This Is the ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE, We're Supposed to Trust

It doesnt make me "feel" one way or another. You are the one proclaiming Netanyahu and the Israeli intelligence failed to stop what should have been seen as an obvious outcome and will result in the end of his leadership.

 

And I also pointed out that Bibi is a corrupt and self serving pos hence does not have Israel's best interests in the fore front. You seem confused or you are just tap dancing.

 

This is the view of most Israelis, regarding their trust in Netanyahu's honesty, about the war:

<Google Snip>
Benjamin Netanyahu's credibility with the Israeli public has taken a significant hit since October 7, with less than 4 percent of Jewish Israelis reporting that they trust the prime minister as the most reliable source of information regarding the war against Hamas, according to a new survey by Bar Ilan University.Nov 14, 2023
https://www.haaretz.com › .premium
As War Rages, Israelis' Trust in Netanyahu Plummets, Polls Find - Israel News
<End Snip>


And here is their more comprehensive opinion, of the Netanyahu government (from The Times Of Israel-- is that source acceptable to you, @Pisa ?):

<Snip>
From coffeeshops to the front lines, many Israelis say they are unified on two things: they are convinced of the need to uproot Hamas, and they do not trust their own government to oversee the process...

Such sentiments are backed up by numbers: New polling data shows that Israelis’ trust in government is at a 20-year low of 18%. Only 20.5% of Jewish Israelis and 7.5% of Arab Israelis polled by the Israel Democracy Institute in the aftermath of Hamas’s attack said they had trust in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet. (In June, these populations polled at 28% and 18%, respectively.)
<End Snip>

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ti...id-criticism-for-inadequate-war-response/amp/


I guess that is the one consolation of having a 28% approval rating-- back during all the scandal over the indicted Prime Minister's attempts to weaken their Supreme Court-- you really can't fall that much further. Nevertheless, rather than having garnered more support-- as we would expect under similar circumstances, here-- the Netanyahu government has lost another 7.5 points (among Jewish Israelis; Arab Israeli support has cratered by another 10.5%).

It is widely believed that, as soon as the war ends, the people will want Netanyahu out. That is precisely why we need not be overly trusting of Bibi: he has an obvious conflict of interest, in wanting to prolong the war, to stay in power (and hope that public opinion will eventually change).

 

No, its just as an American I dont feel I am in a position to criticize the other nations government corruption by their leaders.

 

Utter fail. I just gave you five posts, in which I called the Hamas attack "heinous," and "horrendous," as well as attributed all blame for it, to Hamas. Further, I twice stated that I didn't support them or endorse their actions, to which I referred as "terrorism," while referring to Hamas, themselves, as "monsters."


*DEFinning said: ↑
Do not take that as my endorsing of this heinous attack


*DEFinning said: ↑
For this attack, clearly Hamas is fully to blame. For the situation leading up to this eventuality, there is blame to be laid, on both sides.


*DEFinning said: ↑
We do not support terrorism, and never were fans of Hamas (as so many of you, on the Right are, of Putin).


*DEFinning said: ↑
Also, while Hamas's assault had been horrendous, it had been perpetrated mostly against civilians; and, certainly, among the cover of a dense urban environment, augmented with tunnels, they present a danger, not to be taken too lightly. But, in a straight out battle with an activated Israeli military, I am very dubious of their potential, as an invasion force. So, if need be, Israel could always pull away some of those forces, focused on Gaza, and still safely defend against Hamas attack.


*DEFinning said: ↑
No, I do not deny it, in the least. I am no supporter of Hamas-- their attack proves they are MONSTERS!


