Chief of Staff Halevi Resigns
The chief of staff of the IDF—Herzi Halevi, who held the top position in Israel’s armed forces—has resigned. After decades in the army, he will remove his uniform permanently on March 6.
This is an explosive development, but on the other hand, it was also expected. Halevi certainly sensed the proverbial noose tightening around his neck. The minister of defense made it clear that he had no confidence in the chief of staff, as I have reported on several occasions, and with new information coming to light from the inquiries into the events leading up to October 7, it became increasingly apparent that Halevi was about to take the blame for the army’s serious failures at the time. Other IDF officials are expected to resign in his wake, and one general— Yaron Finkelman, commander of the Southern Command—sent his own letter of resignation just a few hours after Halevi announced his decision. “I failed to protect the western Negev and its beloved residents,” Finkelman wrote, explaining his decision to step down. Rumor has it that the head of the Shin Bet will be the next official to resign.
Herzi Halevi wrote in his letter of resignation, “I knew very well when I took command of the IDF that I was assuming the major responsibility to ensure that the IDF would be ready to face the supreme test of war, that it would know how to deter our enemies and, in the event that it failed to avert a threat in advance, to stand between the enemies and our citizens. On the morning of October 7, the IDF under my command failed in its mission to protect the citizens of Israel. The State of Israel paid a heavy and painful price in deaths, in hostages, and in people who suffered physical and psychological wounds. The heroic and daring acts of many—security forces personnel, IDF soldiers and commanders, and courageous civilians—were not sufficient to avert the terrible tragedy. My responsibility for this horrific failure accompanies me every day and every hour, and it will continue to do so for the rest of my life.”
The letter goes on to enumerate the IDF’s successes after the massacre on October 7 and concludes, “The goals of this war still haven’t been fully achieved. The IDF will continue fighting for the dismantlement of Hamas and its governance capabilities and for the return of all the hostages, and will reinforce the security conditions that are intended to allow the residents of the north and south to finish returning to their homes safely.”
Returning to the topic of his own failure, Halevi’s letter continues, “In recognition of my responsibility for the IDF’s failure on October 7, now that the IDF has made exceptional accomplishments and has rehabilitated the deterrence and power of the State of Israel, I request to conclude my tenure on March 6, 2025. I made this decision a long time ago. Now, as the IDF has the upper hand in all the theaters of combat and another hostage agreement is underway, the time has come. With the time remaining to me, I will complete the investigations and will continue strengthening the IDF’s readiness for the challenges that lie ahead. In that way, I will transfer command of the IDF in a proper and organized way to my successor. I will always be a soldier of the State of Israel. General Herzi Halevi, Chief of General Staff.”
Concrete Intelligence Was Ignored
As the results of the IDF investigations come to light, an increasingly incriminating picture is emerging of the conduct of the army, especially the military intelligence division, as well as the Shin Bet and possibly the Mossad. Ronen Bergman of Yediot Acharonot is one of the journalists who has been repeatedly publishing information from the investigations, which are still classified. (Bergman also writes for the New York Times and its weekly supplement, the New York Times Magazine, where he is not bound by the restrictions imposed by the Israeli censor.) This week, Bergman revealed that an internal IDF investigation in recent months uncovered dramatic information that caused serious heartache to the investigators: It was revealed that intelligence sources within Gaza relayed information on the night before October 7 that showed worrying signs that Hamas was preparing for an attack on Israel. These sources even warned Israeli intelligence of the potential of a Hamas raid on the communities in the Gaza envelope. Nevertheless, senior IDF officials refused to take action based on the information; they preferred to believe the misleading indications that Hamas had crafted to lull the Israeli defense establishment into a false sense of security. The worrying signs that should have set off giant red lights in the decision makers’ minds included reports that Hamas was preparing to fire rockets from Gaza into Israel, as well as indications that the Gaza Strip was being readied for a state of emergency. Nevertheless, Israeli officials chose to remain indifferent and inactive.
