All News (Page 47)

The Jerusalem Magistrate’s Court acquitted Yona Simcha Schreiber on Wednesday over his attack on a Christian nun near King David’s Tomb on grounds of mental illness, ordered him to be hospitalized for up to six years.

Judge Ophir Tischler found that the evidence established that Schreiber did commit the acts described in the indictment, but he accepted the district psychiatrist’s conclusion that Schreiber was psychotic at the time and could neither understand the nature of his actions nor stop himself from carrying them out.

The ruling means that Shreiber cannot be held criminally responsible for the attack because of his mental condition at the time.

He had been charged with assault causing actual bodily harm motivated by hostility toward a religious group, as well as common assault. On April 28, he pushed a nun to the ground, then returned and kicked her, and finally assaulted a passerby who tried to intervene.

Acquitted by reason of insanity

The district psychiatrist diagnosed Schreiber with schizophrenia, finding that he had been psychotic for many years and lacked insight into his illness.

There was no conclusive evidence that specific psychotic thoughts directly caused the attack, the psychiatrist said. He nevertheless concluded that Schreiber’s illness directly influenced his actions and that, at the time, Schreiber could not understand what he was doing or refrain from doing it.

The psychiatrist recommended inpatient treatment, a position the prosecution ultimately accepted after requesting additional clarifications.

Under the court order, Schreiber’s hospitalization, dated from August 24, may continue for a maximum of six years, corresponding to the maximum penalty attached to the most serious offense in the case.

That period is a ceiling rather than a fixed sentence. A psychiatric committee may order his earlier release if it concludes that his medical condition permits. The committee has been instructed to notify both the prosecution and the defense of any such decision.

The court reached its final decision after several hearings over the psychiatric findings and the rights of the woman who was attacked.

At an August 16 hearing, the prosecution raised questions about the psychiatric opinion, prompting the court to ask the district psychiatrist for clarification. In a response filed the following day, the psychiatrist said he was convinced that Schreiber suffered from schizophrenia, had experienced psychosis for years, and was unable to understand or control his actions during the attack.

The prosecution initially agreed that the case should end with an acquittal and a hospitalization order. It then sought a short delay after an attorney representing the nun arrived at an August 24 hearing and said she had not been properly informed of the psychiatric findings.

Harassment and attacks against Christians in Jerusalem

The nun’s attorney, Zaki Sahlia, questioned the assessment and argued that the fact that Schreiber targeted the nun rather than other people nearby raised doubts about whether the attack resulted from his illness. He also placed the case in the context of recurring harassment and attacks against Christian clergy in Jerusalem.

Tischler rejected the argument that the law required a further delay before the court could act on the psychiatric opinion. The law provides victims with an opportunity to state their position before a plea bargain or another negotiated arrangement closes a case, he wrote, but this was not such an agreement.

The opinion came from the state’s own district psychiatrist and left the court required to address Schreiber’s continued detention, the judge added. He ordered that Schreiber be held in hospital conditions while the prosecution completed its consultations.

At Wednesday’s final hearing, the prosecution said it had fulfilled its obligations toward the nun, heard her position, and remained in favor of accepting the psychiatric opinion. The prosecution and defense then jointly asked the court to acquit Schreiber.

The nun’s attorney said she remained uncomfortable with the psychiatric findings but respected the court’s decision.

Schreiber’s public defender, Idan Gamlieli, said the district psychiatrist had determined that the “regrettable incident” resulted from Schreiber’s illness and that he required inpatient psychiatric treatment.

“We hope the medical treatment will help him return to optimal functioning,” Gamlieli said. “It is important to note that we understand the complainant’s difficult feelings and wish her recovery from the consequences of this regrettable incident.”

Nun’s attack caught on video

The attack occurred at approximately 5:42 p.m. near King David’s Tomb in Jerusalem.

Schreiber, a resident of the West Bank settlement of Peduel, saw the nun wearing clothing that identified her as Christian, ran toward her, and pushed her forcefully to the ground.

She struck her head and became dizzy. Schreiber initially walked away but returned several seconds later and kicked her while she was still on the ground. When a passerby intervened, Schreiber attacked him with punches and kicks.

The nun suffered bruising to her face and leg. The assault, which was captured on video, prompted widespread condemnation from Christian representatives, academics, and Israeli officials.

Sahlia told The Jerusalem Post that an appeal was not likely, but that he was “still studying the decision” and that there were other avenues to pursue.

This post was originally published on here. 

US President Donald Trump said on Wednesday he doesn’t think Iran’s Supreme Leader is dead.

“I don’t think he’s dead. He was very seriously wounded. The left side of his body, the arm, the leg, the whole thing. He was very seriously wounded. But I don’t think he’s dead,” Trump said on the Glenn Beck program.

The Jerusalem Post has reported several times that Mojtaba Khamenei was not killed in Operation Roaring Lion, but was likely seriously injured. 

What happened to Mojtaba Khamenei?

Trump has also said that he believes that Khamenei is “more rational” than his father and predecessor, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

“He’s pretty badly injured. So there’s a certain bravery there,” Trump said in June.

Notably, Khamenei has not been seen in public since he became Iran’s supreme leader. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Hadash-Ta’al MK Ofer Cassif accused IDF troops on Wednesday of physically and verbally assaulting him while attempting to reach Palestinian families in the West Bank village of Kusra, whose homes have been surrounded amid an ongoing confrontation involving extremist settlers and Israeli security forces.

“Yesterday, I tried again to reach the besieged families in the Palestinian village of Kusra,” Cassif said. “During my attempt to enter the village, I was verbally and physically attacked by the occupation forces.”

He shared footage showing him approaching the soldiers with his hands behind his back, in view of the camera, as he tried to walk past while the soldiers blocked him.

“Before the checkpoint, with my hands behind my back, one of the soldiers threw himself to the ground and claimed that I had attacked him. Later, they violently pushed me back to my car. I filed a complaint over this incident,” he said, noting that he ultimately succeeded in reaching the homes and meeting the families.

“If this is how the occupation forces treat a serving member of Knesset, one can only imagine what Palestinians experience every day and the extent of the lies spread to justify this reality,” Cassif said.

In his statement, Cassif called for international intervention and reiterated his opposition to Israel’s presence in the West Bank.

“The international community must intervene immediately and act to end the siege,” he said. “But that is not enough. The occupation as a whole must end, so that justice can prevail and the two peoples of this land can live in peace, security, and prosperity!”

IDF confirms Cassif arrived at Kusra, says soldiers’ conduct ‘under review’

The IDF confirmed to The Jerusalem Post that Cassif and several civilians did arrive at Kusra, and that the argument was regarding the entry of accompanying individuals who were not members of Knesset into the village, which has been designated as a closed military zone. 

According to the IDF, Cassif arrived without prior coordination, and entry was permitted in accordance with the existing exceptions for MKs

Regarding the fight seen in the video, the IDF told the Post that “The conduct of the soldiers during the incident is being examined.”

אתמול ניסיתי שוב להגיע למשפחות הנצורות בכפר הפלסטיני קוסרה.

במהלך ניסיוני להיכנס לכפר הותקפתי מילולית ופיזית על ידי כוחות הכיבוש. לפני המחסום, כשידיי מאחורי גבי, אחד החיילים הפיל עצמו ארצה וטען שתקפתי אותו. בהמשך דחפו אותי באלימות עד רכבי. על האירוע הזה הגשתי תלונה.

אם כך… pic.twitter.com/HEdVMTOqKq

— Ofer Cassif עופר כסיף عوفر كسيف (@ofercass) August 26, 2026

Cassif has gone to Kusra before since extremist clashes with Palestinians began

Cassif had previously visited Kusra on August 14, when he said IDF troops initially prevented him from entering the village, before he was eventually able to cross the checkpoint and bring water, food, medicine, and equipment to reconnect water pipes that he said had been damaged by settlers.

The confrontation in Kusra followed days of unrest surrounding Palestinian homes on the outskirts of the village. On August 12, settler extremists clashed with IDF troops after the evacuation of an outpost near Kusra, while footage showed roads being blocked and fences dismantled.

Palestinian residents subsequently said extremist settlers remained near their homes despite military efforts to remove them, leaving families feeling under threat. The IDF later announced that it would investigate its handling of the events in Kusra, including the time taken to remove the outpost and the treatment of Palestinian families in the area.

This post was originally published on here. 

A 24-year-old Ramle man was indicted on Wednesday for allegedly planning and carrying out the murder of his own lawyer over the handling of a NIS 18,500 insurance claim, shooting him six times at close range inside his Rishon Lezion office.

Ahmad al-Rajoub was charged in the Central District Court in Lod with intentional murder under aggravated circumstances, carrying a weapon and ammunition, destroying evidence and obstructing justice. The case is before Judge Maor Even Han, and the next hearing is scheduled for September 16. 

The indictment alleges that Al-Rajoub decided to kill attorney Arbel Feldman after becoming angry over what he believed was the slow handling of a claim arising from damage to a vehicle involved in a traffic accident.

Feldman had represented Al-Rajoub in proceedings against Harel Insurance. The NIS 18,500 claim was filed in the Rishon Lezion Magistrate’s Court in June 2024, while a related dispute over insurance coverage was being heard separately in Rehovot.

Al-Rajoub was reportedly frustrated by length of case

The proceedings were repeatedly delayed while the parties awaited the outcome of the related case, according to the indictment. Al-Rajoub allegedly complained that Feldman had failed to move the claim forward quickly enough and said that he was in serious financial difficulty.

During a recorded telephone conversation on July 20, prosecutors allege, Al-Rajoub spoke to Feldman in a threatening tone, complained that the case had continued for nearly three years and accused the lawyer of having “screwed him.”

The two met at Feldman’s office the following day. On July 28, the civil proceedings ended in a settlement providing that the insurance payment would be made within 30 days.

Al-Rajoub allegedly shot his lawyer six times

Exactly one week later, prosecutors allege, Al-Rajoub arrived at Feldman’s office carrying a loaded semiautomatic handgun concealed beneath his clothing. 

Al-Rajoub allegedly entered the office shortly before 1 p.m., approached Feldman, drew the gun and fired six times at close range with the intention of killing him. The bullets struck Feldman’s upper body, head and hand.

Feldman collapsed onto the office floor and died there from blood loss, according to the indictment. Prosecutors said just 21 seconds passed between Al-Rajoub’s entrance into the office and his departure.

He then allegedly ran down the building’s stairs, fled to his vehicle and drove toward Ashdod. At an unknown location along the way, prosecutors claim, he disposed of or concealed both the gun and his mobile phone to prevent investigators from using them as evidence.

Turning himself in to the police

About two hours later, Al-Rajoub presented himself at an Ashdod police station and initially told officers that he had killed Feldman for a financial motive, according to the detention request. The same filing says he later exercised his right to remain silent during three formal interrogations.

Prosecutors said their evidence includes security footage showing Al-Rajoub arriving at the building, entering Feldman’s office and running away with an object resembling a firearm. Approximately 100 gunshot-residue particles were found on his hands and hair, according to a forensic opinion cited by the prosecution.

The evidence also includes the recorded July 20 conversation, telephone and message records, documents from the civil proceedings and a firearms examination indicating that one weapon was used in the shooting, prosecutors said. 

The killing was first reported after police received an emergency call from Feldman’s office on Moshe Levy Street. “Urgent, urgent, they shot my office partner,” the caller told police. Officers found Feldman with multiple gunshot wounds, and he was pronounced dead at the scene.

Prosecutors say Al-Rajoub poses threat and risk of obstruction to justice 

Feldman, a Rishon Lezion resident and father of three, had practiced law for more than 20 years and specialized in tort and traffic-accident claims. Friends and colleagues remembered him as quiet, courteous and devoted to his family. Lawyers across Israel observed two minutes of silence after his killing.

Prosecutors have asked the court to keep Al-Rajoub detained until the conclusion of the proceedings, arguing that the circumstances of the alleged attack demonstrate extreme danger and that his purported efforts to conceal the gun and telephone create a risk of obstruction.

“An attack on a lawyer acting within the law as his client’s representative crosses a red line,” prosecutors wrote, adding that lawyers must be able to perform their work without fear that they will be killed.

This post was originally published on here. 

Turkey’s ruling AK Party welcomes the dissolution of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces as an important step towards strengthening Syrian unity, a spokesman for President Tayyip Erdogan’s party said on Wednesday.

NATO member Turkey has emerged as one of the main allies of neighboring Syria’s President Ahmed al-Sharaa after he toppled Bashar al-Assad’s decades-long rule.

Ankara has vowed to help Damascus rebuild the country and restructure its state institutions and armed forces, and it has provided Damascus with political and diplomatic support.

“An important threshold was passed in terms of strengthening Syria’s internal unity with the dissolution of the SDF,” AK Party spokesman Omer Celik wrote on X, adding Ankara supported Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.

The announcement by SDF commander Mazloum Abdi of the group’s dissolution and integration into Syria’s armed forces under an agreement with Damascus comes amid peace efforts in Turkey with the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) militant group, which Ankara views as linked to the SDF.

In February 2025, jailed PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan called on his group to disarm and disband, and it announced in May 2025 that ​it would do so. A group of militants symbolically burned their weapons at a ceremony in northern Iraq two months later.

As part of the process, Ankara has repeatedly said the SDF must also dissolve and disband, voicing support for the integration process.

Turkish troops will only withdraw once threats are eliminated

Turkey, which backed rebels looking to oust Assad, had mounted several cross-border military operations against the SDF in northern Syria and still has thousands of troops stationed there. It says they will only be withdrawn once the security threats it faces are eliminated.

The government describes the peace process with the PKK as part of its goal of creating a “terror-free Turkey” and “terror-free region.” While Turkey’s parliament passed a law this month establishing a legal framework for the disbanding of the PKK, Kurdish politicians have said lasting peace will require broader democratic and legal reforms.

The PKK, designated a terrorist organization by ​Turkey, the United States and the European Union, launched its insurgency in 1984. The conflict has ​killed more than 40,000 people, imposed a heavy economic burden on mainly Kurdish southeast Turkey and fueled ‌decades ⁠of political and social division.

This post was originally published on here. 

