballroom project – is not required to face that scrutiny.

Kathleen Clark, a government ethics lawyer and law professor at Washington University in St. Louis, called the agreement’s review process “nothing more than a sham,” because it mandates the Trust conduct a narrowly scoped conflict of interest examination while ignoring the vast majority of the federal government. Meanwhile, companies and individuals could be anonymously donating tens of millions of dollars as they stand to gain billion-dollar government contracts, want to avoid a Justice Department criminal investigation, or rid their companies of onerous labor or environmental regulations, she said.

The contract was signed as work on the ballroom project was already underway. Crews had begun clearing trees and foliage from the White House grounds in September. Twelve days after it was signed, demolition crews started tearing down the East Wing. The existence of the contract was not disclosed at the time. Trump, who says the ballroom is needed to host VIPs at larger functions, is pushing to finish it before the end of his second term in 2029.

Congressional Democrats have pressed the Trust for months to share more information about the project. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts) and colleagues sent a letter in January demanding to know how much money had been raised, whether donors had been promised special access or other perks, and whether the organization had internal controls to prevent preferential treatment. The Trust declined to disclose the amount raised but said it was adhering to all Park Service guidelines.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut), the top Democrat on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, demanded answers from dozens of ballroom donors and contractors about their involvement and questioned the “rapidly changing and secretive terms” of Trump’s planned ballroom. He also sent letters to several people who attended a White House dinner in October, which Trump held to honor ballroom donors. Blumenthal asked whether they had contributed and under what terms, noting that the administration had acknowledged it had not publicly identified all donors.

“At every turn, President Trump has sought to conceal the facts about his monstrous multimillion-dollar ballroom,” Blumenthal said in an statement to The Post. “His Administration has kept the contract under wraps, the identities of big dollar donors secret, and the American people in the dark about what big corporations have to gain by funding this boondoggle.”

Blumenthal, Warren and other Democrats have introduced legislation to ban anonymous donations for the ballroom and other projects on the White House grounds.

“There’s only one good explanation for why Trump’s ultra-wealthy ballroom donors want to stay anonymous: They have something to hide,” Warren told The Post.

A federal judge last month also criticized the Trump administration’s approach to soliciting private donors through its contract with the Park Service, calling it a “Rube Goldberg contraption” that allowed the president to avoid congressional oversight while building the ballroom. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, an appointee of President George W. Bush, ruled last month that construction must be halted on the ballroom until Congress authorizes the project. The Trump administration has appealed that ruling, and a three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has allowed construction to continue while the case proceeds.

The White House has repeatedly declined to release the government’s contracts with the private companies designing, engineering and building the ballroom.

(c) 2026, The Washington Post · Jonathan Edwards, Dan Diamond
 

Moderna is launching a large-scale clinical trial of a shot to combat bird flu in humans after Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s department had canceled hundreds of millions of dollars in funding previously committed to aid in vaccine development.

The company is developing the vaccine using messenger RNA (mRNA), which is the technology used in the most commonly administered coronavirus vaccines and was hailed during President Donald Trump’s first term as a major medical achievement. It has since come under intense scrutiny from Kennedy and other conservatives, and the Department of Health and Human Services last year announced a winding down of investments in 22 mRNA vaccine development projects.

Last May, HHS pulled millions of dollars that President Joe Biden’s administration had said it would provide to Moderna to accelerate mRNA-based pandemic influenza vaccines amid an outbreak of bird flu in dairy cattle. The move delayed a large-scale clinical trial for several months as Moderna sought alternative funding sources, according to Chris Ridley, a Moderna spokesman.

The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, a global partnership to speed up the development of vaccines and other countermeasures, is investing up to $54.3 million to support the bird flu vaccine. On Tuesday, Moderna said the first participants in the large-scale clinical trial have received the vaccine in both the United States and Britain.

The trial is expected to enroll about 4,000 adults ages 18 and older. Moderna had previously announced positive interim data about immune response and safety from an early-stage clinical trial of roughly 300 healthy adults ages 18 and older.

Stéphane Bancel, Moderna’s CEO, called the launch of the trial a milestone for efforts to “strengthen global pandemic preparedness.”

“Our platform technology’s efficiency and scalability are critical to supporting global health security and responding to potential future threats,” he said in a press release.

Last year, HHS said the decision to pull Moderna’s funding was made after a “rigorous review,” adding mRNA technology “remains under-tested” and accused the Biden administration of concealing “legitimate safety concerns.”

In a statement Tuesday, HHS spokesman Andrew Nixon said the department “sees promise in mRNA technology for recurrence of hard-to-treat cancers” and recently committed to a public-private partnership.

“Last year, HHS wound down its investments in mRNA vaccines for upper respiratory viruses because they do not protect effectively against infections from mutating strain of viruses such as COVID and flu,” Nixon said. “Also, these companies had already been massively subsidized by the government, and we decided to reinvest the money in other more promising technologies.”

Medical experts say coronavirus vaccines using mRNA technology have been shown to be safe and effective. Unlike traditional vaccines, which use dead or weakened versions of the virus or viral proteins to train the immune system, mRNA vaccines deliver genetic instructions that prompt the body’s cells to trigger an immune response. Because they rely on genetic sequencing rather than growing the virus in a lab, they can be developed more quickly than conventional vaccines.

On Monday, Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary was questioned by CNN on the health department’s cancellation last year of mRNA vaccine research contracts. He said he was “excited” about the potential technology.

“We just felt like it should be the companies that made $50 billion from mRNA technology during the covid pandemic that should be funding their own research, not taxpayer dollars,” Makary said. “Taxpayer dollars should be going for research that nobody else in the market or investor community will fund.”