According to Bergman’s report, the signs of this intelligence failure came to light in an IDF investigation into the onset of the war. This information appeared in documents that were recently assessed by high-ranking officials in the government and defense establishment; some officials pointed to these documents as an explanation for Herzi Halevi’s decision to resign. In contrast to the government’s previous claims, these documents indicate that there were signs not only that Hamas was preparing to attack Israel, but also that the attack was imminent. Worst of all, despite the flow of intelligence from the Gaza Strip, the IDF brass chose to believe the reassuring signs deliberately planted by Hamas as a smokescreen for their activities rather than giving credence to the intelligence they had received. Following a hasty assessment of the situation, the officials chose to refrain from exposing sensitive sources of intelligence by acting on their warnings; therefore, they declined to go on alert in advance of the expected attack. These revelations have exposed a dramatic and disturbing aspect of the events of the night before the massacre. One of the participants in the recent discussion labeled this revelation a “nuclear bomb.”
Why Wasn’t the Nova Festival Canceled?
In light of the importance and the disturbing nature of these revelations, I will share some details of the army’s findings. At 2:00 a.m., several hours before Hamas began its attack, the IDF received a report of unusual activity in the Gaza Strip. At 3:00, the commander of the Southern Command held a phone consultation with his staff after receiving concrete information about multiple SIM cards that had been activated in cell phones held by Hamas, along with other sensitive intelligence information. One of the possible scenarios discussed by the IDF officials was a terrorist invasion of Israeli territory. At 4:00 a.m., two hours before the terrorists infiltrated Israel, Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi issued instructions for an unmanned drone to be launched to survey Hamas’s preparations to fire on Israel. Nevertheless, the IDF did not implement any measures to defend the country or to prepare for a possible attack.
It is hard to imagine any chain of events more egregious than this. Many believe that the chief of staff resigned due to the concern that the IDF’s internal probes would be publicized and his reputation would be shattered. Meanwhile, more investigations are taking place within the Southern Command, the IDF’s operational division, and the intelligence division. According to someone who was present for one of the recent discussions, a high-ranking officer decried the IDF’s failure to cancel the Nova music festival, which was held near Gaza on that night. “Let’s assume that we reached the conclusion that it was only a military exercise and there was no real danger of an actual attack,” he said. “Nevertheless, as soon as we received intelligence that the terrorists were preparing to fire rockets at Israeli territory, even if there was other information that indicated that we could be calm, the first thing we should have done was to immediately evacuate the area near the border where thousands of people had congregated without sufficient protection in the event of rocket attacks.”
Hundreds of people attended this unnecessary music festival, which was held in blatant violation of Shabbos and Yom Tov, and 364 of the participants were murdered by Nukhba terrorists, while another 44 were abducted and taken to Gaza. This event had received all the necessary security permits and clearance from the IDF; after all, it was adjacent to the border. And this was perhaps the ultimate failure. How is it that the permits for this party weren’t canceled? That is what should have been done even if there was only a minor suspicion that an attack was imminent, and this was much more than a minor suspicion. Remember, there were some sources who claimed that the attack was definitely about to happen.
This issue has reached the state comptroller’s desk, and he is currently evaluating whether it was negligent for the permits for the festival to be issued in the first place, and whether someone should be held accountable for the fact that the party wasn’t canceled in light of the intelligence warnings. The comptroller has complained that the IDF isn’t cooperating with his inquiry into this matter. It seems that we are only at the beginning of a wave of revelations and resignations that may yet shake the country.
The Terrorist Came from Brooklyn to Murder in Tel Aviv
The subject of Israeli officials failing to prevent terror leads us to another story: Two stabbing attacks took place in Tel Aviv last week. In the first incident, a 28-year-old man was critically wounded by a terrorist from Tulkarem who was in the country illegally and who was shot and killed after stabbing his victim. The second incident took place on Tuesday evening and injured five people, one of them seriously. In this case, the terrorist was a 29-year-old Moroccan citizen named Qadi Abed al-Aziz who held an American green card and had arrived in Israel from Brooklyn just three days earlier.
