All News (Page 11)

As Israeli families abroad prepare for the holidays, one familiar question may hover over the festive table: When are you coming home?

The answer may be after the degree, after the next contract, or simply not yet. A family can live with that uncertainty for years. The law, however, may begin answering the question before the family does.

A child may come to be considered habitually resident in another country even while the parents continue to describe the move as temporary. If the parents later separate, one may not be able to bring the children back to Israel without the other parent’s consent or a court order.

“Once things go wrong, each parent can claim the opposite,” family and inheritance lawyer Judith Meisels told the Magazine in an interview. One may say the family always intended to return to Israel; the other may argue that, whatever the original plan, they built a life elsewhere.

What began as an informal family decision can then affect where a dispute over the children is heard, where divorce proceedings take place, which law applies to the couple’s property, and how assets in several countries are handled after a death.

People do not always realize how many international questions can arise in family law, Meisels said. Families may marry in one country, live in another, and retain property or legal ties in Israel, without considering what would happen if they later separated.

The statistics

The number of Israelis moving abroad has risen in recent years. A Central Bureau of Statistics release published in September 2024 classified 55,300 Israelis as long-term emigrants in its 2023 statistical cohort, up from about 38,000 a year earlier. That does not mean all 55,300 left in 2023: They first left in 2022 and were classified only after a year-long monitoring period. To qualify, they had spent at least 275 days abroad during that year, including the first 90 days continuously.

A later Knesset Research and Information Center report, using updated CBS data and listing emigrants by their year of departure, put the number at 59,400 in 2022, 82,800 in 2023 and a provisional 69,500 in 2024. The figures cannot be compared directly with those in the earlier release because the two publications assign the year differently and the later report uses updated data.

Looking at the broader population already overseas, the Institute for Jewish Policy Research estimated that approximately 630,000 Israelis or former Israeli residents lived abroad in 2021-2023. Including an estimated 325,000 children born to Israelis abroad brought the wider “Israel-connected” population to approximately 955,000, although that figure is not a count of Israeli citizens.

The child factor

For families with children, the most immediate legal question is the child’s habitual residence – essentially, the country that has become the practical center of the child’s life.

Courts look at “where children wake up, where they are, and how they see the center of their lives,” Meisels said. They may also consider the parents’ last shared plan for where the family would live.

The concept is central to the 1980 Hague Convention on international child abduction, which operates among more than 100 countries. The convention is intended to secure the return of children who have been wrongfully taken from or kept outside the country of their habitual residence.

A Hague proceeding decides whether the child should be returned; it does not decide custody. If the child is returned, the custody dispute will generally be heard in the country where the child was habitually resident.

There is no fixed period after which a child automatically acquires a new habitual residence. The precise test varies, but courts may consider where the child lives and attends school, how settled the child has become, and what the parents intended.

Meisels gave the example of a couple who leaves Israel for a defined purpose, such as a postdoctoral program. The original plan may be relatively clear: The family will return when the program ends.

The position becomes less certain if the family stays for a job afterward without agreeing on a new return date.

“One parent says, ‘We only traveled to the US for the postdoc, and we were supposed to return,’” she said. “The other says, ‘No, we decided to try our luck in the US without an end date.’”

A court may then examine how the family actually lived: whether the parents sold or retained property in Israel, what they told relatives and friends, where the children attended school, and how settled the family became abroad.

Meisels therefore advises parents moving abroad with children to record the purpose and expected duration of the move, along with what should happen if one parent wants to return earlier.

“If Israelis are thinking of leaving the country with their children for more than a vacation, then in addition to making sure the passports are not expired and packing the right things, they need to seek legal advice,” she said.

A written agreement can provide important evidence of what the parents understood at the time. It does not, however, necessarily determine the child’s habitual residence or bind the court hearing a later dispute – a court may consider the agreement alongside everything the family did after signing it.

Meisels said the question is particularly difficult for families that left Israel after Oct. 7 or during later periods of fighting without deciding whether they were relocating permanently or simply waiting for security conditions to improve.

In those cases, one parent may also argue that returning a child to Israel would be dangerous.

The Hague Convention allows a court to refuse a child’s return when there is a grave risk that returning would expose the child to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place the child in an intolerable situation. The existence of a war does not produce an automatic result: The court must examine the circumstances facing the particular child.

“It really depends,” Meisels said. She described being retained to provide an expert opinion in a US Hague Convention case in which a parent argued that returning a child to Israel would expose the child to grave risk following a missile attack.

“The judge was very surprised,” she said. “The way she perceived what was going on here, it seemed to her like everybody was being struck by missiles.”

Meisels also pointed to a Portuguese child-return case in which the lower and appellate courts reached opposing conclusions. The subsequent official record shows that the case took another turn after the appeal.

An Israeli mother traveled to Portugal with her six-year-old daughter on October 17, 2023, after both parents agreed that the child would leave Israel temporarily following the Oct. 7 attack. When the mother did not return the child, the father sought the child’s return through the Hague Convention.

A Portuguese trial court declined to order the return. The Lisbon Court of Appeal later reversed that decision in a divided ruling, finding that the war, without evidence of a concrete danger to the child in Tel Aviv, was insufficient to establish the grave-risk exception. It ordered the child returned to Israel.

Portugal’s Supreme Court subsequently denied the return request on November 26, 2024, according to a later official court record.

The sequence illustrates the uncertainty Meisels described: Neither Israel’s broader security situation nor the fact that a family initially left because of the war necessarily determines the outcome. Different courts examining the same case reached different conclusions.

The divorce factor

Children are only one part of the legal picture. A move abroad can also divide a divorce between two legal systems. A Jewish couple may divorce civilly in the country where they live but, if they married according to Jewish law, still need a religious divorce, or get.

If both spouses agree, a rabbinical court can sometimes arrange the get through an authorized representative, allowing the couple to remain in different countries.

Israeli law also allows the rabbinical courts to hear certain get-refusal cases involving couples abroad, but only in situations specifically set out by law.

“There are many Israelis who travel abroad and don’t really feel at home there,” Meisels said. “They don’t know the language, they don’t have a supportive family there, they don’t have lawyers. For these people to suddenly find themselves in a different legal system is a problem.”

The property factor

Property disputes create a further set of questions: Which court can hear the case, which country’s law will it apply, and will its eventual decision take effect elsewhere?

An Israeli couple may own an apartment in Israel, a home in the country where they now live, and financial assets in both. The court hearing the divorce may not be the only court or legal system that becomes involved.

An Israeli couple whose assets and lives are entirely in the United States may be able to conduct the divorce and divide their property there “just like any other American couple,” Meisels said. The position becomes more complicated when one spouse approaches an Israeli court, or the couple retains assets in Israel.

Under Israeli law, the property rules that ordinarily apply are those of the country where the couple made their home when they married – not necessarily the country where the wedding took place.

Real estate may also require proceedings or other legal work in the country where it is located. In some cases, Meisels said, lawyers in Israel and in the country where the couple lives will need to work together.

A court order from one country does not automatically take effect in another. In Israel, a foreign judgment generally must be declared enforceable by an Israeli court before it can be carried out here.

The same complications arise in inheritance.

One option for someone with substantial assets, particularly real estate, in two countries is to prepare a separate will in each, Meisels said. The lawyers preparing the documents should know about both wills so that they do not conflict.

Under Israeli law, an estate is generally governed by the law of the country where the deceased’s life was centered at the time of death – not simply the country in which the person happened to die.

If most of the assets are in Israel and only one or two are abroad, such as a foreign bank account, Meisels said another option is an Israeli will that identifies the foreign assets. The heirs may still need a separate legal process in the country where those assets are held.

The common problem running through each of these areas is that a family’s legal connections do not move from one country to another all at once.

Children may become habitually resident abroad while property remains subject to proceedings in Israel, or a divorce may require steps in both a civil court overseas and a rabbinical court here.

Planning cannot prevent every disagreement or dictate what a court will decide, but it can preserve evidence of the family’s plans and leave fewer questions to fight over later.

FOR FAMILIES who just marked another Rosh Hashanah overseas, another year abroad does not automatically change the legal answer. But arrangements left undefined can carry consequences over time.

A family does not need to decide where it will live forever. It should, however, write down what it has decided for now.■

This post was originally published on here. 

Dr. Galia Melman Shalev, a veterinarian and founder of Negev Vet clinics, will receive the World Small Animal Veterinary Association’s 2026 Animal Welfare Award for her efforts to rescue and treat hundreds of pets following the October 7 massacre.

The award recognizes her efforts, described as “unwavering dedication, exceptional performance under combat conditions, leadership and genuine risk to her own life.” Shalev was selected following a strong recommendation from the Israeli Companion Animal Veterinary Association.

Shalev remained in Moshav Ein HaBesor, near the Gaza border, during the turbulent days after October 7 to rescue and treat hundreds of pets left behind during evacuations.

On the morning of October 7, Shalev and her husband, Ziv, were on their way to a cycling training session near Kfar Aza and Nahal Oz when the attack began. Their two children were home alone in their community.

When the couple returned home, they encountered the chaos and destruction caused by the October 7 massacre.

Shalev extends her stay to provide treatment

The following day, after reuniting with their rescued children, the couple returned to Ein HaBesor. They loaded their vehicle with basic supplies for an extended stay in the evacuated moshav, along with animal food and medication donated by Vet Market.

There, they encountered scenes of severe distress, including animals trapped inside burned homes, pets wounded by gunfire and shrapnel, and others wandering through the area traumatized, thirsty, and starving.

As Israel’s western Negev was filled with security forces, faced continued infiltration threats, and came under relentless fire, Shalev and her husband began searching evacuated communities, providing urgent treatment in the field and rescuing animals from the devastated area.

“It was different from anything I had experienced during my many years as a veterinarian,” Dr. Shalev recalls. “The rescue and treatment of the animals from the evacuated communities was simply something that had to be done.”

Lone dog rescued and returned to owner

Among the many animals she treated, one dog from Kibbutz Sufa stood out. The dog had hidden under a couch in a safe room with her owners for hours. When soldiers arrived to rescue the couple, the frightened dog ran away.

The couple was forced to evacuate without her, but some time later, she was found at the gate of a neighboring kibbutz.

Shalev and her husband arranged to collect the dog, and a volunteer from the community drove her to a hotel at the Dead Sea, where she was reunited with her owners.

“Bringing a family who had been evacuated to a hotel, who had barely taken anything with them, the dog that had been left behind at home — there is nothing more moving than that.” Dr. Shalev reflected.

She added, “Sometimes we even put ourselves at risk to bring these animals back, because we knew that an animal like that is part of the family. For some families, it was truly a lifeline after the terrible day they had endured.”

What began as a spontaneous initiative quickly became a large-scale emergency operation. When Shalev’s private clinic became overcrowded, she and her husband converted a stable in the moshav into a temporary emergency shelter.

New network and emergency clinic established

A broad volunteer network was subsequently established around the shelter, including a Zoom command center set up by Shalev’s daughter and her friends from Ben-Gurion University to recruit foster families. The veterinarians’ organization also established a command center in Beit Shemesh.

Later, after Shalev arrived in Eilat as an evacuee, she established an improvised emergency clinic on the minus-one floor of the Royal Beach Hotel.

With equipment, medication and vaccines supplied by the organization, she spent three months in Eilat providing free treatment to hundreds of pets belonging to evacuees staying in hotels across the city. She carefully documented each case, checked microchips and updated the national database.

“These tasks in Eilat helped me maintain my sanity to some extent during that period,” she says. “I felt that I was able to fulfill my purpose and help animals and people who needed it so desperately.”

WSAVA said Shalev’s work highlights the importance of professionals during emergencies as a force that can help heal and strengthen communities.

Dr. Anat Lichter-Feld, chair of ICAVA, congratulated Shalev on the award, calling her work “a reflection of the highest values of the veterinary profession: compassion, service, responsibility and courage.”

Dr. Segev Dishon, a member of the organization’s executive committee, added that her response on the ground reflected her ‘practical leadership’ and ‘sense of personal responsibility’.

Reinventing herself and her clinics

Nearly three years after October 7, Shalev’s clinics are operating again in a new format, after the entire team that worked with her before the massacre was reportedly replaced.

“We reinvented ourselves, as so many people have,” she concludes. “Although this award bears my name, it represents the compassion, courage and commitment of my husband, Ziv, my daughters and the many volunteers who worked to save animals. It is a powerful reminder of our responsibility as veterinarians to be there for animals and the people who love them in their most difficult moments.”

This post was originally published on here. 

After Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish calendar, Israel will enter another period of remembrance, this one marking the massacre of October 7, 2023.

For Israelis of my generation, the proximity is especially haunting.

Yom Kippur evokes prayer and repentance. It also carries the memory of October 1973, when Egyptian and Syrian forces launched a surprise attack that caught Israel dangerously unprepared and led to one of the bloodiest wars in the country’s history.

Half a century later came October 7.

The circumstances were very different. But an uncomfortable connection links the two catastrophes: in both cases, what Israel believed shaped what it knew.

That distinction should concern every intelligence service and every national leader.

I have spent much of my professional life around Israel’s defense and intelligence establishment. Over the years, I have learned that strategic surprises rarely arrive in the form we expect. They can be catastrophic. They can also be hopeful.

And certainty can be the greatest danger of all.

Peres asks National Security College graduates if they predicted USSR collapse

I remember a 1996 meeting between former prime minister Shimon Peres and the graduating class of Israel’s National Security College. Peres had just lost the election to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and was in a somber mood.

He asked the officers a simple question.

He had, he said, dozens of books on the Soviet Union in his library. Now that the Soviet Union no longer existed, what was he supposed to do with them?

Then came the more serious question: Had any of them predicted its collapse? Had their commanders?

Silence.

The dissolution of one of the world’s two superpowers had transformed the international order. Yet much of the global intelligence community had failed to anticipate the speed and scale of what was happening.

I remember another surprise.

In August 1990, I was attending the wedding of Amnon Lipkin-Shahak, then head of Military Intelligence and later IDF chief of staff.

During the ceremony, word arrived that Saddam Hussein’s forces had invaded Kuwait.

The invasion would lead to the Gulf War and, for Israelis, to something previously almost unimaginable: Iraqi ballistic missiles falling on Tel Aviv and other Israeli cities.

Yet another surprise followed. Israel had prepared extensively for the possibility that Iraq would use chemical weapons. Gas masks were distributed to the population.

The chemical attack never came.

Fears of Egyptian deception before Sadat’s 1977 Jerusalem visit 

Intelligence failures extend beyond failures to anticipate wars.

In 1977, Egyptian president Anwar Sadat announced that he was prepared to travel to Jerusalem.

Only four years after Egypt and Syria had surprised Israel on Yom Kippur, Egypt’s president proposed standing before the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, and speaking about peace.

Israel’s military leadership was deeply suspicious. Some feared deception.

But Sadat came.

That surprise ultimately helped produce the peace treaty between Israel and Egypt, one of the most consequential strategic achievements in Israel’s history.

This is the part of intelligence work that receives too little attention.

Governments spend enormous resources asking, “Where will the next threat come from?”

They spend far less time asking: Where might the next opportunity come from?

History contains both kinds of surprises.

Israel failed to foresee the fall of the shah of Iran and the rise of the Islamic Republic, despite its deep military, intelligence, and economic relationship with Iran at the time.

The Oslo process developed through secret negotiations that surprised many inside Israel’s own political and security establishment.

The Arab Spring toppled governments that had seemed entrenched.

And Bashar Assad remained in power for years after senior Israeli officials publicly predicted that his regime was about to collapse. It eventually fell in December 2024.

I have known many brilliant intelligence professionals. Even for them, prediction is difficult.

The problem is fundamental.

Human beings interpret information through assumptions.

Intelligence organizations do the same.

Before the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Israel possessed important information about Egyptian and Syrian preparations. But that information was filtered through what Israelis came to call the “conception,” a deeply entrenched analytical framework about when and under what conditions Egypt and Syria would go to war.

Before October 7, 2023, Israel again possessed warning signs and pieces of information.

The catastrophe exposed how that information was interpreted through assumptions about Hamas, its intentions, and its willingness to risk a full-scale confrontation.

That is why I have developed a small tradition over the years.

When a new head of Military Intelligence takes office, I try to remind him of something simple:

You see only what you see.

You hear only what you hear.

You know only what you know.

And you understand only what you understand.

There are always things you do not see, hear, know, or understand.

For an intelligence officer, acknowledging this is a mark of professionalism.

Israel today possesses extraordinary intelligence and technological capabilities. Its security establishment operates satellites, cyber systems, sophisticated surveillance networks and advanced missile defenses. It must monitor threats thousands of kilometers from Israel, around the clock, across multiple fronts, in an age when artificial intelligence is transforming both intelligence collection and warfare.

These capabilities are essential.

But technology can also create an illusion of omniscience.

A country that can watch an enemy from space may still fail to understand what is happening on the ground.

A military equipped with some of the most advanced technology in the world can still be surprised by paragliders, drones, tunnels and tractors.

That should be one of the enduring lessons of October 7.

Intelligence requires the disciplined questioning of assumptions alongside the accumulation of information.

And the lesson applies to opportunities, too.

On this Yom Kippur, Israel’s intelligence and political leaders should continue asking the question they are trained to ask:

Where might the next danger come from?

But they should add another:

Where might the next opportunity come from?

Israel’s next strategic surprise could be another war. It could be a dangerous political transformation in a neighboring country. It could be a technological or military development we have failed to anticipate.

But it could also be something entirely different: a diplomatic opening, an unexpected regional realignment or an initiative for peace that today seems impossible.

No intelligence system can eliminate surprise.

The goal should be to prevent confidence from becoming blindness.

That requires technology, expertise, and constant scrutiny.

Above all, it requires humility.

This post was originally published on here. 

The Haifa Magistrate’s Court filed an indictment against Dean Mor, a 34-year-old Haifa resident, for vandalizing a church and assaulting a police officer on Friday.

According to the court’s indictment, Mor smashed a church window and, after being arrested by police, spat twice in the face of a Druze officer and yelled racist slurs at him.

The incident occurred on Sunday around eight in the morning. Mor entered the church before Sunday services and walked up to the priest’s pulpit when a member escorted him out of the building.

After he left, Mor threw a stone through one of the church’s windows, shattering it, according to the court indictment. 

Following Mor’s arrest and detention at the Haifa police station, he spat twice in the face of a Druze police officer and shouted racist slurs while waiting for a lawyer.

Mor admits to charges, claims he felt threatened

During his interrogation with police, Mor, who has no prior criminal record, admitted to the charges against him, but claimed that he had felt threatened at both the church and by the officer at the police station.

The court’s indictment did not allege a religious or hate crime motive to Mor’s actions. Along with its indictment this morning, the police prosecution unit asked the court to order Mor’s continued detention until the end of the proceedings.

This post was originally published on here. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky launched a new regional grouping of eight countries from the Carpathian region of central and eastern Europe on Friday at a summit in Ukraine designed to promote trade and security cooperation.

At the meeting in western Ukraine, Zelensky thanked regional allies for keeping trade and transport links open following Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022.

The new grouping brings together Romania, Serbia, Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Austria, Hungary, and the European Union.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, Serbia’s President Aleksandar Vucic and Romania’s President Nicusor Dan attended the inaugural event, which is expected to last until Sunday.

“This marks the start of a movement that should bring our countries even closer together and create another strong framework for cooperation at the EU level,” Zelensky said on Telegram, citing the expansion of energy and logistics cooperation, cross-border trade, and security.

Zelensky: ‘Security issues are priority’

“Naturally, security issues are a priority right now and for the years ahead,” Zelensky said in a speech.