You can call attacks by extremist Israeli settlers on Palestinian villages in the West Bank outrageous. You can call them disgusting. You can call them terrorism.

But there’s one thing you can’t call them – a surprise.

For much of the current Israeli government’s term, extremist settlers have been setting up “farms” close to Palestinian villages. The farms start out illegally, but the government later approves them. All the while, the settlers spend less time cultivating crops than burning fields and houses and harassing – even killing – Palestinians. They get away with it. Almost no one is arrested. It’s as if all this were Israeli government policy – which, despite denials, it is.

For years, this behavior has been attributed to the “hilltop youth,” a small, violent group among the settlers, identifiable by their oversized head coverings and the long fringes hanging from their clothes – the marks of politically extreme Orthodox Jews.

It’s no small group anymore. The sheer number of farms – at least 100 and perhaps as many as 240 – and the settler attacks designed to “encourage” Palestinians to leave their land provide clear evidence that this is larger than a hilltop youth problem.

We should have seen this coming.

Most are peaceful, model citizens

Israel took control of the West Bank in 1967. The first settlement was established in a Hebron hotel in 1968. From there sprouted a settlement movement that spread across the length and breadth of the territory. Today, more than half a million Israeli settlers live there.

Most are peaceful, model citizens. The largest settlements are near the old ceasefire line between the West Bank and Israel, and they function as suburbs of Israeli cities, offering cheaper housing at a time when urban housing costs are through the roof. The problematic settlements are in the interior. There, families have lived in relative isolation for 50 years.

If you use the definition of a generation as roughly 17 years, three generations of Israeli settlers have grown up next to Palestinians in an atmosphere of conflict, hatred, aggression, and fear on both sides.

A Tel Aviv University sociology professor conducted a study showing that, as the years passed, residents of isolated settlements grew increasingly extreme in their religious outlook – which included the firm belief that the West Bank, or Judea and Samaria, is exclusively Jewish property. From there, it’s not a great leap to attacks by fanatics against Palestinians.

Here’s the thing: That study was conducted about 25 years ago. Since then, the process has continued and intensified.

A small number went overboard and turned to violence

I observed it while traveling around the West Bank and Gaza as a radio reporter back then. Settlements that began as farming communities for mainstream Orthodox Jews evolved over the years into centers for yeshivas, where many of the men wore black suits and hats and spent their days studying – signs of religious ultra-Orthodoxy. A small number went overboard and turned to violence.

Before we get into what to do about this, it’s important to note that the settlers might have been long gone by now if the Palestinians had accepted one of the US-backed peace deals Israel offered. In 2000 and 2008, the Palestinians could have had an independent state in nearly all of the West Bank and Gaza, with parts of Jerusalem as its capital. They turned down the offers, and now they are irrelevant.

They are irrelevant because in 2005, Israel evacuated the Gaza Strip, removing its soldiers and all 21 settlements. Instead of pursuing a peaceful, fruitful partnership with Israel, Gazans chose rule by Hamas terrorists, who fired thousands of rockets at Israel over the years and set off several wars.

Then, in what they call their crowning achievement, Hamas terrorists invaded southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, murdering 1,200 people, raping women, butchering children, and dragging 251 hostages, dead and alive, back into Gaza.

PA indoctrinates children with vitriolic hatred

Meanwhile, in the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority spent decades indoctrinating children with hatred of Israel, using textbooks containing maps that do not even show Israel’s existence while glorifying terrorists who murder Jews.

Nothing here is meant to excuse or justify atrocities by either side. But anyone who truly believes that a peaceful solution to this conflict can now be achieved simply through an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and the creation of a Palestinian state there is either ignorant of recent history or willfully blind to it. With its bloody Oct. 7 invasion, Hamas killed the two-state solution. One can still strive for it, but it is, at best, generations away.

In the meantime, what can be done about the growing number of Israeli settler extremists? There are several options:

Evacuate the extremist settlers and resettle them inside Israel. That is to say, forcibly remove violent settlers who know only the West Bank and its conflicts and plunk them down in, say, Tel Aviv. Even Israelis who favor that solution would say, “Not in my neighborhood.”

Decades ago, I suggested building a new city in the Galilee or the Negev and naming each neighborhood after a settlement that would be evacuated. The idea never gained traction. I’m putting it out there again.

An option: Ban convicted violent offenders from accessing the West Bank

Send in the Israeli army to take control of the entire West Bank, expelling the Palestinians to Jordan, Egypt, or the moon. That’s the extremists’ dream, but besides being political and diplomatic kryptonite, it can’t be done. Israel is already fighting wars on all its borders and far beyond them. Setting off a war to end all wars over the West Bank could bring about the end of Israel.

That leaves an unsatisfying but practical option: Evacuate the bogus “farms,” move the extremist settlers into established, defensible locations, and hunker down for a long struggle. Under such an arrangement, any person – Israeli or Palestinian – convicted of violence against a neighbor would be banned from the West Bank for life.

It’s not ideal, but it’s the best we can do for now.

Mark Lavie has been covering the Middle East for major news outlets since 1972. His second book, Why Are We Still Afraid?, which follows his five-decade career and comes to a surprising conclusion, is available on Amazon.

This post was originally published on here. 

Major album releases by some of the world’s biggest music stars are linked to an increase in fatal traffic crashes in the United States, according to a Harvard University study examining road deaths between 2017 and 2022.

Researchers analyzed 233,809 traffic fatalities during the six-year period and found that the rate of fatal crashes increased by 15.1% on days when major albums were released on streaming platforms. That translated into an additional 18 deaths on each such day.

“The number of traffic deaths was significantly higher on major music album release days than during the 10 days before and after,” the study found.

The researchers examined 10 prominent albums released in the United States between 2017 and 2022, including Taylor Swift’s Midnights, Harry Styles’s Harry’s House, and Drake’s Certified Lover Boy.

The musicians themselves are not to blame, of course. Rather, the findings provide further evidence of the effect that mobile phone use and listening to music can have in distracting drivers from the road.

Dr. Vishal Patel, one of the study’s authors, said the release of a new album could distract drivers because accessing music involves a search process rather than simply pressing a single button.

“You open your phone, open the app, find the song, read a song list, tap the right song. That’s several seconds of looking at the screen.”

Cars with Apple CarPlay had increase in crashes

Another surprising finding was that the increase in crashes was recorded, among other places, in cars equipped with Apple CarPlay connectivity. The system entered the market as early as 2016, ahead of Android Auto, and connects a mobile phone to a vehicle’s audio system. Such applications are generally considered tools that reduce risk by limiting the need to use a phone screen directly.

According to Patel, unfamiliar music may itself demand more attention from drivers. New songs are also often played at higher volume, he said, which can further weaken a driver’s connection to what is happening on the road.

The researchers’ recommendation is straightforward: If there is a passenger in the vehicle, let that person handle the music.

The advice, however, does not solve the problem for people driving alone, who may still be tempted to search for, select, or switch tracks while behind the wheel.

This post was originally published on here. 

New episodes every Sunday-Thursday. 

For more news, analysis, and the latest updates, head to jpost.com.

Headlines edited by James Genn.

Hosted and produced by Shifra Jacobs.

This post was originally published on here. 

Hapoel Beersheba came up short against Sabah FK late Tuesday night in agonizing fashion as it fell 5-2 (6-4 on aggregate) and was knocked out of UEFA Champions League contention in a dramatic clash in Azerbaijan.

The Southern Reds will drop down and play in the Europa League league stage as their Champions League dreams were dashed seconds before full-time.

With Ran Kozuk’s team holding on to a slim 4-3 aggregate lead late in the game, Tellur Mutallimov scored just ahead of the final whistle to send the clash into overtime, where Orphe Mbina’s goal and Joy-Lance Mickels’s insurance marker sent Sabah to the promised land and saw Beersheba’s dream come to a crashing conclusion.

Beersheba coach Kozuk spoke about the loss.

“I have to thank God for putting us in the position that we have been. I know an Israeli coach who lost the Champions League final [Avram Grant], and I also know that Hapoel Beersheba will come back even stronger from this. We all wanted to play in the Champions League, but we also have to understand that Sabah was a very good team and now we will play in a very good competition, the Europa League, which is an honor in itself.”

‘We will stay together going forward’

Speaking about the game itself, Kozuk continued: “I don’t know what to say about [Djibril] Diop’s second yellow card; I’ll keep my mouth shut about that. But so many players really did a great job, and we will stay together going forward. We couldn’t create what we needed to in this game, but we changed formations in order to try and help us out. Ultimately, we didn’t deserve to advance, and Sabah did.”

Hapoel Beersheba captain Miguel Vitor spoke about the loss.

“I feel very bad; we had about 30 seconds to finish the game and qualify. I have no words for how I feel; these moments are very tough. These are moments that are hard to repeat, and there are a lot of things in my head that this would be the last chance to qualify. I feel bad for the entire organization. It’s tough for everybody. I don’t know what else to say.”

Beersheba came into Tuesday’s match nursing a 2-1 advantage from the first leg, and looked to take a quick lead in order to close in on a Champions League league stage spot. It almost did so in the second minute of the match when Igor Zlatanovic was left all alone in front of the goal, but his marker was ruled to be just offside. However, by the 10th minute Zlatanovic put home a Niv Yehoshua’s rebound to grab a 1-0 lead.

Sabah looked to draw even, but Beersheba ’keeper Ofir Marciano was up to the task with multiple saves. However, the Reds’ goalscorer Zlatanovic had to be substituted off due to an injury, and Muhammed Abu Romi entered the fray soon thereafter. As the hosts pushed for the equalizer in earnest, they finally found it via Christian Nwachukwu as the two sides headed into the break knotted up at 1-1 (3-2 on aggregate in favor of Beersheba).

Beersheba captain Vitor subbed out due to chest injury

Beersheba captain Vitor was subbed off at half time due to an injury to his chest, while Yehoshua tried to give Ran Kozuk’s squad breathing room as the second half began, with his screamer just clearing the bar.

At the other end, Mickels hit the woodwork, and Mwachukwu’s chance missed the target while Marciano made a miraculous kick save on Mickels as well.

But just as Sabah ’keeper Stas Pokalitov cleared the ball, he did so right to Guy Mizrachi, who calmly sent it right back and into the goal for a 2-1 Beersheba lead in the 61st minute. However, 10 minutes later, Saban caught the Southern Reds sleeping when Umarali Rakhmonaliev slotted the ball past Marciano to draw even at 2-2 in the match and pull to within 4-3 on aggregate.

As Beersheba desperately tried to hold on as the minutes ticked off the clock, they conceded again with just seconds left in regulation as Mutallimov slammed home a corner kick to help Sabah grab a 3-2 lead and 4-4 on aggregate to send the game into overtime.

Xander Severina had a point-blank chance that was just blocked by Marciano as the extra session began, while Mbina also had an incredible chance that was somehow saved.

But after Djibril Diop was issued a second yellow card for what seemed to be a phantom foul, which reduced Beersheba to 10 men, Mbina made the Israeli side pay with a stunning strike to give Sabah a 4-2 lead and 5-4 on aggregate.

Beersheba tried to get back into the game, but Mickels added an insurance marker while Peretz was sent off with a second yellow as Sabah kept it under control to close out the victory and drop the Israeli side to the Europa League.

See more Israeli sports coverage at www.sportsrabbi.com/en

This post was originally published on here. 

The IDF struck and destroyed a structure in the Jabalya area of the Gaza Strip that was used as an ambush position for Hamas terrorists and as a storage facility for various types of weapons on Tuesday, the military said on Wednesday.

The position was located approximately 50 meters from the Yellow Line, 70 meters from Kamal Adwan Hospital, and 170 meters from a school, the IDF said, calling it an example of Hamas’s systematic use of civilian and humanitarian infrastructure, contrary to both the ceasefire agreement and international law.

The structure was destroyed, and multiple terrorists were killed after they planned to attack IDF troops and began to rebuild Hamas‘s military capability from the structure.

Steps were taken to mitigate the risk to civilians, including the use of precise munitions and aerial surveillance, the IDF said.

IDF, Shin Bet, conducted strikes to kill Hamas commander

This comes days after the IDF and Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) killed the terrorist Ismail Abu Pul, commander of a weapons production site at Hamas’s production headquarters, who took part in producing charges and anti-tank missiles for the terror organization in a strike on the Al-Maghazi area in Gaza.

In addition, the same production site, which was established near an aid distribution point for an international organization, was attacked, the military said, calling it an example of Hamas’s systematic use of civilian infrastructure for the purpose of promoting and executing terrorist plots against IDF forces operating in the Yellow Line area and Israeli citizens. 

This post was originally published on here. 

US Senate Democrats on Wednesday urged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to rein in a “surge” of violence by West Bank settlers and mass arrests of Palestinians by Israeli security forces in the occupied territory.

In the letter to Netanyahu, seen by Reuters and signed by 42 of the Senate’s 47-member Democratic caucus, the lawmakers noted increasing levels of “fatal violence by settlers.”

They also appealed to Israel’s leader to step up investigations into the deaths of nine American citizens they said have been killed by settlers or security forces in the West Bank since 2022.

The “significant surge” of violence in recent weeks has resulted in “a large-scale response by Israeli security forces, mass arrests of Palestinians, and reported attacks by settlers on mosques,” the letter stated.

The letter marks the latest sign of growing friction between Democrats in Congress and the Israeli government over its handling of the West Bank, with many in the party also calling for curbs on US military aid to Israel over its conduct of the war in Gaza.

Senators led by Schumer urge Netanyahu to issue clear instructions to police, IDF

It was drafted by Senator Adam Schiff of California, Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York – long one of Israel’s most prominent supporters in Congress – and Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey.

Last week, an Israeli man guarding a group of Jewish settlers walked onto Palestinian land and opened fire toward civilians, killing a 17-year-old and a 70-year-old man, officials said.

The senators urged Netanyahu to issue clear instructions to Israeli police and military to prevent and intervene in violent West Bank confrontations “regardless of the perpetrators.”

Rights groups have repeatedly documented how Israeli forces are slow to respond to settler violence in Palestinian communities – or stand by as attacks are carried out.