This terror attack indicates more serious failings on the part of Israeli intelligence, as the terrorist should never have been able to enter the country in the first place. For one thing, the Israeli consulate in New York hesitated to issue him a visa when he first applied. (A non-Jew who wishes to visit Israel is required to apply for a visa in advance.) Nevertheless, the application was relayed to the Shin Bet for further examination, and they saw no reason to turn him down. At the consulate, he presented documents showing that he was an excellent Uber driver with a five-star rating and over 3000 trips. He also provided details on his bank account and documents indicating that he had over 10,000 dollars in his possession, which proved his economic ability. The fact that he had a green card also contributed to the officials’ certainty that he was not planning to remain in Israel; they assumed that he would return to the United States and continue the process of receiving citizenship. The Shin Bet approved his request within two days.
This wasn’t the end of the intelligence agency’s blunders. When the terrorist arrived at Ben Gurion Airport, the border control officers grew suspicious since he had no explanation for the purpose of his visit, no money, and no information as to where he was planning to stay. The Shin Bet was called in, as is the standard procedure in such cases, and they ultimately allowed him to enter Israel. There is only one possible explanation for their decision: They didn’t investigate the man thoroughly enough. His social media posts in support of terrorism were accessible to anyone on the internet and provided a wealth of evidence against him, but the Shin Bet somehow failed to uncover that evidence. After the terror attack, Interior Minister Moshe Arbel called on the director of the Shin Bet to investigate this serious incident and to identify his agency’s failings. The Shin Bet released a laconic statement of its own to the media: “When [the terrorist] entered Israel, a security check was conducted that included questioning the subject and other investigations. In the end, it was decided that there was insufficient data to serve as a basis for preventing him from entering the country for security reasons. The case will be investigated further.”
The terrorist, who flew from New York to Poland and then caught a connecting flight to Israel, came to this country for only one purpose—to murder Jews. Before the terror attack, he entered a pizza store and bought several slices. The owner of the pizza shop certainly realized just a few minutes later that he had been narrowly spared from death. As I mentioned, the terrorist arrived in Israel with very little money and without an explanation as to where he was planning to stay. A police officer who was standing beside the Interior Ministry worker at the airport also was suspicious of al-Aziz, whose body language seemed to indicate tension. Al-Aziz was sent for questioning by the Shin Bet, but they concluded that there was no reason to prevent him from entering the country. While the Shin Bet has been faulted for making a bad judgment call, they are laying the blame on the Ministry of the Interior. In any event, this was a massive failure on the part of Israel’s security services.
Four More Hostages Return
Last Sunday, the entire country was thrilled when Emily Damari, Doron Steinbrecher, and Romi Gonen were released in the first stage of the prisoner exchange deal with Hamas. The three young women remained in the hospital for a full week and were released only this Sunday, at which point they returned home in reasonable condition. On Shabbos, another four hostages were released: Liri Albag, Karina Ariyev, Daniella Gilboa, and Naama Levi. These four young women are soldiers in the IDF who served as lookouts at the Nir Oz base and were abducted from there on October 7. They were in captivity for 477 days. The country rejoiced at their return, and we were all saddened by the fact that the fifth lookout, Agam Berger, did not return with them. Berger is likely to be one of the hostages who will be freed next. A female civilian hostage, Arbel Yehud, was not freed this Shabbos, which Israel sees as a violation of the agreement, which calls for civilians to be released before soldiers. On account of this violation, Israel has barred Gazans from returning to the northern Gaza Strip until she is set free.
The four hostages who were freed on Shabbos were put through a vicious ordeal before they were sent home. They were placed on a stage by their captors, where Hamas held a ceremony of sorts marking their release. The four young ladies were dressed in makeshift uniforms provided by Hamas and then were handed over to the Red Cross. When they arrived in Israel, their parents were already waiting for them at a meeting point arranged by the IDF, and they were then airlifted by helicopter to Beilinson Hospital, where they were reunited with the rest of their family members. Huge crowds greeted them wherever they went; unfortunately, this meant that their return was accompanied by massive chillul Shabbos.
