India🏛️ PoliticsProgressiveOverlooked by conservatives
UAE warned Netanyahu of Oct 7 attacks by Hamas 10 days ahead, he didn't share intel
The article reports that the UAE's President, Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about an impending Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, at least 10 days in advance. This revelation, published by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, claims that Netanyahu did not share the intelligence with his administration. The warning reportedly originated from a Palestinian advisor linked to Gaza, who received information from a Fatah intermediary known as 'coal eyes,' who had previously met with Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar. Sinwar allegedly described the attack as a 'huge surprise' using the term 'zilzal,' meaning earthquake. The UAE president initially hesitated to act due to concerns over false alarms but became more certain after receiving additional information. Netanyahu's office has denied the report as an 'absolute lie,' while opposition figures and former military leaders have criticized him for allegedly ignoring prior warnings, leading to significant civilian casualties.
UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of a major Hamas attack 10 days before the October 7, 2023, assault, according to a report by Israeli newspaper Haaretz. The warning, which took place during a 45-minute phone call, was reportedly conveyed by bin Zayed through a Palestinian advisor linked to Fatah, who had received information from Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar. Sinwar allegedly described the planned operation as a “huge surprise” and used the term “zilzal,” meaning “earthquake,” to emphasize its scale. The UAE president passed the information to his advisors, who then briefed Netanyahu, urging him to prepare for the threat. Netanyahu reportedly responded with “relative calm,” assuring bin Zayed that Israel was ready for any scenario. He suggested that the attack might originate in the West Bank rather than Gaza. Despite the warning, Netanyahu did not inform Israel’s senior security officials, including Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar and former IDF chief of staff Herzl Halevi. The report states that these officials were not made aware of the communication, raising questions about the handling of critical intelligence. The Haaretz report, which is part of a forthcoming book titled Kidnapped: 843 Days of Abandonment by journalists Shlomi Eldar and Ruth Yuval, is based on interviews with diplomatic sources, internal documents, and correspondence. A close adviser to bin Zayed, who was present during the call, confirmed that the UAE leader emphasized the severity of the threat and urged Netanyahu to take action. The adviser noted that Netanyahu appeared unconcerned, focusing instead on potential operations in the West Bank. Earlier in 2023, Egyptian intelligence chief Abbas Kamel had also warned Netanyahu of an impending Hamas attack, according to the report. However, similar to the UAE warning, Netanyahu did not share the information with his security apparatus. Israeli intelligence officials, including Shin Bet, had already received intelligence about Hamas’s intentions, but the warnings were not acted upon. An anonymous intelligence official cited by Haaretz speculated that Sinwar’s messages were meant to pressure Israel into negotiating or test the readiness of the Israeli Defense Forces. The report highlights a pattern of missed opportunities to preempt the October 7 attack. Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and former IDF chief Gadi Eisenkot have criticized Netanyahu for his perceived negligence, with Eisenkot stating that Netanyahu “received dozens of warnings about October 7 and ignored them all.” The allegations have intensified scrutiny on Netanyahu ahead of Israel’s general elections, scheduled for October 27, 2023. Opposition leaders have used the report to challenge Netanyahu’s leadership and decision-making during the crisis. Netanyahu’s office has categorically denied the report, calling it an “absolute lie.” It claimed that the prime minister did not speak with bin Zayed during the relevant period and received no warning. The UAE Foreign Ministry has not commented on the allegations. Meanwhile, the report notes that bin Zayed shared the warning with U.S. intelligence officials, including CIA Director William J Burns, indicating that the information reached high-level international channels. The Haaretz investigation suggests that the lack of coordination within Israel’s security establishment contributed to the failure to prevent the attack. A senior Shin Bet official told Haaretz that awareness of the warnings could have altered the interpretation of other intelligence, potentially leading to a different outcome. The report underscores the complexity of the intelligence landscape and the challenges of interpreting and acting on fragmented warnings. As the investigation unfolds, the implications for Netanyahu’s political future remain uncertain.
Go to the primary sources (1)
The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.