Close to 550 business representatives were expected to attend the forum, and Zelensky said investment and trade agreements worth €1 billion ($1.15 billion) were expected to be signed.

“It’s a good start: energy, logistics, infrastructure and cross-sector agreements,” he said in a speech transmitted on Ukrainian TV.

This post was originally published on here. 

Russians began voting on Friday in a three-day parliamentary election which President Vladimir Putin has said will show that millions of people back his army fighting in Ukraine, even though most anti-war candidates were not allowed to run.

The State Duma election, the first since Russia launched its full-scale war in Ukraine in February 2022, is widely expected to see the ruling pro-Putin United Russia party retain its dominance in Russia’s tightly controlled political system.

The result is likely to be held up by the Kremlin as evidence of widespread public support for Putin’s policies and, in particular, for his prosecution of Europe’s deadliest conflict since World War Two, now in its fifth year.

“Your choice, and your will, will once again demonstrate that millions of people stand behind our soldiers, that we are a united people bound together by shared values, historical memory, and love for our homeland, and that no one will succeed in dividing or intimidating us,” Putin said in a televised address before the vote.

An advert on state TV urging people to vote showed Russian military commanders down the ages before cutting to soldiers holding up the national flag after winning a battle in Ukraine with the slogan: “Their voice is the voice of victory. Your vote is the strength of Russia!”

In another move to boost morale and support for fighting on until victory, bone fragments from the sword hand of a medieval Russian prince who won a famous victory over the Mongols were sent to the front in Ukraine in the run-up to the vote.

Voting in Moscow, Anatoliy Simonenko, 76, said he was sanguine about what might happen after the election amid speculation, repeatedly denied by the authorities, that a new wave of mobilization may be announced.

“There are some very grim predictions, and others that are more optimistic. I expect the outcome will likely fall somewhere in the middle. War is war. It entails expenses, defense spending, and cuts to various social benefits. Well, it’s necessary; there’s no getting around it,” he told Reuters.

Another voter, who declined to give his name, said he believed the results were easy to rig and raised doubts about an electronic voting system being used in some parts of the country. The electoral commission has rejected such suggestions as false.

Candidates against Ukraine-Russia War have been excluded from Moscow’s Duma election ballot

Most anti-war candidates were excluded from the ballot before voting across Russia’s 11 time zones got underway, after the Supreme Court ruled last month that the liberal Yabloko party, which wants a ceasefire in Ukraine, had breached electoral rules, something it denied.

Some candidates from Yabloko, which has traditionally only got single-digit support in opinion polls, are still running in individual constituencies that account for half the 450 seats in the lower house of parliament.

In the run-up to the vote, Lev Shlosberg, a senior figure in the Yabloko party, was jailed for 11 years for comments about the war. Its deputy leader, Maxim Kruglov, was jailed for seven years on similar charges in June.

Discrediting the army or spreading what authorities regard as fake news is punishable with long jail terms.

Some opinion polls show public support for peace talks has risen to over 60%, and the Kremlin has repeatedly said that it is ready to resume such talks.

However, it has also made clear, as its troops push to take control of the rest of the Donetsk region in eastern Ukraine, that any settlement must leave it in full control of all of that territory and that it only wants a long-term deal, not a ceasefire.

Voting is taking place at a time when opinion polls show some Russians have become more anxious about how the conflict affects them.

The economy is also under strain, and the authorities are expected to use the vote to gauge the depth of society’s war weariness as fuel shortages caused by Ukrainian drone strikes on oil refineries roil some parts of the country, and businesses grapple with drone attacks on their warehouses, high interest rates, a labor crunch and Western sanctions.

National unity vital amid Ukraine attempting to stir unrest, Kremlin claims

The Kremlin says national unity is vital because of what it says are increasingly dangerous efforts by Ukraine’s intelligence services and other enemies to stir unrest inside Russia.

Initial and partial results are expected to begin trickling out on Sunday evening, and near-complete results to be available on Monday.

This post was originally published on here. 

Spanish riot police fired rubber bullets into the air and struck people with batons on Friday as they began an operation to clear thousands of migrants off beaches in the North African enclave of Ceuta and move some of them into temporary housing.

Spain estimates 10,000 migrants remain in the tiny territory. More than 72,000 crossed into the enclave from Morocco at the end of July in an unprecedented border rush, although most later left.

The authorities have built new temporary housing inside the enclave’s port to hold 1,700 people. NGOs say thousands remain unhoused and have been sleeping rough in camps.

Friday’s operation to clear the beaches began shortly before 7 a.m. local time and involved both riot police and the Spanish military.

Migrants who had spent the night waiting on the beach in hope of a place in temporary shelter initially applauded as the march got under way, but tussles later broke out as they competed for the limited number of places available.

Footage from state broadcaster TVE showed crowding and jostling as people struggled to enter the designated route. Police fired rubber bullets into the air and struck several migrants with batons before the situation calmed down and the operation resumed.

Later footage showed mostly adult men carrying belongings, walking in small groups under police escort along a route of just over 1 km. (0.6 miles) from the El Trampolin beach to the port.

Most Ceuta migrants are men, boys

The vast majority of the migrants are men and boys. The temporary housing is built only for adult men, so minors are being separated and housed separately.

Three NGO leaders told Reuters that authorities had been too slow to provide migrants with the minimum shelter required under the European migration pact, and that reception centers opened so far could not accommodate those still sleeping on the streets.

One NGO estimated that about 4,000 migrants remained outdoors on Ceuta’s beaches and pavements, meaning the new center would not be sufficient to clear makeshift camps in public areas. Two NGO leaders said officials probably expect most migrants to return voluntarily to Morocco.

This post was originally published on here. 

Conservative radio personality Sid Rosenberg, a vocal critic of JD Vance’s positions toward Israel, left a meeting with the vice president on Thursday giddy with optimism. 

“I went in there with very low expectations,” Rosenberg told the hosts of WABC Radio’s Cats & Cosby.

Noting that multiple people had assured him Vance would win him over, Rosenberg confirmed that “he did.”

“I think I charmed him more,” he said. 

The highly publicized meeting occurred amid Vance’s attempt to make overtures to the Jewish community following a series of controversial remarks about Israel, in order to shore up its support for a possible 2028 presidential run.

Rosenberg, a Jewish New Yorker and friend of US President Donald Trump, has faulted Vance for not being “strong enough on Israel.” He has also called for Vance to distance himself from Tucker Carlson, a right-wing commentator who regularly condemns US military support for Israel and has been accused of amplifying antisemitic tropes. 

“Honestly, I’ve been very critical of JD, very critical,” said Rosenberg, who hosts his own WABC show, Sid & Friends In The Morning.

He told Rita Cosby and her co-host John Catsimatidis that he was “really surprised” to receive an invitation to meet with the vice president, after they both spoke last month at a Republican Jewish Coalition meeting in Las Vegas. 

“The talk was that I was going to grill JD Vance on Tucker Carlson and the Israel comments he’s been making as of late,” Rosenberg said. “This was more of a get-to-know-each-other session.” 

While Rosenberg explained that most of their conversation would remain off the record, he emphasized that “it went well” and they “hit it off,” adding that the two men would likely have “many more meetings about very substantial things” in the future. 

Though he remained outspoken about his preference for Secretary of State Marco Rubio as a 2028 presidential nominee, Rosenberg said that if Vance is “going to be our guy,” he left Thursday’s meeting feeling like he could work with him. 

“He is willing to listen,” Rosenberg said. “I don’t think by any stretch that JD Vance hates Israel, hates the Jewish people.”

Just a few hours before Rosenberg’s meeting with the vice president, i24 News reported that Vance was also planning to host a Shabbat dinner this week as a method of outreach to Jewish Republicans.   

“Vice President Vance is making considerable outreach efforts to the American Jewish community, particularly with this Shabbat dinner,” Shabbos Kestenbaum, a pro-Israel campus activist who spoke at the Republican National Convention in 2024, told The Jewish Telegraphic Agency.  

Kestenbaum, who filed a Title VI lawsuit against Harvard University for ignoring antisemitism in 2024, added that he looks “forward to working together on our common interests while also expressing our concerns.” 

Vance says Trump willing to oppose Netanyahu

Despite the rosier outlook shared by Jewish Republicans on Thursday, the meeting between Rosenberg and Vance came just two days after the vice president told participants at a technology conference that Trump does not shy away from opposing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in order to advance the interests of the American people.

The president “has shown a willingness to actually part ways with ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu when he feels like the interests of the American people are different from the interests of the government of Israel,” Vance said in a virtual address at the All-In Summit.

In response to those remarks, Sam Markstein, national political director for the RJC, told JTA in a statement that “the vice president has said, time and again, that Israel is a close and important ally of the United States.”

Markstein recalled how at last month’s RJC meeting – where both Vance and Rosenberg also spoke – Israel’s former minister for strategic affairs, Ron Dermer, said he’d be “forever grateful” for Vance’s role in the June 2025 conflict with Iran.

“All true partnerships between proud, independent, sovereign nations have room for disagreement – that is the mark of the alliance’s strength,” Markstein added. 

Vance aims to mend ties with Jewish conservatives

Vance’s address at the RJC meeting was seen across the media as a chance to mend ties with Jewish conservatives, particularly regarding his views toward Israel and his connection to Carlson. The vice president spoke at a closed-door session, during which he reportedly described Israel as “extremely important to America’s national security,” according to Axios. 

Regarding another right-wing podcaster, Joe Rogan, Vance argued that “the best approach is to actually go in there, and talk to him, and make the best argument you can,” The Wall Street Journal reported. Although the vice president denounced a third podcaster, Nick Fuentes, as someone who “really does hate Jews,” he did not offer an opinion on Carlson, per the Journal.

After the address, Rosenberg slammed Vance for foregoing “a chance to hammer” Carlson and for blaming antisemitism on immigration, which the radio host called “silly.”

But following what he described as “a great meeting” with the vice president on Thursday,  Rosenberg appeared to have changed his tune. 

Asked by Cosby if he walked away optimistic about Vance’s stance on Israel, Rosenberg responded, “The answer is yes.” 

This post was originally published on here. 

Nearly three years after the October 7 massacre, a wedding was held at Kibbutz Kerem Shalom on Thursday for the first time since the attack, as a daughter of the kibbutz returned to marry in the community where she grew up.

Sivan, who was raised in Kerem Shalom, and her partner, Meir, chose to hold their wedding at the kibbutz swimming pool, near the Gaza border, surrounded by family members, friends, and residents.

For the Kerem Shalom community, the wedding marked an exceptional occasion. No large-scale celebration had been held at the kibbutz since the October 7 attack and the community’s subsequent evacuation. Some of the residents who attended the wedding returned to live at the kibbutz only recently, after spending an extended period away from their homes.

The couple chose to marry specifically in the place where Sivan grew up, turning the celebration into a symbol for community members of a return to routine and renewed life in the kibbutz.

“The couple’s decision, when she is a daughter of the kibbutz who grew up here, to get married specifically here is, for me and for the kibbutz, our greatest victory,” the Kerem Shalom administration said. “We went through the worst imaginable. This place has also seen very difficult moments; our community fell apart and was rebuilt, and we returned here a year and several months ago.”

The kibbutz added: “The choice to build this new home specifically here is a moving declaration that we continue to live and grow out of a great love for this place.”

Kerem Shalom wedding occurs weeks before October 7 anniversary

The wedding took place just weeks before the third anniversary of the October 7 attack.

“In about two and a half weeks, we will mark October 7 as a community,” the kibbutz said. “The pain and the hope are intertwined, especially on this evening.”

This post was originally published on here. 

At least 112,000 people have been displaced inside Yemen within the last two weeks as fighting continues along the country’s west coast amid a renewed ​conflict, while nearly 3,000 have fled by sea to Djibouti, the United Nations migration agency said on Friday.

Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthi terrorists have stepped up attacks on Saudi cities and energy infrastructure while advancing along Yemen’s Red Sea coast towards the Bab al-Mandab Strait, a key shipping route. Responding to the Houthi offensive, the Saudi and Yemeni air forces have bombarded Houthi targets.

Nearly 3,000 people have crossed the Gulf of Aden to Djibouti in the Horn of Africa in less than a week as escalating violence has forced more families to flee, Sandrine Desamours, the representative for the UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, told reporters in Geneva via video link from Djibouti.

The government of Djibouti is preparing for the arrival of up to 10,000 refugees – which will add acute pressure on the country’s health care and education services, she said.

The UN International Organization for Migration said people are fleeing on overcrowded boats and arriving with very limited food and water. Most fleeing are Yemeni families seeking refuge in Djibouti, but IOM is also beginning to see a small number of migrants, mainly from Ethiopia, heading in the same direction.

Additionally, authorities in Somaliland and Puntland have also reported increased arrivals from Yemen, including Yemeni refugees and Somali refugee returnees, though numbers remain in the hundreds for now, UNHCR said.

UN: Yemen escalation is crisis on top of multiple crises

UN agencies described the latest fighting as being a crisis on top of multiple crises, as the country’s health services and economy have been shattered amid a long civil war between forces of the internationally recognized, Saudi-backed administration and the Houthis, creating one of the world’s biggest humanitarian crises.

The Houthi advance along Yemen’s Red Sea coast is bolstering Tehran’s hand in its conflict with the US, as the group tightens its control of the Bab al-Mandab Strait, a strategic chokepoint for global oil and commodities shipping, more than six months after US and Israeli attacks on Iran.

This post was originally published on here. 

Hunter Biden, the son of former US president Joe Biden, sharply criticized Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli government on Wednesday, telling Britain’s LBC that what was happening in Gaza “resembles genocide.”

Biden made the comments in an extensive interview on the Tonight with Andrew Marr program.

Asked whether he still shared his father’s positions regarding Israel in light of the war in Gaza and developments in the West Bank, Biden said, “I am an avowed opponent of Bibi Netanyahu and the Likud government, and what they have done in Gaza, what they continue to do in the West Bank, and what they are now doing in Lebanon as well.”

“What has happened and what continues to happen in Gaza, especially, resembles genocide,” he said. “I think that’s a very loaded word, but I think it’s an appropriate word to describe the intent of Benjamin Netanyahu.”

Biden went on to argue that Netanyahu’s policies had also had serious consequences for Jews outside Israel.

“I think he, more than any other person, has made Jews around the world less safe than they have ever been since World War II, since the Holocaust,” he said. “I really, really believe that.”

People knew October 7 was coming, Hunter Biden claims

Biden later addressed the October 7 attacks, citing what he described as an “explosive report” published recently, apparently referring to a report in Israel based on a book by Shlomi Eldar and Ruti Yuval, which alleged that Netanyahu had been aware that an attack was being planned ahead of October 7 and failed to stop it.

Biden claimed that people who had examined the events of October 7 had concluded that “they knew what was coming,” and further alleged that they allowed the attack to take place so they could later carry out actions that otherwise would not have been approved.

Biden did not present new evidence during the interview to support the allegation, and LBC itself presented the claim in its publication as Biden’s assertion rather than as an established factual finding.

In the same context, Biden stressed that the October 7 attack was “horrific” and that “Hamas is horrific.”

During the interview, Biden also sharply criticized the war with Iran.

Asked whether he believed impeachment proceedings should be opened against US President Donald Trump if Democrats take control of the House of Representatives in the midterm elections, Biden said yes.

He said several of Trump’s actions could, in his view, justify such proceedings, including “going to war with Iran without congressional authorization.”

Earlier in the interview, Biden also discussed the economic cost of the war, saying the United States was in “a war that nobody wanted,” and linked the conflict, among other factors, to rising energy prices.

Biden’s strongest criticism of the US president came toward the end of the interview.

He said he feared Trump would not want to leave the White House at the end of his term. Asked whether that could result in Trump having to be removed by force, Biden said he did not know how such a situation might unfold, but that the United States should “prepare for the worst and hope for the best.”

Trump is ‘existential threat’ to NATO and world, Hunter Biden says

Interviewer Andrew Marr asked whether Biden was effectively describing the possibility of a “Trump dictatorship” and the greatest crisis facing the American republic since the Civil War.

Biden went further.

“I think this is the greatest crisis for the world since World War II,” he said. “Maybe everybody will jump all over me for that, but I truly believe that. I believe Donald Trump is an existential threat not only to our constitutional republic, but to all of NATO and to the entire world.”

Biden also said in the interview that he did not currently intend to run for political office.

Instead, he said he preferred to use his public profile to reach people struggling with addiction.

Biden, who has spoken publicly for years about his addiction to drugs and alcohol, told LBC that he has been sober for more than seven years and that public exposure and shame had forced him to confront his condition openly.

That process, he said, “in many ways saved my life.”

This post was originally published on here. 

The Azcatitlan Codex, a rare manuscript that recounts the founding of the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan and the subsequent arrival of Spanish conquistadores, is back in Mexico for the first time since 1840.

The 16th-century artifact, considered one of the most important visual records of Aztec history, is on loan from France’s Bibliotheque Nationale, where it has been held since 1898. The two nations are celebrating 200 years of diplomatic ties.

Combining Mesoamerican pictograms with European writing, the Azcatitlan Codex is divided into three sections. It traces the Mexicas’ migration from Aztlan, the mythical birthplace of Aztec civilization, to the founding of Tenochtitlan (in present-day Mexico City).

It also recounts the succession of the city’s tlatoanis, or rulers, and depicts the arrival of the Spanish, the conquest and the subsequent evangelization, according to Mexico’s National Institute of Anthropology and History.

“These codices are extremely important to us because they continue to give us identity and value as human beings during these very special times we are experiencing,” said Maria Eugenia Castañeda, representative of the Mexica peoples. “They elevate our morale, our customs, our culture, and our sense of who we are.”

Codex to be displayed until December

More than five centuries have passed since the fall of Tenochtitlan to Hernan Cortes, the leader of the invading Spanish force. After defeating the Aztec leaders and the Mexica people who lived in Tenochtitlan, Cortes and his allies looted and razed the city, ushering in three centuries of Spanish domination.

An Indigenous craftsman from the Otomi people created the Azcatitlan Codex, according to Maria Castañeda de la Paz, historian at the Institute of Anthropological Research at Mexico’s National Autonomous University (UNAM).

The codex will be on display until December at Mexico City’s famed National Museum of Anthropology. As part of the exchange, Mexico will loan France another important historical document, the Codex Boturini.

This post was originally published on here. 

AMSTERDAM – In the Dutch capital, the contrast between pro- and anti-Israel protesters couldn’t be more striking. As soon as the organizers of the ‘Into the breach for Israel’ rally announced that they would gather on Amsterdam’s monumental Dam Square, far-Left pro-Palestinian groups called for a disruption under the slogan “No Israel Celebration in Amsterdam.”

However, authorities in the Dutch capital, who are familiar with the propensity for violence of these groups, banned their presence near the mostly evangelical pro-Israel rally. The Amsterdam Palestina Coalition subsequently lost a court case in which they demanded access to Dam Square. The court decided they would only be allowed to stage their counter-protest at the Oude Turfmarkt, about 500 meters away.

Around a hundred left-wing and Muslim protesters showed up on Thursday, many wearing keffiyehs and waving Palestinian flags. Some were masked, and at least one carried a flag of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), officially deemed a terrorist group by the European Union. Their slogans called for violence: “From the river to the sea” and “Yallah, yallah intifada” among others. Despite the court ruling and a large police presence, some of the anti-Israel protesters managed to reach Dam Square.