(c) 2026, The Washington Post · Rachel Roubein 

An appellate court ruled Tuesday that Texas may require that public school classrooms display the Ten Commandments, a significant win for the conservative campaign to break down the legal walls between church and state and inject more religion into the public square.

The 9-8 ruling came from the conservative Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in New Orleans. The case is widely expected to head next to the Supreme Court, where the conservative majority has been steadily removing restrictions on government support for religion.

Texas passed its Ten Commandments law in 2025, one of several efforts in recent years to infuse religion into public education. The Texas Board of Education, for instance, has also approved Bible-infused teaching materials and the state lets chaplains serve as school counselors.

A similar law requiring display of the Ten Commandments was approved in Louisiana in 2024. Federal judges blocked both statutes from taking effect, and a three-judge panel of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals called Louisiana’s law “plainly unconstitutional.” Both states appealed to the full court, and the 17 active judges heard the case in January.

In February, the court ruled that it was too soon to challenge Louisiana’s law because it had not yet taken effect. On Tuesday, the court rendered its narrowly divided decision in the Texas case.

“This is a major victory for Texas and our moral values,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a post on X. “ … The Ten Commandments have had a profound impact on our nation, and it’s important that students learn from them every single day.”

The American Civil Liberties Union and other groups representing challengers to the law said they were “extremely disappointed” and anticipate appealing to the Supreme Court.

“The Court’s ruling goes against fundamental First Amendment principles and binding U.S. Supreme Court authority,” the groups said in a statement. “The First Amendment safeguards the separation of church and state, and the freedom of families to choose how, when and if to provide their children with religious instruction. This decision tramples those rights.”

Central to the case is the reach and interpretation of the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, where the court allowed a football coach to pray at midfield after a game, calling it a personal religious observance protected by the right of free expression of one’s beliefs. In its decision, the court disavowed a long-standing legal standard known as the Lemon test, which for decades was used to invalidate policies that have a religious purpose or foster excessive government entanglement with religion.

A landmark Supreme Court decision in 1980 had relied at least in part on that test in invalidating a Kentucky law very much like recent laws passed in Texas and Louisiana mandating display of the Ten Commandments. In the Kentucky case, the court ruled that the mandatory displays were unconstitutional because the law had no secular purpose.

The question now is whether the football coach’s case means that other religious expressions are also permissible. In that case, the court endorsed considering “historical practices and understandings” in assessing the constitutionality of religious actions.

In its ruling Tuesday, the appellate court noted that the Lemon test had been jettisoned and said the Kentucky precedent no longer applied. Instead, it said, the court must consider whether the Texas law would have been considered an unconstitutional establishment of religion at the time of the nation’s founding.

Using this lens, the appellate court said Tuesday, displaying the Ten Commandments does not look like the establishment of religion.

“It does not tell churches or synagogues or mosques what to believe or how to worship or whom to employ as priests, rabbis, or imams. It punishes no one who rejects the Ten Commandments, no matter the reason. It levies no taxes to support any clergy. It does not co-opt churches to perform civic functions,” it said.

The court said that students would not be coerced into any religious exercise or observance.

“All the law requires is a poster on a classroom wall. To be sure, Plaintiffs disagree with the poster’s content, but that disagreement alone does not transform S.B. 10 into religious coercion,” the court wrote.

Michael A. Helfand, a law professor at Pepperdine Caruso School of Law who is an expert in church-state law, said the court was right to look to how this practice would have been viewed at the founding of the country but said the court’s answer to that question was wrong.

“The historical record provides evidence that when government acts to manipulate the religious preferences of its citizens, it violates the Establishment Clause. And requiring the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom should have been interpreted as an attempt to do just that,” Helfand said.

(c) 2026, The Washington Post · Laura Meckler 

The Trump administration is broadening its effort to combat fraud in federal healthcare programs, requiring every state to outline how it will recheck the credentials of certain Medicaid providers, marking a shift from earlier actions that focused on select states.

Dr. Mehmet Oz, who leads the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, said Tuesday at a Politico healthcare summit that states will soon be formally asked to take responsibility for addressing fraud. He indicated that each state will be required to submit its plan within 30 days.

“It’s an example of what we’d like them to do to prove that they’re serious about this,” Oz said. “And if you don’t take it seriously, it indicates to us that we might have to take the audits that we’re doing to the different states more aggressively.”

The move is part of a broader initiative aimed at reducing waste, fraud, and abuse within Medicaid and Medicare, efforts that until now have largely concentrated on states governed by Democrats.

Last month, President Donald Trump signed an executive order establishing a government-wide task force focused on fraud in federal benefit programs, led by Vice President JD Vance. It remains unclear whether the latest directive is formally tied to that initiative, although Oz has been coordinating with Vance on related probes. When asked for additional specifics about the audits, a CMS spokesperson said the agency is reviewing questions submitted by the Associated Press.

Oz defended the expanded effort by pointing to concerns that some states have allowed large numbers of providers into federal health programs who may not be delivering legitimate care, instead exploiting the system for financial gain. He said the verification push would concentrate on “high risk areas,” though he did not elaborate on what qualifies as high risk.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat who has faced criticism from the administration and congressional Republicans over alleged fraud in federally funded programs, responded positively to the announcement.

Walz told reporters Tuesday that Minnesota had not yet received the formal request but noted that the state has already begun revalidating providers and has implemented major improvements. Minnesota previously filed a lawsuit against CMS in February after funds were withheld, and that case remains unresolved. The withheld funding has not yet been released, though CMS informed state officials last month that it had accepted Minnesota’s corrective action plan.

During the Politico discussion, Oz was asked whether the administration’s anti-fraud push could unintentionally disrupt or weaken essential healthcare services. He dismissed those concerns, expressing confidence that the effort would strengthen the programs.

“I believe this audit and others like it will save the programs we care most about,” he said.

{Matzav.com}