Netanyahu ‘knew exactly what Hamas was planning’ - Former Defense Minister
On Sunday, Israeli Knesset (Parliament) member and former Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of strengthening Hamas while knowing the terror group was planning the October 7th massacre.
In a lengthy post on X, Lieberman said that when he served as defense minister in 2016, he presented Netanyahu with Hamas’ plans to invade Israel and take hostages. Four months later, Netanyahu appeared before a Knesset committee and detailed the October 7th attack strategy.
“He spoke explicitly about Hamas' plan to invade the State of Israel with 1,000 or perhaps more terrorists, to occupy settlements, take hostages and kidnap them to Gaza. He spoke of a combined attack of missiles, paragliding, an attack from the sea, above and below the surface of the ground – with a clear goal to damage morale and shock the Israeli public. The debate in which Netanyahu presented this appears on all networks and anyone can watch it for themselves,” wrote Lieberman.
Nevertheless, he continued, Netanyahu only helped strengthen Hamas’ rule in Gaza. In 2018, the prime minister ensured the delivery of “suitcases” full of cash to Hamas as part of a “settlement.” In 2020, when Qatar expressed a desire to discontinue funding the terror group, he sent then-Mossad chief Yossi Cohen to convince Qatar to continue the payments.
Lieberman also noted that it was the Netanyahu administration that released Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas mastermind behind the massacre, from an Israeli prison in 2011. Sinwar was one of 1,026 terrorists Israel released in exchange for a hostage taken by Hamas—a low-level IDF soldier named Gilad Shalit. Netanyahu later refused to assassinate Sinwar and other top Hamas members despite the urging of the Shin Bet, Israel’s domestic intelligence agency. Lieberman stopped short of accusing Netanyahu of treason, seeming to chalk it down to political negligence.
"I do not believe there was a conspiracy or betrayal, but it is clear to me who led the concept: Netanyahu. He is directly responsible for it. Now he is merely trying to evade responsibility and prevent a state commission of inquiry—because he knows that the documented protocols will expose the truth."
Israel’s soft stance on Hamas frustrates Trump
The Israeli government’s discreet financial support for Hamas stretches back to the terror group’s launch in the 1980s. This, combined with Israel’s reluctance to conquer the entire Gaza strip after October 7th, despite overwhelming public support to do so, choosing instread to launch repeated raids and retreats on individual Gaza neighborhoods, has led observers to question the motives of the leaders of Israel's government and army. The political establishment, which has banned patriotic parties from running in elections, has repeatedly weakened the Trump administration’s tough stance against Hamas, instead insisting on making lopsided prisoner swaps like the one that freed Yahya Sinwar. These swaps, which have involved trading hundreds of Palestinian terrorists in exchange for dead Israeli hostages, swell the ranks of Hamas and have frustrated the Trump administration.
Earlier this month, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio torched the “ridiculous” concessions Israel's leaders have been making to Hamas.
“We care about all the hostages, we want all the hostages released . . . But we’re also talking about bodies. And these trades that are being made, they’re ridiculous trades—400 people for three. These are nuts,” Rubio said at a press conference during the G7 Foreign Ministers Meeting in Quebec.
Although Rubio diplomatically did not expressly blame Israel's leadership for the trades, the Trump administration has been losing patience with Israel. The president has given the Netanyahu administration carte blanche to destroy Hamas and even issued a deadline for the terror group to release all hostages—but Israel undermined the Trump administration by promising the release of more Palestinian terrorists in exchange for a slow trickle of hostages. Observers say the move seems calculated to prolong the war.
In the Oval Office, Trump distanced himself from Israel’s surprising approach by diplomatically telling reporters that he would have dealt with Hamas “differently” than Netanyahu.
“I said it from that point [of my ultimatum], it's up to Bibi Netanyahu and Israel,” the president said. “I may have taken a different stance. I said well if they're not going to release any there'll be hell to pay. But the rest is really up to him. I might have done it differently than [Netanyahu]. It’s not my decision, it’s his decision.”
Trump has also stated that "Somebody's going to have to get a lot rougher" with Hamas, in an apparent reference to Netanyahu's accommodating stance towards the terror organization.
Gen. Flynn: October 7th was a ‘decision’
US Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn (ret.) is one of the observers familiar with Israel’s security apparatus who says that October 7th could not have occurred without the government’s deliberate hand.
In an interview with reporter Alex Jones, the former national security advisor called for a “major, serious investigation” into the “breakdown of security” that led to the attack.
“So this thing is getting really bad, and it’s because there was a decision made to have a security stand down on the seventh of October for seven hours on the southern zone of Israel up against the fence line of [the] Gaza Strip,” said the former intelligence official.
“And I’m telling you, folks, that wasn’t done out of happenstance, that’s not a coincidence. Somebody made that decision. I don’t know whether it’s Netanyahu that made it [or] the southern zone commander who made it. Somebody made it, because there’s no way in the world for the security breakdown that the Israelis had on that day.”
Flynn added that he has personally seen Israel’s security infrastructure up close and inspected the defensive systems on the border with Gaza.
“I’ve walked it. I know what their security system is made of, and I know the levels that they go through,” he explained. “They have multiple layers of defenses. They have multiple layers of electronic detection systems. They have drones. They have balloons. They have people watching from all sorts of cameras. It is one of the most secure borders in the world, if not the most secure border in the world.
“It’s a huge scandal.”