Speaking of Shabbos, I mentioned last week that Yair Lapid attacked the chareidi government ministers who returned home before the government meeting on Shabbos and left voting slips in support of the agreement with Hamas. Despite Lapid’s groundless accusation that the chareidim’s behavior might endanger the hostages’ timely release, I pointed out that it was actually the Supreme Court that nearly caused the hostages’ release to be delayed because it does not convene on weekends. In the interim, one of the Knesset members from the Likud party (who wears a yarmulke) attacked the chareidim as well, which was quite infuriating. What could possibly be wrong with supporting the agreement while still avoiding chillul Shabbos? In fact, what would have justified the unnecessary chillul Shabbos of remaining at the government meeting on Friday night?
The MK from the Likud party, a low-ranking official who released an insolent statement denouncing the chareidim and accusing them of apathy toward the hostages, was completely out of line. Contrary to his accusations, the chareidim care very deeply about every hostage—and they also care about the kedusha of Shabbos. It was precisely because of their deep concern for the hostages and their value for human life that they voted in favor of the agreement. The chareidi government ministers had no need to hear the discussions that would take place in the government meeting; they had already decided to support the agreement. And this was precisely because they care about the hostages—and they also care about the sanctity of Shabbos, kavod Shomayim, and daas Torah, which was clear on this topic and is not shaped by any government meetings or discussions between ministers. There was nothing wrong at all with leaving their voting slips behind and going home for Shabbos, since nothing that occurred at the meeting could possibly have changed their decision.
Academics Nervous About Chareidi Population Growth
I recently came across the latest issue of an economic newspaper that is in the habit of purveying anti-chareidi incitement, and I was surprised to find that the word “chareidim” did not appear on the front page. This newspaper typically features at least one article denouncing chareidim on its front page, yet this time there was no sign of their usual slanderous coverage. For a moment, I allowed myself to hope that this heralded a change for the better, and that the anti-religious journalists had begun to ease up on their attacks against chareidim. But then I spotted a different headline: “After Rushed Funding Release, MKs Appeal to Supreme Court Against Knesset.” Sure enough, this article turned out to be the latest anti-chareidi diatribe.
“The last-minute discussion in the Finance Committee on December 31, in which an allocation of 4.5 billion shekels was approved for chareidi and right-wing settlement schools in a whirlwind debate lasting about two hours, will now be brought before the courts,” the journalists explain on the front page of the newspaper. On page 4, a single headline spans the entire page: “They stole votes to steal funds: It’s time for change in the process of budget approvals, which has become robbery in pure daylight.” The editorial staff of this newspaper might be irritated by the way these allocations were passed, but that does not change the fact that it is standard parliamentary procedure. Yet for some reason, they are permitted to slander the chareidim with accusations of thievery. Yair Lapid was candid when he once said that there are different classes in Israeli society, and what goes for one class of people is considered unacceptable for others.
On a similar note, frightened statisticians are already predicting the end of Israeli society as they know it. A recent report projected that 120,000 non-chareidi babies (Jewish or other) will be born in Israel in the year 2039, in contrast to the 100,000 babies who will be born to chareidi parents. They may be even more frightened by the predictions made by the Central Bureau of Statistics for the year 2044, when they expect 127,000 babies to be born in the general populace, as opposed to 116,000 chareidi births. Just four years later, they expect chareidi births to outstrip those in the general populace, with 133,000 chareidi infants born in that year but only 129,000 births in other categories. They view this as an unmitigated disaster. Perhaps this is the reason for their efforts to funnel all the chareidim into a melting pot with the express purpose of secularizing the community.
Experts claim that it is not correct to include nationalist chareidim in the same category as the general populace. Out of the 15 percent of Israeli citizens who define themselves as “national religious,” they explain, there are 28 percent who label themselves “chareidi Torani.” Dr. Gilad Malach of the Israel Democracy Institute considers this group even more problematic than the chareidim. “The chareidim want mainly to preserve their community, but the chardalim [nationalist chareidim] want to put a yarmulke on the entire state,” he fretted. He is probably wrong about that, but in his view, births in the nationalist chareidi community should be grouped together with those in the chareidi community as a whole. And that will only serve to make the chareidi majority develop sooner. “The revolution,” Dani Bar-On writes in a scholarly article with a panicked tone, “is bound to happen sooner or later—depending on whether the birth rate decreases among chareidim or rises in the secular community.” Either way, they consider this a chilling prospect. Professor Ben-Moshe, a demographer and former deputy director of the CBS, is worried as well. “The chareidi population doubles in size every 17 years, whereas a population that grows by only half a percentage point every year takes 140 years to double,” he asserted.