Israeli officials have said authorities, including the president and prime minister, have repeatedly condemned violence against Palestinians.

The letter also called on the Israeli government to stop approving additional settlements and construction of “illegal outposts in the West Bank” and to take steps to remove existing outposts.

Democrats grow increasingly critical of Israel

Democrats in Congress and many of the party’s candidates running in this year’s midterm elections have become increasingly critical of Netanyahu and his government in the wake of Israel’s war in Gaza.

Amid a flagging US-brokered peace deal in Gaza and escalating settler violence in the West Bank, many Democrats have called for either significantly curtailing – or completely shutting off – billions of dollars in annual US military aid to Israel. 

President Donald Trump has said little about the situation in the West Bank. His ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, has denounced militant settlers as “Israeli terrorists” and told Reuters this month that those responsible for besieging the Palestinian village of Kusra could face US sanctions.

This post was originally published on here. 

Music crosses borders between cultures, communities, and strangers. Our rave culture was founded on the belief that everyone belonged; that all were welcome, safe, and celebrated. Until, on a Saturday morning, a specific border was crossed that would bring the pulse of music and its uniting values to a hard stop.

If DEI ever mattered as much as I believed it did in the music industry and rave culture, 7 October 2023 would become a rude awakening.

For nearly twenty years, I worked in an industry that came of age alongside some of the most impactful social and political shifts of my generation. I was part of movements like #MeToo and BLM as they took the stage, grabbed the mic, and demanded that long-standing wrongs be confronted.

We were building, or so I believed at the time, a new social contract: protect one another, respect one another, and never tolerate in our scene what we would not accept for ourselves.

I drank the Kool-Aid. I believed in diversity. I believed in safe spaces. And, perhaps most importantly, I believed in zero tolerance for sexual violence on the dance floor.

Sexual violence does not belong on the dance floor, or anywhere else

Around the time of Eric Morillo’s death, an American DJ who had taken a fatal overdose three days before he was due in court for rape charges, I had authored a code of conduct as a pro bono researcher for an industry-leading trade body: a document its members would adopt, addressing gender discrimination and sexual violence in the music industry and rave scene.

The code gained significant attention and press coverage, including from the BBC, due to its relevant timing. And rightly so. Sexual violence does not belong on the dance floor, or anywhere else.

At the time, I felt proud to be part of that change. I believed I was contributing to something bigger: an industry willing to confront its own failings and create a safer and more equitable culture- perhaps even a voice of resistance.

We were tastemakers. We shaped conversations and conventions and moved society in directions that politics sometimes struggled to impact. For better or worse, I believed this music culture was a pioneer of social change.

It was righteous. However, I began to see that the principles we worked so hard to establish were not universal. They extended only to those deemed worthy of them – those who passed the unspoken test of our industry’s court of public opinion.

October 7 should have been the day on which those principles became uncomplicated. A music festival had become a killing field.

Young people who had gone to dance were raped, murdered, kidnapped and hunted while fleeing.

‘Solidarity with the Palestinian struggle’ posted as Oct. 7 unraveled

Yet, before the Nova Festival had even finished counting its dead, the cultural sorting had already begun. On October 8, while the scale of the massacre was still emerging, Kneecap posted its ‘Solidarity with the Palestinian struggle’ across its socials, with a fist emoji.

First, I bore witness to the music industry turning its back on its own DEI values in favor of ideological purity tests, exclusionary of those not approved of, selective boycotts in the name of selective social justice, and perhaps inevitably the trend developed into straight-up discrimination under the rule of law.

Let us sit with the following thought experiment for a moment and ask ourselves where political expression ends, and political conformity as a condition of cultural participation, begins.

After the cruelest and deadliest (sexual-) violence at a rave, that distinction became painfully clear.

American pop singer Kehlani declared ‘Fuck Israel, fuck Zionism’, while her “Next 2 U” video opened with ‘Long Live the Intifada’. At the 2024 Rolling Stone UK Awards, Fontaines DC guitarist Carlos O’Connell collected the Album Award and used his acceptance speech to say ‘Fuck Netanyahu and fuck Zionism’. Rolling Stone UK not only reported what happened on its stage; it subsequently published the hate speech as part of its own awards coverage, as if these were astounding words of heroism and inspiration.

Then came Glastonbury. In 2025, Bob Vylan stood before one of the world’s most famous festival audiences and led the crowd in chants of ‘Death, death to the IDF’. The BBC streamed the performance live on national tv. It later concluded that the broadcasting breached its editorial standards on harm and offense. Vylan later told Louis Theroux in a podcast that BBC employees had congratulated the band backstage, telling him it ‘was fantastic’ and they [the BBC] ‘loved it!’.

When ‘Fuck Zionism’ becomes an awards acceptance speech subsequently amplified by the institution handing out the award, and a death chant is broadcast by a national broadcaster whose employees apparently congratulated him backstage, the question becomes not only what artists are saying, but what cultural institutions have learned to tolerate, amplify and even celebrate.

Foundation of rave culture: Radical inclusion

Call it the rave scene, or dance, or culture; its foundational mythology was essentially: radical inclusion.

House and techno developed through marginalized communities, until house and techno itself was marginalizing communities. The festival conference Sonar in Barcelona, and the LGBTQ festival in Amsterdam, Milkshake, were two of the many events where artists pulled out of the event lineup because the event was somehow connected to a Zionist investor and thus immediately complicit in the only ‘genocide relevant enough’.

By 2024, this movement was effectively policing the ideological purity of its own infrastructure. Apparently, radical inclusion does not apply when artists or company ownership are born in one specific country or belong to one specific marginalized race.

Peace-building musical collabs such as Jonny Greenwood and Dudu Tassa’s Arabic show, Jarak Qaribak (“Your Neighborhood is Your Friend”), were canceled as a result of the BDS Movement. The project involved musicians from Syria, Lebanon, Kuwait, and Iraq – the kind of cross-collabs generally praised by the arts & culture.

While peace-building performances become unacceptable, shouting hate speech and antisemitic libels through a mic when accepting an award on stage becomes celebrated as an act of cool resistance; what is being contributed to these foundational DEI values of the music industry? Because where does political accountability end and collective punishment of a people as a whole begin?

By 2025, over 400 musicians had joined a geo-block boycott to make their music unavailable in Israel, calling their campaign ‘No Music for Genocide’. The name itself invites an uncomfortable 

question. If No Music for Genocide is really a principle rather than a geographical preference, where were the comparable mass geo-blocking campaigns and cultural boycotts as Sudan or Iran descended into mass atrocity?

Challenging their objective, I posted a few very politically correct words on my LinkedIn, the point of which was ‘Boycotting musicians and fans in Israel will not free Palestine’.

Exclusion, hate, and polarization didn’t really seem like the way to go for me as a music executive who believed in dialogue and listening to each other.

I’d lead my own panel for five years at Amsterdam Dance Event on the subject of DEI, so I believed in ‘talking about the hard stuff’. Then followed the wave of hate, antisemitic libels, and threats from industry professionals employed by major labels, publicly traded tech companies, and places of work with codes of conduct specifically prohibiting them from publicly attacking ‘fellow colleagues’.

‘I believed… safety, dignity, inclusion applied to everyone’

The proof remained, indeed, in the pudding.

I believed that the principles we spent years building – safety, dignity, and inclusion – applied to everyone.

Radical inclusion, it seemed, had added an exception: it did not apply to people born in a particular country, or to Jews and Israelis. A counterculture that once challenged the boundaries of society was now policing the ideological boundaries of its own. Glorifying terror under the banner of DEI was dubbed ‘resistance’.

DEI’s own conviction of righteousness and one-sidedness expanded rapidly, well organized, and well funded. By then, the contradiction became impossible to ignore.

And perhaps Damon Albarn provides the simplest counterexample. Albarn has hardly been silent about Palestinian suffering or his criticism of Israel. Yet after Bob Vylan’s Glastonbury performance, he called the episode a ‘spectacular misfire’ and spoke instead about wanting to work with musicians in both Palestine and Israel.

It really should not be revolutionary to suggest that one can advocate for Palestinians without demanding the cultural exclusion of Israelis. Isn’t this exactly what music was supposed to be for?

What started as an industry-wide commitment to safety had developed into ideological gatekeeping: diversity but under political uniformity. Inclusion, except when the artist was born in Israel.

Freedom of expression, unless the expression comes from Boy George or another ‘wrong person’. And #MeToo, except if you were a girl dancing at 6:29 a.m. at the Nova festival.

To quote a house classic: If music is the answer, the answer cannot be less cultural contact. It has to be more. Because when we try to make music morally pure, we destroy precisely the thing that made it morally valuable: its ability to bring together people who would otherwise never meet. 

The writer, Sarah Hildering, is a former music executive at Universal Music Group, author of Code of Conduct, and former DEI lead at the Association for Electronic Music.

This post was originally published on here. 

Music crosses borders between cultures, communities, and strangers. Our rave culture was founded on the belief that everyone belonged; that all were welcome, safe, and celebrated. Until, on a Saturday morning, a specific border was crossed that would bring the pulse of music and its uniting values to a hard stop.

If DEI ever mattered as much as I believed it did in the music industry and rave culture, 7 October 2023 would become a rude awakening.

For nearly twenty years, I worked in an industry that came of age alongside some of the most impactful social and political shifts of my generation. I was part of movements like #MeToo and BLM as they took the stage, grabbed the mic, and demanded that long-standing wrongs be confronted.

We were building, or so I believed at the time, a new social contract: protect one another, respect one another, and never tolerate in our scene what we would not accept for ourselves.

I drank the Kool-Aid. I believed in diversity. I believed in safe spaces. And, perhaps most importantly, I believed in zero tolerance for sexual violence on the dance floor.

Sexual violence does not belong on the dance floor, or anywhere else

Around the time of Eric Morillo’s death, an American DJ who had taken a fatal overdose three days before he was due in court for rape charges, I had authored a code of conduct as a pro bono researcher for an industry-leading trade body: a document its members would adopt, addressing gender discrimination and sexual violence in the music industry and rave scene.

The code gained significant attention and press coverage, including from the BBC, due to its relevant timing. And rightly so. Sexual violence does not belong on the dance floor, or anywhere else.

At the time, I felt proud to be part of that change. I believed I was contributing to something bigger: an industry willing to confront its own failings and create a safer and more equitable culture- perhaps even a voice of resistance.

We were tastemakers. We shaped conversations and conventions and moved society in directions that politics sometimes struggled to impact. For better or worse, I believed this music culture was a pioneer of social change.

It was righteous. However, I began to see that the principles we worked so hard to establish were not universal. They extended only to those deemed worthy of them – those who passed the unspoken test of our industry’s court of public opinion.

October 7 should have been the day on which those principles became uncomplicated. A music festival had become a killing field.

Young people who had gone to dance were raped, murdered, kidnapped and hunted while fleeing.

‘Solidarity with the Palestinian struggle’ posted as Oct. 7 unraveled

Yet, before the Nova Festival had even finished counting its dead, the cultural sorting had already begun. On October 8, while the scale of the massacre was still emerging, Kneecap posted its ‘Solidarity with the Palestinian struggle’ across its socials, with a fist emoji.

First, I bore witness to the music industry turning its back on its own DEI values in favor of ideological purity tests, exclusionary of those not approved of, selective boycotts in the name of selective social justice, and perhaps inevitably the trend developed into straight-up discrimination under the rule of law.

Let us sit with the following thought experiment for a moment and ask ourselves where political expression ends, and political conformity as a condition of cultural participation, begins.

After the cruelest and deadliest (sexual-) violence at a rave, that distinction became painfully clear.

American pop singer Kehlani declared ‘Fuck Israel, fuck Zionism’, while her “Next 2 U” video opened with ‘Long Live the Intifada’. At the 2024 Rolling Stone UK Awards, Fontaines DC guitarist Carlos O’Connell collected the Album Award and used his acceptance speech to say ‘Fuck Netanyahu and fuck Zionism’. Rolling Stone UK not only reported what happened on its stage; it subsequently published the hate speech as part of its own awards coverage, as if these were astounding words of heroism and inspiration.

Then came Glastonbury. In 2025, Bob Vylan stood before one of the world’s most famous festival audiences and led the crowd in chants of ‘Death, death to the IDF’. The BBC streamed the performance live on national tv. It later concluded that the broadcasting breached its editorial standards on harm and offense. Vylan later told Louis Theroux in a podcast that BBC employees had congratulated the band backstage, telling him it ‘was fantastic’ and they [the BBC] ‘loved it!’.

When ‘Fuck Zionism’ becomes an awards acceptance speech subsequently amplified by the institution handing out the award, and a death chant is broadcast by a national broadcaster whose employees apparently congratulated him backstage, the question becomes not only what artists are saying, but what cultural institutions have learned to tolerate, amplify and even celebrate.

Foundation of rave culture: Radical inclusion

Call it the rave scene, or dance, or culture; its foundational mythology was essentially: radical inclusion.

House and techno developed through marginalized communities, until house and techno itself was marginalizing communities. The festival conference Sonar in Barcelona, and the LGBTQ festival in Amsterdam, Milkshake, were two of the many events where artists pulled out of the event lineup because the event was somehow connected to a Zionist investor and thus immediately complicit in the only ‘genocide relevant enough’.

By 2024, this movement was effectively policing the ideological purity of its own infrastructure. Apparently, radical inclusion does not apply when artists or company ownership are born in one specific country or belong to one specific marginalized race.

Peace-building musical collabs such as Jonny Greenwood and Dudu Tassa’s Arabic show, Jarak Qaribak (“Your Neighborhood is Your Friend”), were canceled as a result of the BDS Movement. The project involved musicians from Syria, Lebanon, Kuwait, and Iraq – the kind of cross-collabs generally praised by the arts & culture.

While peace-building performances become unacceptable, shouting hate speech and antisemitic libels through a mic when accepting an award on stage becomes celebrated as an act of cool resistance; what is being contributed to these foundational DEI values of the music industry? Because where does political accountability end and collective punishment of a people as a whole begin?

