Allegations of Netanyahu's Prior Knowledge of Hamas Attack Surface Before Elections

As elections approach, a series of "sensational revelations" from various sources suggest that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was warned about the impending Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, but allegedly ignored these warnings. Attorney Michael Kleiner, writing in an opinion piece, posits that these revelations are strategically timed to influence the upcoming vote by creating a narrative of "Benjamin's guilt."

Kleiner criticizes the timing of these disclosures, which he claims have been kept secret for nearly three years. He suggests that these reports, often attributed to American and Israeli investigative journalists, are designed to shape public opinion by focusing on Netanyahu's alleged culpability for the failures leading up to the attack. The author implies that without this "new information," the public would remain ignorant of the events.

The article touches upon the upcoming elections, framing them as particularly "fateful" and highlighting the difficult choice voters face between looking at the past or the future. Kleiner argues that those who believe the current leadership is less responsible for past failures might find it easier to choose, while others will struggle with the decision.

Kleiner also critiques Netanyahu's stance on a state inquiry commission, suggesting the Prime Minister cynically uses the opposition's objections to a potentially biased commission chairman to his advantage. He questions the necessity of complex legal proceedings, proposing that a jury of ordinary Israelis could determine responsibility for the October 7th failures.

The piece further speculates on Netanyahu's actions, including a supposed visit to the UAE to ask its president to deny warning him of the attack. It also questions why, if warnings were received, the Nova music festival was not canceled and the Prime Minister not alerted, implying that the Shin Bet chief, Ronen Bar, should be held accountable. Kleiner concludes that understanding the scale of the massacre requires common sense, not just legal expertise, to determine responsibility.