At the end of the interview, Ben-Moshe was asked if his children live in Israel. “No,” he admitted. “One is in Germany, and the other is in England.”
Minister Katz Holds Portfolios for Ben-Gvir
Of course, we cannot let a week go by without some political news. Netanyahu’s coalition seems to have lost six supporters in the Knesset, thanks to the withdrawal of the Otzma Yehudit party, led by Itamar Ben-Gvir, from the government and the coalition. In the days leading up to his departure, Ben-Gvir repeatedly threatened to resign from the government and take his entire party with him if Israel signed an agreement requiring it to halt the fighting in Gaza. Sure enough, the ministers of Otzma Yehudit (Ben-Gvir, Yitzchok Wasserlauf, and Amichai Eliyahu) submitted their letters of resignation last Sunday. Eliyahu had resigned from the Knesset under the Norwegian Law when he accepted his ministerial position, allowing Yitzchok Kroizer to take his place, and he reclaimed his Knesset seat upon stepping down from his position as a minister. The other Knesset members from Otzma Yehudit are Almog Cohen, Tzvika Fogel, and Limor Son Har-Melech.
When Ben-Gvir made good on his threat to leave the government, he asserted that he is a man of his word. He also expressed anger toward Betzalel Smotrich and his colleagues, who failed to follow his example and resign from the government as well. Nevertheless, Smotrich was forced to vacate his government position for a short time in any event, for a more technical reason. When a minister who resigned from his Knesset seat under the Norwegian Law decides to resign from the government and reclaim his seat, the MK who replaced him is forced to give up the seat. In this case, when Amichai Eliyahu returned to the Knesset, he displaced MK Tzvi Sukkot, who had taken over his Knesset seat. Sukkot, however, is a member of Smotrich’s party, which shares a joint list with Otzma Yehudit. In order to maintain the balance of power between the two parties, Smotrich resigned from his ministerial position so that Kroizer, who is a member of Otzma Yehudit, would be forced to leave his seat in the Knesset. Smotrich intended to rejoin the government after this complicated maneuver. This entire process was necessary to preserve the delicate balance between the two right-wing parties, which have become political rivals to a certain degree.
The coalition members are certain that Ben-Gvir will soon return to the government table and to the coalition. They also believe that he will not act against the government in the interim. For that reason, Netanyahu has decided not to appoint new ministers to take over the ministries that were held by Otzma Yehudit. (Ben-Gvir was the minister of national security, Wasserlauf headed the Ministry of the Negev and Galil, and Amichai Eliyahu was in charge of the Heritage Ministry.) Many ministers from the Likud party (especially Avi Dichter, who previously held Ben-Gvir’s position) and Shas (which previously controlled the Ministry of the Negev and Galil) set their sights on various ministries held by Ben-Gvir’s people, but Netanyahu has decided for the time being to leave all three ministries under the control of Chaim Katz, the minister of tourism. And that speaks volumes about the current situation.
The Judges Ignore the Will of the People
I have already written in the past about the ongoing feud between Justice Minister Yariv Levin and Judge Yitzchok Amit, who was the next in line to become chief justice of the Supreme Court. The two men have been locked in conflict for many months, and the animosity between them has reached record heights over the past two weeks. It would take an entire article to cover all the events associated with their conflict. The bottom line is that the minister of justice refused to convene the Judicial Selection Committee to discuss appointing Amit as the chief justice. Levin argued that the numerous reports that have surfaced about inappropriate conduct on Amit’s part must be investigated before the process could take place. However, the judges of the Supreme Court convened last Thursday and issued a verdict requiring the committee to meet this Sunday. This may sound like pure corruption to you, but that doesn’t particularly bother the judges of the Supreme Court. Justice Minister Levin, who also serves as the chairman of the committee, decided to boycott the session, as did the other two representatives of the coalition: Minister Orit Strook and MK Yitzchok Kreuzer. Amit was also prohibited from participating in the committee session since it dealt with his own appointment as chief justice. With Levin and the other coalition members absent from the session, though, Amit’s appointment was guaranteed.