Pro-Israel protesters heavily outnumbered anti-Zionists

There they were hopelessly outnumbered by some 2,000 mostly evangelical protesters who, despite heavy rain, had come to the Dutch capital to show their support for Israel and their solidarity with the Jewish people. Hundreds of blue and white flags were waved, Hebrew songs were chanted, and speakers vehemently condemned a new law that makes the nominally centrist Dutch government one of the frontrunners in Europe when it comes to anti-Israeli policy.

The government in The Hague has decided to outlaw the import of all Israeli products that are manufactured in the West Bank, but more surprisingly also from east Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. This means a Dutch tourist who brings back a souvenir from Jerusalem’s Old City could, in theory, get a six-year prison sentence.

Speakers at the rally yesterday alluded to the fact that in The Netherlands only the most violent criminals, like bank robbers, rapists and even murderers, receive such sentences.

Despite the growing anger about this new law, which is widely regarded as antisemitic, the rally on Dam Square felt more like a celebration than a protest.

There were no calls to violence, nor was there any racial animosity towards Palestinians. Unlike the counter-protest at the Turfmarkt, where chants explicitly called for the removal of “zios,” a term popularized by white supremacist David Duke, the pro-Israel rally seemed more inclusive, as demonstrated by the presence of Iranian anti-regime protesters.

‘Here to show solidarity with Jews,’ Iranian protester says at Amsterdam rally

“We are here to show our solidarity with the Jews, since they have given us their support time and again,” says Iranian Jazmine, while wearing a two-sided flag: one side showing the Israeli blue and white, the other the lion and sun flag favored by the Iranian opposition. “Of course we stand with Israel; we have shared a common history for thousands of years. Jews and Iranians stand strong together.”

Yet the rally seemed to have attracted very few Dutch Jews. Baruch, a 41-year-old from the town of Apeldoorn, is one of a handful of protesters wearing a kippah.

He recently returned from a month of volunteer work in the Negev and is considering migrating to Israel. “I don’t understand why so few of us (Jews) are here today. I think they’re afraid after all that has happened in the Netherlands since October 7. But if you don’t show yourself today, when will you ever?” he said.

A near-total absence of fear shows how highly motivated the evangelical protesters are, as does the fact that none leave when the downpour intensifies. Thirty-six buses brought hundreds of them from towns and villages like Nijkerk, Urk and Katwijk, in what is known as the Dutch “Bible belt.”

Chrissie is a 36-year-old from Wilnis, a village halfway between Amsterdam and the city of Utrecht. She waves a large Israeli flag and wears Star of David earrings. “It’s all about solidarity,” she says.

“We know how hard it is to be Jewish in Holland right now, and we wanted to show the Dutch Jews they don’t stand alone,” she added.

“Into the breach” is the brainchild of Jacques Brunt, a 46-year-old evangelist from the town of Alblasserdam.

“On October 7, 2023, I felt compelled to do something. I just started handing out a flyer saying, ‘I stand with Israel, where do you stand?’” he said.

Brunt’s initiative went from local to regional to national. This was the third year his grassroots organization held its rally in Amsterdam.

“It’s amazing to see that we grow every year, thanks to a handful of very passionate people,” says Brunt.

Given the prevalent anti-Israel mood in Dutch politics, this may be surprising, but Brunt says that “As a Christian, I am attached to the hip with Israel. The country has given us so much; our support is unconditional.”

On Dam Square, both the Jewish state and the Jewish people enjoy that support. “You can make a distinction between Israel and the Jews, but you can never separate them,” says Brunt.

Rabbi Yanki Jacobs, whose father, Chief Rabbi Binyomin Jacobs, is one of the speakers on the podium, expressed his gratitude.

“It’s fantastic to see so many non-Jewish people here showing their support for our community and for Israel’s right to exist. All I can do is be here to show my appreciation for their support,” he said.

Some counter-protesters try to provoke the crowd. From the third-floor balcony of a nearby H&M clothing store, a huge Palestinian flag is unfolded. It’s so large the bottom reaches the street level, so several pro-Israel protesters rush in and tear it down.

A young Muslim immigrant screams abuse at the crowd before being hurled away by police. A clearly inebriated man with a beer bottle in his hand screams ‘Fascists!’ at the crowd and yells that people in Gaza are starving. A minor scuffle breaks out, and the police quickly break it up.

Growing group of counter-protesters clad in keffiyehs and hijabs causes concern

More menacing is the growing group of counter-protesters, clad in keffiyehs and hijab headscarves, who have gathered in front of the Dutch national war monument on Dam Square.

Apparently, they have found a way to break through the police lines at the Oude Turfmarkt and now hurl abuse at the much larger pro-Israel crowd.

Despite their illegal presence, the police wait about an hour before surrounding the group and arresting some fifty of them.

Not even their presence seems to influence the fair-like atmosphere on the Dam. After a video message by Israeli Ambassador Zvi Aviner Vapni, a gigantic Israeli flag is unfolded over the heads of the protesters, dwarfing even the Palestinian flag at the H&M store. Hatikvah, the Israeli national anthem, is sung in unison.

Nonetheless, the organizers are keenly aware of the ever-present danger of violence to their people. This is why Jacques Brunt asks the protesters to hide their Israeli flags when they leave, or to immediately board the buses that will bring them back to the towns and villages of Holland’s heartland. ‘Don’t let yourself be provoked’, Brunt says, ‘Go home.’ But when the buses leave Dam Square, fearless Iranians are still dancing to Jewish folk music from a lone speaker.

This post was originally published on here. 

Berkshire Hathaway said on Friday that Warren Buffett will step down as the conglomerate’s chairman and will become its chairman emeritus, effective immediately.

Earlier this year, Buffett had stepped down as CEO, handing the reins to longtime lieutenant Greg Abel.

“Father Time always wins. He has, however, been generous with me,” Buffett, 96, wrote in a letter to shareholders.

The conglomerate named his son, Howard Buffett, a Berkshire director since 1993, as chairman.

“As Chairman Emeritus, Mr. Buffett will remain a member of the Board of Directors and will continue to offer his valued judgment and perspective,” Berkshire said in a statement.

Buffett built Berkshire into an approximately $1.03 trillion conglomerate with dozens of businesses, including Geico car insurance, the BNSF railroad, Berkshire Hathaway Energy, Dairy Queen ice cream, Fruit of the Loom underwear and Squishmallows plush toys.

“The culture Warren built and the values he championed will remain at the heart of Berkshire, and Howard will be their guardian,” Abel said in a statement on Friday.

Buffett’s influence extended beyond Berkshire Hathaway

Buffett’s influence has extended far beyond Berkshire, shaping generations of corporate leaders and investors with his emphasis on long-term thinking, disciplined capital allocation and straightforward management.

CEOs across Corporate America have looked to him as a sounding board on everything from acquisitions and succession to navigating periods of market turmoil, while his annual shareholder meetings became a gathering point for investors seeking insight into the broader business landscape.

Buffett first announced plans to step away from the conglomerate in May 2025, surprising shareholders and analysts despite his age. After decades at the helm, he had become synonymous with the company, making his succession one of the most closely watched in corporate America.

In August, Berkshire said it began reducing its enormous stockpile of cash in the second quarter, investing billions ​of dollars in stocks such as Alphabet and repurchasing billions of its own, as it reported higher-than-expected profit.

Its quarterly operating profit rose 16% to $12.98 ​billion, topping analyst forecasts, while net income more than doubled to $25.67 billion, including unrealized gains and losses on stocks that Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire still owns.

This post was originally published on here. 

The Venezuelan government and the opposition are close to an agreement to transfer the central bank’s gold reserves, worth about $4 billion, from the Bank of England to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Financial Times reported on Friday.

Reuters could not immediately verify the report, which cited four people familiar with the discussion.

Under the proposed deal, the interim government of Delcy Rodriguez would gain legal control of the gold but would be unable to sell the holdings immediately, the report said.

Instead, the reserve could be used as collateral for government borrowings, including for reconstruction following June’s twin earthquakes, the newspaper added.

A spokesperson for the British foreign office said the government was “not a party in the legal case to determine who should have control of Venezuelan gold held in the Bank of England.”

UK Courts and the Bank of England are independent of government, the spokesperson added.

In response to a Reuters query, the Bank of England said it is not in a position to act until there is a further order from the UK Court on who has legal authority over the account.

“This requires the parties involved in the case to approach the UK Court to settle the dispute,” the BoE said.

Gold could be used to try to counter inflation

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York did not immediately respond to Reuters‘ requests for comment outside regular business hours. The Venezuelan government and the opposition could not be reached for comment.

Last month, Venezuela’s National Assembly chief Jorge Rodriguez said the country was working to recover gold reserves held in the Bank of England’s underground vaults, in an effort to counter surging inflation.

The Bank of England has withheld about 31 metric tons of Venezuelan gold for years, citing its non-recognition of the legitimacy of then-president Nicolas Maduro’s government.

The BoE’s refusal to release the gold goes back to early 2019 when the British government joined dozens of nations in backing then Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido on the basis that Maduro’s election win the previous year had been rigged.

The bullion has since been the subject of a prolonged legal dispute in British courts, and has not been released despite Maduro’s capture by the US in January and a ​request by acting President Delcy Rodriguez to King Charles.

“The UK maintains its longstanding position of support for a democratic transition of power in Venezuela which reflects the will of the Venezuelan people,” the spokesperson for the British foreign office said.

This post was originally published on here. 

At least 16 people, including five police personnel, were killed in northwest Pakistan on Friday after a suicide attacker rammed an explosives-laden car into a police facility as people were praying at a mosque inside, police said.

The incident occurred in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province’s Kohat city, with the vehicle ramming into an outer wall of the police facility and gunmen who accompanied it opening fire, provincial police chief Zulfikar Hameed said.

It was a suicide attack, he added.

No one immediately claimed responsibility.

The blast occurred close to a mosque where the police personnel, their family members, and other civilians were offering Friday prayers, a police statement said.

A gun battle was still raging between police and the attackers, and one assailant wearing an explosives-laden vest had been killed, the statement said.

The interior ministry said the “cowardly actions” of the attackers could not weaken the “nation’s firm resolve”.

Militancy in Pakistan’s border areas has ⁠risen sharply in recent months, targeting mainly the military and police.

Islamabad says the militants use safe havens in Afghanistan to ​train and plan attacks in Pakistan. Afghanistan’s Taliban government has denied the charge ​and said militancy is Pakistan’s domestic problem.

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

Thai Prime Minister and Interior Minister Anutin Charnvirakul issued unusually harsh remarks on Thursday against foreigners seeking to establish private cemeteries in the country, saying, “If you’re going to die, go die in your own country. There’s no need to come die here,” during an Interior Ministry policy meeting in Bangkok, in which he instructed provincial governors to step up enforcement against foreigners who break the law.

Anutin did not explicitly mention Israel or a Jewish cemetery. However, his remarks came as he discussed foreigners establishing houses of worship and private cemeteries, just days after a highly publicized controversy surrounding a Jewish cemetery in Chachoengsao Province, east of Bangkok.

On Wednesday, Thai authorities removed four bodies from the site, those of three Israeli citizens and one British citizen, and transferred them for reburial at a licensed cemetery in Chonburi Province. The cemetery received a license in 2021, but the permit was subsequently not renewed. One of the Israelis was buried while the license was still valid, while the other three deceased were buried after it had expired.

“Establishing a place of worship is not something you can simply do on your own,” Anutin said, according to reports in Thai media, adding that the establishment of religious institutions must take local society and culture into account.

He then turned to the issue of cemeteries. “I recently learned that an application had also been submitted to establish a private cemetery. This is already going too far,” he said. “The fact that we allowed you to come here is more than enough. If you come, earn your living honestly. If you’re going to die, go die at home; there’s no need to come die here. And don’t take advantage of others.”

Thai PM says enforcement not aimed at any particular nationality

He made the remarks Thursday morning at the Interior Ministry headquarters in Bangkok during a meeting attended by senior ministry officials, with provincial governors joining by video conference. The prime minister ordered authorities to intensify enforcement against foreigners who, he said, exploit Thai citizens, operate businesses illegally, use nominees, or establish institutions without the necessary permits.

Anutin stressed that the enforcement measures he was discussing were not aimed at any particular nationality. He said authorities have encountered cases involving foreigners from various countries in Asia, the Middle East, Central Asia, Europe, and Africa. He added that foreigners who enter Thailand legally, earn an honest living, and respect the country’s laws and culture are welcome to continue coming.

The remarks come amid growing public discussion in Thailand about the conduct of foreigners in the country, including Israelis. In recent months, local media have published allegations concerning inappropriate behavior at tourist sites, operating businesses without permits, using nominees, holding land in violation of the law, and breaching local customs.

A survey by the NIDA Poll Institute published this week also illustrates the role of media exposure in shaping the discussion. Some 76.38% of respondents in six provinces said they had heard through the media or social networks about inappropriate or illegal behavior attributed to Israelis in Thailand. By contrast, only 5.11% said they had personally experienced such an incident.

Among respondents who had been exposed to such reports or who reported direct experience, 77.49% said the authorities should enforce the law strictly. The survey was conducted from September 8 to 10 among 1,410 people in Bangkok and the provinces of Chachoengsao, Chonburi, Surat Thani, Phuket, and Mae Hong Son, meaning it does not constitute a fully representative nationwide sample.

Thai attitudes toward Israelis shifting

In recent weeks, attitudes toward Israelis have become a more prominent subject in Thai public discourse, against the backdrop of protests, media reports, and contacts between Thai officials and Israeli representatives. At the same time, the Thai government has continued to stress that enforcement measures against illegal activity by foreigners are not directed at Israelis alone.

Now, days after the bodies were removed from the Jewish cemetery, the prime minister’s unusually sharp remarks about the establishment of private cemeteries add another layer to the discussion, even though Anutin himself did not explicitly connect his comments to Israelis or Jews.

This post was originally published on here. 

Sofian Abu Zaida, a former senior Fatah official, revealed in a video posted to his Facebook account that he is the figure known as “Coal Eyes,” the channel through which then-Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip Yahya Sinwar conveyed direct warnings shortly before the October 7 massacre.

As previously reported by Haaretz, Sinwar held a one-on-one meeting with Abu Zaida (“Coal Eyes”) in September 2023, several weeks before the attack.

During the conversation, Sinwar demanded that a firm message be conveyed to Israel: “Tell the Israelis that if they do not move forward, I am preparing a huge surprise for them.” At the time, Sinwar used the keyword “zilzal” (“earthquake”), an unusual reference that was meant to raise red flags among the intelligence community.

According to Haaretz, Abu Zaida left the conversation shaken and consulted with a close friend, a Palestinian who had emigrated from Gaza to Abu Dhabi and served as an adviser to UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

Abu Zaida feared reporting directly to the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), worried he would be accused of cooperating with Sinwar, but at the same time feared for his life if the information was not passed on. As a result, it was decided to convey the message directly to the UAE leader.

UAE president warned Netanyahu about October 7

In mid-September 2023, they held another meeting in Gaza. According to Eldar’s report, Sinwar asked Abu Zaida whether the message had been passed on. When he was told that it had not, he calmly said: “Send them a message that I am preparing a surprise from the land of surprises. A terrifying operation. Something unusual,” again repeating the word “zilzal.”

Abu Zaida quickly left the Gaza Strip and held a private meeting with the adviser in Abu Dhabi. After an in-depth analysis of Sinwar’s body language, tone of voice, and the context of his remarks, the two reached a clear conclusion: Sinwar was not making empty threats, but intended to launch a full-scale war.

Following this, the UAE president called Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and warned him of the expected attack.

Israel, Hamas negotiated for release of hostages in exchange for prisoners

In a video Abu Zaida published Thursday night, he also noted that lengthy contacts had taken place between Israel and Hamas before October 7 in an effort to reach a deal.

The agreement was intended to secure the release of the four Israeli hostages Hamas was holding at the time, Hadar Goldin, Oron Shaul, Avera Mengistu, and Hisham al-Sayed. In exchange, Israel would release hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, lift the blockade on Gaza, and work to resolve electricity and water issues, basic needs for life in Gaza, which Israel had conditioned on the release of the bodies and prisoners held by the organization.

Abu Zaida also promised to publish additional details in the coming days about the message Sinwar asked him to deliver to the Israeli side in mid-September 2023, just weeks before the October 7 attack.

This post was originally published on here. 

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani said he had no plans to join demonstrations against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his upcoming visit to the city.

“I do not have any plans to attend any protest at the UN General Assembly,” Mamdani said in response to reporters’ questions.

He said he had been in contact with the New York Police Department ahead of the General Assembly week and that “right now, there are no expected threats that we know of, and we continue to be confident in being able to deliver safety and security for New Yorkers.”

Mamdani also sought to clarify that he was not calling on city residents to demonstrate against Netanyahu.

“To New Yorkers, I have never encouraged them to protest,” he said. “What I have always told them is that they have the right to do so in the city. We respect that right. And this is a city that is proud of the Constitution, proud of the First Amendment, we’ll continue to do so.”

Mamdani has made his positions on Netanyahu clear

Asked why, given his previous sharp criticism of Netanyahu, he had decided not to participate in the protests himself, the mayor said he had already made his positions clear.

“I have made very clear about my views, my thoughts, my assessments,” Mamdani said. “Also, when it comes to the UN General Assembly, my focus is ensuring that our city remains prepared to host representatives from across the world to keep New Yorkers safe.”

He added that the city also had to ensure it could “both address the global conversation that is happening here in our city and the very local concerns that New Yorkers have about traffic and their ability to get from point A to point B over the course of that time period.”

During his campaign and after taking office, Mamdani examined whether the city had any authority to act on the arrest warrant issued against Netanyahu by the International Criminal Court. In July, he announced that the legal review had found that New York City did not have the authority to execute the warrant, although he continued to say that he believed the federal government should take action on the matter.

Mamdani also said at the time that Netanyahu was not welcome in New York as far as he was concerned and that, unlike previous mayors, he would not personally greet him.

Prayer vigil in support of Israel outside mayor’s residence

Mamdani was also asked about students from the Ramaz Jewish school and other Jewish schools who are planning to hold a prayer vigil outside his official residence, Gracie Mansion, on Friday to express support for Israel and Netanyahu.

“I welcome them,” he said. “They can have a vigil, or I’ve heard some describe it even as a protest. Whatever it is intended to be, they have the room and space to do so outside of Gracie Mansion.”

Asked whether he would go outside to meet them and hear what they had to say, however, Mamdani made clear that this was unlikely.

“I think that at the time that they are there, I will probably be somewhere else across the city,” he said.

This post was originally published on here. 

A US government website employed an AI model from a Chinese company for users to search proposed federal regulations, despite the FBI accusing the model’s developer, Alibaba, of “malicious” copying of US rival Anthropic’s technology.

The website of the Federal Register, which is run by the National Archives, had the search tool using Alibaba’s Qwen model available on Wednesday along with other search options. It was unclear when it was deployed.

The Qwen-powered search was taken down on Wednesday around the same time social media posts appeared about it, according to screenshots and an archived version of the site’s source code reviewed by Reuters.

The FBI last week accused Alibaba of copying Anthropic’s models to build its own artificial intelligence tools, raising tensions between Washington and Beijing ahead of a meeting next week between the countries’ leaders.

US officials said then that Chinese AI companies were engaged in “malicious” copying of US technology on an “industrial scale.”

FBI declines to comment, National Archives, White House do not respond

The FBI declined to comment on Thursday. The National Archives and the White House did not respond to requests for comment. A spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in Washington said the allegations of copying were “unfounded.”

The US government’s use of Qwen emerged amid a global reckoning about AI safety and a US debate over whether regulatory safeguards on AI are needed or would put the country at a competitive disadvantage.

