Netanyahu's Hamas surprise attack 'pre-emptive call' fabrication and media manipulation investigation

Netanyahu's Hamas surprise attack 'pre-emptive call' fabrication and media manipulation investigation

A full-scale investigation has been launched into Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's manipulation of the record of a 'preemptive call' to Hamas in advance and the smuggling of foreign media.
The investigation began when Army Major General Avi Gil, who resigned in May, wrote to the prosecutor general to protest that "the official transcript of the conversation with the prime minister on the morning of October 7 appears to have been fabricated," regarding the fact that a high-ranking general had called the prime minister on the morning of the Hamas surprise attack and reported that "hundreds of armed forces were preparing to invade," the investigation began, the New York Times reported on the 14th, citing four sources.
The New York Times reported, citing four sources who were briefed on the investigation, that "the prime minister's aides are currently being investigated for altering the content of the call in the official record of Prime Minister Netanyahu's activities that day." While Prime Minister Netanyahu himself is not under investigation, officials in his office are already under investigation for leaking military secrets during the war between Israel and Hamas, as well as for allegedly altering official transcripts of conversations and threatening those who controlled access to them to enhance Netanyahu’s reputation, officials confirmed.

Netanyahu has been reporting on the developments of covert operations since before the U.S. presidential election, including the intensification of attacks on Hezbollah in Lebanon and airstrikes against Iran, to Trump’s son-in-law, Kushner, and as the Trump election became more tangible, he was the first to speak to Trump. Trump then spoke to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has been in close contact with the Ukrainian defense minister, a Muslim, since his appointment in May of last year.
The New York Times said the Israeli officials who spoke to the Times about the investigation were prohibited from speaking publicly about the matter, so they spoke on condition of anonymity.

On Oct. 7, 2023, the day Hamas launched its surprise attack on Israel, Netanyahu spoke frequently by phone with senior security officials, including the military minister, Major General Avi Gil, and Gil, the official said in the complaint, pressured one of the prime minister’s aides to falsify the transcript.
In one recorded conversation early in the morning on Oct. 7, Gil told the prime minister that “hundreds of Hamas operatives had begun to act in a way that suggested they might invade Israel,” three people briefed on the investigation told the Times.
“The timing of that call is one of the details that has been altered from the official transcript,” the Times said. “For more than a year, Netanyahu has denied being informed of the invasion in advance, and he has avoided a parliamentary inquiry that would assess the culpability of Israel’s military and political leaders, including himself.” The additional threat investigation into the forgery case is particularly complicated by a video that shows “a Netanyahu aide threatening a military officer who controls access to phone records,” according to four people briefed on the case.
The threat was captured on security cameras at the prime minister’s residence, and the prime minister’s top aide is accused of approaching the officer and “directing the recorder to tamper with Netanyahu’s conversations.”
The officer who received the threat told his commanding officers about the aide’s approach, fearing “that the aide might use the video to blackmail him in the future,” the people told the Times.
The additional investigation into Netanyahu’s aides also involves allegations that they secretly provided sensitive, classified security documents to foreign media outlets.

Six officials briefed on the secret deal said the “secret document” was an incident in which, when Prime Minister Netanyahu was under pressure from many sectors of Israeli society to agree to a ceasefire with Hamas in early September, he provided foreign media outlets with information about the killing of dozens of hostages held by Hamas, rather than releasing them, thereby reinforcing public opinion against the “broken negotiations” and sparking “anti-ceasefire protests” in Israel.

On September 8, in an attempt to reinforce his position against the ceasefire, Netanyahu issued a statement at a cabinet meeting citing an article published a few days earlier in the German tabloid Bild.

The Bild article was a memo written by a Hamas intelligence officer and then obtained by the Israeli military, and Bild reported that the document showed that Hamas had attempted to manipulate the families of the hostages into convincing Netanyahu to compromise in ceasefire talks and agree to less favorable terms for Israel. At the time, Netanyahu cited Bild’s report as saying Hamas was “trying to sow discord among us and wage psychological warfare against the families of the hostages,” and ceasefire talks collapsed, and efforts to free the hostages stalled as the Israeli military continued its heavy-handed approach.
Investigators are looking into whether Netanyahu was citing documents leaked by his aides, sources told the Times.
Netanyahu opposed the “ceasefire negotiations” at the time, saying the terms of the ceasefire would “allow Hamas to regroup.”
Netanyahu’s stance angered many of the hostages’ families, who claimed that “Netanyahu abandoned the hostages in favor of far-right lawmakers who threatened to destroy his coalition if he agreed to the ceasefire.”
Investigators are looking into whether Netanyahu is citing documents leaked by his aides, officials said.

Israeli intelligence agency Shin Bet is investigating this particular leak “because it comes from a confidential military intelligence database,” six officials briefed on the case told the Times.
One of Netanyahu’s aides, Eli Feldstein, was arrested and detained along with four unnamed military officers accused of helping to obtain the documents.
All five of the leakers have since been detained under a rare legal provision that can only be used in cases of extreme threats to national security.

Shin Bet’s investigation includes a London-based newspaper that was published in early September. An investigation into the “fabricated article” incident that occurred in the 180-year-old Jewish newspaper, the Jewish Chronicle, is also underway. The fabricated article supported Prime Minister Netanyahu’s “opposition to the ceasefire,” and the Jewish Chronicle later admitted to the fabricated information article and retracted it, and officials told the New York Times that “the article is believed to be completely fabricated and not based on leaked documents.” The core of the fabricated article was that “Hamas leader Sinwar planned to take hostages out of the Gaza Strip,” and based on the exclusive report by the British Jewish newspaper, Netanyahu stated on October 13 that “Israel must occupy the border area between Gaza and Egypt to prevent Hamas from smuggling weapons from Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula to Gaza,” and that “control of the Philadelphia Corridor, the border area, is an existential issue for Israel,” and announced the Israeli military’s border stationing policy. Justified.
The Jewish Chronicle report was reposted by one of Netanyahu’s sons, Yair, on his social media account, and the prime minister’s wife, Sara, mentioned the story during a meeting with the hostages’ families, emphasizing her “opposition to the ceasefire.”
The German tabloid Bild also reported on the story, but questions quickly arose about the Chronicle story, with the Israeli military’s chief spokesman, Major General Daniel Hagari, telling reporters that he had “no knowledge of any intelligence that Shinwar planned to flee Gaza with the hostages.” Other Israeli officials later called the Chronicle report a “ridiculous fabrication,” and the Chronicle’s editor, Jake Wallis Simons, apologized for the story and removed it from the paper’s website.
The freelance journalist who wrote the story, Elon Perry, has since cut ties with the Chronicle. “Being fooled by a reporter is every newspaper editor’s worst nightmare,” Simons wrote on his social media posts.

The report remained on the Chronicle’s website even after the Israeli military denied it, The New York Times reported on September 30.
The Chronicle retracted the stories only after Jonathan Freedland, a prominent journalist who had written columns for both the Chronicle and the Guardian, and other columnists cut ties with the Chronicle.

“Israeli national security journalists were told that the report bore the hallmarks of a disinformation campaign by Israeli government sources,” the Times said. “Such stories are often published in friendly publications outside Israel because foreign reporters and editors are less likely to vet them.”
See <Netanyahu’s Aides ‘Killed Six Hostages’ in Secret Media Deal to ‘Break Up Ceasefire’, November 4, 2024>