Levin made it clear that he will insist on having the allegations against Amit fully investigated, despite the insistence of Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara and Boaz Ballat, the head of the investigative division of the police force, that there is nothing to investigate. Levin’s calls for an investigation are based on about 15 news reports that indicate inappropriate conduct on Amit’s part, which includes presiding over court cases in which he had a clear conflict of interest. Levin claims that this behavior indicates that Amit is unfit for the position. Sure enough, the committee appointed Amit to the post of chief justice on Sunday, but Yariv Levin announced that he does not intend to recognize the appointment or to collaborate with Amit on the management of the courts. Since the judicial system requires certain administrative decisions to be made jointly by the chief justice and the minister of justice, this means that those decisions will not take effect. And until the end of Levin’s term as justice minister, the Supreme Court will therefore have only ten judges instead of fifteen.
In a nutshell, these are the allegations that were publicized against Justice Amit: In recent years, Amit has been involved in civil legal proceedings concerning an apartment in south Tel Aviv that he owns jointly with his brother. The court papers in those proceedings identify him by his previous name, Yitzchok Goldfriend, and Amit did not report his involvement in the case, nor were his attorneys aware that they were representing a Supreme Court justice. In one of those cases, an indictment was filed against him. A judge who was presiding over one of the cases involving Amit in Tel Aviv was also nominated as the “judges’ candidate” for a position debated by the Judicial Selection Committee at a time when Amit was serving on the committee. At the same time, Justice Amit also presided over cases that involved the same legal firm that represented him and his brother, and he also presided over a case involving the Tel Aviv municipality, which was pursuing the legal proceedings against him. Other news reports claim that illegal construction was performed on Justice Amit’s house in Mevasseret Tzion, and that the judge had failed to comply with a court order requiring him to demolish a portion of the roof of his home. Amit denied any wrongdoing at first, but then relented under public pressure and promised to have the house evaluated by professionals and to make any necessary adjustments. Yet another report claimed that Amit was involved in a case in the Supreme Court that involved his own brother. According to this report, Minister Dudi Amsalem had previously dissolved a board of directors that included Amit’s brother, and Amit then issued an injunction dealing with the issue. He has now been accused of acting amid a conflict of interest, which certainly might jeopardize his eligibility for the position of chief justice. Amit has responded to all the allegations against him, but his answers were not persuasive. As I said, this affair reeks of corruption, but the justices of the Supreme Court, and Yitzchok Amit in particular, have no qualms at all about that.
Benefits in the Wake of a Sacrifice
On Monday, we received the tragic news that the tzaddik Rav Eliyohu Cohen Naami had returned his pure soul to his Creator. Rav Eliyohu was killed in heroic circumstances—in the midst of saving a life. At the beginning of this month, he left his Gemara and plunged into a burning apartment to save a young child who had been trapped behind the flames. On Monday, copious tears were spilled while the maspidim paid tribute to the niftar for his heroic act. There is no doubt that he was ushered through the gates of Gan Eden upon his arrival in Shomayim.
This tragic death reminded me of a couple of similar incidents that took place four years ago and shook the country. In the first case, the heroic rescuer was Michoel Ben-Zikri of Ashkelon, who arrived at the Zikim beach and quickly discovered that a group of small children had begun drowning. Michoel managed to save the lives of a Bedouin woman and three children, but then he lost his life beneath the waves. In the second case, Motti Ben-Shabbat of Nahariya lost his life while saving a woman and her three children, as well as an elderly couple, who were trapped in their cars on the flooded streets during a torrential rainstorm. Motti was on his way to save another couple, who were standing on the roof of their car, when he succumbed to the flood and drowned. I can never forget the Ben-Zikri family, whom I visited during the shiva. I still remember the members of his family, including his son who was at the age of bar mitzvah, and the signs supporting the Shas party that hung on their front gate. At the Ben-Zikri home in Ashkelon, I was struck by an idea: The Knesset should pass a law guaranteeing benefits to the families of people who died while saving the lives of others. The initiative was quickly picked up by MK Michoel Malchieli and his aide, Akiva Chofi. The two men invested their hearts and souls in the effort and enlisted support for the bill, which was ultimately passed into law.