A report by Israeli publication Haaretz claims that UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed (MBZ) warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu days before the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack that Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar was planning a major assault. According to the report, based on a new book and interviews with Israeli officials, MBZ spoke directly with Netanyahu for 45 minutes from Abu Dhabi, urging Israel to prepare for the attack. Despite the warning, Netanyahu allegedly did not inform Israel’s senior security leaders, including the Shin Bet, Mossad, and IDF chief of staff. The report suggests that Netanyahu believed Hamas was targeting the West Bank rather than southern Israel, and that he failed to act on the warning. The information reportedly came from Hamas itself, with Sinwar threatening an 'earthquake' if negotiations stalled. Egypt’s intelligence chief also issued similar warnings to Netanyahu around the same time.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the failure of Netanyahu to act on the UAE warning as a significant oversight, implying potential negligence or misjudgment. It emphasizes the credibility of the UAE and Egyptian intelligence warnings while highlighting Netanyahu’s lack of response. The tone leans toward holding a
Why factuality (85): The article thoroughly details the warning from UAE President bin Zayed, referencing Haaretz and providing context from interviews, documents, and correspondence. It includes specifics about the 45-minute call and the involvement of CIA director William J Burns, supporting the claim with multiple so
Why objectivity (75): The article maintains a balanced tone, presenting both the warning and the subsequent denial by Netanyahu's office. It avoids taking a clear ideological stance and focuses on reporting the events and responses without apparent bias.
An Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, reports that UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about a planned Hamas attack 10 days before the October 7, 2023 attack. Netanyahu's office denies the claim, calling it an 'absolute lie,' and asserts that he did not speak with bin Zayed during the relevant period. The report, included in a new book by journalists Shlomi Eldar and Ruth Yuval, is based on interviews with diplomatic sources and an adviser to bin Zayed with direct knowledge of the conversation. The warning allegedly went unshared with Israel's top security officials, including former Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar and former IDF chief of staff Herzi Halevi. The allegations have become a political issue ahead of Israel's upcoming general election, with opposition leaders questioning Netanyahu's preparedness and decision-making prior to the attack.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the UAE's warning as credible and highlights potential failures in Israeli leadership, particularly Netanyahu's alleged dismissal of the warning and failure to inform security officials. While the report itself is presented as a journalistic finding, the emphasis on Netanyahu's 'c
Why factuality (80): The article accurately references the Haaretz report and provides details about the warning from UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed. It includes the denial by Netanyahu's office and contextualizes the attack with casualty numbers. The sourcing appears reliable and consistent with other reports.
Why objectivity (70): While the article remains largely factual, it uses phrases like 'report stated' and 'according to a report' which can imply a certain level of skepticism. However, it does not overtly take sides, maintaining a relatively neutral tone.
India TodayIndependentProgressiveFactual 75Objective 65
The article reports that the UAE's President, Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about an impending Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, at least 10 days in advance. This revelation, published by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, claims that Netanyahu did not share the intelligence with his administration. The warning reportedly originated from a Palestinian advisor linked to Gaza, who received information from a Fatah intermediary known as 'coal eyes,' who had previously met with Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar. Sinwar allegedly described the attack as a 'huge surprise' using the term 'zilzal,' meaning earthquake. The UAE president initially hesitated to act due to concerns over false alarms but became more certain after receiving additional information. Netanyahu's office has denied the report as an 'absolute lie,' while opposition figures and former military leaders have criticized him for allegedly ignoring prior warnings, leading to significant civilian casualties.
Bias read (Progressive): The article frames the situation as a failure of Netanyahu's leadership, emphasizing the potential lives lost due to ignored warnings. It highlights criticism from opposition figures and former officials, suggesting a left-leaning perspective that holds the government accountable for security lapses
Why factuality (75): The article cites the Haaretz report as a primary source and presents the claim that UAE President Zayed warned Netanyahu 10 days before the attack. It mentions the denial by Netanyahu's office and references previous reports from The Guardian and others. While it aligns with the cross-source consen
Why objectivity (65): The article presents the information in a somewhat sensational manner, using phrases like 'massive political row' and quoting critics directly. It frames the issue as a political scandal, which introduces a degree of bias despite presenting facts.
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
India
