+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

The IDF quietly abandons its spin on Eilat attack

The IDF admits that the Eilat attackers weren’t Gazans, but buries the news

Some 34 days ago, a group of terrorists attacked several points on the Israeli-Egyptian border, near Eilat. While the attack was still going on, Security Minister (the term “Defense Minister” does not capture the Soviet/Socialist undertones of the title) Ehud Barak quickly claimed that the responsibility for the attacks rests with the Gazan Popular Resistance Committees. A short time later, the PRC’s leadership was assassinated from the air.

Several hours later, however, the official version of events began to crumble (see here). Even though the IDF claimed the attackers came from the Gaza Strip – nobody explained how, precisely, that happened, and the IDF Spokesman backed down from this claim for a short while – the IDF did not publish the names of the attackers, which it generally does, and there were no signs of mourning in Gaza.

When I published those points earlier, I found myself under attack by a gaggle of Hasbara useful idiots, who claimed that Hamas could have suppressed mourning so as to distance itself from the attack – which is an interesting point, given that nobody actually blamed Hamas for the attack.

So, 34 days later, why were there no mourning huts in Gaza? Because the attackers weren’t Gazans. Quietly and without drawing attention, Yediot Ahronot published yesterday (Wednesday) a report on pg. 13, which says that the IDF’s internal investigation reached the conclusion that all of the attackers were Egyptians or residents of Sinai – and we know the three attackers killed by the Egyptians were Egyptians.

The investigation also claims that the attackers were trained by the PRC, but this looks like an excuse to whitewash the acts of the IDF in retrospect. We have facts: the bodies of the attackers are those Egyptian nationals. And then we have conjecture: that they were trained by the PRC. We have no evidence to support this conjecture, and must treat it as such – and a suspect one. I mean, the IDF has been spouting disinformation about this attack for a month now. Why should we believe what it says without proof? Also, we should remember that a few days after the attack, the IDF killed an Islamic Jihad operative, and then claimed he was responsible for funding the attack. Again, we have no proof for this. It may be the truth. It may be just an attempt to justify an attack on a Palestinian target of opportunity.

So, to sum, the IDF’s position nowadays looks like this: The attack near Eilat, which nearly sent the IDF into a major offensive in the Gaza Strip, was carried out by Egyptian nationals, trained by the PRC and funded by the Islamic Jihad. Now, this could happen – stranger things have; it is commonly heard in Israel that Australian messianic Jews of a heretical sect have once funded the campaign of a secular Israeli politician, who was once married by a Conservative rabbi and who changed his name so that it would sound more American. It could happen – but it contradicts what the IDF so stridently told us about a month ago. Then, it kept repeating the attackers were Gazans. That, afrer all, was the casus belli.

In short, the IDF and Barak – not necessarily in this order; the army may well have been trying to cover for the lies of its minister – lied to our faces, nearly dragged us into a major offensive, all of which took place during a massive social protest which put the military’s budget at risk, and protecting that budget is the army and its minister’s first priority. When the chairman of the Security and Foreign Relations Knesset Committee tried to summon senior IDF and ISA officers, the security minister and the prime minister blocked them from testifying. In a normal country, parliament would create an investigative committee and/or announce the army is out of control; in Israel, it ends with a hidden headline on pg. 13 on a day full of international news, and the army and its minister can count on the fact no one would remember, or make a fuss.

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article

    * Required


    1. aristeides

      And the truth will not bring back the dead or heal the wounded. But then, they’re only Arabs, and the bombing strengthens Israel’s deterrence.

      Reply to Comment
    2. Philos

      Is there 972mag in Hebrew? I need to send this stuff to my friends. They refuse to stop watching the shadows on the wall of the cave…

      Reply to Comment
    3. Historian

      Out of curiosity, was your problem with the “hasbara useful idiots” that they believed that Gazan Palestinians would attack Israeli civilians randomly with murderous intentions or are they were too stupid to see the obvious source of the attack: Egyptians from the Sinai?

