top of page

Israeli Officials Disregarded Warnings of Hamas Attack Plan




TEL AVIV, Israel — Israeli intelligence agencies had obtained a detailed Hamas battle plan more than a year before a devastating terrorist attack occurred on October 7. However, they underestimated its feasibility and threat level. This plan, known as “Jericho Wall,” was a comprehensive document outlining a methodical assault that eventually led to the deaths of about 1,200 people.

The document, which the New York Times reviewed, did not specify the date of the attack but described an intricate plan to breach the Gaza Strip's fortifications, seize Israeli cities, and target key military bases. Despite its precision and depth, Israeli military and intelligence officials dismissed the plan as overly ambitious and beyond Hamas' capabilities.

The Hamas attack, executed with alarming accuracy as per the blueprint, involved a barrage of rockets, drones disabling security cameras, and gunmen infiltrating Israel. Furthermore, the plan contained detailed information on Israeli military forces and communications, raising questions about Hamas' intelligence-gathering and potential leaks within the Israeli security establishment.

Despite widespread circulation among Israeli military and intelligence leaders, the plan was not taken seriously. It remains unclear whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or other top political leaders were aware of the document.

The failure to heed these warnings, as acknowledged by Israeli security officials, is now regarded as a significant intelligence lapse, akin to the surprise attack leading to the Arab-Israeli war of 1973. Underlying these misjudgments was a belief that Hamas lacked the capability and willingness to launch such an attack, a belief so entrenched that it led to the disregard of growing evidence.

So, What Does This Mean?

The overlooked Hamas battle plan and the subsequent attack represent a critical failure in Israeli intelligence and defense systems. This incident underscores the importance of taking potential threats seriously, regardless of the perceived capabilities of the adversary. It also highlights the need for rigorous analysis and preparedness in national security operations. The repercussions of this event have led to a reevaluation of intelligence practices and the acknowledgment of the necessity to remain vigilant against all forms of threats, regardless of their perceived likelihood.

884 views10 comments

10 Comments


Unknown member
Dec 02, 2023

If the New York Times was confident about that information, why didn't they publish it. The possibility of a threat like the plans they had, and the outburst from the readers and others, might have spurred the Israelis to take the report more seiously. Was the Times complicit with Israel in ignoring this information?

Like
Unknown member
Dec 09, 2023
Replying to

There's nothing in there saying the NYT had any of this information antebellum. The story of their post 07OCT23 investigation is an interesting one: https://youtu.be/m-kWt1jhA7Y?si=DWow5BWBV7y7qLW-

Like

Unknown member
Dec 02, 2023

I have no way of knowing the answer to this but it would be interesting to know how many reports the Israeli received about planned attacks by Hamas, Hezzbolah, ISIS, and others.

Like

Unknown member
Dec 01, 2023

Gotta keep the USA war economy going. They let it happen. They want to eradicate Palestine. Israeli leaders are fundamentalists. They lie to the public move towards their ultimate goal. Very sad irony how the Israeli culture traumatized by WW2 became like the Nazis by creating a massive open air prison/concentration camp. How can you do this to a culture for 80 years and expect them not to resist?

Like
Unknown member
Dec 09, 2023
Replying to

Indeed, and note that this discussion becomes very different looking at the West Bank. Likud always loved Hamas, that's why they've done everything to screw over the PA, especially now.

Like

Unknown member
Dec 01, 2023

And those advance warnings on 9/11 and the warnings on the Russian invasion of Ukraine as I recall. WTF?


Like
Unknown member
Dec 09, 2023
Replying to

Too true. They side with a vengeful paranoiac who clearly hates Germany and Germans. His older siblings both died in the Siege of Leningrad, and his Hitler-esque 'Stab In The Back' moment was when the Berlin Wall fell. He's openly discussed how traumatized he felt and how much he hated the cheering crowds outside the KGB offices.

Like
bottom of page