AI experts said the use of the Chinese tool on the Federal Register’s website may not have posed national security risks. But it raised questions about whether the federal government was contradicting its own messages about Chinese AI models.

Daniel Castro, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, said there was a disconnect between the fierce US-China competition to build superior AI models and a US agency choosing to use a Chinese-made AI model.

“It’s one of the most insane things I’ve ever seen,” he said.

The Federal Register website, which provides a daily list of newly proposed regulations, offered the Qwen model as a tool to browse public comments.

Qwen is an open-weight model, meaning key components of the system are publicly available. Developers can download and modify the model for specific uses, often at lower cost than closed models from companies such as Anthropic and OpenAI.

No gov’t entity should use Chinese AI model, House China cm’tee chair says

“No federal government entity should use a Chinese AI model,” said US Representative John Moolenaar, a Michigan Republican who chairs the House China Committee. “Doing so only makes the federal government more dependent on Chinese AI models and that is not in the national interest.”

Security experts say open-weight models can run on a company’s own IT infrastructure, giving organizations greater control over sensitive data that might otherwise be shared with outside providers.

Georgetown Law Professor Anupam Chander said the use of Qwen did not appear to present an immediate cybersecurity risk, though that depends on how the model was trained. The Federal Register website’s content is already public, so the model was not working with sensitive government information.

Democratic US Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement that the risk depends on whether US data left the government’s security boundary and was processed on Alibaba-controlled systems.

In April, the US House committees on China and homeland security sent a letter to Airbnb, which also uses Qwen, asking for details about its use as part of an investigation into the “national security risks created by the integration” of Chinese AI tools into platforms used by Americans.

This post was originally published on here. 

I think of it as a blast from the past. Ahead of Yom Kippur, which starts on Sunday night, I was reminded of the British Mandate period when the authorities, fearing Arab protests, banned the sounding of the shofar at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. 

British cowardice was met with Jewish courage, and every year a ram’s horn was smuggled to the holy site and the traditional blast of the shofar was sounded at the end of the Neilah prayers, although it usually resulted in the arrest of the person brave enough to blow it.

The Old City, including the Temple Mount and Western Wall, fell under Jordanian control during the War of Independence in 1948; but in the 1967 Six Day War, it was liberated, and Jerusalem was reunited. Both wars, it should be noted, were attempts by the Arab world to eliminate the Jewish state and predate “settlements.”

The “settlements,” now labeled an “obstacle to peace,” were a result of the war, not the cause. It was the Jewish presence anywhere “between the river and the sea” that the Arab world objected to. Many of today’s “settlements” are in fact communities where Jews lived until forced out by war or massacres, including Hebron, Jerusalem’s Old City, and the Etzion bloc.

Fast forward to September 2026, and British authorities again seem intent on silencing the Jews and harming their rights in their historic homeland. Last week, British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband announced future sanctions on products from the “settlements,” including Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and Jerusalem.

Miliband made much of being a Jew himself. It’s easy to recognize the type: it’s the “wicked son” from the Passover Haggadah, the one who excludes himself from being part of the community celebrating the Exodus from Egypt.

The British move was joined by a chorus of “useful idiots,” France, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden. It remains to be seen what it means in practical terms, but it obviously was not intended to be favorable to Israel. 

The timing was particularly significant. Coming ahead of the Israeli elections next month, the UK, under Prime Minister Andy Burnham, could have waited to see who leads the new government before taking action against the current one.

Sanctions might have boosted Israel’s Right

The threat of sanctions to be implemented in the future seems more an attempt to influence voters. It might backfire. Miliband might have inadvertently boosted the Israeli Right.

Acts like this certainly don’t bring peace closer – on the contrary, it encourages Palestinian terrorism and could be devastating for the Palestinians employed in boycotted factories and workplaces, where they work alongside Jews.

Framing the move as a necessary response to “settler violence” is disingenuous at best. Where is the similar boycott on Turkey (holding Northern Cyprus) or China (holding Tibet and eyeing Taiwan)? Or any of the other scores of countries involved in territorial disputes? Where is the action against other countries where there are localized acts of despicable violence? Should the Israeli government act against every foul incident of anti-immigrant violence taking place around the globe, let alone acts of antisemitism?

This is a de facto boycott of Israel, the Jewish state. It is also an attempt to redirect attention away from the real violence – the invasion on October 7, 2023, and subsequent missile attacks from seven fronts. It’s easier for the UK government to resort to its standard policy of sanctioning Israel than to take real and meaningful action against Iran and its evil axis, which still launches rockets across the Gulf states while viciously repressing reformists at home.

The revival of the “two-state solution” mantra is a numbingly naive reward for terrorism. More than half a million Jews live in Judea and Samaria, and more than 300,000 live in “East Jerusalem.” Are they to be ethnically cleansed in the name of peace? If the Palestinians can’t tolerate living with Jews among them, how will there be a peaceful state alongside them?

In the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led invasion and mega-atrocity, 1,200 were murdered, 251 abducted, and thousands wounded. It took place 18 years after the entire Jewish community was removed from Gaza. The terrorists who proudly filmed themselves as they raped, murdered, and rampaged their way through pastoral communities and small towns in southern Israel referred to their victims as “settlers.” 

This is the lesson of October 7 – the terrorists did not attack because of an Israeli presence in Gaza, but because the absence of an Israeli presence emboldened and enabled them.

While the succession of British Labour governments have announced a series of sanctions against Israel, the Palestinians are being allowed to literally get away with murder – the Palestinian Authority’s “Pay-for-slay” policy actually rewards imprisoned terrorists and their families for killing Jews.

One meme doing the rounds on social media shows Burnham calling Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to clarify: “We still need the defense systems, life-saving drugs, navigation aids, intelligence-sharing, irrigation advances, and communications technology. It’s just the avocados, dates, and tomatoes that we want to cancel.”

If it were a laughing matter, the joke would be on the UK.

Of the various Israeli responses being considered, the most appropriate was long overdue: closing the British consulate in Jerusalem. Absurdly, the consulate served only Palestinians (apartheid, anyone?) while Israeli Jews used the embassy in Tel Aviv. 

Even after the UK last September declared its recognition of a “State of Palestine” (borders unknown), it didn’t set up consular offices in Ramallah to serve it. In effect, the consulate in Jerusalem served as its embassy to the Palestinian Authority. Even more preposterously, the UK and other countries funding UNRWA are ostensibly saying that the Palestinians are refugees in their own state.

It’s possible that the sanctions declaration was intended to be mainly symbolic; the question is, symbolic of what? The answer is the decline of Britain rather than the end of Israel.

I might boycott the movie NAZA, which received a record-breaking almost 25-minute standing ovation at the Venice Film Festival last weekend and won the Special Jury Award. Who stands for nearly half an hour clapping for a movie? Someone who is entirely consumed by the subject – or someone too scared to publicly say “Enough is enough” after the first few minutes of applause. (Stalin sends regards.)

Produced by the Guardian, the title is the Hebrew acronym for “Collateral damage,” “nezek agavi,” but there’s no need to spell out why filmmakers Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor chose to keep the Hebrew term, which just happens to look like a certain German word, instead of the English CDE (Collateral Damage Estimation).

The movie isn’t about targeted killings; it’s about the character assassination of Israel and the IDF.

Israelis and Jews are no strangers to blood libels, including movies purporting to be objective documentaries. Israeli Arab filmmaker Mohammed Bakri’s Jenin, Jenin springs to mind. Incidentally, the cinema culture that once flourished in Gaza ended when Israel pulled out, and Hamas took over.

As KAN 11 reporters noted, there’s a certain irony in focusing on “collateral damage” to try to strengthen allegations of genocide and deliberate mass killings. But Abraham and Szor must have realized they had a winning formula – attacking Israel without context – after their movie No Other Land, made with two Palestinian directors, won an Oscar last year.

NAZA’s interviewees hid behind the protection of anonymity, and there is no way to check their claims, real positions, and what level of knowledge they had – the greater picture rather than the cinema sound bite.

The interviewees could be arrested abroad for “war crimes,” by the way, for having served in the IDF. Israeli filmmakers critical of the government, including Nadav Lapid, who made Ahed’s Knee, have ended up suffering from the sanctions they themselves helped promote.

IDF Chief-of-Staff Eyal Zamir has asked to see NAZA, to take measures if any verified claims require it. The IDF is also looking into this as a possible intelligence leak, where modes of operation might have been revealed.

No other military makes such an effort to evacuate civilians before an operation. Hamas’s strategy is to operate among civilians, and in tunnels under homes, schools, hospitals, and mosques, thereby endangering the local population.

October 7 wasn’t collateral damage; it was genocide – against Jews. Fighting terrorism is never easy, but it’s even harder when terrorists are encouraged by international applause.

This post was originally published on here. 

Former US senator Jon Kyl of Arizona died at the age of 84 from complications of a neurological disease, it was announced on Thursday. Kyl served 18 consecutive years in the US Senate, from 1995 to 2013, before briefly returning to the chamber in 2018.

In addition to his work securing funding for the Arrow missile defense system, Kyl also fought against former US president Barack Obama’s recognition of a Palestinian state

Most notably, Kyl was considered one of the principal authors and architects of the 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act. He worked alongside Senate majority leader Bob Dole to advance the legislation, which stated that Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital of the State of Israel and that the US Embassy should be relocated there.

The legislation passed the Senate with an unusually large bipartisan majority of 93 votes in favor and five against. For more than two decades, US presidents refrained from fully implementing the law until US President Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in 2017 and moved the US Embassy there in 2018.

Kyl later described the Jerusalem Embassy Act as one of the legislative achievements he was most proud of. In a 2011 interview, he said he regretted the inclusion of a provision allowing presidents to delay the embassy move for six months on national security grounds. The waiver was repeatedly invoked by successive US administrations before the embassy was ultimately relocated.

‘Israel will not forget his true friendship’

Haim Silberstein, chairman of the Jerusalem Center for Applied Policy (JCAP), mourned Kyl’s death.

“Jerusalem and the State of Israel have lost one of their greatest and most significant friends in the US Senate. Jon Kyl did not settle for declarations of support for Israel, but helped turn recognition of Jerusalem as its capital into a principle enshrined in American law.

“There are leaders who stand before the cameras at the moment history is being made, and there are leaders who spend years paving the road that makes that moment possible. Kyl was one of the architects of the diplomatic and legislative infrastructure that ultimately led to American recognition of Jerusalem and the relocation of the embassy.

“The State of Israel owes him a profound debt of gratitude. His work deserves to be commemorated in Jerusalem, the city whose recognition he worked so determinedly to advance.

“Israel will not forget his true friendship, and Jerusalem will not forget the man who helped enshrine its status as Israel’s capital in American law. May his memory be a blessing.”

This post was originally published on here. 

When US President Donald Trump addressed the United Nations General Assembly a year ago, he touted the US bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites just months earlier as “totally obliterating everything” and said he had brought peace between Israel and Iran.

Returning to the world body on Tuesday, Trump will face a deeply skeptical audience increasingly rattled by six months of war between US forces and an emboldened Iran, growing regional instability and a nuclear threat that has not disappeared despite his claims.

Though battered militarily and economically, Tehran has remained defiant, obstructing oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz and in recent days gaining new leverage as its Houthi allies in Yemen tighten their grip on a Red Sea chokepoint, further spiking global energy prices.

The lightning advance by the Houthi terrorists has put Trump in an ever-tighter bind over the unpopular conflict, dealt a blow to US ally Saudi Arabia and exposed the limits of Washington’s ability to protect its regional partners.

Most European and Asian allies have spurned Trump’s demands for assistance in a conflict he launched without consulting them and which has had damaging fallout for their economies.

And with US gasoline prices high and his approval ratings low, Trump could pay a price in November’s midterm elections when his Republican Party’s control of Congress is at risk.

“We are seeing what happens when a president launches a war of choice without anticipating the unintended consequences,” said Aaron David Miller, a former adviser on Middle East policy to Republican and Democratic administrations.

Trump expected to frame Iran military campaigns as victory

In Trump’s speech to the annual gathering of heads of state and government in New York, he is likely again to frame as a victory a military campaign he promised would be over in weeks.

The conflict has instead hardened into an uneasy stalemate that has failed to achieve Trump’s shifting goals while depleting the Pentagon’s missile stockpiles.

Trump’s problems have only deepened since Houthi fighters overcame Saudi-backed Yemeni government forces, sweeping down the Red Sea coast and seizing islands at the mouth of the Bab al-Mandab Strait, a crucial shipping corridor that allows Iran to further threaten global oil supplies.

In response to Reuters’ questions, a senior Trump administration official said the US is focused on security interests such as ensuring freedom of navigation in the Red Sea “while empowering our regional partners to take the lead in managing and resolving regional security challenges.”

Iran took up only a small portion of Trump’s speech at last year’s UNGA.

He recounted how, three months before, he had sent B-2 bombers to drop 30,000-pound bombs that “demolished” Tehran’s uranium enrichment capacity. However, experts determined the strikes had only seriously set back the program.

“No other country on Earth could have done what we did,” Trump said.

The US president – who campaigned on a vow to avoid foreign military entanglements – also presented himself as a peacemaker, repeating claims to have ended conflicts around the world, including a 12-day war between Israel and Iran in 2025, and again insisted he should receive the Nobel Peace Prize.

Events since then have contrasted with his remarks.

Trump joined Israel in striking Iran on February 28, citing what he said was an imminent nuclear threat to the US. Experts have disputed his claim that Iran was close to developing a nuclear weapon, which Tehran has always denied seeking.

But analysts say Trump underestimated Iran’s resilience. Despite airstrikes that killed many of Iran’s top leaders, it has hit back at Gulf neighbors and the US bases they host.

At the same time, Iran has retained a stockpile of near-weapons-grade highly enriched uranium believed buried by the US strikes in June 2025.

Trump alone ‘possessed courage’ to confront Iran on nuclear program, White House spox. says

White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly said Trump alone had “possessed the courage” to confront Iran over its nuclear program, that he had achieved all his objectives and Iran’s economy was being crippled by stepped-up sanctions and a US maritime blockade.

Trump, meanwhile, has rebuffed Saudi pleas for direct military intervention against the Houthis, who agreed to a ceasefire with the US last year.

This has dented confidence in US security guarantees among Gulf states, whose doubts Trump’s decision to go to war over their objections had already fed, analysts say. He plans to meet Gulf leaders on the sidelines of the UN next week, Axios reported.

The dilemma for Trump is that while the US can ill afford to have the Houthis close a second major shipping corridor, he is reluctant to undertake a dangerous new mission for a US military stretched by the fighting against Iran.

US officials met the Houthis last weekend in Oman, where the group said that while it was targeting Saudi shipping it had no intention of attacking American vessels, according to five people familiar with the matter.

“The US clearly has (military) capacity challenges, but even so the cost of inaction here is likely to intensify tensions among Gulf allies,” said Jonathan Panikoff, a former deputy national intelligence officer on the Middle East.

The Houthis’ sudden re-emergence as a regional threat has further complicated Trump’s efforts to find a way out of the conflict.

With the war grinding on in a seventh month, the US is mired in a battle of attrition while Trump tries to intensify economic pressure on Tehran.

Trump, who has offered shifting timelines, told reporters on Wednesday that “hopefully we are towards the end.”

But analysts warn that the conflict is likely to drag on well past the midterm elections.

“Iran isn’t about to let him off the hook here while they have so much leverage to damage him in the midterms and make him a lame duck,” Brett Erickson, a geopolitical analyst and managing principal at Obsidian Risk Advisors, wrote on X/Twitter.

This post was originally published on here. 

Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa has been diverting most of the country’s resources, from tax revenues to international aid, toward building a large standing army and acquiring weapons systems, according to Israeli security assessments.

Instead of investing in infrastructure, rebuilding the country, or improving the welfare of civilians who suffered through 15 years of war, the extremist regime is focusing on an arms buildup while working to conceal its military expansion strategy. The development is raising concern and red flags within the intelligence community.

According to IDF assessments, Sharaa’s operational plans are intended for the point at which he believes he can strike Hezbollah in Lebanon, which he despises, as well as pro-Iranian Shi’ite militias in Iraq.

The belief is that he is waiting for the right moment, combining the completion of advanced stages in his force buildup with a reduction in the US military presence in the region, particularly in Iraq, in a way that would make it more difficult for the United States to prevent such a move.

As Syria continues its military buildup, European countries, led by Germany, are providing aid and embracing the Syrian president in an effort to stem the flow of refugees and pave the way for their return to the country. According to security officials, once Syria stabilizes and is no longer defined as a combat zone, European governments will be better positioned to justify returning refugees.

Moderate Sunni states seeking to moderate Sharaa’s policies

At the same time, moderate Sunni states, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, are working around the clock to draw Sharaa closer to them. They are investing money in him and granting him honors in an effort to soften his agenda, distance him from extremist elements, and moderate his policies, despite his well-known jihadist past.

According to security sources, relations between Turkey and Syria are complicated.

“Al-Sharaa will not be so quick to hand territory over to Erdogan, nor will he necessarily allow him to take control of military bases in Syria. Therefore, to some extent, the recent Israeli strike in Syria helped Ahmed al-Sharaa,” one security official said.

“Ahmed al-Sharaa wants to build Syria under his leadership into a regional power that will look in every direction. The moment he decides to, he will also direct military force against Israel.”

Israel missed opportunity to make agreement with weakened Sharaa

According to security sources, Israel missed a historic opportunity to reach an agreement with Sharaa when he was still very weak and had only just taken office. Israel could have established facts on the ground regarding the border area and the status of the Israeli Golan Heights, but hesitation on the Israeli side and its focus on other arenas prevented progress.

As a result, the IDF is required to intensify its intelligence-gathering efforts concerning the Syrian military, its personnel and its capabilities, and to prepare operational plans in case it is required to launch a broad operation to thwart hostile intentions or a military buildup that undermines Israel’s freedom of action or military superiority.

A future confrontation is only a matter of time, security sources assess.

This post was originally published on here. 

Having just seen Manhattan’s Twin Towers collapse in a live broadcast, this column wrote: “This week’s towering infernos should etch 2001 in human memory as a watershed year on the scales of 1492, 1789, and 1939” (“A time to kill,” September 14, 2001). 

Noting that the third millennium had just opened “with a totalitarian bang,” the column argued that freedom, “the Cold War’s shining victor,” had been dealt a massive blow that demanded a massive counterattack. It followed that “2001 can end up as the year in which the free world waged the ultimate war on tyranny.”

Having lived in this war’s trenches for the subsequent 25 years, Israelis now feel that some of this war has been won, some has been lost, and some – the most important part – has yet to be waged. 

The victorious part of the war that followed al-Qaeda’s attacks is visible in south Manhattan. The emergence of the Freedom Tower, where Ground Zero’s cavity once gaped, an inspiring work of iron, steel, and glass that every night shoots skyward a pillar of bright light – is a looming testament to America’s resilience and its attackers’ defeat. 

This dimension of victory is in the realm of psychology, but America won in other ways as well. 

America’s resilience outlasted the 9/11 attackers’ ambitions

The terrorists hoped to shock American civilization by pitting against each other two of its most iconic inventions: the skyscraper and the airplane. This hope was also dashed. American inventions, from the airplane, the skyscraper, and the personal computer, to the motion picture, the rock concert, and the fast-food restaurant, have remained civilization’s fixtures, to the jihadists’ chagrin. 

Equally frustrated was the raid’s political quest. Targeting America’s commercial, military, and political nervous centers was designed to debilitate its economy, army, and government. None of that happened. 

