WATCH (SKIP TO MINUTE 102:00):
Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu held a direct and strained conversation with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio over the makeup of the Gaza Executive Board, despite earlier indications that the issue would be handled through diplomatic channels by Israel’s foreign minister.
An announcement from the Prime Minister’s Office said Netanyahu had instructed Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar to convey Israel’s objections to Rubio following the disclosure of the board’s members. However, a report by Channel 12 said Netanyahu himself took the lead in speaking directly with Rubio, while Sa’ar was publicly presented as managing the dialogue because of the political and public sensitivity surrounding the matter.
According to the report, Netanyahu’s main concern during the discussion was not the specific individuals selected for the board, but the fact that the announcement was made publicly without prior coordination with Israel.
Sources familiar with the conversation told Channel 12 that Rubio made clear the decision would not be rolled back, and that Qatar and Turkey would be involved in post-war “day after” arrangements in Gaza through their participation on the executive board. Netanyahu was said to have voiced objections but also recognized that Israel’s ability to influence the process was limited once the plan had been formally unveiled.
The executive body, also described as an international executive council operating under the Board of Peace, is expected to be made up of senior international figures. The report said its members will be assigned specific areas of responsibility, including stabilizing Gaza, strengthening governance, managing regional ties, overseeing reconstruction efforts, promoting investment, arranging large-scale financing, and mobilizing capital.
In its statement, the Prime Minister’s Office said: “Prime Minister Netanyahu instructed Foreign Minister Sa’ar to address this matter with the US Secretary of State. At the same time, the Prime Minister held a conversation with the Secretary of State, with whom he maintains ongoing contact.”
{Matzav.com}
The criminal case against Chanukah Monsey stabber Grafton Thomas has been put on hold yet again after a Rockland County judge approved a fresh order keeping him in psychiatric custody, following a determination by the state Office of Mental Health that he remains unfit to stand trial.
Evaluators concluded that the 43-year-old still does not understand the nature of the charges against him and is unable to meaningfully participate in his legal defense.
Thomas is charged in both state and federal court in connection with the December 2019 attack in Monsey, where a man armed with a machete burst into a local rov‘s home during a mesibas Chanukah and stabbed five people. One of those injured later died as a result of the wounds he sustained.
Since the attack, Thomas has been held at the Mid-Hudson Forensic Psychiatric Center, where he continues to undergo treatment and periodic evaluations aimed at determining whether he can ever be restored to competency.
Under the most recent court order, the proceedings have been postponed until January 2028, extending the case by another four years. The delay leaves victims’ families and the broader Monsey community in continued uncertainty, as the court remains in a holding pattern, waiting to see whether Thomas will eventually be deemed capable of facing trial.
{Matzav.com}Several public health groups are suing to reverse a decision from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that narrows the list of vaccines recommended for children, arguing that Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and other leaders failed to consider how the new policy would endanger families and burden the health care system.
The plaintiffs, which consist of seven public health organizations led by the American Academy of Pediatrics, a physician, and two patients, accused Kennedy of “inappropriately” influencing a key vaccine advisory committee by packing it with unqualified experts who hold anti-vaccine views.
“Defendants have engaged in a pattern and practice of changing U.S. vaccine policy without consideration of the relevant factors or providing any reasoned explanation,” reads the complaint, filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts.
Spokespeople for the CDC and the Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The Health Department’s Jan. 5 decision means the CDC will no longer recommend every child be immunized for rotavirus, influenza, meningococcal disease and hepatitis A. Instead, the agency will recommend those vaccines only for smaller groups of high-risk children or if a doctor recommends them.
The Washington Post reported Monday that some pediatricians are ignoring the new guidelines, which have caused confusion and anxiety among American families.
In announcing the decision, Kennedy, a longtime vaccine skeptic, said the department is aligning U.S. vaccine schedules more closely with “international consensus,” specifically citing Denmark’s more limited set of recommendations. “This decision protects children, respects families, and rebuilds trust in public health,” Kennedy said in a statement at the time.
The lawsuit takes issue with recent appointments to a key vaccine advisory committee called the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP. The Post has reported that the committee itself was not consulted before the decision being made public, and many federal vaccine scientists said they were blindsided.
The plaintiffs asked the court to disallow the committee from meeting any further, citing federal law requiring federal advisory committees to be “fairly balanced” and not “inappropriately influenced.” The lawsuit cites past statements from recently appointed committee members questioning the validity of vaccines, arguing that all but one of the recent appointees don’t have the necessary qualifications.
The complaint also stated, citing unspecified “information and belief,” that only Republicans and Independents were considered for inclusion in the committee. The plaintiffs said in their suit that 10 of its members have publicly stated views that align with secretary’s, and accused the group of spreading misinformation.
“The public meetings of this [advisory board] have served as a megaphone for spreading misinformation about immunization and infectious diseases that is directly harming the Plaintiffs and the American public,” the complaint reads.
(c) 2026, The Washington Post · Aaron Gregg
{Matzav.com}
Airlines could ultimately benefit financially from the growing use of weight-loss medications, as lighter passengers would reduce aircraft weight and cut fuel consumption, according to a new analysis by Jefferies Research Services.
As GLP-1 drugs designed for weight loss become more widely available across the United States, analysts expect a gradual reduction in average body weight. That shift, Jefferies says, could translate into meaningful fuel savings for airlines, where fuel remains one of the industry’s largest expenses.
The amount of fuel an aircraft burns is closely tied to how much it weighs, including the combined weight of passengers, their baggage, and onboard cargo. When total weight decreases, fuel requirements decline as well.
Carriers have long sought ways to minimize aircraft weight in order to save fuel, the report notes, citing efforts that range from food choices like serving pit-less olives to the use of thinner or lighter paper products onboard.
Airlines “have a long history of searching for unique methods to reduce the weight of the aircraft, in turn reducing fuel consumption and limiting an airline’s largest cost bucket,” analysts said in the report.
Despite those efforts, airlines have little control over how much their passengers weigh.
Jefferies examined a scenario in which weight-loss drugs such as Ozempic and Wegovy lead to a 10% reduction in average body weight across society. Under that assumption, total passenger weight on flights would fall by about 2%, resulting in roughly 1.5% fuel savings for airlines and an estimated 4% increase in earnings per share.
To illustrate the impact, the analysts modeled a typical Boeing 737 Max 8. The aircraft weighs about 99,000 pounds empty and can hold up to 46,000 pounds of fuel. With 178 passengers averaging 180 pounds each, plus roughly 4,000 pounds of additional cargo, the plane’s takeoff weight reaches approximately 181,200 pounds. If average passenger weight drops by 10% to 162 pounds, the total weight falls to about 177,996 pounds.
Based on that reduction, Jefferies estimates annual fuel savings of roughly $580 million for the four largest U.S. carriers — American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, Southwest Airlines, and United Airlines. Together, those airlines are projected to spend about $38.6 billion on jet fuel this year.
The research was conducted as pharmaceutical companies continue developing new weight-loss treatments, building on a Jefferies report released in 2023 that examined how reductions in passenger weight could affect fuel costs.
“With the drug now available in pill form and obesity rates falling, broader usage could have further implications for waist lines,” analysts said.
{Matzav.com}