By 2025, over 400 musicians had joined a geo-block boycott to make their music unavailable in Israel, calling their campaign ‘No Music for Genocide’. The name itself invites an uncomfortable 

question. If No Music for Genocide is really a principle rather than a geographical preference, where were the comparable mass geo-blocking campaigns and cultural boycotts as Sudan or Iran descended into mass atrocity?

Challenging their objective, I posted a few very politically correct words on my LinkedIn, the point of which was ‘Boycotting musicians and fans in Israel will not free Palestine’.

Exclusion, hate, and polarization didn’t really seem like the way to go for me as a music executive who believed in dialogue and listening to each other.

I’d lead my own panel for five years at Amsterdam Dance Event on the subject of DEI, so I believed in ‘talking about the hard stuff’. Then followed the wave of hate, antisemitic libels, and threats from industry professionals employed by major labels, publicly traded tech companies, and places of work with codes of conduct specifically prohibiting them from publicly attacking ‘fellow colleagues’.

‘I believed… safety, dignity, inclusion applied to everyone’

The proof remained, indeed, in the pudding.

I believed that the principles we spent years building – safety, dignity, and inclusion – applied to everyone.

Radical inclusion, it seemed, had added an exception: it did not apply to people born in a particular country, or to Jews and Israelis. A counterculture that once challenged the boundaries of society was now policing the ideological boundaries of its own. Glorifying terror under the banner of DEI was dubbed ‘resistance’.

DEI’s own conviction of righteousness and one-sidedness expanded rapidly, well organized, and well funded. By then, the contradiction became impossible to ignore.

And perhaps Damon Albarn provides the simplest counterexample. Albarn has hardly been silent about Palestinian suffering or his criticism of Israel. Yet after Bob Vylan’s Glastonbury performance, he called the episode a ‘spectacular misfire’ and spoke instead about wanting to work with musicians in both Palestine and Israel.

It really should not be revolutionary to suggest that one can advocate for Palestinians without demanding the cultural exclusion of Israelis. Isn’t this exactly what music was supposed to be for?

What started as an industry-wide commitment to safety had developed into ideological gatekeeping: diversity but under political uniformity. Inclusion, except when the artist was born in Israel.

Freedom of expression, unless the expression comes from Boy George or another ‘wrong person’. And #MeToo, except if you were a girl dancing at 6:29 a.m. at the Nova festival.

To quote a house classic: If music is the answer, the answer cannot be less cultural contact. It has to be more. Because when we try to make music morally pure, we destroy precisely the thing that made it morally valuable: its ability to bring together people who would otherwise never meet. 

The writer, Sarah Hildering, is a former music executive at Universal Music Group, author of Code of Conduct, and former DEI lead at the Association for Electronic Music.

This post was originally published on here. 

New York’s political landscape has shifted dramatically over the past decade. Policies once considered far outside the mainstream (higher taxes on top earners, tuition-free public college, expanded public healthcare and broader social welfare programs) are now central to the agenda of many progressive politicians.

Supporters argue these policies create a fairer society by redistributing wealth and expanding access to essential services. For many lower-income Americans, that may well be true.

But for New York’s Jewish community, the financial equation is different, and that has less to do with ideology than economics.

Many Jewish voters are themselves drawn to progressive candidates because Jewish tradition places a strong emphasis on caring for the vulnerable and pursuing social justice. Supporting policies intended to help lower-income families is, for many, an expression of deeply held Jewish values. What often receives less attention, however, is how those same policies may place additional financial pressure on the very institutions that sustain Jewish communal life. 

According to the Pew Research Center’s landmark study of Jewish Americans, Jews are among the most highly educated religious groups in the United States, a factor that has long translated into above-average household incomes. There’s more: over half of Jewish adults hold postgraduate degrees or bachelor’s degrees, substantially higher than the national average. Higher educational attainment has also contributed to greater representation in professional fields such as medicine, law, finance and technology.

That matters because many of the economic proposals championed by democratic socialists are financed by increasing taxes on higher-income households, which is the very demographic in which many Jewish families are disproportionately represented.

The discussion, however, goes beyond income taxes.

Unlike many Americans, a significant portion of New York’s Orthodox and traditional Jewish communities voluntarily assume expenses that public programs simply cannot replace.

Jewish day school tuition often costs tens of thousands of dollars per child each year. Families contribute to synagogue memberships, summer camps, kosher food, security assessments, and charitable organizations that preserve Jewish communal life. Even if the government expands public education or other services, observant families are unlikely to abandon institutions that reflect their religious values.

In other words, many Jewish households would continue paying privately for core aspects of their lives regardless of how much government spending increases.

That creates what many families perceive as a double financial obligation: paying higher taxes to support expanded public programs while continuing to fund private religious education and community institutions.

Higher education offers another example.

Free public college may provide tremendous relief for many American families. Yet many Jewish students choose private universities or yeshivot because they offer religious environments, specialized programs, or stronger campus communities. Expanding public higher education therefore may not substantially reduce costs for many of these families, even as they contribute through higher taxes to finance those programs.

Healthcare presents a similar dynamic.

Programs such as Medicaid provide an essential safety net for millions of Americans so expanding eligibility would undoubtedly help many families. But higher-income households generally do not qualify for means-tested benefits, regardless of how broadly eligibility expands. Many Jewish families instead receive health insurance through employers or purchase private coverage, meaning they help finance expanded programs without directly benefiting from them.

Perhaps the most overlooked consequence of higher taxation, though, involves philanthropy.

Few communities rely on charitable giving as extensively as the Jewish community. Synagogues, Jewish day schools, scholarship funds, social service agencies, security initiatives and organizations supporting Israel depend heavily on private donations. According to Giving USA and numerous studies of charitable behavior, charitable giving is influenced by both disposable income and tax incentives.

When higher-income households retain less after taxes, there is reason to believe some charitable giving could decline. Even modest reductions can have significant ripple effects across institutions that rely on philanthropy to serve their communities.

Nor is philanthropy the only concern.

Jewish entrepreneurship has played an outsized role in New York’s economy for generations. From family-owned businesses to technology startups, many Jewish entrepreneurs reinvest profits into expansion, hiring and innovation. Policies that increase taxes on business income or investment may reduce the capital available for growth, even if the intention is to finance worthwhile public priorities.

None of this suggests that helping lower-income Americans is the wrong objective. A strong safety net has an important place in a healthy society, and many Jewish organizations have long championed caring for the vulnerable as both a civic and religious responsibility.

Indeed, that commitment is one reason many Jewish voters support progressive candidates and policies. They often do so believing they are strengthening society and fulfilling a core Jewish obligation to care for those in need.

The question, however, is whether they have fully considered the economic consequences for their own community. Jewish families are likely to continue paying for day schools, synagogues, kosher food, security, charitable organizations and other institutions regardless of what the government provides. At the same time, many would bear a disproportionate share of the taxes used to finance expanded public programs because of their relatively high levels of education and income.

That does not make democratic socialism inherently good or bad. It does suggest, however, that before embracing sweeping economic change, New York’s Jewish community should carefully weigh not only the benefits these policies may provide to society at large, but also the additional financial strain they could place on the institutions that have sustained Jewish life for generations.

The views expressed are those of the author as of the publication date and are subject to change without notice. This article is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, tax, legal or political advice, or as a recommendation to adopt any investment strategy. Advisory services are offered through Klyman Financial, a DBA of The PARTNERS Wealth Management, an SEC Registered Investment Adviser. Registration does not imply a certain level of skill or training. 

This post was originally published on here. 

Dozens of doctors may have skipped stages of their training at Kaplan Medical Center in Rehovot, according to a special review committee of the Scientific Council of the Israeli Medical Association, Channel 13 reported Wednesday.

According to the report, the committee was formed after a resident doctor at the center alleged that residency logs had been falsified so cardiology residents could skip the internal medicine residency stage while still meeting the requirement on paper.

The committee found that Professor Kobi George, head of the cardiology department, had guided and supervised the falsifications, allegedly to address a manpower shortage.

Concerns were raised about patient safety and the quality of medical care because doctors may have received specialist certification in cardiology without the full required training, according to Channel 13.

Council reportedly recommended barring George from managing residency program permanently

Following the findings, the Scientific Council’s presidency recommended barring George from managing a residency training department and removing recognition of Kaplan’s cardiology department as an approved residency training site while George remains part of its staff, Channel 13 reported.

Additionally, Channel 13 said the council recommended the internal medicine department receive “conditional recognition” for six months and that Dr. Hefziba Green, head of the department, be barred from independently signing residency documents for the next three years. All signatures provided will require an accompanying signature from the hospital’s deputy director.

An individual assessment requirement was also recommended for every doctor who completed residency training at Kaplan Medical Center to examine the length of their training, their focus areas, and whether there are gaps they need to complete, according to the report.

George rejects allegations

George rejected the allegations, claiming that the recommendations of the council were incorrect and reached through an improper process, according to Channel 13.

“All residents and specialists in cardiology underwent the required clinical, theoretical, and research training and gained the necessary experience to fully meet all residency requirements. A significant portion of graduates of the training program successfully passed certification exams, and the doctors currently serve as full-fledged specialists,” the outlet cited George as saying.

George emphasized that the Health Ministry, the only organization with the authority to implement any of the recommendations, had not made a binding decision on the matter.

Clalit Health Services released a statement that the CEO of Clalit had ordered the establishment of a committee to address the findings and recommendations of the report at Kaplan Medical Center in light of the findings of the Israel Medical Association’s Scientific Council review, and added that the Health Ministry had been updated on steps already taken, Channel 13 reported.

“Clalit regrets the incident and is acting decisively to correct and regulate the deficiencies identified in this exceptional report,” Channel 13 cited the statement as saying.

This post was originally published on here. 

National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s Otzma Yehudit called for Ra’am chairman MK Mansour Abbas to be disqualified from running for the Knesset following remarks he made on Wednesday morning, claiming Arab parties were forced to accept Israel as a Jewish state to avoid being barred from elections.

“The senior partner of [Naftali] Bennett and [Gadi] Eisenkot in a future government admits that he does not recognize the State of Israel as a Jewish state,” the party’s statement read.

“We would tell you that what he is saying is delusional, but we are not surprised. He is from the Muslim Brotherhood. The delusion is that Eisenkot and Bennett dream every night about how they will form a government with him.”

Abbas’s post was made as clarification after criticism over comments he made during an appearance on Channel 12’s “Meet the Press,” where Amit Segal confronted him with previous statements, including his assertion that “Zionist gangs conquered Palestine.”

Segal said Abbas had indicated in the interview that he would not use the same formulation now. In his Wednesday post, Abbas maintained that changing his political language did not amount to abandoning his Palestinian identity or narrative.

“Is it not possible that different wording and a different political approach could actually express the truth of the Nakba, draw lessons from the historical experience accurately and wisely, and present a practical vision for the future? Could this not provide an opportunity to gain influence that would enable us to address the injustices and wounds we inherited from our ongoing Nakba, prevent a new displacement in its various forms, and move beyond the historical narrative in order to write the narrative of the future we aspire to?” Abbas wrote on Facebook.

Abbas: Accepting Israel as Jewish state was ‘imposed on us’

Regarding the Jewish character of the state, Abbas wrote that it was “a reality imposed on us and we did not choose it,” adding that it reflected the choice of Israel’s Jewish majority rather than a demand by Arab citizens.

“The Arab parties were forced to accept it practically, otherwise they would be eliminated in the parliamentary and local elections,” he wrote.

Abbas said his political priority was instead to strengthen the standing of Arab citizens, secure national and civil rights, and seek influence within government rather than remain permanently in the opposition.

Abbas reiterated that his position supporting “the recognition of the Palestinian state alongside the State of Israel” was well known.

“Our supreme interest is to replace this racist government, even if it means paying the personal cost,” he wrote. “The necessity of lifting and removing injustice, warding off and reducing corruption, and bringing and increasing benefits, requires us to take all possible measures to achieve this.”

Winter, Erdan also call to bar Abbas from Knesset

Otzma Yehudit’s statement further claimed that “Eisenkot and Bennett will let Mansour take control of the National Security Ministry. They will let him stop home demolitions in the Negev, enforcement against noise from the muezzin, shut down the protection-racket and polygamy units established by Minister Ben-Gvir, and turn the Galilee and the Negev into Hamastan.”

Brig.-Gen. (res.) Ofer Winter, chairman of the newly launched Amcha Yisrael Party, also stated that anyone who does not recognize Israel as a Jewish state should not be eligible for election to the Knesset.

“Anyone who does not recognize the State of Israel as a Jewish state can go to any Arab country he wants. And certainly such a person must not be allowed to be elected to the Knesset of Israel,” Winter said.

“It is time to understand: What was will be no more.”

Former Israeli ambassador to the UN Gilad Erdan, chairman of the Unity Party, decried the statement as well, stating Abbas was “pulling the wool over the Election Committee’s eyes, pulling the wool over the public’s eyes, and there are those who fall into his trap.” 

“He does not want a Jewish state here; he wants an Islamic caliphate. Only a broad unity government will ensure a Zionist government, without Abbas and without deception,” Erdan said.

This post was originally published on here. 

US CIA Director John Ratcliffe held talks with Russian intelligence officials during his visit to Moscow on Tuesday but did not meet President Vladimir Putin, the Kremlin said on Wednesday.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters that Putin had been briefed on the outcome of Ratcliffe’s talks, but declined to provide further details.

Peskov said it was also too early to say whether such contacts between the two countries’ intelligence agencies could help pull US-Russia relations out of what he described as a “deep crisis.” 

Reports first emerged on Tuesday that Ratcliffe traveled to Russia aboard a US military C-17 transport plane for meetings in Moscow and left that evening.

First visit by US spy chief since Ratcliffe’s predecessor

The visit was the first known visit to the Russian capital by a US spy chief since Ratcliffe’s predecessor, William Burns, held talks with Vladimir Putin in November 2021. About three months after that meeting, the Russian president launched Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.

The last direct flight of a US-registered jet to Russia from Europe took place in January this year, carrying special envoys Steven Witkoff and Jared Kushner for peace talks with Vladimir Putin on Ukraine.

A source familiar with the details of Ratcliffe’s trip told The Jerusalem Post that Trump administration officials asked Ukraine several days ago to pause any strikes against Moscow and other cities from Monday through Wednesday.