On other fronts, however, victory has been elusive. 

The attacks’ first success was their inspiration for other jihadist massacres worldwide. Here is a very partial list:

The Bali bombings that killed 202 people in 2002, the Madrid train bombings that killed 193 in 2004, the London Underground attacks that killed 52 in 2005, the Mumbai train bombings that killed 209 in 2006, the Moscow train bombings that killed 40 in 2010, the shopping mall attack in Nairobi that killed 67 in 2013, the Ankara bombings that killed 109 in 2015, the Charlie Hebdo attacks that killed 137 the same year in Paris, the concert hall attack that killed 145 in Moscow in 2024, the New Orleans truck attack that killed 15 last year, and last December’s Bondi Beach shooting that killed 17 in Sydney. 

Some would argue that the scope of these attacks and their diminishing frequency indicate a loss of momentum. That was arguable until Hamas’s October 7 attack. The jihadist energy, it proved, is alive and well. 

Then there was the failure of what the American president of the day, George W. Bush, called The War on Terror. 

Iraq and Afghanistan created a costly strategic challenge

Failure began with the choice of that war’s locations, a pair of entirely different theaters 1,500 km. apart: Iraq is a steaming flatland, Afghanistan is a continuum of snow-capped mountains. Politically, Afghanistan was a fundamentalist theocracy, while Iraq was a secular tyranny. Conquering and governing both countries simultaneously meant military and financial overstretch.

The reason to attack Afghanistan was that it had sheltered the terrorists and shared their jihadist agenda. The reason to attack Iraq was that its leader cheered the attack, and represented all that was politically ill about the Arab world that produced the 19 perpetrators of the September 11 attacks. 

Taking Afghanistan was meant to eradicate jihadists. Attacking Iraq was meant to redesign the Arab world. Each of these aims was in itself a tall order, but put together they were too much, even for the US. 

That all this ended with Iraq under Iranian influence, and Afghanistan under Taliban rule, is a major fiasco, which began immediately after September 11, with the very naming of the counterattack that Washington resolved to wage.  

The name “The War on Terror” fingered the enemy’s weapon instead of the enemy’s cause. In World War II, Americans were told, rightly, that they were fighting fascism, not the kamikaze suicide. During the Cold War, all Westerners understood that the enemy was not the Soviet Union’s atomic bomb, but communism. Now the enemy was jihadism, but world leaders, from America through Europe to China, would not say this. 

Intelligence efforts alone cannot defeat jihadist ideology

Yes, 9/11 ignited an international intelligence effort to thwart jihadist attacks before they are waged, and to hound their plotters wherever they may nest. But that is not enough. Civilization has an enemy, one that, deep in its soul and mind, cannot accept pluralism, or even just diversity, and thus seeks to subdue all other faiths by terrorizing millions worldwide. That must be said; plainly, repeatedly, and loudly. 

Seen this way, the threat that announced itself at the millennium’s outset is intact, and must be met with two global efforts, one military, the other political. 

The military aim should be what is now Israel’s doctrine, namely, fight tooth and nail any jihadist militia that emerges on your borders. The political aim should be to tell mankind what jihadism has in store for it, and to expose the governments that help its plots. 

For instance, a recent French government report that the Muslim Brotherhood controls 139 French mosques, and that this is part of a broader Islamist effort, backed by Qatar and Turkey, to infiltrate Europe – should be trumpeted worldwide. (See “French report warns of Islamist ‘entryism’ as risk to national cohesion” BBC.com, May 21, 2025).

That is not what’s happening. In fact, the current American president considers this pair of Islamist engines his allies, and their leaders his personal friends. No, that is not the victory the September 11 terrorists had in mind. It is, however, America’s defeat. 

www.MiddleIsrael.net
The writer, a Hartman Institute fellow, is the author of the bestseller, The Jewish March of Folly (Yedioth Books 2026), now available in English on Amazon.

This post was originally published on here. 

We stand at the threshold of the holiest day in the Jewish calendar – Yom Kippur. It is a day when the Jewish people opens its heart to purity, forgiveness, and repentance.

Yet despite its greatness and spiritual intensity, Yom Kippur can sometimes be perceived as a frightening day. Ask people what they feel when they think about Yom Kippur, and many will speak of fear.

The surprising truth, however, is that the deepest emotion associated with this day – and perhaps the very emotion we are called upon to awaken within ourselves – is one of joy and yearning.

We encounter this joy already on the eve of Yom Kippur, through one of the most remarkable mitzvot in the Jewish calendar: eating and enjoying a festive meal on the eve of Yom Kippur.

Surely, a festive meal would be the last thing that comes to mind

But this raises a profound question: How is it that precisely on the eve of this great and awesome day, the day when a person stands before his Creator, and his judgment for the coming year is sealed, we are commanded to eat and rejoice?

One might think this should be the moment of our greatest anxiety. A person knows that he is about to enter a day of fasting, prayer, and soul-searching. Surely, a festive meal would be the last thing that comes to mind.

The question becomes even more striking when we learn from our Sages that, in a certain sense, the merit of eating on the ninth day of Tishrei, the eve of Yom Kippur, is even greater than that of fasting on the 10th day, Yom Kippur itself. As the Talmud teaches:

“Whoever eats and drinks on the ninth day, Scripture considers it as though he had fasted on both the ninth and the 10th” (Yoma 81b).

In other words, eating on the ninth day has such great significance that a person is considered as though he had fasted for two consecutive days. How can this be?

The answer can be found in the words of Rabbeinu Yonah, in his foundational work on the laws of repentance:

“If a person has transgressed a negative commandment and repented, he should be concerned over his sin and yearn and wait for Yom Kippur to arrive, so that he may find favor before the Almighty, for His will is the life of the soul and the body, and the life of every created being, as it is written: ‘In His favor is life’ (Psalms 30:6).

“Therefore, our Sages of blessed memory said that whoever makes a festive meal on the eve of Yom Kippur is considered as though he had been commanded to fast on the ninth and 10th days and had fasted on both, because he has demonstrated his joy at the arrival of the time of his atonement. This joy will bear witness to his concern over his guilt and his sorrow over his sins” (Sha’arei Teshuvah 4, section 8).

A person who knows that he has been given the opportunity to cast off the burden of the past and renew his relationship with his Creator should feel a profound sense of joy – joy at the ability to repair, to become pure again, and to begin anew.

It is difficult to express this joy on Yom Kippur itself, a day of fasting, prayer, and soul-searching. That is why it finds its expression on the eve of Yom Kippur. We rejoice that the day has arrived on which we have been given the opportunity to atone for our deeds and turn the page to a new beginning.

‘Light is sown for the righteous, and joy for the upright in heart’

THIS IDEA is reflected in a verse recited in some communities as the Torah scrolls are carried around the synagogue after the Kol Nidre prayer: “Light is sown for the righteous, and joy for the upright in heart” (Psalms 97:11).

At the very beginning of the holy day, after Kol Nidre, when the Torah scrolls are brought out of the ark and the worshipers stand facing them, we invoke the words, “and joy for the upright in heart.” At first glance, if we were asked to describe Yom Kippur, we might expect words such as “awe,” “repentance,” “forgiveness,” and “atonement.” And yet, precisely as the day begins, we awaken the emotion of joy.

This is one of the deepest dimensions of the spiritual work of Yom Kippur. We are called upon to make our hearts upright – not merely to confess what we have done, but to remove the crookedness that has taken root within us over the course of the year and return to our own true and authentic selves. When the heart becomes upright, joy does not need to come from outside. It emerges naturally from within. As Rabbi Nahman of Breslov taught: “Joy is in the heart, and one whose heart is crooked cannot rejoice.”

What is this joy of the heart, and how do we make the heart upright?

The answer lies in a person’s yearning to cleanse himself of his sins and draw close once again to his spiritual roots. It means no longer dwelling on the calculations, labels, and everything else that has distanced him from himself and from his Creator, but simply rejoicing in the privilege of being Jewish and in the extraordinary opportunity he has been given to cleanse himself of all the dirt and grime that have accumulated throughout the year and begin anew.

When a person straightens his heart and prepares himself to become a worthy vessel for receiving the holiness of the day, he experiences a simple, pure joy – a joy that reaches into the deepest chambers of the heart.

Yom Kippur gives us the opportunity to make that same inner journey: to return from crookedness to uprightness, from heaviness to freedom, and from distance to connection.

And then we discover that the joy we searched for throughout the year was never far away. It was there all along, lying deep within the heart, simply waiting for us to make room for it. ■

The writer is rabbi of the Western Wall and holy sites.

This post was originally published on here. 

Yom Kippur is a personal and solitary experience. We descend into the chambers of our personality and search for what we spend the year avoiding. We confront weaknesses we would rather ignore and habits we have learned to excuse. 

We peel away layers of ego, conceit, self-deception, and artifice, stripping ourselves down to something exposed, genuine, and vulnerable. 

Without our usual protections, we search for painful truths and hope to summon the courage to become different.

Yom Kippur is the night journey of the soul. For one day, distractions recede, and we confront who we are, what we have failed to become, and the brevity of our lives against the backdrop of eternity. Few images capture Yom Kippur more powerfully than a person bent over a machzor (prayer book), quietly reciting its catalogue of sins.

Yet Yom Kippur is also a time for collective repentance. For the first time in 2,000 years, we live as a sovereign Jewish nation, and just as individuals must examine themselves, so must a nation. 

The past three years have tested us severely, and we have responded with faith, courage, and resilience. But admiration for what we have achieved cannot exempt us from honest self-examination. As a people, we too have sins to confess.

Collective vidui (confession) is inevitably personal and subjective. Yet there are failures that we as a people should be willing to confess on Yom Kippur and address through our collective teshuva (repentance).

The sin of spiritual bewilderment

One of the sins listed in the machzor is timhon levav, a bewilderment or confusion of the heart. During these years, we have sometimes wondered obsessively about God’s decisions and His providence, without allowing sufficient faith to steady us. 

Under the strain of war and uncertainty, pessimism about the future of our people and of the State of Israel has crept in, weakening confidence in a destiny that God has promised us. We have witnessed remarkable victories, made possible by the courage and heroism of our defense forces. 

Have we also sufficiently thanked God and recognized His hand in those achievements?

The sin of historical inattention

We are living through history. The October 7 Hamas-led massacre is an event that will shape, and should shape, the remainder of our lives. We will tell its story to future generations, much as Holocaust survivors were charged to preserve what they witnessed. 

Yet it is possible to live through history without absorbing its meaning. We can remain absorbed in our own stories even while the larger story of Jewish history is hurtling forward around us. 

Have we sufficiently taken the measure of this moment, or have we retreated too quickly into our own private lives? 

The sin of numbness

Our society is exhausted. Three years of war have left us carrying grief, anxiety, and disrupted lives. The news cycle has been dizzying, with one major event barely settling before another arrives. Being tired is no sin. But prolonged exhaustion can quietly become numbness. 

Have we begun, simply from sheer fatigue, to stop feeling what once would have shaken us?

The sin of taking sacrifice for granted

The burdens of this war have not fallen equally. Some have endured losses and sacrifices almost impossible to imagine. Their heroism can never become part of the background scenery of war. Bereaved families, wounded soldiers, reservists and their families, and everyone who has carried a heavy burden deserve our gratitude, compassion, and support. 

Have we embraced them with the love they deserve?

We must also be extraordinarily careful when speaking about their experiences. Pain is intensely personal, and even well-intentioned words can wound when they are careless or insufficiently sensitive. 

Have we always chosen our words carefully enough? Have we sometimes spoken too casually about sacrifices we ourselves were not asked to make? And have we ever diminished someone’s pain simply because others have suffered more? Suffering does not have to be the greatest suffering to deserve our sympathy.

The sin of ideological overconfidence

The war and its aftermath have resurfaced tensions already simmering within our nation. We have slipped back into some of the social strife and divisiveness that troubled us before October 7. Positions have hardened around questions that touch the heart of Jewish identity and the meaning of life in the modern State of Israel.

Conviction is necessary, particularly when the issues are serious. But conviction can also harden into overconfidence. We should ask whether we have left enough room for the possibility that our positions may be mistaken, or at least incomplete. Have we rushed to defend our convictions without examining their weaknesses and limitations? 

Matthew Arnold quotes Bishop Wilson’s warning that we should follow our “best light,” but also take care that our “light be not darkness.” A measure of intellectual humility would not erase our convictions, but it might soften some of the divisions battering our society.

The sin of reckless language

Even amid profound ideological divisions, our language demands greater care. The issues dividing us are painful and touch deeply held values. Too often, though, we escalate rather than speak with restraint, respect, and nuance.

At times our language has become outrageous. Calling another Jew a Nazi displays historical myopia and is deeply disrespectful to Holocaust victims. A Jew who can call another Jew a Nazi has revealed a profound rupture in his own Jewish identity, peoplehood, and historical consciousness. 

That historical crime corrupts anything further he has to say on the subject and renders it irrelevant.

Similarly, casually branding another Jew an antisemite distorts both Jewish history and the bonds connecting us as a people. We can believe another Jew’s position is profoundly mistaken, even dangerous to the Jewish future, without reaching for language that casts him outside our shared story.

Language, language, language. Perhaps no failure has contributed more to the escalation of our internal divisions. Words can intensify conflict and leave wounds long after the argument has ended.

The sin of forgetting our shared destiny

We conclude Yom Kippur by dreaming of L’shanah haba’ah b’Yerushalayim, longing for the day when the Jewish people will gather in a redeemed Jerusalem. That shared destination should shape the way we look at one another now. 

Despite our differences, we share a common past and destiny. When we forget that, we begin to treat one another as if we do not belong to the same people. Even when we disagree deeply, we remain partners in the same covenant and travelers toward the same redemption.

As we bend over the pages of the machzor and recite our catalogue of private sins, perhaps we should also imagine another book open before us: the book of Jewish history. We are living through one of its most consequential chapters, and we are helping to write it.

Some of the sins that belong to this book are not found explicitly in the machzor. They are written into the way we live our moment: how we speak, how we disagree, how we carry the pain of others, how we recognize God’s hand, and how faithfully we remember our shared destiny. 

On Yom Kippur, God examines the hidden chambers of each individual heart. Perhaps He also examines the character of the people we are becoming together, and the way we are writing this chapter of His people’s history. ■

The writer is a rabbi and educator at Yeshivat Har Etzion (Gush). Find his latest book, Echoes of Rashi: Bereishit at mtaraginbooks.com.

This post was originally published on here. 

A rare early Christian gold amulet and a roughly 3,500-year-old stone seal bearing a hieroglyphic inscription were discovered during excavations by Turkish archaeologists, Turkish outlet Turkey Today reported in late July. 

According to Turkey Today, researchers from Bilkent University, the University of Chicago, and Bilecik Seyh Edebali University found the artifacts during the third excavation season at the Turkmen Karahoyuk archaeological site.

The Christian amulet, which is believed to date back to the fourth or fifth century CE, according to Turkiye Today, was found within a small copper container. 

Inside the amulet, archaeologists found a thin sheet of gold that is reportedly thought to carry a passage from the bible.

“Inside a copper box, we found an extremely thin gold sheet, only 0.1 millimeters thick, most likely carrying a passage from the Bible,” Turkey Today cited Michele Ruzgar Massa of Bilkent University as saying. 

Amulet likely was a protective charm

Massa explained that the amulet likely belonged to a small child, and that “we can think of it as something like a nazar boncugu, a traditional evil-eye charm.”

Such amulets are rare, noted Massa, adding that a similar artifact was discovered in Germany.

The stone seal, which was also discovered at the site, bore hieroglyphic Luwian inscriptions, reported Turkey Today.

Luwian, also known as Luvian or Luish, is an ancient Anatolian language used during the Bronze and Iron Ages.

The inscription includes a personal name and an official title, which, Massa explained, indicates that it belonged to an individual who held a lower-ranking position in an organized state bureaucratic system.

The name on the seal is “Kurunti-ziti,” according to Turkey Today, related to the Hittite stag god and a guardian deity of the countryside, Kurunta.

Further, the discovery suggests that Turkmen Karahoyuk had functioned as a major administrative center at the time.

Two additional copper seals and a clay seal impression bearing a different name were also unearthed at the site.

This post was originally published on here. 

New satellite imagery from Vantor Technologies appeared to show the Iranian regime rapidly attempting to reconstruct the Taleghan 2 facility in the Parchin military complex, the Institute for Science and International Security stated on Thursday.

The facility is located approximately 30 kilometers southeast of Tehran. It was initially destroyed in Israeli strikes in October 2024, before being partially rebuilt starting in May 2025. Israel again struck it in March 2026 during Operation Roaring Lion, and it has been heavily damaged since.

New Imagery Update: Iran is Rapidly Reconstructing Taleghan 2@vantortech satellite imagery from September 13, 2026, shows that Iran is rapidly moving forward with the reconstruction of the Taleghan 2 facility located at the Parchin military complex. Iran has erected a tarp… pic.twitter.com/onKG40itFc

— Inst for Science (@TheGoodISIS) September 17, 2026

The satellite imagery appears to show the regime having erected a tarp above the hardened buried facility, which has been tied to nuclear bomb testing as part of Iran’s AMAD program.

The tarp seems to be an attempt to hide reconstruction activity from satellite view or aerial reconnaissance, the institute assessed.

This assessment was boosted by significant activity being seen throughout the construction site, including various construction vehicles, such as dump trucks, bulldozers, concrete pump trucks, concrete mixers, and cranes being seen at the site in the latest satellite imagery.

The “repair and rehabilitation work began in June,” the institute stated.

The first step Iran took in its reconstruction project was to repair and place concrete caps over penetration holes caused by bunker-buster heavy bombs dropped on the facility, the institute said.

Iran reinforces nuke test facility with ‘concrete apron’ during reconstruction project

Iran also appears to have built a new “concrete apron reinforcement on the right side of the facility,” the institute said, adding that it will “provide additional blast protection from an aerial attack.”

“Significant questions remain as to Iran’s plans for the facility; not least is why Iran keeps rebuilding it,” the institute stated.

“What is clear is that Iran remains committed to rebuilding this facility, a deeply concerning development considering the long history of nuclear weapons research and development activities that occurred there,” it warned.

This post was originally published on here. 

Three people were killed in a school shooting in the southern Philippines on Friday, including the 16-year-old suspected gunman, with eight others injured, the town’s mayor said.

Four of the eight injured were in critical condition, and all the victims were students aged 14 to 17, Banga town mayor Albert Palencia told Reuters.

The incident follows two shootings since June at schools in the south of the country. School shootings were previously rare in the Philippines.

The Department of Education said it was deeply concerned over the reported shooting in Banga town in South Cotabato.

A student last month live-streamed himself shooting and killing another student in a classroom in Zamboanga before taking ‌his own life.

In June, at least three students were killed, and about 20 others were injured in an attack at a public high school in Tacloban, where two classmates opened fire on campus.

The Philippines has relatively strict gun ownership regulations, including background checks and psychological evaluation requirements, although illegal firearms remain in circulation.

The incident also follows a high-profile incident in Thailand in August, where a student went on a shooting rampage at a school on the outskirts of the capital, Bangkok.

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

Saudi Arabia has conveyed through the Sultanate of Oman a new proposal to the Houthis in Yemen, including a two-week ceasefire and the opening of direct talks between Riyadh and the Houthi leadership.

According to the Lebanese newspaper Al Akhbar, which is affiliated with Hezbollah, the aim is first to discuss the Houthis’ humanitarian demands and then attempt to reach a comprehensive agreement by the end of the ceasefire period.