Knesset Shows Appreciation for Chareidi Organizations
This week, an event took place in the Knesset which was attended by Rav Yisroel Meir Lau and other noted figures. As usual, Rav Lau made a powerful impression simply by being who and what he is—a man of legendary accomplishments and prodigious knowledge who radiates majesty and refinement. In the Knesset auditorium last wek he was showered with admiration.
The event was dedicated in honor of the chareidi chessed organizations that have made a powerful impact on the country. Many of the foremost leaders of these organizations were present: Eli Pollak of United Hatzolah, Yosef Schwinger of ZAKA, Tzvi Chossid of ZAKA Tel Aviv, Ahrele Weingarten of Darchei Miriam, Mayor Meir Rubinstein of Beitar Illit, Yossi Levi of Netzach Yehuda, Chaim Ehrenthal of Zichron Menachem, Yisroel Almasi of Yedidim, Boruch Lieberman of Chaverim L’Refuah, and representatives of Ezer Mizion, Aleh, Mishmar, and Hatzolah (such as Rav Michoel Kakon of Bnei Brak) along with hundreds of other people who have dedicated their lives to communal work. (I hope they will forgive me for not mentioning them all by name.) It was a deeply impressive event.
The event was organized by MK Galit Distal-Atbaryan of the Likud. Every member of the Knesset is permitted to arrange a special event once a year, and this was the subject that she chose, which says something about her. In fact, anyone who has been listening to her public statements is aware that she is a strong advocate for the chareidi community as a whole and for Torah learners in particular. Many of the speakers at the event hailed MK Distal for her friendship to the chareidi community.
One of the speakers was Uri Maklev, who expounded on the difference between the concepts of chessed and tzedokah. Personally, I thought that the distinction is obvious: Tzedokah can be performed only for the poor, while chessed can be done for the wealthy as well. I will never forget the day when the famed philanthropist Reb Zev Wolfson asked me for twenty shekels to buy a salad in the Knesset cafeteria. I would never consider myself to have performed an act of tzedokah for him, but it was certainly chessed. The event also featured several fascinating panel discussions, and when Rachamim and Leah Atbaryan entered the room, the moderator announced, “We welcome Galit’s parents; they are the roots of all of this.” The couple received a ringing ovation, and for good reason.
Motti Weiss sang the song “Al Abba Lo Shoalim Sheailot” (“We Don’t Question a Father”), which made a powerful impression on his listeners, many of whom had experienced traumatic ordeals on Simchas Torah and thereafter. Mrs. Vered Atzmon-Meshulam, a medical psychologist and head of the resilience division in ZAKA, spoke about the emotional needs of those who provide aid to others. When Weiss sang the song “Aneinu,” it pierced every heart. “No matter how far I am, You are always near,” he sang with passion. “Answer us, He who hears the silent voice….” As usual, he was accompanied by Shulem Wagschal and young Yehuda Galili, who played music masterfully. Galili informed me that he had been a talmid in Rav Hillel Zaks’s yeshiva, Knesses Hagedolah.
“In that case, you can tell me something about him,” I said.
“Because the yahrtzeit is tomorrow?” he asked, surprising me with his knowledge. Indeed, the rosh yeshiva’s tenth yahrtzeit was marked on the 22nd of Teves (and he is the subject of a separate article in this week’s newspaper).
“I don’t have much to tell you,” he added, “but the rosh yeshiva invited me to meals at his home and was very kind to me.”
“That alone is a valuable story,” I replied.
During Motti Weiss’s performance, Uri Maklev was seated in the front row next to Rav Yitzchok Panger. As the singer passionately intoned his assertion that one cannot question a father, Maklev turned to his seatmate and said, “It’s true that we don’t question a father, but one must feel that Hashem is a Father!”
“Absolutely,” Rav Yitzchok agreed.