This post was originally published on here. 

IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir met with US Air Force Commander General Kenneth S. Wilsbach, together with Israel Air Force Commander Maj.-Gen. Omer Tischler on Sunday in Tel Aviv to discuss Iran and other regional security issues, the military confirmed on Wednesday.

The visit comes as US President Donald Trump has shifted away from military threats to boosting the economic sanctions against Iran to try to achieve nuclear and other concessions.

This shift doubtlessly impacts ongoing and even long-term joint military planning between the countries, including what US military assets will remain in Israel and the region.

Wilsbach’s visit was unusual, as generally the US Central Command (CENTCOM) Chief Admiral Brad Cooper or CENTCOM Air Force Chief Lt.-Gen. Daniel T. Lasica would be expected to make such personal visits, with the American air force top commander having to cover the whole globe.

It was unclear whether Wilsbach visited because of the elevated levels of past and future cooperation between the countries’ air forces during and after the early 2026 Iran war, or because Lasica had only recently taken office to replace Lt.-Gen. Derek C. France and needed more time to settle into his new role before undertaking foreign visits.

The officials discussed their joint assessments of the regional situation, including Iran and other security threats, advancing learning lessons from the joint campaign, and future areas of cooperation.

IAF Chief Tischler thanks CENTCOM for cooperation during inagural speech in role

At his inaugural speech in May, Tischler addressed France, saying, “Your presence here is very meaningful for us and for me personally. In the most complicated and sensitive situations, you and your forces have always stood with us. We won together, and we don’t take it for granted.”

US Vice Chief of the Air Force Gen. John D. Lamontagne also attended Tischler’s inaugural ceremony.

This post was originally published on here. 

A 67-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of stabbing a Bank Mizrahi employee on Salma Street in Tel Aviv, Israel Police announced on Wednesday morning.

Police responded to the scene immediately, arresting the man and seizing the knife used to attack the employee.

The employee, a 45-year-old woman, was evacuated in moderate condition to Wolfson Medical Center in Holon by Magen David Adom.

Police said the incident is criminal in nature, and they transferred the suspect for further investigation.

United Hatzalah paramedic Noa Ben Tal, who arrived first at the scene, said that they had been informed at the scene that she was injured as a result of violence.”

“We provided her with initial medical assistance, and then she was evacuated to receive further treatment at Wolfson Hospital.”

Man stabbed in Beit Shemesh

Later on Wednesday, first responders treated a 55-year-old man who was stabbed on Yitzhak Rabin Street in Beit Shemesh. 

Magen David Adom evacuated the man in moderate condition to Shaare Zedek Medical Center in Jerusalem.

“When we arrived at the scene, we were directed towards a man in his 60s who was suffering from penetrating injuries to his abdomen and hand after being injured in a violent incident,” said United Hatzalah volunteers Yossi Bernfeld, Shimon Dinin and Avromy Wiesel. “Together with other MDA medics and paramedics, we provided him with initial medical assistance, including stopping the bleeding and applying bandages.”

“He was evacuated by MDA intensive care vehicles in moderate condition for further treatment in the trauma room at Shaare Zedek Hospital in Jerusalem.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Yair Netanyahu, the prime minister’s son, launched a sharp attack against the new party founded by Ofer Winter, “Amcha Yisrael,” on Tuesday.

He also targeted Yoseph Haddad, who is ranked No. 2 on the party’s list, in a social media post.

Netanyahu claimed that the new party would lead to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu losing the upcoming election to Gadi Eisenkot.

“Yoseph, if you are running alone, mathematically there can be no scenario other than the following three scenarios,” Netanyahu wrote. 

He outlined what he described as the possible outcomes as: “You do not pass the electoral threshold, burn votes from the right, and crown the Eisenkot-Yair Golan-Mansour Abbas government.”

“If you pass the electoral threshold and bring Smotrich below the electoral threshold, you crown the Eisenkot-Yair Golan-Mansour Abbas government.”

“If you do not pass the electoral threshold, but take enough votes from Smotrich so that he also does not pass the electoral threshold, you also crown the Eisenkot-Yair Golan-Mansour Abbas government.”

Netanyahu concluded his post by writing: “Mathematically there cannot be any other outcome. This is a fact, not an opinion. You will be remembered like the Tehiya Party is remembered as the party that brought the Rabin government and the Oslo disaster.”

Report emerges over Netanyahu’s connection to Winter

Following Winter’s announcement of his party, Channel 13 reported on information regarding his ties with the prime minister.

According to the report, in the first months after the October 7 massacre, Netanyahu met with Winter in several safe apartments in Tel Aviv. During those meetings, Netanyahu heard from Winter about “Winter’s plan to conquer Gaza.”

A source close to Netanyahu also said that “Winter is the biggest threat in the election.” The report added that another attack against Winter from Netanyahu’s circle is expected soon.

The report comes amid criticism of Winter after he rejected a reserved slot on the Likud list. Officials in the ruling party are concerned that Winter could “drink” many mandates, primarily from Likud and other parties considered part of the same political bloc.

This post was originally published on here. 

In Likud and among Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s associates, officials are already analyzing the scenario that could emerge the day after the election, where neither bloc secures 61 seats, no narrow government is possible, and the political system reaches a deadlock.

Under such a scenario, one option being discussed by Likud officials is a broad government with a rotation between Netanyahu and Yashar party head Gadi Eisenkot.

The main question occupying them at this stage is what Netanyahu could offer Eisenkot to convince him to join a rotation government with him, and how he could persuade him that the rotation agreement would be honored this time, following the precedent of the Netanyahu-Benny Gantz government.

Among the possibilities being raised in closed Likud discussions is advancing Netanyahu toward the presidency in the future, creating both an agreed political exit path for him and a political guarantee that the premiership would eventually pass to Eisenkot.

At this stage, these are strategic assessments and scenario analysis surrounding Netanyahu’s “broad government” campaign ahead of the election.

The premise behind the scenario is straightforward: Likud officials believe Netanyahu could finish the election without 61 seats, but they are also counting on the possibility that the opposing bloc will not have enough seats to form a government. If both sides remain unable to build a coalition, officials estimate that pressure to avoid another election could reopen the possibility of a unity government.

Netanyahu would serve first, then transition to presidential role

Eisenkot, if he enters the election leading a large force in the anti-Netanyahu bloc, is viewed as one of the main potential partners for such a move. According to the scenario being discussed in Likud, one possibility is that Netanyahu would serve first in the rotation, before later transferring the premiership to Eisenkot.

However, the obvious obstacle to such a move is the crisis of trust created by the rotation government with Gantz in 2020. Eisenkot would need a mechanism to ensure he does not find himself in the same position Gantz held at the time: a partner in a rotation agreement that was never implemented.

Against this backdrop, the possibility of the presidency is also being raised in discussions. According to the scenario, the date of the leadership transition could be linked to Netanyahu’s future move to the President’s Residence after Isaac Herzog’s term ends.

Those raising the possibility believe such a move could give Netanyahu an agreed political destination after ending his term as prime minister, while also giving Eisenkot greater confidence that the rotation would take place.

Even within Likud, officials stress that the presidential scenario is far from being a finalized plan, and some describe it as a remote possibility. However, it is already being discussed as part of an effort to find a mechanism that could overcome the trust issue.

According to one assessment being voiced in Likud, if the presidential scenario becomes relevant in the future, Netanyahu’s criminal trial would need to be resolved. From a legal standpoint, the argument in these discussions is that no automatic legal obstacle prevents a person facing trial from running for president; the more complex issue would be public and political.

Those raising the scenario believe that as part of a broader deal that would end Netanyahu’s term as prime minister and allow for the establishment of a stable government, it would also be possible to present such a move to the public.

Netanyahu calls for ‘broad gov’t’

The discussion also explains the line Netanyahu has promoted in recent weeks regarding the need for a “broad government.”

Likud officials estimate that Netanyahu understands that a 61-seat right-wing government is not a guaranteed outcome, and therefore believes it is important to prepare in advance a public and political foundation for the possibility of bringing figures from the opposing camp into the government after the election.

If the results show that neither bloc has a majority, Netanyahu would be able to argue that voters did not give either side a decisive victory and that, under such circumstances, there is no justification for leaving a large segment of the public outside the government.

The Gantz precedent, however, will remain central to any future discussions. Likud officials understand that Netanyahu’s political promise alone will not be enough.

Therefore, alongside the presidential idea, more practical mechanisms are also being examined in political discussions: commitments regarding the budget and no-confidence votes, legal mechanisms that would make it harder to violate the agreement, and even the possibility of depositing a resignation letter with a trustee, which would be activated if Netanyahu fails to uphold his commitments.

Likud officials also point to a fundamental difference between such a scenario and the Netanyahu-Gantz government.

If the election results leave Netanyahu without an independent majority and force him to rely on Eisenkot to maintain the government, that dependence itself would become another element of the guarantees system.

Unlike a situation in which the partnership could be dismantled and an alternative coalition formed, a breach of the agreement in this scenario could bring down the entire government. The number of seats Likud wins would also be decisive.

Likud officials estimate that, given current expectations, a result of more than 25-26 seats for Netanyahu would be presented as an achievement that would allow him to argue he remains the leader of a large political camp that cannot be ignored when forming a government.

By contrast, a significantly weaker result would damage his ability to demand the first turn in the rotation and would alter the balance of power in any future negotiations.

This post was originally published on here. 

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director-General Rafael Grossi met with US Energy Secretary Chris Wright and discussed nuclear non-proliferation issues, including Iran and Grossi’s recent visit to Syria, Grossi announced in a post on X/Twitter on Tuesday evening.

Grossi arrived in the US ahead of the launch of the IAEA‘s initiative ATLAS, designed to aid the deployment of civil nuclear applications at sea, including nuclear-powered ships and floating nuclear power plants to support trade and provide energy for remote communities and industries. 

Nuclear material in Syria was discovered and collected by the IAEA, Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad Hassan al-Shaibani said in a joint press conference with Grossi on August 18.

“We will provide the necessary conditions for handling nuclear materials and storing them safely,” said Shaibani, who further noted that Damascus, “on its own initiative,” permitted the IAEA to access the site.

Syrian authorities working with IAEA over Assad nuclear legacy

Since the ouster of former president Bashar al-Assad in late 2024, Syria‘s new authorities have committed to working with the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog to address the legacy of nuclear activities during decades of Assad family rule.

Grossi said the agency accessed the site after the Syrian government notified it.

Syria is not known to hold operational stockpiles of nuclear material for a weapons program, but Israel bombed a suspected Syrian nuclear reactor in 2007 in the country’s eastern province of Deir Ezzor.

Reuters contributed to this report.

This post was originally published on here. 

Israel Police on Tuesday arrested a 33-year-old Bnei Brak resident suspected of stabbing a bus driver in Ramat Gan last week.

According to the police, a confrontation had broken out last Tuesday between the motorcycle rider and the bus driver over a road-use dispute. During the confrontation, the driver was stabbed, while the suspect, working as a Wolt delivery courier, left the scene and fled.

The bus driver was lightly injured and taken for medical treatment. Meanwhile, investigators from the Bnei Brak and Ramat Gan police stations opened an investigation and began collecting evidence to identify the motorcycle rider and locate him.

During the investigation, detectives identified the suspect and tracked him to Tel Aviv.

Suspect to be brought before court 

A further finding was discovered during a search conducted after the arrest: Inside the Wolt delivery box attached to the motorcycle, which the suspect uses as part of his work as a courier, detectives found spiked objects and scissors.

The suspect was taken for questioning at the Bnei Brak, Ramat Gan police station and was detained at the conclusion of the interrogation.

He is slated to be brought before the Tel Aviv Magistrate’s Court on Wednesday morning, where police will request an extension of his detention and continue investigating the circumstances of the stabbing.

This post was originally published on here. 

Oklahoma nurse and activist N’kiyla Jasmine Thomas, who ran a campaign with anti-AIPAC messaging, defeated centrist Jim Priest in a Democratic Senate primary runoff on Tuesday that marked the latest victory for a progressive politician in a solidly conservative state.

The Associated Press called Tuesday’s race, a sequel to the state’s June primary, less than an hour after polls closed. By the time 80% of votes were tallied, Thomas had accrued 59.9% of the votes to Priest’s 40.1%. 

Like many progressives in the current election cycle, she repeatedly vowed during her campaign to reject funds from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the influential pro-Israel lobby.

Although AIPAC has not participated in this race, Thomas posted a social media reel in November that showed her pulling a giant red trash bin, labeled “AIPAC Funds” and “Corporate PAC Funds.” Adjacent to the reel is a caption that reads, “Just taking out the trash.”

“I am a sole grassroots candidate,” she said in the reel. “And we are not accepting AIPAC or corporate PAC funds. It’s garbage.”

JUST IN: N’kiyla Jasmine Thomas has won the Democratic primary runoff for U.S. Senate in Oklahoma.

Onward! pic.twitter.com/bjTec0OIJn

— Democrats (@TheDemocrats) August 26, 2026

Asked about her rhetoric on AIPAC, Thomas told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency in a written statement that her “concerns [with AIPAC] have NEVER been about Jewish people, Judaism, or Israel’s existence,” adding that she instead prioritizes human rights, civilian lives and the accountability of all governments.

“When I discuss political influence or organizations, my focus is on the broader role of money, lobbying, and special interests in our political system, not on any one religion or community,” she added. 

In their previous matchup, a five-candidate race, neither candidate had earned the majority required to secure a win. Thomas earned 45% of votes in June, while Priest, a lawyer and ordained minister, accrued 24%. 

Heading into Tuesday’s runoff, it was already clear that both Thomas and Priest would be longshots this November in a state that hasn’t sent a Democrat to the Senate in more than three decades. The Republican opponent, Rep. Kevin Hern, swept his primary and has the endorsement of President Donald Trump.

But Thomas’s win served as yet another litmus test on the potency of progressivism in a deep-red state, just a week after democratic socialist Angie Nixon trounced a moderate candidate in Florida’s Democratic Senate primary. 