According to sources who spoke with the Lebanese newspaper, the proposal was formulated after a series of contacts Saudi Arabia held in recent days with the United States, Egypt, Pakistan, and the Sultanate of Oman.

The sources claimed that Riyadh sought to convey a message to the Houthis that it was interested in using the period of calm to “discuss addressing all humanitarian demands,” and afterward “reach a comprehensive agreement at the end of the truce.”

Oman, which has played a central mediating role between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis in recent years, was asked to deliver the proposal to Sanaa.

Houthis escalate, seize areas around Red Sea coast

The report comes amid a sharp escalation in fighting in Yemen and rising tensions between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia. In recent weeks, Houthi forces have seized strategic areas along the Red Sea coast, while also carrying out attacks with missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles against targets inside Saudi Arabia.

Riyadh has accused the Houthis of attacking civilian and economic facilities in Abha, Khamis Mushait, Jizan, and Najran, as well as threatening commercial shipping in the Red Sea. In an official statement issued by Saudi Arabia last week, it was claimed that 73 civilians, including women and children, were injured in one of the waves of attacks.

US secretly holds talks with Houthis

At the same time as the Saudi contacts, secret talks were held over the weekend in Oman between US representatives and senior Houthi officials.

According to a Reuters report, the meeting took place at the US Embassy in Muscat with the assistance of the Omani government. The Houthis told the Americans that they intended to continue honoring the ceasefire reached with Washington in 2025 and that they did not intend to attack US vessels.

The Saudi move reflects an attempt to shift from a military channel to a diplomatic one as the fighting takes an increasing toll and also threatens regional trade and energy routes. According to Al Akhbar, Sanaa has not yet provided a final response to the proposal, and the Houthis continue to demand a comprehensive settlement that includes an end to the war, the lifting of the blockade, and addressing humanitarian demands. At this stage, Saudi Arabia has also not officially confirmed the details of the proposal published by the Lebanese newspaper.

This post was originally published on here. 

Lockheed Martin unveiled on Thursday details of a next-generation air-to-air missile developed to counter threats from ​China and a new agreement with the Defense Department to ‌boost production as the Pentagon rebuilds munitions stockpiles.

The war on Iran depleted US and allied missile stocks, spurring a push to rapidly acquire less ​expensive long-range precision-strike weapons.

The missile, known as the AIM-260 ​Joint Advanced Tactical Missile (JATM), has been developed in secrecy ⁠for years as the US military’s answer to increasingly capable ​long-range air threats from China. Lockheed said the weapon offers greater ​range and effectiveness than existing air-to-air missiles — an advantage against Chinese fighter jets like the J-20.
 
The AIM-260 will be used on stealth fighters like the ​F-22 Raptor and F-35.

“JATM is one of our nation’s most ​important air dominance capabilities, but because of the classified nature of the program, ‌it’s ⁠also a story we haven’t been able to tell,” Tim Cahill, president of Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, said in a statement. “We’re proud to finally talk about the extraordinary work ​behind this missile ​and how we’re ⁠working with the U.S. government to rapidly scale production.”

The first images of the weapon emerged in ​May and Australia has announced it will buy ​roughly $521 million ⁠worth of JATM missiles. The quantity and unit price were not disclosed.
 
The framework agreement lays the groundwork for a multiyear procurement contract ⁠aimed ​at strengthening the defense industrial base ​for the program. Lockheed said it would fund investments needed to boost output under ​the deal.

This post was originally published on here. 

American actor Matthew Lillard said that he felt “ashamed” for appearing in Scream 7 during a Q&A in Austin, Texas, after actress Melissa Barrera was fired from it for sharing pro-Palestinian posts online.

“She’s on the right side of history,” Lillard said. “The whole world should have popped up and said, ‘She’s right.’ And they didn’t. And that’s brutal.”

He described himself as being “on the wrong side of history” for appearing in the movie, saying, “I still like being in the movie, but it may not have been the best idea.”

He also referred to the ongoing controversy surrounding musician Ed Sheeran, who is facing heavy backlash after his opening act, rapper Macklemore, was dropped following pro-Palestinian remarks during a show.

Barrera dropped from horror franchise due to anti-Israel posts

Barrera was dropped from the Scream franchise in 2023 after making several Instagram posts condemning Israel for its treatment toward Palestinians in Gaza.

“Gaza is currently being treated like a concentration camp,” she wrote in one post, describing the situation as being both genocide and ethnic cleansing.

After her removal from the film, a spokesperson for production company Spyglass told Variety that “Spyglass’ stance is unequivocally clear: We have zero tolerance for antisemitism or the incitement of hate in any form, including false references to genocide, ethnic cleansing, Holocaust distortion, or anything that flagrantly crosses the line into hate speech.”

This post was originally published on here. 

How many people in Israel, or even around the world, could name the winner of the Special Jury Prize at the Venice Film Festival last year? Probably almost no one.

Venice is one of the world’s most prestigious film festivals, but it is an industry event – a place where filmmakers, directors, and producers showcase their latest projects, generate buzz, and hope that distributors and critics take notice. Most of what happens there never reaches the wider public.

Then came NAZA, the documentary by Israeli journalists Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor that won the Special Jury Prize at Venice this weekend and almost immediately became the center of a political and public storm in Israel.

The film examines allegations surrounding Israeli military targeting in Gaza, including anonymous testimony from purported soldiers and intelligence officers claiming that the IDF permits “mass killing” with AI-powered tools.

And if the goal of the Israeli officials attacking the film was to prevent people from seeing it, they accomplished exactly the opposite. Culture and Sports Minister Miki Zohar’s announcement that he would seek to revoke the filmmakers’ citizenship only increased the world’s attention to the film. He can be sure that now viewer numbers will go up exponentially.

What Zohar fails to understand is that this is not the way to counter the false allegations raised in the movie. Like Zohar, and almost everyone else attacking the film, I have not seen it (it is not available yet in Israel), and so it is hard to start to dissect the details.

Nevertheless, we can argue about the general way the IDF fights – in my view, in one of the most humane ways in modern warfare – and against the perverse claims of genocide that have been leveled for the last three years against Israel.

In other words, you can hate the film, believe it is distorted, unfair, or even defamatory. You can challenge every allegation and even take the filmmakers to court and sue them for libel. But threatening to strip Israelis of their citizenship because they made a film critical of their country is something else entirely.

Not only does such a move not make Israel look stronger, but it creates the impression that we have something to hide and are afraid of criticism. It makes it seem like we fear to stand up for our truth and what we believe in.

Doing this undermines one of the basic values Israel has always insisted distinguishes it from its enemies: that as a vibrant democracy, we allow people to say things that the government – and many citizens – might find outrageous.

This is not how a side confident in its case should behave. Someone wants to make a movie accusing the IDF of war crimes? Then fight back. Explain why the claims are wrong. 

Show how the combatant-civilian ratio is historically low when compared to any urban warfare conflict with remotely similar conditions. Produce a film showing your truth and the other side of what happened in Gaza. Make the case. But don’t try to silence the criticism. Confront it head-on.

But the political response was only one part of the problem. Then came the IDF’s response.

Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir ordered the establishment of a multidisciplinary, interorganizational team led by the head of the IDF Planning Directorate to develop ways to counter what the military described as false allegations against the IDF and its soldiers.

I read that announcement and had one question: Where has Zamir been for the last three years?

Did nobody in the IDF, the Prime Minister’s Office, or the Foreign Ministry read an American or European newspaper over the last three years? Did nobody watch CNN or the BBC? Did nobody see the way Israel and the IDF were being portrayed around the world?

Now, because of a movie, the IDF is creating a multidisciplinary team? This should have been done years ago. Israel needed a coordinated effort to collect facts, release information, quickly investigate accusations, and challenge false claims in real time. 

A responsible country doesn’t wait for a movie to come out before realizing it has an information problem. It identifies the problem early on (the massive protests around the world should have helped them wake up) and builds the tools needed to confront it.

But even if Israel had handled the public diplomacy surrounding the war perfectly, NAZA would still raise a deeper and far more uncomfortable question – one that Israelis need to confront regardless of whether the movie itself is accurate, distorted, or something in between.

It is a question about Gaza itself.

A few months into the war, in a meeting with a senior executive at one of Israel’s leading television stations, I asked her a simple question: Why don’t we see on the evening news what is happening inside Gaza? She answered that we did, since almost every night there was footage from IDF operations there.

I explained that what I meant was not what the IDF was doing in Gaza but what was happening to Gaza.

To her credit, she paused before answering.

“We have limited time on the news,” she said. “We have hostages, dead soldiers, evacuees from the north and the south, and protests across the country. We can’t show everything.”

I was not arguing that Israeli television had some ideological obligation to generate sympathy for Gaza. My point was simpler: Israelis were forced into a war that they did not want and were now fighting in one of the most just wars in the nation’s history. 

In addition, what was happening in Gaza was Hamas’s fault. They embedded themselves in civilian infrastructure since they wanted Israel to attack and kill as many civilians as possible. It was for this reason that Israel, for almost 20 years, held back from launching such an operation despite fighting a conflict almost every two years since the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2005.

But none of that meant that Israelis should ignore the full scope of the war. We can believe that Israel was 100% justified in responding the way it did to October 7 and in fighting Hamas with the aim of its elimination, while also recognizing the consequences of that war. 

To understand the conflict we are fighting, we also need to understand what it has done to the people living on the other side. War is terrible. That we know. It is why we tried for so long to avoid it. But understanding a war means looking not only at why it was fought and what our soldiers were asked to do, but also at what happened as a result.

Importance of recognising the suffering of the other side

Our sympathy will obviously be first and foremost for ourselves. That is the way it should be. But that does not mean we should ignore what is happening on the other side, including the pain and suffering there as well. That, too, is part of the story.

Recognizing that does not mean accepting the accusations against Israel. It does not mean agreeing with claims that Israel committed genocide or deliberately targeted civilians. I have repeatedly explained why I believe those accusations are baseless and false.

But rejecting those accusations does not require us to deny what happened in Gaza. It simply means recognizing what happened.

We can believe that the war was forced upon Israel by Hamas and that Hamas bears responsibility for the devastation because of the way it fights and embeds itself in civilian infrastructure. We can believe that after October 7, Israel could no longer tolerate a genocidal terrorist army on its border with a declared desire to carry out another massacre.

We can remain committed to the mission that has yet to be accomplished to ensure that Hamas no longer exists and at the same time, we can look at what happened in Gaza and acknowledge the tragedy.

Those two thoughts can coexist.

In many ways, that tension helps explain why NAZA has touched such a raw nerve. Whatever one thinks of the film itself, it forces Israelis to look directly at something that, as a society, we have largely managed not to look at for nearly three years.

Our own suffering has understandably dominated our consciousness since October 7. We suffered the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, saw entire communities destroyed, people killed in the worst ways known to man, and hostages starved in complete darkness inside tunnels.

That trauma is real. But recognizing what subsequently happened to civilians in Gaza does not diminish it. It does not create some moral equivalence between October 7 and the war that followed. It simply requires us to look at the full picture.

Part of the reason that has been so difficult is leadership. Israeli political leaders do not speak publicly about Palestinian suffering during the war. Even acknowledging it is viewed as an admission of guilt rather than a recognition of the human consequences of war.

But leadership is only part of the explanation. There is another reason Israelis have struggled to look at Gaza: For much of the public, the war does not feel over.

All of the hostages, living and dead, have returned home, but Israeli soldiers remain deployed in Gaza, and Israeli strikes continue. Hamas has yet to disarm, and significant parts of President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza remain unfinished. The objective of the war – Hamas’s destruction – has yet to be met.

As a result, the wound of October 7 therefore remains open, and when your own wound is still open, it is difficult to look at somebody else’s.

But eventually Israel will have to. Part of recovering from October 7 will mean confronting what was done to us: the failures that allowed the attack to happen, the trauma that followed, the lives that were lost, and the damage this war inflicted on Israeli society.

Recovery will also require something else: the confidence to look honestly at what happened on the other side without believing that doing so somehow weakens our own story.

What it means is understanding that a country can believe deeply in the justice of its cause and still recognize the consequences of the war it was forced to fight.

Israel is strong enough to do both.

The writer is a co-founder of the MEAD Forum, a senior fellow at the Jewish People Policy Institute, and a former editor-in-chief of The Jerusalem Post. His latest book (with Amir Bohbot), While Israel Slept, is a bestseller in the United States.

This post was originally published on here. 

When a film accuses Israel of calculated mass killing, wins the Venice Special Jury Prize, and receives a nearly 25-minute standing ovation, we should examine not only the screen, but who produced it, which investigations it relies on, and who funded the organizations behind them.

In other words: follow the money.

NAZA, directed by Israelis Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor, is listed by the Venice Biennale as a production of The Guardian and JW Films. The festival synopsis says the film reveals systems behind what it calls Israel’s “calculated mass killing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza.” 

The filmmakers state that many revelations were first published by The Guardian with +972 Magazine and Local Call.

The film relies on 24 anonymous Israeli military and intelligence personnel whose identities are concealed, faces obscured, and voices altered. Viewers cannot independently determine their positions, what they witnessed, or whether they were positioned to know the strategic decisions they describe.

The IDF categorically rejected the allegations, saying it could not verify the identities, roles, or relevant knowledge of the anonymous sources and disputing claims about how targeting decisions are made.

But the journalistic ecosystem behind the film also deserves scrutiny.

+972 Magazine is published by the nonprofit 972 Advancement of Citizen Journalism. The same nonprofit co-publishes the Hebrew-language Local Call (Sicha Mekomit), with Just Vision. Both publicly describe this partnership.

Now follow the financial trail.

According to +972’s donor disclosures, Local Call received Open Society Foundations grants every year from 2018 through 2024, totaling $562,900.

Open Society Foundations were founded by George Soros, who, according to the organization, has given them more than $32 billion of his personal fortune since 1984.

The documented chain is real, but must be described precisely: Soros founded and financed Open Society; Open Society granted hundreds of thousands of dollars to Local Call; and NAZA, according to its directors, draws partly on investigations published by Local Call, +972 Magazine, and The Guardian.

That does not prove Soros, Open Society Foundations, or another donor directly financed NAZA. I have seen no evidence of such a link. Nor does funding itself prove journalism false.

But funding and institutional context are not irrelevant.

Open Society has also taken clear public positions on the Israel-Hamas War. On November 1, 2023, it unequivocally condemned Hamas’s October 7 attack, calling its cruelty heartbreaking and inexcusable.

In the same statement, however, it said Israel’s campaign was becoming “increasingly indiscriminate” and argued that restrictions on electricity, water, fuel and food, together with bombing, were likely to be judged as collective punishment.

In December 2023, Open Society published a fact sheet saying it supports human-rights organizations documenting what it describes as Israeli abuses and advocating accountability, alongside policy and civil-society groups.

It reported providing $14.3 million in 2023 to groups working on Israel and Palestine, excluding an additional $3.3 million emergency commitment after October 7. The Foundations also say they do not support Hamas and their grantees are committed to nonviolence.

On May 20, 2024, Open Society welcomed the ICC prosecutor’s decision to seek arrest warrants for senior Israeli and Hamas leaders, calling it an important first step toward accountability.

These are Open Society’s own published positions. They do not establish that the Foundations dictated the editorial line of Local Call, +972, or NAZA, but they are relevant context when audiences assess reporting that later becomes the basis of a major international documentary.

Follow the testimony. Follow the credits. And follow the money.

Then ask what has been pushed to the margins: October 7, 2023.

Hamas and other armed groups invaded Israel, murdered about 1,200 people, and abducted around 250. Families were slaughtered in their homes. Young people at the Nova festival were hunted down.

A UN mission led by Pramila Patten later found reasonable grounds to believe rape and gang rape occurred during the October 7 attacks in several locations, and “clear and convincing information” that hostages were subjected to rape, sexualized torture, and other forms of sexual violence.

Yet the horror that began this war is pushed to the margins while Israel’s military response is placed under a microscope.

Civilian deaths in Gaza are tragic. Every innocent child who dies is a catastrophe, and Israel must investigate suspected violations. 

But there is a fundamental moral and legal distinction between deliberately murdering civilians and attacking a military target while facing a foreseeable risk of civilian casualties. Assessing possible civilian harm before an attack is not, by itself, proof of an intention to murder civilians.

In my view, NAZA takes an extraordinarily complicated battlefield and compresses it into a devastatingly simple accusation: civilians died, therefore Israel intended to kill them.

That may be powerful propaganda. It is not a serious description of war.

Because these accusations come from Israelis, their international power is multiplied. The social-media takeaway will not be: “Anonymous Israeli sources make allegations disputed by the IDF.”

It will be: “The Israelis themselves admit it.”

Israel should respond with the truth

Israel’s answer should not be censorship. It should be truth – delivered faster, more intelligently, and more persuasively.

Israel must acknowledge Palestinian suffering without allowing October 7 to be erased, and investigate misconduct without accepting that killing civilians is state policy.

When films and investigations present themselves as fearless examinations of power, the public should apply the same scrutiny to them.

Examine the evidence. Examine the sources. Examine the producers.

And follow the money.

Because sometimes what is missing from the screen can be found in the credits – and in the financial reports.

The writer is the CEO of Radios 100FM, an Honorary Consul and vice dean of the Consular Diplomatic Corps, president of the Israel Radio Communications Association, and previously served as a monitor for Israel Army Radio and as a television correspondent for NBC News.

This post was originally published on here. 

Scientists have identified a new species of wild cat living in Bolivia’s cloud forests, the first new living feline species described in more than a century, according to research published Thursday in the journal Current Biology.

The small, spotted cat, named Leopardus tilcayo, lives in the Yungas forest on the eastern slopes of the Andes. The animal is smaller than an average domestic cat and bears dark, leopard-like rosettes across its light-brown coat, National Geographic reported.

Its path to scientific recognition began in 2016, when Bolivian biologist Paola Nogales-Ascarrunz received a call from the Senda Verde wildlife sanctuary about what staff described as an unusual cat.

A local man had reportedly found the animal as a kitten on a road near a forest and brought it home, initially believing it was a domestic cat. After about a year, its wild behavior convinced him to transfer it to the sanctuary.

Nogales-Ascarrunz, founder of the Bolivian Felids Research Program, initially believed the animal belonged to Leopardus tigrinus, one of a group commonly known as tiger cats. She photographed the animal extensively but did not immediately suspect that it represented a species unknown to science.

Several years later, while preparing a guide to Bolivia’s wild cats, she noticed that the animal’s markings differed substantially from those of tiger cats found in neighboring Brazil. In particular, its rosettes appeared considerably larger.

That observation ultimately led Nogales-Ascarrunz and an international team of researchers to investigate its genetics. The scientists compared complete genomes from 38 animals belonging to the Leopardus genus, according to National Geographic.

The analysis placed the Bolivian animal on a distinct branch of the feline family tree and indicated that its lineage separated from related tiger cats roughly 1.4 million years ago.

The name was chosen in recognition of the people of the region

Researchers proposed the scientific name Leopardus tilcayo in recognition of the name people in the region traditionally used for the cat.

Nogales-Ascarrunz told National Geographic that when researchers asked residents why they called the animal “tilcayo,” they said the name had simply been passed down through generations. Its precise linguistic origin remains unclear.

Scientists currently know that the species inhabits Bolivia’s Yungas, a humid forest ecosystem where the Andes descend toward the Amazon basin. Beyond that, much of its biology remains unknown.

