Source "Coal Eyes" Speaks: Hamas Message Not Seen as War Warning
Translated & summarized from Maariv by baba
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Source "Coal Eyes" says Hamas message wasn't seen as war warning.
- Message from Sinwar was passed to Shin Bet, not interpreted as October 7th alert.
- Likud party criticizes reports as "false blood libels" aimed at elections.
- Sinwar's message mentioned an "earthquake" before end of September.
- Timing of message predates October 7th attack by about a week.
Dr. Soufian Abu Zeida, the source identified as "Coal Eyes," confirmed he received an unusual message from Sinwar and passed it to the Shin Bet, but stated he did not interpret it at the time as a warning of war. The Likud party responded by calling the reports "false blood libels" that will continue, aimed at diverting public attention from the central election issue of "either right or Palestine."
Abu Zeida stated in a Channel 12 interview that he did not perceive Sinwar's words as a warning of war, and certainly not of an attack on the scale of October 7th. He believed it might relate to the West Bank, and that no one, including individuals in the Emirates, foresaw a war. He met with Sinwar on September 14, 2023, during discussions concerning prisoners and missing persons. Sinwar conveyed a message that Hamas would "put its cards on the table" before the end of September, using the Arabic word "zalzal," meaning earthquake.
Abu Zeida presented a note he wrote during the meeting, indicating Sinwar insisted the message be delivered to Israelis. Abu Zeida understood this as a threat related to negotiations, possibly involving the abduction of a soldier or civilian in the West Bank to improve Hamas's bargaining position. He explicitly stated he did not consider what might happen on October 7th at the time, viewing it as a threat but not a war alert.
Following the meeting, Abu Zeida relayed the message in Hebrew to his Shin Bet contact to prevent misunderstandings. He reported that the Shin Bet contacted him within half an hour to clarify the circumstances of the message. Abu Zeida's account does not resolve the dispute regarding a claimed conversation between Ben-Zaid and Netanyahu, but focuses on his initial understanding of Sinwar's message. The timing also raises questions, as Sinwar's message referred to an event before the end of September, while the October 7th attack occurred about a week later.
Read the original at MaarivMentioned