Thomas, unlike Nixon, is not a member of Democratic Socialists of America, but she has openly identified with socialist policies. The 31-year-old is a citizen of the Chickasaw Nation who says she represents “the next generation of leaders.” Among her priorities are women’s health and safety, civil rights and LGBT protections. 

During a debate this past Saturday, both Thomas and Priest described a “genocide” in Gaza. Priest linked the word to Israel, while Thomas connected it to the actions of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. 

She emphasized that “we can be for our Jewish brothers and sisters, and we can be against Netanyahu and what he is doing.” 

“He is committing genocide. He is absolutely murdering children,” Thomas said at the debate. “We have to stop providing funding for these wars.”

In her statement to JTA, Thomas expressed her commitment to a two-state solution, adding that “both Israelis and Palestinians deserve the opportunity to live in peace, security and self-determination.”

This post was originally published on here. 

The IDF debated whether to send a security force for MK Zvi Sukkot when he requested to conduct a “memorial tour” in three West Bank villages, KAN News reported Tuesday evening. 

The IDF initially told Sukkot weeks ago that it did not have the operational capacity or available forces for the mission, as an escort would mean diverting forces from the Kusra area, Army Radio reported Wednesday morning.

Sukkot threatened to carry out the tour on his own, compromising once the IDF agreed to arrange security after events in Kusra calmed down.

The IDF ultimately decided to send a security force consisting of around 10 soldiers under the command of a junior officer for a visit scheduled for Tuesday morning.

Citing the soldiers, KAN reported that the IDF did not expect Sukkot and those accompanying him to exit his car with hammers and smash the memorial in Kafr Madama. The soldiers had met with Sukkot before entering the village and, due to his position as an MK, did not believe it necessary to search his car.

Soldiers frustrated, felt time wasted on Sukkot’s visit

Army Radio reported that soldiers who were assigned to Sukkot’s protection detail were frustrated with the assignment.

“It was obvious that there would be a mess there. We felt that our time and forces were being wasted. The feeling is that this is not why we came to this sector,” Army Radio cited a soldier as saying.

Soldiers explained to Army Radio that they had been working without sleep, conducting multiple operations, and felt that the Sukkot trip was a waste of time.

While commanders who oversaw the incident said they were shocked that Sukkot and his aides pulled hammers out of his vehicle, some soldiers said that an incident like this was expected. 

“We have to deal with things like this all the time; it was expected to happen. We are stuck here between Jewish terrorism and Palestinian terrorism,” the soldiers said, according to Army Radio. 

Following the incident, IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir was furious with the MK’s behavior, sources close to him told KAN. A directive was issued not to approve tours by MKs during the election period, as concerns were raised that IDF operational preparedness would be sacrificed for campaign purposes.

The IDF had already scheduled the demolition of the memorial that Sukkot had attacked for September, according to Army Radio, regardless of Sukkot’s involvement.

Smotrich coordinated condemnation statement with Sukkot

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich also condemned the incident after speaking with Sukkot about it, KAN reported. Smotrich called Sukkot, asked him to update him on future plans, and then coordinated the public condemnation statement sent to the media, according to the report.

“We will advance settlement through the proper channels. These are days when things can be done with authorization and authority,” Smotrich said, according to KAN.

Sukkot rejects claims of international damage to Israel’s reputation

Sukkot said claims that his actions would cause international damage were unfounded while speaking to Kol Barama Wednesday morning. 

According to Sukkot, the only countries that condemned his actions were Turkey and Iraq, and all other criticism was from Israel.

“Nothing has caused less damage than this thing. The condemnation by [Foreign Minister] Gideon Sa’ar and the IDF spokesperson, they caused damage; everywhere they’re quoting them. I have nothing to regret,” Sukkot said. 

This post was originally published on here. 

As the Iranian regime seeks ways to bypass US sanctions, increasing restrictions on Tehran risk extremist elements within the regime gaining power, according to a KAN News report aired on Tuesday that cited an interview with an Iranian political dissident.

According to the activist, while the public endures heavy economic pressures, it does little to affect those in leadership positions within the regime. 

His remarks reflect a seemingly widespread sentiment within the Iranian population, who often assume that deepening troubles within the country would further entrench the regime.

According to KAN, Israeli authorities who are monitoring Iran’s domestic developments are observing an increase in economic damage in all sectors of society, causing internal rifts among Iran’s leadership.

While Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian is showing concern for the effects on the general population, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has reportedly taken a considerably more aggressive stance, entrenching itself as it prepares to weather the conflict and crack down on economic protests. 

Tehran feels the pain of US sanctions, seeks alternate avenues

A day after the launch of the Trump administration’s “Operation Economic Outcast” against Iran, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Tuesday evening that Iran’s leadership “is admitting what the whole world can already see: the pressure is working.”

“Under President Trump, the Treasury Department will continue to cut off every economic lifeline sustaining this regime, until Tehran is left completely alone,” Bessent said.

“No matter how much military power we have, if the people are hungry and we lack cash flow, economic growth, and domestic production – we will not be able to hold out,” Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf stated.

Meanwhile, Iran and Oman announced that their consultations regarding the Strait of Hormuz will continue, aiming to resume navigation through the strait and formulate a mechanism to manage vessel traffic.

In a joint statement, Iran and Oman reported that negotiations between the countries focused on the importance of resuming navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, while preserving their sovereignty and rights. It was further reported that professional negotiations will continue regarding future arrangements for managing the strait, and the formulation of a mechanism for information exchange and vessel traffic management.

Iran’s economic stress: ‘The war must end at some point’

In the background, Washington is attempting to frame the Iranian-Omani move as a direct result of growing US economic pressure. Bessent quoted Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, who he said acknowledged the economic distress Iran is suffering and stated that “the war must end at some point.”

Subsequently, the Iranian Foreign Ministry also addressed the sanctions, sharply attacking the decision to escalate them, saying: “American sanctions against Iran are a threat to international law and the UN Charter, and no respectable nation will accept the normalization of ‘blatant lawlessness and bullying.'”

Under the framework discussed between the parties, vessels would enter the Gulf through the lane on the Iranian side and exit through the lane on the Omani side. According to previous reports, Iran is not expected to receive the mandatory fee it demanded, but “voluntary” payments for insurance, environmental protection, or safety services might be introduced.

Ceasefire violations, Hormuz frictions

Iran, on the other hand, attempted last week to distance the talks with Oman from the American track. A source close to the Iranian negotiating team told the IRGC-run Fars News Agency that “in practice, no direct negotiations took place between Iran and the United States,” and that talks on exercising sovereignty in the Strait of Hormuz occurred solely with Oman.

According to the source, following the US “violation of the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding,” talks with the American side were halted.

This development follows weeks in which the Strait of Hormuz became one of the primary friction points between Tehran and Washington.

During the war between Israel and Iran, Tehran imposed a de facto blockade on the strait, and senior Iranian officials declared their intention to turn passage through it into a permanent source of revenue by levying fees on vessels. Reports later indicated that Iran and Oman were promoting a plan to collect payment from ships passing through the strait, despite public opposition from the United States.

The US administration views the Strait of Hormuz as a central pressure point on Iran. It was previously reported that the United States and Oman tried to persuade Tehran to abandon its demand to levy transit fees on vessels crossing the strait, with one lever of pressure being the potential unfreezing of a portion of roughly $100 billion in Iranian assets held abroad.

The strait is considered one of the world’s most vital trade and energy routes, and Tehran views it as a strategic bargaining chip against the United States and the Gulf states. Now, as Iran and Oman continue to discuss a new management mechanism while Washington ramps up economic pressure, the central question is whether Tehran will choose a settlement that allows the resumption of navigation – or continue using the strait as a tool of leverage against the West.

Implementing new measures could lead to Iran’s collapse in six to nine months

Economist Shlomo Maoz addressed potential measures against Iran, asserting that full implementation of these sanctions by the US and the West could cause Iran to completely collapse within six to nine months, in an interview with Maariv published on Wednesday.

“The strangulation will be absolute,” he said, explaining that the goal is not only to hit Iran directly, but to deter other countries, companies, and international banks from maintaining ties with Tehran. “They will essentially be able to enforce this on everyone. Any country, organization, company, bank, shipping line, or airline doing business with the Iranians will be boycotted by the US. And nobody wants to mess with them, because they are effectively the largest superpower.”

The logic behind the strategy relies primarily on the US’s dominance in the global financial system.

Any firm choosing to continue trading with Iran risks facing US sanctions, impairing its ability to trade in US dollars, process payments, and engage with the global financial grid. “The global financial system is built on the dollar, which accounts for about 60% of world payments and transfers. Additionally, they control SWIFT, the international money transfer system.”

“All payments – the trillions moving today – mostly run through this system, and the Americans previously removed Russia and Iran from SWIFT, which is why those countries are sinking. Russia is sinking too; for instance, anyone trying to send money from Israel to a relative in Russia cannot do so – the US will suffocate Iran in the exact same manner,” he explained.

According to Maoz, US sanctions on Iran could evolve into a global economic war within months, extending far beyond the Islamic Republic’s borders and severely impacting countries maintaining commercial ties with it.

Maoz argues that the pressure will not remain confined to finance. “Anyone buying oil from them will be boycotted. Anyone selling them drilling equipment, for example, will be boycotted. Airlines, shipping lines, banks – there will be total strangulation here, including Arab countries that maintain good relations with Iran. They will be hurt too. It’s essentially like waging a world war against them – a global economic war.”

He identifies Turkey as one of the hardest-hit nations, having served as a major commercial pipeline for Iran in recent years, particularly in the gold trade. “Turkey bought gold for the Iranians,” he explains. “The Iranians used oil and other payment methods to acquire gold and accumulate assets outside the Western financial system because they have no play with foreign currency.”

Consequently, if the US tightens oversight on Turkish entities trading with Iran, Turkey could face a major crisis. “The primary party harmed will be Turkey,” he assesses.

The key question is how Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will react if ties with Iran become a severe economic burden. Maoz doubts Erdoğan can afford to retreat. “He is in a position where he won’t step back because his economy is already collapsing. They are in deep trouble – they have no gas, no gasoline, no oil,” he says.

He contends that if Turkey attempts to bypass sanctions via shell companies or alternative trade routes, it risks additional US sanctions. He highlights trade ties between Iran, Armenia, and Turkey, suggesting regional trade routes will become a primary focus of US enforcement. “In my view, Armenia, which maintains good trade relations with Iran, will also be hit by sanctions. I’ve personally seen massive oil trucks traveling from Iran to Armenia,” he adds.

Beyond banking and international trade, Maoz highlights three sectors likely to become central battlegrounds: gold, oil, and blockchain. As Iran’s access to the traditional financial system is blocked, it will increasingly seek alternative channels for moving funds.

He ties the pressure on Iran directly to the surge in Bitcoin prices. “In my assessment, the Achilles’ heel of sanctions is the crypto space. As the Americans choke Iran and restrict its access to banking and the dollar, Iran and other entities seeking to bypass sanctions will look for alternative avenues to transfer funds, and crypto could be one of them. I estimate this is one reason we are seeing a rise in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies,” he says, noting instances where Israeli spies working for Iran were paid in cryptocurrency.

However, he acknowledges he is not a crypto expert and cannot predict how US authorities will address crypto usage. Still, he notes that the ability to track blockchain transactions could turn crypto into another arena of conflict between Iran and the West. Ultimately, he argues, economic sanctions represent a relatively cheap method for the US to exert pressure compared to a prolonged military war.

“We’ve seen in the past that sanctions and economic pressure can work,” he notes. “It happened in South Africa with the apartheid regime, which eventually fell. Therefore, I believe that in Iran’s case as well, if the West shows patience and persists with sanctions, economic pressure can yield a significant outcome.”

“Iran will collapse within six to nine months,” he concludes, emphasizing that this scenario depends on US persistence and Western alignment. “The condition is that Trump goes all the way and the rest of the Western countries fall in line.”

He suggests sanctions will focus on five key sectors: maritime, aviation, communications, oil, and banking. However, he cautions that the impact will not be immediate. “There’s no button you press to make it happen instantly. It doesn’t work that way. It requires patience.”

From Israel’s perspective, he views this as a positive development, as economic pressure could substitute for military confrontation. “I think this is very good for Israel. Fewer wars, more economic warfare,” he says.

Ultimately, the central question is not just whether Iran can survive the sanctions, but how determined the US will be to enforce them long-term – and how much countries like Turkey, China, India, and Pakistan are willing to pay to maintain ties with Tehran. If Washington builds a unified Western front, pressure on Iran will intensify, though the path forward may trigger severe economic shocks across neighboring states, starting with Turkey.

This post was originally published on here. 

Border Police officers earlier this week rescued an Israeli citizen from Holon who had accidentally entered Area A of the West Bank near the Ramallah area after getting lost, Israel Police confirmed on Wednesday morning.

Upon receiving a report of the Israeli’s entry, a Border Police team was sent out to search for the individual. Officers succeeded in contacting the Israeli over the phone before locating his vehicle and escorting him from the area.

Entry to Area A, which is under the Palestinian Authority’s civil and security control, is prohibited for Israelis.

On Sunday, soldiers from the Coordinator of the Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT)’s Civil Administration rescued three Israeli Jews who had separately entered Area A near Bethlehem, Jericho, and Ramallah.

One of the Israeli Jews was spotted near the village of Ein Arik, while armed. Officers from the Binyamin Region’s Coordination and Liaison Administration worked to rescue him through coordination channels before transferring him to the IDF.

All three Israelis transferred to police for further handling

At the same time, the Civil Administration received a report about an Israeli Jewish woman who was seen walking through the city of Jericho in the Jordan Valley area, putting herself at risk.

Officers from the Jordan Valley Coordination and Liaison Administration acted quickly to rescue her. An initial investigation found that she had entered the Palestinian city intentionally.

In Bethlehem, an Israeli man who appeared to be suffering from mental distress was seen wandering the streets of the city. Local residents passed the information to security forces, and they quickly handed him over.

All three incidents were transferred to the Judea and Samaria District Police for further handling. The security establishment reiterated that entering Area A, which is under the control of the Palestinian Authority, is life-threatening and prohibited by law.

Avi Ashkenazi contributed to this report.