But, as predicted: no retraction of your bogus charges. To insert a correction here: I had said that your allegations which you were refusing to offer any specific quote of mine to support-- 'cause sure, it is not a despicable tactic to call someone a bigot, just because you disagree with their opinion-- were that I hated Jews, and that I was prescribing some course of action which would spell the end of Israel. But that had actually been your prior, baseless (and also unsupported) attack. Your arguments are just so forgettably toothless and randomly fictional, that I hadn't recalled your more recent joke of a post, alleging that every one of my posts overflows with hatred for the Jews-- and yet, you have been unable to provide even one example (yeah, sure, that doesn't seem too unbelievable a contradiction):

Tipper101 said: ↑
So much anger directed at Jews in every post you write on this subject. So what exactly did Jews do to you? I’d love to know more about leftists who hate Jews



Like I had said:

1) You are always wrong; and make false accusations;
2) I am not only innocent of your baseless slurs, but will always be able to show your arguments to be worthless;
3) I am the only one of us, with any decency, integrity, or class:

 

Oh, so you are riding that mythical high horse into the sky then? Is up down?

 

PLO is not Marxist and never was. The PFLP is Marxist.

Your WAPO article is behind a paywall.

The opinion piece in the Times of Israel is obviously written by someone engaged in a brutal war with reality. The PLO was not a socialist organization, even though Arafat was a KGB asset. The PLO was not popular among Palestinians. The US never funded the Taliban because the Taliban emerged in Afghanistan after the retreat of the Soviet troops. Sayyid Qutb was not the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood. All Palestinians can - and do - receive treatment in Israeli hospitals, even terrorists wounded during terror attacks against Israelis.

All that is easy to find with Google.

Debunked.

 

~ More "stuff" about Israel intelligence :

What did Israel know about Hamas’ October 7 attack ?​

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/01/middleeast/israel-hamas-gaza-intelligence-intl/index.html​

 

The PLFP is one influential part of the PLO.

Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - Wikipedia
The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (Arabic: الجبهة الشعبية لتحرير فلسطين, romanized: al-Jabhah al-Sha`biyyah li-Taḥrīr Filasṭīn, PFLP) is a secular Palestinian Marxist–Leninist and revolutionary socialist organization founded in 1967 by George Habash. It has consistently been the second-largest of the groups forming the Palestine Liberation Organization, the largest being Fatah.

 

Wikipedia is not a reliable source.

The PFLP consists of several factions, not all affiliated with the PLO.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Popular-Front-for-the-Liberation-of-Palestine

 

~ You are correct.

 

The Marxist/Socialist PFLP was enough a part of the PLO to receive $70K per month from PLO funds until 2016. If you don't like wikipedia, how bout the Times of Israel?

Abbas cuts PLO funding for PFLP terror group | The Times of Israel

 

???? I wouldnt consider my shame to be a "high horse" or a ride "into the sky".

 

Another Poster whose name I've forgotten compiled the following list of questions and observations long before the NY Times article you mention.
It's beginning to look more and more that at least some in the Netanyahu regime knew the attack was coming, let it happen as a pretext to destroy Gaza and exterminate its native Palestinian residents.

1. "The day before the Hamas attack, Israel had intelligence that an attack was looming.
2. The Egyptians may have sent intelligence to them three days before.
3. The day before, Israel had several high-level meetings on a possible attack by Hamas.
4. The attack on Israel occurred on a Holy holiday, exactly 50 years to the day of the attack on Israel and war of 1973.
5. Arabs like to attack on holidays and recurring dates and events.
6. The decision at these meetings was to do nothing. Not to call out the IDF to man the border.
7. Who made that decision?
8. In 1973, Golda Meir made a similar decision not to attack first to prevent being attacked in order to stave off international criticism.
9. Border guards in Israel who have been interviewed prior to the attack of last week stressed that they had all kinds of monitoring equipment of every type watching the Israeli border 24/7 day and night and a bug couldn't move out there without their knowing about it.
10. After the attack, despite there being IDF everywhere in the country and military gear everywhere, help to the Israeli victims took between 8 to 20 hours to arrive. Why?"

As you know, Israel has initiated several False Flag attacks as early as the Lavon Affair in the 1950s and Zionists are not above sacrificing Jews for "Greater Israel":

“If I knew that it was possible to save all the children of Germany by transporting them to England, and only half by transferring them to the Land of Israel, I would choose the latter, for before us lies not only the numbers of these children but the historical reckoning of the people of Israel.”
Ben-Gurion (Quoted on pp 855-56 in Shabtai Teveth’s Ben-Gurion in a slightly different translation).
https://www.progressiveisrael.org/ben-gurions-notorious-quotes-their-polemical-uses-abuses/


Thanks,

 

Maybe you should. If you have no real point, being a pest isn't a solution but being honest could be.

