Debunking Misinformation: Fact-Check of Netanyahu’s Press Conference
At a press conference on Wednesday evening,
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
discussed extensively a range of topics such as the continuing conflict; the Hamas assault on October 7; inquiries into his staff for disclosing sensitive information and offering PR support to Qatar; the High Court of Justice’s decision earlier that day which declared that he had acted unlawfully in dismissing the head of Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency), Ronen Bar; and additional matters.
Much of what the prime minister stated was incorrect, deceptive, conflicting, or conspiracy-driven. Here are several instances:
Netanyahu’s effort to minimize the role of Qatari funds on October 7th
To minimize the appearance of how extensively the
Qatari money assisted Hamas
In developing the resources that ultimately led to the October 7 atrocities, Netanyahu contended that Hamas militants assaulted Israel using “flip-flops, Kalashnikovs, and pickup trucks,” items that were inexpensive and readily available even without financial support from Qatar.
This statement is incorrect and deceptive. Multiple investigations, witness accounts, and video evidence show that Hamas employed drones along with antitank and various shoulder-fired missiles. Furthermore, they initiated their assault by launching thousands of rockets ahead of time. Additionally, the well-coordinated nature of the Hamas operation suggests significant preparation and training.
The prime minister similarly tried to attribute responsibility for failing to protect the border on October 7 to the IDF and various security organizations. In his assertions, he suggested that an ensuing inquiry should look into why the air force was deployed “only hours” post the onset of the assault, as well as determine who gave the orders to act—or conversely, to hold back.
These statements reflect conspiracy theories. The prime minister referenced allegations circulating on social media, which were also shared by his son Yair, suggesting that some Israeli Air Force personnel deliberately postponed offering support to forces operating on the ground as part of their resistance against the government’s proposed judicial changes. Similar accusations have been leveled at the Shin Bet by individuals like Yair Netanyahu, Knesset member Talya Lotan, and others. They allege that the security agency purposefully withheld warnings about impending attacks with the aim of undermining Prime Minister Netanyahu and forcing him out of office.
The Prime Minister subsequently contended that one kibbutz, Ein Hashlosha, was not issued an order to refrain from mobilization. As a result, he stated, “no incident occurred,” and invaders did not breach the kibbutz premises. Following this claim, the kibbutz released a statement expressing their surprise and shock at what they termed thePrime Minister’s “disturbingly inaccurate” remarks.
The kibbutz reported that numerous terrorists entered their area, resulting in the deaths of four of its members. Later, Netanyahu apologized, stating that his comments “had been misunderstood,” clarifying that he intended to convey that the lack of instructions from the security apparatus preventing action caused those within the kibbutz to respond accordingly.
Netanyahu says he was unaware whether Aids received funding from Qatar.
Netanyahu firmly rejected receiving any payments from Qatar personally but said he was unsure about whether his assistants might have done so.
received funds from Qatar
However, he quickly went back on his statement, claiming that “the only thing he knew for certain” was that everything was “nothing but one huge deception.”
The Prime Minister subsequently claimed that the payments made by Qatar to Hamas during his time in office received backing from the security establishment. However, this assertion is incorrect—although most of the security apparatus did support the initial transfer in November 2018, leaders from two distinct intelligence agencies later cautioned the Prime Minister. These warnings occurred twice: once in 2019 and again in 2020, with both instances highlighting that the funds were aiding Hamas’s military branch.
Netanyahu cited Rishon Lezion Magistrate Court Judge Menachem Mizrahi, stating that the allegations against his top assistant, Yonatan Urich, were ambiguous and posed “no threat to national security.” However, this statement is deceptive because Netanyahu did not disclose that the initial decision was overturned when an appeals court judge reviewed the case. The appellate judge concluded that Urich should stay detained due to the risk of “clear potential danger” concerning security issues if he were freed.
The government has the authority to appoint and remove the head of Shin Bet.
In reply to a query from Channel 14’s Moti Kastel, the prime minister recited the statute stating that the government holds the authority to employ and
dismiss the head of Shin Bet
, and contended that the High Court had “invalidated the legality” of the decision to dismiss Bar.
This is deceptive. The prime minister neglected to reference previous governmental choices that established criteria for a screening procedure concerning the appointment and dismissal of the seven key public figures, such as the head of Shin Bet. This was noted in the court’s decision by the High Court.
The prime minister similarly neglected to acknowledge that Bar did not receive an arraignment, which is mandated by law. Previously, the prime minister contended that a cabinet session held on March 20, during which the decision to dismiss Bar was taken, functioned as his arraignment. They further asserted that since Bar chose not to be present at this gathering, he forfeited his entitlement to an official arraignment. Nonetheless, this justification emerged retrospectively and lacks historical backing for considering such governmental proceedings equivalent to formal arraignments. This stance was also scrutinized in the High Court’s judgment.
The statement made by the prime minister claiming that the High Court “overturned the law” is deceptive because it implies that his understanding of the legislation holds equal weight or possibly surpasses that of the court. Nonetheless, according to Basic Law: The Judiciary, the High Court stands as the exclusive legal body authorized to interpret laws, with its decisions being obligatory and enforceable.
The High Court decision concluded that Netanyahu violated laws when dismissing Bar because of his involvement in a conflict of interest related to the Qatargate probe. Following this verdict, Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara stated that these findings prevented him from selecting a new head for the Shin Bet agency until specific guidelines addressing the conflict of interest issue are established. In response, the Prime Minister labeled both the court’s judgment and the subsequent legal advice as a “spectacle,” asserting that similar restrictions have never been imposed on a premier over the past seven decades, thus deeming them unwarranted.
This information is both deceptive and part of a conspiracy narrative. The prime minister neglected to point out that no previous prime minister has ever dismissed a Shin Bet director, particularly not during an investigation into significant national security issues that might have direct implications for them. Furthermore, his comments echoed a baseless theory suggesting that the High Court and the Attorney-General were deliberately making rulings unfavorable to him due to undisclosed political agendas.