This post was originally published on here. 

Israeli AI trust, safety, and security company Alice today announced the completion of a $140 million financing round led by Apax Digital, with participation from new and existing investors including Samsung, SentinelOne, Maj Invest, MoreTech, Phoenix Insurance, Norwest, CRV, Vintage, Grove and Highland Europe.

Sources inform “Globes” that the financing round, which brings the total amount raised by Alice to $280 million, was completed at a company valuation of $800 million. The company’s annual recurring revenue (ARR) is approaching $100 million.

Founded in 2018 as ActiveFence by CEO Noam Schwartz, CTO Iftach Orr, CCO Alon Porat, and president Eyal Dykan. Initially the company developed systems that helped social networks and internet platforms detect violent content, fraud, extremist propaganda, disinformation and coordinated activity. This activity required the company to monitor how hostile actors changed methods and tried to bypass defense mechanisms.

With the launch of ChatGPT in 2022 and the rapid penetration of generative AI into the market, the company realized that the same knowledge could also be used to protect models and the systems based on them. On the one hand, criminal actors began to use AI tools to produce fraud, phishing attacks and misleading content on a larger scale. On the other hand, the companies that developed the models needed a systematic way to examine how they could be misused.

The knowledge gained from the original activity also underlies Rabbit Hole, a repository of attack patterns and harmful content collected from the real world. The database allows the company’s researchers to test AI systems against methods already observed online and identify new versions of them. As AI became a larger part of the company’s operations, management decided that the name ActiveFence no longer reflected its business, and last January it completed the rebranding to Alice.

Schwartz said, “AI builders should be able to trust their models to do exactly what they were built to do. The only way to earn that trust is to stress test models and agents every day and guard them with defenses built from real attacks. For years, our teams have been embedded with the world’s leading platforms and AI labs, finding failures before deployment. Now we are bringing that capability to every AI lab and enterprise launching AI in production.”

Alice provides AI safety solutions across the full lifecycle of AI systems. During training, Alice’s researchers help frontier labs, including Anthropic, Google, and Nvidia, simulate malicious prompts and agentic tasks to identify and prevent dangerous or unpredictable model behavior, and harden models against jailbreaks and prompt injection attacks.

The company will use the funding to further advance its AI platform, deepening the technology that tests, defends, and monitors AI models across their lifecycle, expanding the team behind Rabbit Hole, its proprietary dataset of real-world adversarial and harmful content, to keep pace with attacks that evolve by the day, and scaling its go-to-market organization serving foundation model labs and enterprises building with AI.

Alice currently has about 400 employees, most of them in Israel, with the rest in offices in New York, London and Hanoi. “Our goal is for organizations to be able to trust their AI systems and know that they will work as designed,” said Schwartz “To get there, you need to put experts in front of the models who challenge them every day.”

This post was originally published on here. 

Israeli defense-tech company ParaZero Technologies has received its first order for its DefendAir counter-drone system from a US federal government entity, marking the company’s first sale of the system to a US government customer.

The order includes DefendAir net launchers, Net Pods, and on-site operator training by ParaZero personnel, the company announced Tuesday.

The Kfar Saba-based company said the deal reflects growing demand among governments and security organizations for counter-unmanned aerial systems (C-UAS) that can provide a physical interception capability against small drones, particularly around sensitive sites and populated areas.

ParaZero’s DefendAir system incorporates patented net-launching technology. The Net pods are engineered by the company for integration across various platforms to deliver precise and effective neutralization of hostile drones.

The technology, which integrates sensors, real‑time monitoring, and automated deployment mechanisms, became a regulatory enabler for commercial drone operators seeking approval for flights over people, as well as other high‑risk operations. 

These systems rely on autonomous guidance and net‑based interception rather than kinetic or explosive methods, making them suitable for urban environments, airports, and sensitive facilities where traditional counter‑drone solutions pose unacceptable risks.

The manually operated DefendAir configuration acts as a final layer of defense by allowing security personnel to physically intercept a hostile drone immediately. 

The C-UAS system can be operated by individual operators and mobile forces protecting strategic sites.

Tech and training

ParaZero will also provide hands-on training to the US government operators, covering system familiarization, deployment, and practical use. The company said the training component reflects its broader approach to C-UAS, which it describes as providing an operational capability rather than just selling interception hardware.

“Counter-UAS capability is not created when a box arrives. It is created when trained operators can deploy the system confidently and act when seconds matter,” ParaZero CEO Ariel Alon said in a statement released by the company.

“Our approach extends beyond supplying launchers and Net Pods. DefendAir is designed to provide customers with an operational capability supported by training and hands-on preparation. We believe this approach is increasingly important as Counter-UAS solutions move from evaluation to real-world deployment,” he added.

The US order comes as small drones have increasingly become a security concern beyond the battlefield, with government facilities, critical infrastructure, public spaces, and other sensitive locations facing growing exposure to unauthorized or hostile unmanned aircraft.

ParaZero says it has seen growing interest in DefendAir from defense forces, government organizations, security agencies, and defense companies across several international markets.

Earlier this month, the company announced that it received an initial order for its DefendAir Net Pods from a Tier-1 European defense manufacturer. 

Alon said that the initial order from the manufacturers points to the fact that there is a growing recognition for net-based interceptors.

“For ParaZero, we believe that integration with established defense manufacturers has the potential to expand the reach of DefendAir beyond individual products and into larger platforms and programs. Each successful integration strengthens our position as an enabling technology provider to the global Counter-UAS market and creates a foundation for broader commercial opportunities as these systems advance,” Alon said.

This post was originally published on here. 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s son, Yair, was the target of Iran’s assassination attempt, Newsmax reported late on Tuesday, citing a US law enforcement source familiar with the matter.

According to the source, Israeli intelligence learned of the plot targeting Yair in December 2025, believing that Iranian operatives were allegedly already “on the ground” in Miami conducting surveillance of the prime minister’s son’s residence and movements.

Newsmax reported that Yair was told to leave Florida immediately, leading to his sudden return to Israel.

Netanyahu revealed that one of his sons had been the target of an Iranian plot during a phone call with Channel 14’s military correspondent Noam Amir, broadcast on Monday.

“This is an unbelievable case. Iran targeted one of my sons. Iran tried to murder him, tried to murder one of my sons,” the PM stated to Amir, though at the time did not elaborate on whether Yair or Avner was the target of Iran’s assassination attempt.

Shin Bet extends protection for Netanyahu’s family

“Is this part of the intelligence provided to you?” Amir asked.

“Iran tried to murder one of my sons. And this is why this promise [I am making] is more than a luxury – without it, they could succeed [in killing my son.] People need to show some restraint, especially during an election campaign,” Netanyahu replied.

“I spoke with the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) chief [David Zini] and asked him to provide appropriate security to any prime ministerial candidate,” Netanyahu also said.

In July, the Ministerial Committee for Shin Bet Affairs approved extended personal protection for Netanyahu’s wife, Sara, and their sons, Yair and Avner.

Iran airs videos threatening Melania, Barron Trump

The revelation of the assassination plot comes several weeks after Iranian regime-linked news outlets published two separate instruction videos on how to kill US First Lady Melania Trump and her son, Barron. 

The video on how to kill Melania, shared in late July by Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-linked Tasnim News Agency and seen by The Jerusalem Post, included plans and suggestions on how to kill the first lady.

It called on “freedom fighters” to target the shops the first lady frequented, claiming to share “information from several anonymous security networks,” and showing schemes of how Melania’s security operates and the places that she usually goes in New York.

On Monday, Iran International reported that Iranian state-affiliated TV Channel 3 released a video threatening Barron, detailing specific surveillance against him and offering a $10 million reward for his death.

The Post could not locate the original video on Channel 3’s platforms.

The video, however, was linked on X/Twitter by anti-regime London-based journalist Niyak Ghorbani, and showed various locations Barron had been at specific points in the past, including Trump Tower and his school campus.

At all these locations, the video highlighted elements of Barron’s security detail, including claims that Secret Service agents disguised themselves as students at his school to blend into his surroundings.

The video also claimed to have found Barron’s online Xbox, Discord, and FIFA accounts, as well as those of his classmates, naming two as Liam Carter and Bo Louden.

While Liam Carter appeared to be a fake profile, Louden, a conservative media influencer, is a known friend of Barron’s.

James Genn contributed to this report.

This post was originally published on here. 

A few weeks ago, I was en route to an airport I’d earmarked for landing when I noticed bad weather closing in on it. I checked the alternative, the backup airport I initially planned for, and saw that we’d have to fly through bad weather to get there too. So, I picked a third airport, landed, waited it out for a few hours, and continued safely once the system had passed.

Could we have beaten the weather to the original airport? Maybe. Could we have threaded the patches en route to the alternate? Maybe. But “maybe” is not a risk management strategy. Good risk management doesn’t ask whether you can get away with something. It asks whether the risk is worth taking at all. We landed. We waited. We lived to fly another day.

Every pilot learns a simple framework for making this kind of call in the moment. It is clearly laid out in the FAA’s Aviation Instructor’s Handbook. It’s built for cockpits, but it translates almost line-for-line into how managers decide how fast, and how far, to push AI deployment.

Accept no unnecessary risk

In aviation, the rule isn’t “avoid all risk”. Flying is impossible without risk. The rule is that risk needs a corresponding return. A new pilot doesn’t take a new airplane into low-visibility conditions on day one. There’s no benefit that justifies that specific risk, even though the same pilot might accept real risk elsewhere.

Applied to AI, the question managers should be asking isn’t “Is this AI system risky?” It’s: What, specifically, are we getting in return for this specific risk, and would we accept it if we wrote it down? 

Shipping an unvetted model into a workflow that touches medical records, financial approvals, or safety-critical decisions because it’s faster to ship than to test is an unnecessary risk with no commensurate return. If a competitor’s speed advantage is the only justification, that’s fear dressed up as strategy.

Make risk decisions at the appropriate level

On a single-pilot flight, the pilot decides. Not air traffic control. Not the passengers. The person accepting the risk has to be the person who can actually build and implement the controls that manage it.

This is where a lot of AI governance quietly breaks down inside organizations. Decisions about deploying a customer-facing model or giving an agent write-access to production systems, often get made by whoever is closest to the deadline: a product leader, an engineer under pressure; rather than by the manager who actually owns the downstream consequences.

Ask: “Who in this workflow has the authority to say no, and does that person have full visibility into what’s being deployed?” If the answer is “Nobody, really,” the decision is happening at the wrong level, and it needs to be pushed up the chain until it lands with a manager who has both the information and the authority to own it.

Weather is a good analogy here too: A clear day is a far better time to fly an unfamiliar airplane for the first time than a day with deteriorating conditions. Deploying AI is the same. The acceptable risk changes with the environment.

Managers should be asking the equivalent question before every material AI deployment: “Is this the right environment for this risk?” A generative AI pilot in an internal, low-stakes workflow, with a human reviewing every output, is a clear-weather flight. 

The same model, wired into an autonomous decision loop with no human check, touching customer money or physical safety, is flying in questionable conditions into weather you haven’t checked. 

The technology’s raw capability doesn’t change between those two cases. The acceptable level of risk does.

Integrate risk management into planning at all levels

The earlier a risk gets caught, the cheaper it is to fix. Changing course mid-flight is harder than choosing the right route before takeoff. It’s exactly the same with AI systems bolted together in production versus designed with guardrails from the get-go.

Retrofitting oversight, auditability, and kill-switches onto an AI system that’s already embedded across a team’s workflows is the equivalent of trying to change your destination airport after you’ve already flown into weather. It’s not impossible, but it’s expensive, stressful, and far more likely to end badly. Risk management belongs in the design conversation on day one, and not in the incident review six months later.

The diversion wasn’t a failure.

Nobody remembers that flight as a bad day. We made the airport, on schedule for what mattered, with nothing more dramatic than a longer layover than planned. That’s what good risk management actually looks like – not heroics, not close calls retold as bravado – just a series of unremarkable, disciplined decisions that never had to become a story about what went wrong.

The managers who will deploy AI well over the next few years won’t be the ones who moved fastest. They’ll be the ones who knew, at every stage, exactly which airport they were headed to, and were willing to divert the moment the weather said otherwise.

This post was originally published on here. 

A 43-year-old man was arrested and indicted for assaulting a minor, causing serious bodily harm, by a person responsible for a child, Israel Police said.

Police also released a video, seen by The Jerusalem Post, that appeared to show a seven-year-old child being kicked by a man police identified as his uncle while lying on the ground.

The police received a report of the assault in a northern village on August 11, and Northern District police officers arrived at the village and arrested the suspect.

The investigation revealed that the child lives in the same house as his mother and uncle. During a family argument that took place in the uncle’s presence, the police allege that he took the child to the yard of the house, kicked him while on the ground, then lifted him up and threw him into a garbage bin. 

The child was taken for medical treatment after the incident, after sustaining numerous injuries to his body.  

State Attorney’s office requests extension of custody

The suspect was indicted on August 24, after several extensions of the suspect’s detention, and the Northern District State Attorney’s Office requested to keep him in custody until the end of legal proceedings. 

This post was originally published on here. 

The United States will refrain from striking Iran “for the time being,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told several foreign counterparts, Axios reported Tuesday, citing a US official and a second source familiar with the matter.

According to the sources, the US instead intends to pressure Tehran through other means, including the recently announced Operation Economic Outcast, though the official did not rule out a return to strikes should Iran attack the US first.

Another US official said that the US Navy’s clearing of mines from the Strait of Hormuz is a “watershed moment in the war,” which removes one of Iran’s main points of leverage in the war.

“The Iranians have lost control over the strait. Now the US controls it,” Axios quoted one US official as saying.

Rubio outlined the Trump administration’s current policy on Iran to his counterparts, Axios reported, including the intention to avoid military action against Iran for the time being, increasing economic pressure on Tehran, and transporting as much oil as possible through the Strait of Hormuz.

The policy is expected to last until after the US midterm elections on November 3, according to a second US official, after which a new military offensive might return to the table.

“The Iranian economy is in free fall, and the regime’s military has been decimated,” US State Department Spokesman Tommy Pigott told Axios, “and we are cutting off every financial lifeline the regime has remaining.”