 

'

Therein lies the rub!

It only takes a SINGLE naysayer to IGNORE the Intelligence warnings.

It was PROBABLY Netanyahoo or ONE of his SYCOPHANTS who DELIBERATELY chose to IGNORE the warning of an imminent attack because that suited their nefarious agenda against Hamas and the Palestinian people in Gaza.

 

Regardless, it's either gross incompetence, stupidity or worse.

 

PROVE it!

Wikipedia has ESTABLISHED itself as one of the MOST reliable internet sources because it is SELF CORRECTING in an ONGOING manner.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relia...veys attempting to,late 2010s and early 2020s.

The Xtofascist controlled GOP spreads DISINFORMATION about Wikipedia BECAUSE it IS a RELIABLE source.

Kindly REFRAIN from disparaging sources WITHOUT substantiation to support YOUR allegations.

 

Nobody should trust Wikipedia, says man who invented Wikipedia
He says there’s a complex game being played to make an article say what somebody wants it to say

https://www.the-independent.com/new...-founder-larry-sanger-democrats-b1885138.html

 

Which happens to be TRUE for virtually EVERYTHING on the internet.

What Wikipedia has is the constant SELF REMEDIATING process. When these BIASES are identified they are TESTED against the STANDARDS and when they FAIL they are FLAGGED as being BIASED.

That is a GOOD thing because WE can ALL see this happening and LEARN how to spot it for ourselves.

Caveat Emptor means that the ONUS is ON US to verify our SOURCES. Wikipedia makes that simple because EVERYTHING is sourced and if it is NOT sourced then it is FLAGGED.

Can you say the same thing for Britannica?

 

Who decides what is biased and what not?

Yes, everything is sourced. So what? Can we be sure that all the sources used in Wikipedia articles are trustworthy? Do you check all the sources in the bibliography? Doesn't your opinion on the sources depend on your own biases? A source you deem trustworthy may look suspicious to me.

Show me an article, I'll show you the bias.

 

Granting all your arguments as correct, how would one conclude from them, that Wikipedia is a less trustworthy source of information, than any other source?

 

You ignored both the main topic of our dispute-- the New York Times article-- and most of my other arguments, such as that most Israelis do not trust the current government, overall (only 18% do-- a 20 year low), and even fewer trust Netanyahu as a source of information about this war (only 4% of Jewish Israelis). If you do trust Netanyahu's handling of things, that makes you very much the exception, among Israelis, not representative of your population's general view. As I had noted, which your reply also ignores, even you had said that everybody knew that this was what Hamas wanted to do-- and yet the border was left undefended?

You also did not address my charge that your calling, "anti-Zionist," any view that didn't comport with your own, was patently nationalistic, over- exuberant partisanship. Instead, you discounted one entire news site, because of one writer it employs who, you claim, admires Hitler, though you offered no substantiation of your charge. Why do I feel that there is more to that story? And still, even if true, it would be a long way from therefore being a justification for dismissing all reporting from the site, as false.

The same thing applies, to a publication being "extreme left." That does not mean that things they report aren't true. What sorts of news they reported, their angle of perspective, would be a bigger element of what would set apart a far Left publication, from something more mainstream. If the material itself, wasn't credible, then that information, itself, should be what you challenge-- it is an illegitimate argument, to presume that all information from a source must be false, because of a leftist bias. Sometimes truth, seems to have a leftist bias, as well.

Lastly, and sadly, I have even seen you here disregard an article by someone in The Times Of Israel-- which I take to be a large circulation and so, mainstream publication-- because you didn't like the perspective. So it seems your bias is against everything that disagrees with your own viewpoint. Which is fine, but it is certainly no argument you should expect to carry any weight with anyone (but yourself). That is what is missing from your rebuttal: any real reasoning, which diminishes this current reporting.

 

Ok so maybe their intelligence failed. Like ours did before 9/11. So what? I'm sure they'll talk about it later.

 

~ Israel denied having intelligence/warnings about the attack ...