Hostages are not a political issue, freed hostage Omer Wenkert tells Herzog
Wenkert and his parents stated that Omer wouldn't stop speaking about his experience in Hamas captivity until the last hostage was brought home.
PresidentIsaac Herzog met with released Gaza hostage Omer Wenkert and his parents to discuss Omer's experience in captivity and the challenges of recovery on Tuesday
'Your presence here is a message of hope—to encourage those still held captive, to cry out on their behalf, to pray, and to do everything possible to bring every one of them home, as soon as possible,' Herzog said.
Wenkert, who was held by Hamas for over a year after being kidnapped from a bomb shelter in Kibbutz Re'im following the Nova Music Festival Massacre and was released this past February, told the president that the hostages should not be treated as a political issue.
'First and foremost, it is our duty—as a people and as a state—to bring all our people back,' he said, expressing how worried he was regarding the condition of the remaining hostages.
'They don't have time. Not one more minute. Let's save them. Let's save ourselves so we can truly begin to rise again,' Niva, Omer's mother, added.
Omer's father, Shai, stated that until the last hostage is returned, Omer would continue to testify to what he endured in captivity.
'We are part of the most important struggle in the State of Israel, bringing all the hostages home,' he said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
2 hours ago
- UPI
Supreme Court allows terrorism victims to sue Palestinian groups
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday unanimously upheld a federal law that allows victims of terrorism to sue Palestinian entities in U.S. courts. File Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo June 20 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday unanimously upheld a federal law that allows victims of terrorism to sue two Palestinian entities in U.S. courts. The decision reversed the U.S. Court of Appeals in the New York-based 2nd Circuit that found the law denied the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority fair legal process. All nine justices ruled that the bipartisan 2019 law, called the Promoting Security and Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, does not violate due process rights of the PLO and PA. The lawsuit and appeal involve cases from the early 2000s and not the Israel-Hamas war and airstrikes between Israel and Iran. It was based on the Antiterrorism Act of 1990, which creates a federal civil damages action for U.S. nationals injured or killed "by reason of an act of international terrorism." Founded in 1964, the PLO is internationally recognized as the official representative of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories. The PA, founded in 1994, is the Fatah-controlled government body that exercises partial civil control over the Palestinian enclaves in the West Bank. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the 46-page opinion that included a concurrence by Justice Clarence Thomas and backed by Justice Neil Gorsuch, who wanted to define the boundaries of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. Lawsuits by U.S. victims of terrorist attacks in Israel can move forward in American courts. "It is permissible for the Federal Government to craft a narrow jurisdictional provision that ensures, as part of a broader foreign policy agenda, that Americans injured or killed by acts of terror have an adequate forum in which to vindicate their right to ATA compensation," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court. In April, the high court consolidated two cases for arguments: a Justice Department appeal and an appeal by the family of Israeli-American Ari Fuld, who was fatally stabbed at a shopping mall in the West Bank in 2018. The Biden administration initially intervened in Fuld's case and another one brought by 11 American families who sued the Palestinian leadership groups and were awarded $650 million in a 2025 trial for several attacks in Israel.
Axios
2 hours ago
- Axios
"Zero tolerance": SF leaders denounce recent acts of antisemitism
Local officials and community leaders gathered Friday at City Hall to condemn a recent string of antisemitic incidents and to assure San Franciscans that perpetrators will be punished. Why it matters: The public stand comes after Jewish-owned cafe Manny's was vandalized and a man accused of a violent attack in the Marina was charged with a hate crime. What they're saying: "As a member of the Jewish community, these incidents hit close to home," Mayor Daniel Lurie said. "I want to be clear that we have zero tolerance for acts of hatred. ... If you commit a hate crime in San Francisco, we will find you and we will arrest you." There has been "a dramatic rise in antisemitism locally and nationally, on both polar extremes left and right of our politics," Tye Gregory, executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council, said at the press conference. "This isn't about what's going on outside of the United States in the Middle East or anywhere else," district attorney Brooke Jenkins said. "This is about what we believe and who we are." State of play: Since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks, the Bay Area Jewish Community Federation has recorded over 40 threats — including bomb threats to local synagogues, schools and community centers — and more than 220 incidents of harassment and intimidation, senior vice president Rebecca Randall said Friday. Manny's was hit with graffiti saying "F**k Manny" and "The only good settler is a dead 1" following a night of anti-ICE protests earlier in June. Meanwhile, the attack in the Marina occurred after a Jewish woman asked a group of people to stop shouting "F**k Jews, free Palestine," she told the San Francisco Chronicle. Juan Diaz-Rivas punched the woman's friend, repeating antisemitic remarks and causing him to lose consciousness, prosecutors allege. Diaz-Rivas has pleaded not guilty. The big picture: Jewish leaders across the nation have warned that President Trump's invocation of antisemitism to justify policies like slashing college funds and deporting student protesters risks making Jewish people scapegoats.