“The president has been clear that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon, and that he will use the tools necessary to ensure that objective is accomplished.”

US launches Operation Economic Outcast

Operation Economic Outcast was announced on Monday by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, following earlier threats of an “economic D-Day” against the regime.

“Our objective is to sever every economic lifeline that sustains this tyrannical regime until Tehran stands alone,” said Bessent.

Bessent described the operation as “a sustained campaign to collapse every last option for Iran,” saying that those involved in “any” economic cooperation with Tehran would expose themselves to “the full reach of American power.”

He added that Iran faces a “very clear choice,” saying the regime can either accept “complete global isolation” or a path to normalcy.

Bessent described the operation’s methods as actions that will “tighten the noose” around Iran’s funding sources, leaving it “no breathing space.”

He listed five Iranian “vital lifelines” that the operation would initially target: digital assets, technology, gold, aviation, and shipping.

Aaron Glick, Esther Davis, and Reuters contributed to this report.

This post was originally published on here. 

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani said on Tuesday he did not support an upcoming event in his city featuring the leader of the Hindu nationalist group that is the ideological parent of India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Mohan Bhagwat, chief of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), is scheduled to speak at a Manhattan event on Saturday, according to the event’s website.

“I don’t support the rally, but I don’t know if the city has any jurisdiction to cancel a private event,” Mamdani, who is the first Muslim and Indian American mayor of New York City, said when asked if the event should be canceled.

“The vision of India that I was taught by my family and one that I grew up being very familiar with was of a pluralistic society of a secular Republic that believed in the belonging of each and every person who was from India. And it has been incredibly troubling to see the rise of a movement that is predicated on an exclusionary vision.”

The event’s website casts the August 29 gathering as the “Universal Oneness Celebration” bringing together the Hindu American community.

Local organizations criticize Bhagwat, UN condemned RSS involvement

The organizers, American Hindus for Engagement and Dialogue, say several Hindu American groups back the event, which promotes shared heritage and interfaith unity. Many local organizations have criticized it over Bhagwat’s attendance and the RSS’s history. 

The RSS, a powerful Hindu group from which Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi‘s BJP emerged, said in May it had organized foreign visits, including to the US, to counter perceptions that it is a paramilitary outfit involved in attacks on minority communities. 

The US Commission on International Religious Freedom says the RSS “has been involved in acts of extreme violence and intolerance against members of minority groups for decades.”

The RSS disputes intolerance accusations and says it is a “Hindu-centric civilizational, cultural movement” whose goal is to “carry the nation to the pinnacle of glory,” including by uniting Hindus. 

United Nations and human rights groups say abuse of Indian minorities has risen in recent years, pointing to rising hate speech, a religion-based citizenship law, the demolition of Muslim-owned properties, the removal of Muslim-majority Kashmir’s autonomy, and an anti-conversion legislation that challenges freedom of belief.

The BJP-led Indian government denies being discriminatory and says its policies, including food subsidy programs and electrification drives, benefit all communities. 

This post was originally published on here. 

The confrontation between the United States and Iran has entered a new phase. The military conflict that dominated headlines earlier this year is increasingly giving way to a broader contest of economic pressure, maritime security, diplomacy, and great-power competition. This is part of the changing world order, as the conflict accelerates new trends around the world.

The Trump administration has made it clear that it believes the next stage of the campaign will rely less on airstrikes and more on isolating Iran economically while maintaining military deterrence. Tehran, meanwhile, is seeking to mobilize its remaining allies and show it still has leverage.

Here are five ways the US-Iran conflict is changing.

1. The Strait of Hormuz may be shifting from a battlefield to a shipping corridor

One of the clearest signs of the transition came today, when President Donald Trump announced that the US Navy had successfully cleared naval mines from the Strait of Hormuz. “All mines have been removed and/or detonated from within the International Waters of the Strait of Hormuz,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The message was about more than mines. It was intended to demonstrate that Washington intends to guarantee freedom of navigation despite months of Iranian attempts to disrupt maritime traffic. Trump also warned that Iran had been informed that any vessel attempting to lay additional mines would be “immediately and systematically destroyed.” The US has backed freedom of navigation as policy since the Woodrow Wilson administration more than 100 years ago.

For decades, Iran has viewed the Strait of Hormuz as one of its strategic anchors. Around one-fifth of global oil shipments traditionally transited the waterway. The ability to threaten shipping has provided Tehran with leverage during periods of crisis. It did this in 2019, mining ships. The US objective now appears to be removing that leverage while reassuring global energy markets that international shipping can continue.

2. Economic pressure has become Washington’s primary weapon. The Trump administration has also signaled that economic pressure will now become the centerpiece of US strategy

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced the launch of Operation Economic Outcast, describing it as an unprecedented whole-of-government campaign to isolate Iran financially. “In the Second World War, D-Day marked the historic beginning of a campaign with our allies to target and drive the enemy from its positions,” Bessent said. “Today, in that same spirit, we are launching an economic onslaught against Iran’s financial connections around the globe.”

The Treasury Department indicates it has mapped Iranian financial networks, oil smuggling operations, sanctions evasion mechanisms, and funding channels linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The goal is to sever what Washington describes as every remaining economic lifeline supporting the regime.

Unlike previous sanctions campaigns, this initiative appears designed as an open-ended global effort rather than a series of individual sanctions packages. Washington is also framing the campaign as a choice for third countries: align with the United States or risk becoming economically isolated alongside Iran. It remains to be seen if this will work. 

3. China is slowly expressing its concern about the conflict as it inches its way into the region

The new American strategy immediately highlighted another reality: the growing importance of China. Beijing criticized the new sanctions, warning that they would “only further intensify tensions” and arguing that China’s legitimate cooperation with Iran should not be disrupted. Chinese officials again opposed what they described as unilateral American sanctions. China has a 25-year economic deal with Iran. China also benefits from the US being tied up in fights with Iran.

Iranian officials have emphasized that China remains one of Tehran’s most important partners. Economy Minister Ali Madanizadeh argued that both China and Russia have shown no indication that they intend to fully comply with Washington’s new campaign.

This reflects a broader geopolitical competition. For years, Iran has looked eastward as relations with Western countries deteriorated. China has purchased Iranian oil, invested in infrastructure to a limited extent, and expanded political ties. Russia has likewise deepened military and strategic cooperation with Tehran. Iran expects more from China. China has shown it is cautious and pragmatic.

As a result, the US-Iran confrontation is becoming inseparable from wider competition among major powers as the world order shifts toward a multipolar world. The effectiveness of Operation Economic Outcast may depend not only on American enforcement but also on whether Beijing and Moscow decide to reduce their engagement with Tehran.

4. Iran is responding with economic measures and attempts at deterrence

Iran’s response illustrates that Tehran increasingly views economic pressure as another form of warfare. Madanizadeh described the new sanctions as an “economic terrorist attack” and warned that Washington should “expect an attack” in response. “We know how to play the game too,” he said during an interview broadcast on Iranian state television.

Although the precise meaning of those comments remains unclear, Iranian leaders have sought to respond to economic pressure through so-called asymmetric means. Previous periods of sanctions have coincided with responses that included cyber attacks, threats by Iranian-backed proxy groups, maritime attacks, and efforts to disrupt regional energy infrastructure. The fact that the US has been successful against mines may show Iran can’t control the tempo any longer.

5. Regional diplomacy is continuing alongside confrontation

Diplomacy has not evaporated. On August 25, Oman and Iran issued a joint statement following consultations between Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr bin Hamad Albusaidi and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. They posted about the new initiative on the social media platform X/Twitter.

The discussions focused on restoring safe navigation through the Strait of Hormuz while respecting sovereignty. Both governments said they discussed a phased framework that could provide a practical basis for moving forward following the recent conflict.

Oman has long played a key role in regional diplomacy. The Sultanate has maintained relations with both Washington and Tehran and has frequently served as a discreet channel for negotiations. Previous US-Iran nuclear talks also benefited from Omani mediation. This has led to US threats against Oman.

Iran is seeking to demonstrate resilience while preserving diplomatic options through partners such as Oman. Regional states are attempting to prevent another escalation that could once again threaten global energy markets. Oman’s outreach follows Pakistani officials’ visit to Tehran. 

This post was originally published on here. 

At least 15 infants were killed when a fire broke out at a state-run hospital in Pakistan‘s capital city, Islamabad, triggered by a fault in the air conditioning system, local broadcaster Geo TV reported on Wednesday.

The fire, which broke out at the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) hospital, started around two hours ago, the broadcaster said, adding that “cooling operations” were ongoing.

There were 16 newborns at the hospital’s gynecology ward when the fire broke out, one of whom was rescued, according to Geo. 

This is a developing story.

This post was originally published on here. 

In a lifetime of theater-going I have never heard the word “historiography” on stage. 

But that is exactly what the Tony-Award winning playwright Jonathan Spector served up in his astonishing new play “Birthright.” 

In its first act, set in 2006, we join six friends just back from a Birthright Israel trip. Lev, the seeker of “meaning,” introduces “historiography.” For historians, like me, that is the craft of writing history. Lev drops it into a speech about Yosef Hayim Yersushalmi’s masterwork “Zakhor: Jewish History and Jewish Memory.”

I was stunned. “Zakhor” was published in 1982. Every historian of my generation has read it. My notes on it are so old that they were typed. But it is not a book that many people outside the academy, or even many of my graduate students, have read. 

Its author, Yosef Hayim Yerushalmi (1932-2009), was a professor of Jewish history at Columbia University and a giant in the field. In just a hundred pages, “Zakhor” lays out the tension between the Jewish people’s collective memory and the disruption the modern scholarly study of the Jewish past raised for the Jewish faith. 

‘Lev wrestles with the Jewish past and the fractures of the Jewish present’

To give an example: In 2001, the prominent Los Angeles Rabbi David Wolpe preached at Passover that scholars agree “that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way it happened, if it happened at all.” By giving voice to the modern historical approach, Wolpe’s sermon caused a firestorm.

A few weeks after Oct. 7, 2023, Spector was invited by Miami New Drama’s artistic director, Michel Hausmann, to write a play about this moment in American Jewish life. The play, which premiered in Miami in 2025 and recently completed an extended off-Broadway run at MCC Theater, follows six American Jews over 18 years, exploring how their friendships, Jewish identities and relationships to Israel evolve in the years before and after Oct. 7. 

Early in his research, Spector stumbled on a single quotation from “Zakhor” in the playwright Tony Kushner’s edited collection of essays “Wrestling with Zion.” 

That led Spector to Yerushalmi’s meditation on memory and Jewish history. He considers its analysis so significant that in an earlier draft, Lev’s discourse about Zakhor went on for 10 pages. 

Lev wrestles, as does the play, with the Jewish past and the fractures of the Jewish present. 

The Bible commands Jews to remember, “zakhor,” his past “like 200 times,” Lev tells us. (Yerushalmi actually counted 169 times.)

“Zakhor” shows, Lev explains, just which parts of Jewish history claim a unique place within Jewish tradition. The narrative that extends from Abraham to the destruction of the Second Temple became a central pillar of the Jewish faith, embodied in holidays, prayer and ritual, enacted and re-enacted by the community across the millennia. 

But for medieval rabbis, once the Second Temple was destroyed, history became unimportant. Historiography disappeared from Jewish writing until the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492. With that rupture, and stunned by this trauma, some 16th-century Jews took up their pens to write histories of Jewish suffering since the fall of the Second Temple.

Then history writing once again vanished from Jewish literature until it was again sparked by trauma. 

In 1819, antisemitic “Hep! Hep!” riots, perpetrated largely by craftsmen, small merchants and other townspeople who opposed Jewish emancipation, broke out in Bavaria and spread throughout Germany. In response, a small group of young German Jewish men, whose ranks would come to include the not-yet-converted Heinrich Heine, met in Berlin.

They founded the Society for the Culture and Scientific Study of the Jews. That laid the foundation for the modern writing of Jewish history based on the evidentiary record. 

Spector dedicated the play to his father, Ronald H. Spector

This scholarship, as Wolpe shows us, challenged and continues to challenge Jews and Judaism. Yerushalmi ruefully captured, as Lev reminds us, that today’s Jews may know much more about their past thanks to the writing of history. Yet, as a collective, they remember much less. 

Lev’s search for meaning led him to quit his Birthright trip. Heading off on his own, he latched on to a group of Australian aid workers and followed them into the West Bank. Later, having stumbled upon “Zakhor” in a Haifa used bookstore, Lev comes to believe that Yerushalmi explains what his friends were trying to understand while they were together on the trip: the disconnect between the miracle that became the Jewish state and the violence and suffering that surround it.

Spector told me that he was drawn to Yerushalmi’s assertion that “history has now become the faith of fallen Jews”; that is, as traditional religious belief and practice receded, modern Jews increasingly turn to history as a way of understanding what it means to be Jewish and maintaining a connection to the Jewish past.

Spector had to cut that line from the play. But he had Chaya, the character “in search of community,” call their group “Fallen Jews.” 

Spector dedicated the play to his father, Ronald H. Spector, the distinguished military historian. 

But the son said that it took Yerushalmi’s book, not his father, to introduce him to historiography and to what he has Lev call “the extremely weird and unique relationship” that Jews have with history and historiography. 

I am apparently one of only three people to so far have raised “Zakhor” with Spector during this run of the play. None of the glowing reviews or interviews I have read grasped that he considers this struggle between collective memory and history a “touchpoint” for “Birthright.”

In the past, one Jewish response to trauma was the turn to Jewish history. When Yerushalmi wrote “Zakhor,” the explosion of history-making around the Shoah, including the scores of Holocaust museums and memorials presenting this story to the public, had not yet emerged as another example of historians writing in response to trauma.

I know that historians need distance to write about the past. It is too soon for us to reflect on the story of Oct. 7 and its impact on America’s Jews. But fortunately for theater-lovers, it is not too soon for playwrights to take up the charge.

American University Professor Pamela S. Nadell, the author of the award-winning “Antisemitism, an American Tradition,” has been the Jewish Studies consultant for productions of “The Lehman Trilogy.“

This post was originally published on here.