New cat alert! A call from a wildlife sanctuary about a “weird cat” has led to the first new cat species discovered in over 100 years in Bolivia’s Yungas forest ecoregion. Learn more about this feline surprise: https://t.co/crffXvPqH4 pic.twitter.com/USo7rI3Y5q

— National Geographic (@NatGeo) September 17, 2026

Separating one widespread animal into several species can have immediate conservation implications.

If a population previously considered part of a species distributed over a vast territory is instead recognized as an independent species confined to a limited habitat, its conservation status may look dramatically different.

“If you think [the tiger cat] is a single thing from southern Brazil all the way to Costa Rica, you’re going to find it’s not endangered,” Eizirik told National Geographic. “But if we find that it’s not a single thing, but actually five things, each of them must be assessed separately.”

Scientists do not yet know how many L. tilcayo individuals remain in the wild, making it difficult to assess its conservation status.

The discovery also shows why small wild cats can remain scientifically obscure even when local communities have long known they exist. Unlike lions, tigers and other heavily studied members of the cat family, smaller felids are often elusive, nocturnal and difficult to distinguish from closely related species.

For Nogales-Ascarrunz, the importance of the discovery extends beyond taxonomy.

“Our world is extremely complex,” she told National Geographic. “Sometimes we think that most of it is known, that there’s not a whole lot to discover, but in fact, it’s the other way around.”

Even among mammals as familiar as cats, she said, species may still be waiting for science to recognize them.

“Even in the cats, there are things out there that are undescribed, things that people haven’t found yet,” Nogales-Ascarrunz said. “So let’s go out and find them and protect them.”

This post was originally published on here. 

A majority of Israelis, 54%, believed Israel should assist Saudi Arabia in its struggle against the Houthis, a Friday Maariv poll revealed.

Thirty-eight percent said such assistance should be conditioned on a normalization agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia, while 16% supported assisting the kingdom against the Iran-backed Yemeni terror group even without an immediate diplomatic return.

Twenty-six percent opposed Israeli assistance to Saudi Arabia, while 20% said they did not know.

The poll also surveyed support for the upcoming Knesset elections slated for October 27. The poll’s findings showed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud continuing its downward trend this week, falling to just 18 seats, while the coalition bloc remained stable at 50 seats.

The bloc held its ground as Ofer Winter’s People of Israel once again cleared the electoral threshold, and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s Religious Zionist Party, running in an alliance with Moshe Feiglin’s Zehut, gained one seat, bringing it to six.

Reservists and Economic Party passes electoral threshold

In the opposition bloc, the most significant change this week was Yoaz Hendel and Yaron Zelekha’s The Reservists-Economic Party joint list clearing the electoral threshold with four seats.

At the same time, Gadi Eisenkot’s Yashar lost two seats, while Naftali Bennett’s B’Yachad and Yair Golan’s Democrats each dropped by one. The Zionist opposition, excluding the parties led by Hendel and Zelekha, stood at 54 seats. The Arab parties retained their strength with 12 seats.

However, the poll also found that The Reservists-Economic Party crossed the 3.25% electoral threshold with 3.5% of the vote, while People of Israel received 3.4%, putting both parties only narrowly above the threshold.

When asked who voters would pick if elections were held today, respondents gave the following answers:

Yashar: 23 seats.

Likud: 18 seats.

B’Yachad: 13 seats.

The Democrats: nine seats.

Yisrael Beytenu: nine seats.

Otzma Yehudit: eight seats.

United Torah Judaism: seven seats.

Shas: seven seats.

Joint Arab List: seven seats.

Religious Zionist Party-Zehut: six seats.

Ra’am: five seats.

People of Israel: four seats.

The Reservists-Economic Party: four seats.

Eisenkot’s lead over Netanyahu narrows in polls

The poll also found that Eisenkot led Netanyahu when respondents were asked who was better suited to serve as prime minister, with 48% supporting Eisenkot compared with 40% for Netanyahu. The gap between the two, however, narrowed from 12 percentage points to eight.

Netanyahu also narrowed the gap with Bennett by one percentage point. Bennett led with 44%, compared with 41% for Netanyahu.

By contrast, Netanyahu maintained his advantage over Avigdor Liberman, with 42% supporting Netanyahu compared with 38% for Liberman.

The poll was conducted on September 16-17 by Lazar Research, headed by Dr. Menachem Lazar, in cooperation with Panel4ALL. A total of 4,089 people were invited to participate, and 600 responded, for a response rate of 15%. The respondents constituted a representative sample of Israel’s adult population aged 18 and over, including Jews and Arabs. The poll had a maximum sampling error of 4%.

This post was originally published on here. 

When Guy Sasson and Sergei Lysov rolled onto the tennis courts at the recently completed US Open, they represented the “old” and newer generations of Israeli wheelchair tennis players.

Sasson, 46, has enjoyed a highly successful career competing in the quads division. He won all four Grand Slam doubles tournaments this year and would have completed a calendar-year Grand Slam had he also won the US Open.

Lysov, 22, is an up-and-coming player who competed at the US Open last year and again this year. He won the 2024 Israeli National Wheelchair Tennis Championship and represented Israel at the 2024 Summer Paralympics in Paris.

And several other young Israeli wheelchair tennis players are coming through the ranks.

But with the rise in the number of young, otherwise healthy Israelis who have suffered life-changing injuries in the country’s recent wars, an important question is emerging: Will more newly disabled Israelis discover wheelchair tennis and other wheelchair sports, and could some eventually reach the elite levels achieved by Sasson?

“It is too soon to know – the journey from injury to active sport to competitive sports is a long journey,” says Boaz Kramer, executive director of the Israel ParaSport Center in Ramat Gan and himself a wheelchair user, two-time Paralympian and silver medalist in quad wheelchair tennis at the 2008 Beijing Games.

Still, the numbers suggest more people could participate in wheelchair sports.

Defense Ministry: Over 26,000 war-wounded soldiers sought treatment since start of Gaza war

In July 2026, the Rehabilitation Division at the Defense Ministry reported that approximately 26,200 war-wounded men and women had sought treatment since the war began. It is estimated that there have been 97 amputations since the start of the war.

Some of those injured may discover the world of wheelchair sports and even reach elite levels like Sasson.

Kramer would like to see injured people consider participating.

“I am a big believer in sports as a rehabilitation tool,” he says.

But Kramer also points to an interesting, and perhaps somewhat worrisome, trend: wheelchair sports are becoming “more and more competitive,” something he considers a mixed blessing.

On one hand, Kramer is pleased with how far the sport has come.

“Finally, wheelchair athletes are receiving the recognition, compensation and attention they deserve,” he says. “Paralympic sport is becoming more visible, more attractive and more commercially viable. Athletes are becoming professionals, events are attracting spectators, media are paying attention, fans are following teams and players. After decades of fighting for legitimacy, perhaps Paralympic sport is finally getting there.”

But he also sees a downside.

“But this slow and steady metamorphosis comes with a cost,” Kramer says. “And it raises an important question that has been sitting at the heart of Paralympic sport since its beginning: What is the purpose of Paralympic sport? The competition? The participation?”

Kramer worries that too much focus has gone to competition and that the sport may have “gradually transformed into an elite sport.”

“It rewards talent, it rewards training, it rewards professional support, money, time, access to facilities, coaching, technology and sophisticated sports science,” he explains. “While doing that, it also inevitably leaves people behind.

“So maybe the future of Paralympic sport is not about choosing between participation and excellence. Maybe it is about building a system in which excellence sits at the top without swallowing everything underneath it. While celebrating the jaw-dropping performance of the elite Paralympic sports, we must make sure we never forget why it exists in the first place.”

Kramer, born with arthrogryposis, came to Israel at five years old

Kramer was born with arthrogryposis, a condition characterized by stiff, curved, or locked joints. He came to the Israel ParaSport Center at five and played a variety of wheelchair sports before eventually focusing on tennis.

He became a competitive wheelchair tennis player, played on Israel’s national team for 12 years, and represented the country at the 2008 Beijing Games.

From that experience, Kramer knows that reaching the highest levels of wheelchair tennis can be particularly difficult for athletes who begin using a wheelchair later in life or who did not play tennis as children.

For that reason, he considers Sasson, who has won all four Grand Slam doubles championships in the past, although falling short last week in his quest for a 2026 calendar-year Grand Slam, “an exception in many ways.”

Sasson’s injury, the result of a snowboarding accident, occurred during adulthood. He initially began his competitive career in the open division before later being reclassified for the quads division as the extent of his injury progressed.

The fact that the quads division is smaller has also meant that Sasson has had greater opportunities for success.

Sasson is pleased about the possibility of new wheelchair athletes joining the sport, but he cautions that playing at the elite level is not for everyone.

“If an athlete wants tennis, it is not easy – it cannot be as a side job,” Sasson says.

“If you want to be at the top tier, you need talent, discipline, consistency, and a mindset. You need the physical ability and talent, and you have to do it again and again and again. It is challenging, and it is not easy, but there are rewards.”

Kramer is delighted by Sasson’s tennis success and his potential calendar Grand Slam, but he views what Sasson represents as something much greater.

“It is not just an athletic achievement, not just about tennis – it is also about how he represents Israel, partnering with a Dutch athlete,” Kramer says.

Sasson regularly partners with Niels Vink, 23, of the Netherlands, and together the pair have become one of the most successful wheelchair doubles teams in the world.

Kramer views Sasson’s accomplishments as “a very strong statement on how Israel is more than what people think.”

Perhaps, in time, more newly disabled Israelis will discover wheelchair sports. Some may go on to attain great heights in the competitive sports world. Others may simply find a new source of community, purpose, physical activity, and enjoyment.

Both outcomes, in their own way, could be part of the next chapter of Israeli wheelchair sport.

This post was originally published on here. 

At the high-level Middle East-America Dialogue (MEAD) conference in Washington last week, which brought together current and former senior officials from Israel, the US, and across the Middle East, one theme repeatedly emerged: In Iran, Gaza, and Lebanon, “the perfect” must not be allowed to become the enemy of progress.

“The perfect,” of course, would be an Iran ruled by a different regime that has abandoned its pursuit of nuclear weapons; a Lebanon where the government, not a terrorist organization, actually controls the country; and a Hamas-free Gaza.

That is the ideal. It will also take a long, long time to achieve.

In the meantime, October 7 and the wars it unleashed have set in motion processes in each of these arenas that, if seen through to completion, could bring those goals within sight.

But the key is seeing them through: Maintaining the blockade and economic pressure on Iran; putting into place US President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza, with demilitarization and deradicalization at its core; and moving forward the historic tripartite process in Lebanon.

A 28-month window to anchor regional changes

Patience is needed. But here is the rub: It must be patience laced with urgency.

Israel now has a 28-month window to root and anchor these processes before Trump leaves office and a new administration, possibly with vastly different priorities and a very different worldview, takes power.

This MEAD conference, like the previous three, was unique in the Middle East policy world: Bipartisan and inclusive of key regional actors. Despite the region’s dark clouds, the mood at the off-the-record panels was surprisingly upbeat.

Participants, including former generals, intelligence chiefs, serving diplomats, and politicians, focused not only on what had not been achieved, but on what had.

Some might call that Pollyannaish; others might see it as a refreshing effort to zoom out and examine what one participant called “the overall trend line.”

And that trend line, emerging from a well-air-conditioned Washington hotel where both kosher and halal food was available for the participants, was – believe it or not – positive.

Nowhere was that positive trend line more evident than in regard to Iran. Not because the Iranian threat has disappeared – it has not – but because the military campaign and subsequent blockade have placed Tehran under pressure of a kind it has never experienced before.

Nuclear damage leaves Iran facing years of recovery

Start with the military balance sheet.

Iran’s principal nuclear installations have been destroyed or severely damaged, along with centrifuges, research and development centers, weaponization facilities, and a significant part of the infrastructure needed to rebuild the program. Further, leading nuclear scientists were killed. 

Iran’s nuclear knowledge remains, as does enriched material buried at several locations, but recreating what was lost will take time, money, and scientists with the necessary expertise.

The February 28 attack also contained an element of tactical surprise that has received little attention. One participant said the operation was deliberately launched in the morning because the Iranians did not expect Israel and the US to attack during the day.

That decision was part of what participants described as an unprecedented, “dream-like” level of US-Israel military integration and cooperation.

The damage to Iran’s missile-and-drone industry is extensive. One participant said the campaign reduced Iran’s “ability to produce missiles and drones from 100 percent down somewhere to between 10% and 20%.”

That does not mean Iran has only 10% to 20% of its missiles left. It means its ability to manufacture new ones has been dramatically reduced. Iran can rebuild, but only by diverting scarce resources from an economy already reeling.

Blockade seeks to deepen pressure on Tehran’s regime

And that is where the blockade comes in.

The military campaign damaged Iran’s capabilities. The blockade is intended to prevent it from rebuilding them and to force the regime to choose between funding its military ambitions and keeping its economy functioning.

Another disclosure heard at the conference concerned Israel’s role in the anti-regime demonstrations that erupted in January.

The unrest began in the Tehran bazaar without an Israeli call for people to take to the streets. But once it spread, Israel actively encouraged Iranians to join the demonstrations.

“We knew that they went out into the streets on January 8 partly because of the influence operations we conducted,” one Israeli participant said.

The regime responded by killing thousands and wounding thousands more. Yet the protesters returned the next day, and that decision to return on January 9 demonstrated not merely that large numbers of Iranians opposed the regime – something Israel had long believed – but that some were now willing to risk their lives to challenge it.

The current pressure being applied, according to these assessments, may create the conditions for change from within. 

This requires alternative Iranian leadership, continued influence operations from within and, as one participant put it, “people on the ground.” That referred to Iranians capable of acting inside the country, not to a ground invasion.

But here, too, the clock is ticking.

Iran bets on waiting out Trump’s pressure campaign

Iran is betting that American pressure is temporary – that it need only survive Trump’s remaining 28 months and wait for relief. Washington must therefore convince Tehran that this policy will survive Trump and cannot be escaped by waiting for the next president.

None of this means Tehran will go quietly. Indeed, the expectation voiced at the conference was that Iran will eventually lash out rather than allow itself to be slowly strangled economically, and that an attack on Israel will be a sign that the regime is on its last legs.

But all that is not an argument for lifting the pressure. It is an argument for preparing for Iran’s response while continuing a strategy that, perhaps for the first time in the Islamic Republic’s 47-year history, has placed the regime’s survival in danger.

One participant said Israel’s original assessment – that the regime could fall within one to three years – still stands.

If Iran requires patience to allow pressure to take effect, Gaza requires patience of a different kind: Giving an untested political framework time to establish itself before declaring it a failure and sending the IDF back in.

That was the clear sentiment from senior American, Israeli, Palestinian, and international officials involved in the implementation of Trump’s 20-point plan.

No one suggested that the plan was perfect, or that its success was assured. The problems are immense: Hamas remains armed; the international stabilization force has yet to emerge; the Palestinian technocratic administration meant to govern Gaza is in Cairo, not in Gaza City; and the scale of physical destruction is staggering.

But the participants repeatedly returned to the same point: What is the better alternative?

One panelist put it bluntly: “Every alternative to the Board of Peace is 1,000 times worse.” Those alternatives include the return of Hamas, indefinite Israeli occupation, the restoration of an unreformed Palestinian Authority, or another major Israeli military campaign.

Another participant said that even if the plan has only a 20% or 30% chance of succeeding, Israel is obligated to exhaust that possibility before sending soldiers back into Gaza’s “hornet’s nest.”

Here, too, the Trump clock matters. The president chairs the Board of Peace, is personally invested in the plan, and is sensitive to Israel’s security concerns. That gives the framework political backing it may not receive from a future administration.

The next 28 months must therefore turn the plan from a collection of promises into something that is up and functioning. Above all, the participants stressed deradicalization.

One person said that the final test of victory will not be how many Hamas terrorists Israel killed, how many tunnels it destroyed, or how much damage it inflicted. It will be whether, years from now, three words can be said: “Hamas lost Gaza.”

For that to happen, removing Hamas from government is not enough. Its ideology must also be removed from the enclave’s schools, mosques, and public institutions. Rebuilding homes while leaving intact the educational and religious infrastructure that glorified October 7 would merely reconstruct the foundations for the next war.

That will not happen quickly. Deracialization is a generational project requiring the involvement of regional partners – including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt – that have experience confronting Islamist extremism.

The Gaza plan is cumbersome, uncertain and full of risks. But the MEAD takeaway was that imperfect plans should not be discarded when the available alternatives are worse. Here, as with Iran, patience is essential – but, again, it must be patience laced with urgency.

The final arena where MEAD participants urged patience – again, without illusions – was Lebanon.

Here, too, the arrangement is far from perfect. Hezbollah remains armed, the Lebanese Armed Forces are not yet capable of taking control of areas vacated by Israel, and the verification machinery needed to ensure that Hezbollah does not simply return has not been established.

But the alternative is a return to the familiar cycle: Hezbollah rebuilds, Israel attacks, southern Lebanon is destroyed, and another war begins.

Lebanon’s historic opportunity to reclaim sovereignty

What makes the present moment different, participants argued, is that Hezbollah and its Iranian sponsor have been radically weakened, Lebanon has new political leadership, and the Lebanese state has an opportunity – perhaps a historic one – to reassert its authority. The aspiration can be summed up in six words: “One army, one flag, one anthem.”

Getting there, however, will require moving carefully and learning from the pilot areas where an Israeli withdrawal has been matched by Lebanese Army deployment.

Those pilots are intended to answer the practical questions on which the entire process will stand or fall: Who verifies that Hezbollah has been disarmed? 

What precisely does it mean for the Lebanese Army to “clear and hold” an area? How long must it remain free of Hezbollah personnel and weapons before Israel can consider it secure? And what happens if Hezbollah returns after the IDF withdraws?

The process must also confront a classic chicken-and-egg dilemma. Israel says it cannot withdraw until Hezbollah is disarmed and the Lebanese Army is deployed. Lebanon says it cannot demonstrate that the new order delivers results – or build public support for confronting Hezbollah – unless Israel begins withdrawing.

The practical approach being tried and in its infancy is a phased process: Lebanese Army deployment and verified Hezbollah disarmament in specific areas, followed by corresponding Israeli withdrawals.

Israel, meanwhile, must be careful not to turn military success into political defeat. Continued strikes may further weaken Hezbollah’s capabilities, but strengthen it politically by allowing the organization to present itself once again as the defender of Lebanon against Israel. If that were the case, Israel would win militarily but lose the larger political contest.

The key constituency is southern Lebanon’s Shi’ite population. The Lebanese government needs to demonstrate that the state can offer them what Hezbollah has not: Security, reconstruction, economic opportunity and an end to perpetual war.

The tripartite process is slow, fragile and vulnerable to provocation. Hezbollah may launch drones or in other ways try to trigger a fierce Israeli response and derail the process.

But there has rarely been a better opportunity to restore Lebanese sovereignty and remove Hezbollah’s weapons. 

As with Iran and Gaza, the arrangement should not be judged against an imaginary perfect solution. It should be measured against the available alternative – another war.

This post was originally published on here. 

A discharged IDF soldier was killed in a fatal paragliding accident while traveling in the city of Medellín, Colombia.

After the tragic news, the Chabad updates site reported that the city’s Chabad emissary, Rabbi Levi Vanunu, in close cooperation with the Israeli Embassy there, is working around the clock with local authorities.

The relevant authorities have begun efforts to complete the required bureaucratic procedures and ensure that his body is returned for burial in Israel as soon as possible.

Chabad in contact with killed Israeli’s family

The Chabad emissary is in continuous contact with the bereaved family and is accompanying them during this difficult time.