Washington Post
2 hours ago
- Washington Post
Israel is succeeding but will it overreach?
The Middle East is being reshaped by a fundamental shift in the balance of power: the rise of Israel. Consider the changed landscape. In the 1990s, Israel was closer to a run-of the-mill developing country. Today, its per capita gross domestic product rivals many in Europe and is the highest in the region, except for Qatar (which has a lot of oil and gas and few people). In 1990, Israel's GDP per capita was slightly higher than Iran's; today, it is nearly 15 times Iran's. The country now operates at the frontiers of technology, which is why the Gulf states have been so eager to develop ties with it. And in the last two years, Israel's military and intelligence forces have fought and bested Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, Syria and Iran. Its multi-tiered air defenses have stopped the vast majority of incoming missiles and drones. Put this all together, and you have a country that has become the region's superpower. Even so, Israeli officials were cautious about acting forcefully against some of the threats they faced. As Steven Cook of the Council on Foreign Relations points out, for the last two decades, the conventional wisdom in the United States and in Israel was that with adversaries such as Hezbollah and Iran — which had thousands of rockets and missiles that they could rain down on Israel — deterrence was the best that Israel could achieve. Every time it suffered a blow, Israel hit back, but it all seemed calculated to avoid escalation. The attacks on Oct. 7, 2023, changed the Israeli mindset, much as 9/11 did for the United States. The country's leaders were far more willing to take risks and confront adversaries preemptively, even preventively. Even so, it launched its exploding pager operation last September only because the plans were in danger of being exposed. Only then did the rest of Israel's attack follow, and it succeeded beyond all expectations, utterly devastating Hezbollah's leadership and its rocket infrastructure. This was the turning point. Hezbollah, the foe on Israel's borders it feared the most, turned out to be a paper tiger. In 2024, Israel attacked and destroyed many of Iran's air defenses. Neither of Israel's attacks that year produced anything near the kind of response that it had feared. Instead, the effect of these blows was to trigger the fall of Syria's Bashar al-Assad, who had been propped up by Iran, Hezbollah and Russia. And so, in 2025, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to act on the threat that he had been obsessed with for more than 30 years — and to act aggressively. He launched an air attack against Iran and, so far, it has destroyed much of Iran's military leadership and infrastructure. While it has not destroyed the Natanz and Fordow nuclear facilities, both of which are at least partially buried deep below ground, it has destroyed much of the rest of Iran's nuclear operations. President Donald Trump, who had been eager to negotiate a deal with Iran, counseled Netanyahu not to attack (by Trump's own admission), and, when Israel did anyway, Secretary of State Marco Rubio put out a statement distancing the United States from the operation. Since then, watching Israel's success, Trump has had FOMO — fear of missing out — and embraced the operation, even signaling that he might join in and use America's massive firepower to blast Fordow. But ultimately, putting an end to Iran's nuclear program cannot be done with just bombs, even bunker-busting ones. Iran is a country of 90 million, with a nuclear program that is now almost 70 years old, started under the shah. Thousands of scientists and technicians have worked on it. And nuclear technology is not cutting-edge technology; it was developed more than 80 years ago, in the era of shortwave radio and television tubes. The best way to put it under wraps is to make Iran agree to do so and verify that through intrusive inspections. One of the dangers of military success is that it often expands the victor's ambitions. After a stunning initial success in the Korean War, Gen. Douglas MacArthur decided he would try to unify the two Koreas and moved into the North, triggering a massive Chinese response that bogged down American forces for years. After Afghanistan fell in a matter of weeks in 2001, the Bush administration was emboldened to take the War on Terror to Iraq. In 1982, Israel's early successes in Lebanon led it to try to 'solve the problem' once and for all. What followed was an 18-year unsuccessful occupation of southern Lebanon. Israel's victories have been extraordinary so far, but they are making the country's leaders expand their ambitions — with some openly speaking about regime change and assassinating Iran's supreme leader. They are also emboldening Trump, who wants to get in on the glory. But it is at moments such as this that wise leaders avoid hubris and overreach and instead set clear, achievable goals that can transform military victories into lasting political success.
