The article argues that every press conference by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu raises the same question, whether he is telling the truth or repeating slogans. It says the story begins with what it calls the first lie, his disregard of warning signs and his evasion of responsibility for the failures that led to the October 7 attack. According to the piece, Netanyahu then claimed, as he does now, that warnings were exaggerated and that the situation was fine, which it calls false.
A second lie, the article says, is pretending the conflict can be reduced to a simple outcome. Instead of acknowledging a partial and imperfect result, the writer says Netanyahu preferred false promises that created the illusion that Gaza would disappear as a problem, that Hamas would surrender, and that Hezbollah would cease to exist. The article argues that this avoided the complexity of the situation.
A third point concerns the language of military success. The piece says it is true that the IDF, pilots, and fighters have shown great daring and achieved major battlefield successes, but insists there is still no victory because nothing was done on the political level. In the article's view, military gains were never turned into a strategic achievement.
The article says the alternative is simply to tell the truth: admit responsibility, acknowledge ignoring the warnings, and accept that post-October 7 outcomes will not be perfect. It presents a suggested statement in which Netanyahu would say he is responsible for both the successes and the failures. Instead, the article concludes, he chose empty slogans over honesty.