According to Ynet, the former soldier was 23.

Ynet also reported that the local guide accompanying the discharged soldier had been seriously injured during the same paragliding accident, which likely occurred due to strong winds in the area.

This post was originally published on here. 

A former Syrian government official who ​headed the Damascus Central Prison under ousted President Bashar al-Assad and was convicted of ‌torture by a US federal jury has been sentenced to 60 years in prison by a US judge, federal prosecutors said.

Samir Ousman Alsheikh, 74, was charged in 2024 and convicted in March on one count of conspiracy to commit torture and three counts of torture for his involvement in the abuse of prisoners at Adra Prison, as ​it is colloquially known in Damascus.

Alsheikh was also convicted of lying to US immigration authorities ​about his commission of the crimes, fraudulently obtaining a green card and attempting to naturalize as a US citizen, the US Department of Justice said.

Thursday’s sentence was handed down by US District Judge Hernan Vera in Los Angeles.

Prosecutors said Alsheikh ordered subordinates to inflict physical and ​mental pain on prisoners to deter opposition to Assad’s government and was sometimes personally involved in such ​incidents.

Alsheikh highest ranking former member of Assad government to be tried, convicted in person outside Syria

The US Justice Department said Alsheikh, who held positions in the state security apparatus, was the highest-ranking former member of Assad’s government to be tried and convicted in person outside Syria.

Alsheikh’s legal team had asked for a five-year sentence. In March, they said they were “disappointed” by his conviction. Alsheikh, who headed Adra Prison from 2005 to 2008, had previously pleaded not guilty.

Syrian rebels put an end to more than 50 years of rule by the Assad family in late 2024 following a lightning advance. Hundreds of thousands died in a civil war that lasted more than a decade, ​unleashed a global refugee crisis and left cities across the country in ruins.

Syrian ​President Ahmed al-Sharaa, a former al-Qaeda commander, took over after Assad’s ouster and has worked to improve ties with ​the West.

This post was originally published on here. 

Bursts of gunfire lasting for two hours were heard in the Iranian city of Zahedan from a shooting that left at least six wounded, Iran International reported early Friday morning.

Unconfirmed reports on social media claimed that some who had been wounded or killed were military personnel. 

Several ambulances were dispatched to the area, and checkpoints were established on nearby streets, according to the report. 

Images and videos circulating on social media appear to show armed individuals opening fire with military and security forces present. 

At the same time, large numbers of security personnel, plainclothes officers, and forces belonging to various agencies were deployed within the city, according to Iran International. 

The entrances and exits to the city have also reportedly been temporarily closed. 

This is a developing story. 

This post was originally published on here. 

A haredi (ultra-Orthodox) journalist set out this week to defend Health Minister Haim Katz (Likud) from what she described as Israeli media’s “derisive” treatment of him. In doing so, she inadvertently illustrated a much deeper problem with the way Israeli society works.

Katz has been overseeing several ministries, including the Health Ministry, since Shas resigned from the government in July 2025. The journalist wanted to show that despite claims Katz is stretched too thin to make a real impact in any one ministry, he is capable of getting things done.

Writing on social media, she shared the story of her uncle, who is suffering from a serious illness and urgently needed radiation therapy to relieve a blockage that was causing him excruciating pain.

He did not want to be hospitalized, and his family was told the next available appointment would only be in three weeks.

So, shortly before Rosh Hashanah, she contacted the health minister directly. “To his credit,” she wrote, Katz sprang into action. The next morning, her cousin told her Sheba Medical Center in Tel Hashomer had called: An appointment had been found, and her uncle was already receiving treatment.

Of course, every life saved or suffering alleviated by the health system is something to be grateful for. And if Katz intervened to help a seriously ill patient receive urgently needed treatment, that is something to acknowledge.

But there is something deeply troubling about the story being presented as a testament to the minister’s performance – and, perhaps more troubling still, about how naturally the writer appears to regard the underlying circumstances.

When healthcare access depends on who you know

The most striking thing about this story is what it says about access to Israel’s healthcare system: A sick man – or his relatives – needed a personal connection to a health minister to get help navigating it.

Not every sick Israeli has a relative who can call a government official. Not every injured person has a friend in a powerful office, a journalist with access to senior officials, or someone who can pick up the phone and make an appointment happen.

Most Israelis enter the healthcare system through the same channels as everyone else. They call, they wait, they appeal, they are transferred from one department to another, and they are told that the appointment they desperately need is unavailable.

And when the system is stretched, those without connections have little recourse. But what happens to the person who is suffering just as much but does not have anyone to call?

The journalist’s post was intended as praise. Instead, it reads like a description of Israel’s protekzia (connections) problem.

Israeli culture of protekzia

Israel has a long and complicated relationship with the idea of protekzia – the ability to get something done because you know the right person. It can be treated as a cultural quirk or a useful shortcut through inefficient bureaucracy.

But protekzia is something else entirely when the thing at stake is medical treatment. And it is particularly jarring when the very act of using personal connections to gain access is presented as proof that the system is working.

The post was shared with the best of intentions, as a genuine attempt to thank a minister who helped her family at a moment of terrible distress. But its obliviousness to what it reveals is precisely what makes it so telling.

The question raised by this story is not whether Katz helped a sick Israeli. He did. The question is what happens to the sick Israeli who does not have access to the health minister.

For every appointment that is moved forward after a call to a minister, there is another patient whose appointment is pushed back. Others must simply wait – sometimes for weeks and in considerable pain.

Measuring healthcare by how it treats ordinary patients

This is not a personal or professional indictment of Katz, but rather an indictment of a failing public system. The real measure of a functioning health system is how well it treats the person who has nobody powerful to call – not how quickly it responds when someone powerful intervenes.

And for the Israeli who has no connections, no powerful friends, and no minister to call, there is only the wait in line.

This post was originally published on here. 

A Minnesota man who squirted vinegar on Democratic US Representative Ilhan Omar was sentenced to one year and two months in prison on Thursday after pleading guilty to assaulting a federal official.

Anthony James Kazmierczak pleaded guilty in May and admitted to attacking Omar because he disagreed with her progressive political views. He was sentenced by US District Judge Joan Ericksen at a hearing in Minneapolis federal court on Thursday.

Kazmierczak’s lawyer said he apologized to Omar at the hearing but declined to offer additional comment, citing Kazmierczak’s pending assault and threats of violence charges in state court.

Omar, a progressive Democrat and outspoken critic of Republican President Donald Trump, was giving a town hall speech condemning the actions of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Minneapolis in January when Kazmierczak rose from the crowd and squirted her with a syringe of vinegar.

In a video of the attack that was widely shared online, Kazmierczak can be heard saying, “You must resign.” He was quickly subdued by a security guard, and Omar continued her remarks. 

Minnesota US Attorney Rosen condemned the attack

Minnesota US Attorney Daniel Rosen, a Trump appointee, has previously condemned the attack and called it part of a dangerous national trend of people channeling political hatred into criminal acts.

Rosen’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment after the sentencing.

This post was originally published on here. 

WASHINGTON – Any US sale of F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia should account for Israel’s qualitative military edge and Riyadh’s place in a broader US-led regional security architecture before it moves forward, a Washington national-security expert told The Jerusalem Post following the State Department’s approval of a potential $24.3 billion deal.

Jonathan Ruhe, Fellow for American Strategy at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA), said two major issues should be resolved before the kingdom receives the advanced stealth fighters – with Israel’s military edge and regional integration at the top of the list.

“The entire F-35 program is designed to support US-led collective defense,” Ruhe told the Post.

“America must show leadership on integrating Saudi Arabia into a new regional security architecture, and Riyadh also needs to show it’s a committed partner before it can obtain F-35s,” he said. “Israel’s QME is a key factor in this regional integration, and should be reflected in any potential F-35 sale to the kingdom.”

The State Department on Thursday approved a possible Foreign Military Sale to Saudi Arabia of 48 F-35A Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters, 49 Pratt & Whitney F135 engines and related equipment, training and support, with an estimated value of $24.3 billion.

The proposed transaction is not yet a completed contract. The State Department has approved the possible sale, which now moves through the US arms-sale process and congressional review. The State Department said the deal would strengthen Saudi Arabia’s ability to deter threats and improve interoperability with US and allied forces, and maintained that it “will not alter the military balance in the region.”

Israel is currently the only country in the Middle East operating the F-35. US policy on Israel’s qualitative military edge, or QME, is more than a political commitment: Congress wrote the requirement into law in 2008, obligating the US government to consider the effect of major regional arms sales on Israel’s ability to counter credible military threats while minimizing casualties and damage.

For Ruhe, preserving that edge should be part of a broader US effort to integrate Saudi Arabia into a regional defense architecture, rather than be treated simply as a technical question about the capabilities installed on individual aircraft.

China is the second test

The second issue, Ruhe said, concerns Riyadh’s defense and technology relationship with Beijing.

“In exchange for US arms sales and other security cooperation, Washington and Riyadh need an overarching, and overdue, agreement that formally ends worrisome Saudi-Chinese defense and technology ties,” he told the Post.

The New York Times reported Wednesday that US intelligence officials have warned in internal assessments that China could potentially obtain sensitive F-35 technology through espionage in Saudi Arabia or through Beijing’s existing military and security relationships with the kingdom.

A Defense Intelligence Agency assessment examined Chinese access to Saudi military facilities, as well as the kingdom’s use of Chinese telecommunications technology, and raised questions about whether sites housing sensitive F-35 systems could be adequately secured, according to the report. US intelligence analysts have also examined whether Riyadh would agree to restrict contact with Chinese military and intelligence personnel and remove certain Chinese telecommunications equipment from sensitive installations.

Those concerns are not entirely new. Similar worries over Chinese ties played a role in the difficulties surrounding a proposed F-35 sale to the United Arab Emirates following the Abraham Accords.

US enters negotiations with more to offer

Ruhe argued that Washington enters those negotiations with substantial leverage.

“The United States has leverage here, since it can offer Saudi Arabia much more than China can,” he said.

The F-35 is among the most sensitive weapons systems the United States exports, combining stealth, advanced sensors, electronic warfare capabilities and networked combat systems. The proposed Saudi package would also include secure communications and cryptographic equipment, electronic warfare database support, training, simulators, software and logistical support.

Lockheed Martin, based in Fort Worth, Texas, would be the principal aircraft contractor, while Pratt & Whitney would provide the engines.

The China question has therefore become intertwined with the question Ruhe places first: whether introducing the region’s second F-35 operator can strengthen a US-led security system without undermining Israel’s military advantage.

“The potential F-35 sale to Saudi Arabia shouldn’t move forward unless two key issues are first resolved,” Ruhe said.

Jonathan Ruhe is JINSA’s Fellow for American Strategy. He previously worked at the Bipartisan Policy Center, focusing on Middle East and former Soviet Union security issues, and his work has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, Foreign Policy and The Dispatch.

This post was originally published on here. 

A Reform synagogue in Jerusalem was targeted for the second time in a month when a group of Jewish youths threw eggs at worshippers arriving for Rosh Hashanah services, in what the congregation described as an escalation in a series of attacks on Reform communities in Israel. 

The incident unfolded Sunday morning at Kol HaNeshama in Jerusalem’s Baka neighborhood, on the second day of Rosh Hashanah. The congregation said its security cameras recorded the youths, including their faces. It subsequently filed a police complaint and provided the footage. No injuries were reported. 

Debi Shoua-Haim, one of the congregation’s rabbis, told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that the group had engaged with several members of the community before the egg-throwing began. 

“Some of their questions and comments were homophobic and bordered on harassment,” she said. “They were met with openness by everyone they spoke with, and it is unfortunate that this was their response.” 

“We see this as an escalation,” Shoua-Haim added. 

Congregation increases security

The congregation is increasing security for Shabbat Shuvah, the Sabbath that falls between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, as well as for services on the fast day itself, she said. 

“We would have preferred to keep our doors open to anyone who wanted to come in,” Shoua-Haim said.

The latest incident came a month after vandals broke into Kol HaNeshama overnight, smashing a window, entering the prayer hall, damaging artwork and tearing down Pride flags displayed by the congregation. 

Days later, attackers targeted a second Reform congregation, Darchei Noam in Ramat Hasharon, throwing a heavy paving stone through one of its windows. Rabbi Eli Levin told JTA at the time that he viewed the attacks on Reform communities in Israel as part of a pattern of unchecked hostility toward the movement. 

“The attacks on Reform Jews are carried out by hotheaded, ignorant Jews, and unfortunately there is no one in the political and haredi leadership who will stand up and condemn the act,” Levin said. 

The attacks come amid an ongoing fight over the status of non-Orthodox Judaism in Israel. Earlier this year, lawmakers advanced legislation that would effectively bar egalitarian prayer at the Western Wall. Last year, the governing coalition also considered a bill to narrow eligibility for Israeli citizenship under the Law of Return by eliminating the so-called grandparent clause, a move vehemently opposed by Reform and Conservative leaders. 

Kol HaNeshama has faced other attacks in the past, some of them targeting its support for LGBTQ inclusion. In 2018, a large rock was hurled into its courtyard while more than 200 people were taking part in Simchat Torah celebrations. No one was injured. In June 2023, the synagogue reported two break-ins within several weeks in which Pride flags were torn down, with intruders entering the sanctuary during one of them. 

Shoua-Haim said the congregation had not received any update from police on either of the two recent incidents. 

Israel Police did not immediately respond to a JTA request for comment on the status of either investigation. 

Israel Movement for Reform and Progressive Judaism criticizes lack of arrests 

The Israel Movement for Reform and Progressive Judaism said the lack of arrests in the recent cases was emboldening further violence.

“This is not a prank. This is violence against Jews for the way they choose to practice Judaism,” the movement said in a Facebook post. “And when there is no enforcement, violence grows.”

Kol HaNeshama said it drew encouragement from support it had received from neighboring synagogues across the Jewish denominational spectrum. A group of south Jerusalem congregations, including Orthodox ones, signed a letter of solidarity with the synagogue. Members of different streams also joined the synagogue for a Kabbalat Shabbat service.  

Despite the repeated attacks, Shoua-Haim said the congregation would not change its approach to Jewish communal life.

“We will continue on our path of openness and acceptance of every person,” she said. “We will continue to promote our values and sustain our community.”

This post was originally published on here. 

The problem was not Robert Kraft’s decision. The problem is how we explain it.

We removed the messenger from the stage without confronting the lie he was spreading. We focused on Macklemore–his rhetoric, his history, the hurt his words cause–when the far greater threat is the message itself. And in doing so, we inadvertently helped create precisely the narrative Macklemore and his defenders wanted.

Now the story practically writes itself: Macklemore dared to “speak truth to power.” He said what others supposedly do not want Americans to hear, and for his courage, a Jewish billionaire and other venue owners took away his microphone. Macklemore becomes the martyr. His cancellation becomes evidence of his righteousness. And Jews assume precisely the role his rhetoric already assigns us: morally compromised and willing to use our influence to suppress anyone brave enough to expose an uncomfortable truth.

We should stop defending ourselves against the accusation and start challenging the accusation itself.

Macklemore did not belong on that stage because he was using it to spread hateful lies about the Jewish state. He was telling an audience that the world’s only Jewish state is committing “genocide” and practicing “apartheid,” presenting those accusations not as arguments to defend, but as settled truths.

That is not the same as supporting Palestinians or criticizing Israel. Macklemore remains free to say what he believes. But freedom of speech does not entitle anyone to someone else’s microphone, particularly an entertainment stage before thousands who bought tickets for a concert rather than to hear a political polemic.

There is also a bitter irony in the outrage over Macklemore being “canceled.” Where was this defense of artistic freedom when American Jewish musician Matisyahu had concerts canceled after activists targeted venues over his support for Israel, creating security and staffing concerns? Macklemore did not lose his place because of his identity. He lost that stage because of what he chose to do with it.

The accusations coming from more than Macklemore

And this is much bigger than Macklemore. He did not invent these accusations. He is simply their latest celebrity messenger.

“Genocide.” “Apartheid.” “Ethnic cleansing.” “War criminal.” We hear these charges on college campuses, across social media, in newsrooms, entertainment, politics, and our institutions. Repeated often enough, they enter our discourse not as extraordinary accusations requiring proof, but as established facts requiring allegiance.

That is where the Jewish community has missed something fundamental. We have become very good at identifying antisemitism and condemning those who traffic in it. We have been far less willing to confront the lies that make the antisemitism possible.

Dara Horn has articulated something essential about antisemitism: it does not operate simply as hatred or intolerance toward Jews. It operates through a recurring lie–that Jews are responsible for destroying whatever a society holds most dear.

That distinction changes the prescription. If we treat antisemitism primarily as intolerance, we answer it with tolerance: more education, dialogue, and opportunities to understand Jews. Those things have value. But you cannot cure a lie by teaching people to become more tolerant of the people being lied about. You have to challenge the lie.

And we must confront the genocide lie more boldly. Israel is not committing genocide. The accusation is false and outrageous.

Genocide is not a synonym for a terrible war, a high civilian death toll, or even violations of the laws of war. It is a specific crime requiring intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group as such. Intent is not incidental to the definition. It is essential.

Israel’s conduct matters too. John Spencer, chair of urban warfare studies at West Point’s Modern War Institute, has argued after studying the Gaza campaign that Israel has implemented more measures to prevent civilian harm than any military he has studied. That does not mean every Israeli decision was correct or every strike justified. But warnings, evacuations, and extensive civilian-harm precautions are evidence that must be confronted before accusing a country of intending to destroy a people.

The genocide accusation is a modern blood libel.

The original blood libel accused Jews of deliberately murdering Christian children. Its power came from transforming hatred into righteousness. Those who believed it did not imagine themselves persecuting innocent Jews. They imagined themselves protecting innocent children from evil.

The moral vocabulary changes. The mechanism remains hauntingly familiar. Today, someone can accuse the Jewish state of deliberately destroying a people and still sincerely insist–as Macklemore has–that he has nothing against Jews. He may genuinely believe he is standing against evil. That is precisely what makes the libel so dangerous.

Concern for Palestinian human rights, advocacy for Palestinians and criticism of Israel are not antisemitic. Palestinian suffering is real. Innocent civilians have died, and where individuals commit crimes, they should be held accountable.

But none of that establishes genocide. And compassion does not demand self-flagellation or self-erasure.

Jews should not have to accept the lie that Israel is committing genocide to prove that we care about Palestinian lives. We should not have to sever our connection to Israel to establish our moral credibility or repeat a blood libel against the Jewish state to demonstrate our decency.

Yet that is increasingly the moral test imposed upon us.

Accept that the world’s only Jewish state is committing one of humanity’s gravest crimes, and you can remain among the righteous. Challenge that premise, defend Israel against the charge, or refuse to distance yourself from the Jewish state, and suddenly your disagreement becomes complicity–and your connection to Israel becomes evidence against you.

That is not incidental to the antisemitism. It is how the antisemitism works.

Some argue that Netanyahu’s government or particular Israeli policies have made defending Israel more difficult. But difficulty does not turn an accusation into a fact. We do not have to support Netanyahu or defend every Israeli action. And distancing ourselves from Israel will not make American Jews safer; it only reinforces the dangerous fiction that Jewish safety depends on Jewish behavior.

We can defend Palestinian humanity without surrendering our own. We should not disavow Israel to demonstrate our decency or accept collective guilt for a crime Israel did not commit.

The answer to a blood libel is not to prove that Jews are good people. It is to expose the blood libel as a lie.

Robert Kraft is a hero for standing up. Now it is our job to stand with him–and fight the lies.

This post was originally published on here.