      And while I’m here asking questions, I’d be grateful for an explanation of your assessment of who these Egyptians were, who trained them and how they knew what they were doing. Also, why did they do it? Why didn’t they take credit for the attack?

      Reply to Comment
    4. annie

      “all of which took place during a massive social protest which put the military’s budget at risk, and protecting that budget is the army and its minister’s first priority.”

      it also took place during ramadan, a whole week of bombing gaza.

      Reply to Comment
    5. Rika Chaval

      Well, I guess I’m part of the idiots. Or you are Yossi.
      The israeli government hasn’t come up just NOW with attributing the attacks to a team-work comprising egyptian nationals who actually attacked, PRC who did the scouting and planing pre-attack job and an odd Jihad member who helped with financial transactions.

      That is what the governmenthas been saying for am month now. What they didn’t know at first was the identities of the operatives who actually committed the attacks.

      What you also keep omitting in your relentless desinformation-campaign: The day the attack happend IDF admitted that they had received a warning from exterior intelligence sources, jordanian I believe. They knew that an attack was about to happen on israeli territory, but they didn’t think it was going to be so serious and they didn’t know where it would occure.

      Also, one PRC leader who was killed in Gaza was said (by his PRC comrades) to be one of the few people who know where Guilad Shalit is being held. This is interesting, because according to IDF the egyptian operatives carried equipment (handcuffs and I dont remember what) which was meant to be used for kidnapping Israelis.

      Conclusion: It still is very plausible that PRC was involved, that the egyptians were sub-contractors to a kidnapping plot which was master-minded and ordered by PRC.

      You are indeed.

      Reply to Comment
    6. Piotr Berman

      PCR were described as basically second league militants and not “master minds” of anything. It is highly unlikely that they would be privy to the wherebouts of Gilad Shalit. Somehow IDF and Mossad likes to put that tag on any killing.

      I did not see Egyptian sources of Kovacs link, so again, anonymous info from Israeli security, which is very unreliable. The story of handcuff and chloroform suggests that the plan was to kidnap a soldier and shlep with unconscious captive through the desert while being pursued from helicopters. That makes sense only if there were some hidden bunkers prepared.

      Reply to Comment
    7. delia ruhe

      I can only echo Aristeides and add that these quiet shifts are made without even so much as an “Oops, sorry.”

      America and its vassal states, Israel especially, are now so deeply corrupt that no one in the mainstream even bothers to point it out when yet another criminal act is perpetrated. What would be the point?

      Reply to Comment
    8. Deïr Yassin

      @ Delia
      I’m not so sure Israel is an American vassal state, though I know it’s a common idea on the international radical left.
      The 29 standing ovations that Bibi received in Congress is not the sign of vassalage, and I’m still looking for an event where the US imposed its politics on Israel instead of the other way around.
      I think this is a story of the tail wagging the dog.
      I encourage you to read Mearsheimer & Walt’s book (or at least the article, but the book goes much further) on the Israeli Lobby and American foreign policy. It’s long and full of footnotes but it’s an astonishing academic study that deeply troubled me: I finished the book saying to myself: ‘It’s even worse than I thought’.

      Reply to Comment
    9. Historian

      Walt and Mearsheimer’s extensive footnotes were proven early on to have come from secondary sources. It seems they, or their research assistants, were spending a lot of time reading Electronic Intifada – which, oddly enough was funded by the Dutch Lobby to the tune of $10 million bucks (I’ll bet 972mag wishes it could convince some Europeans to give them that much money, and perhaps if they keep writing articles that bash Israel, their wish will come true). Anyway, a lot of their material came from secondary, often anti-Israel sources and the poor guys, from Harvard and University of Chicago, respectively, just didn’t bother to double-check their info. They got plenty wrong, and they especially got plenty wrong when they started to blame most American Jews of being part of this made-up lobby.

      In the meantime, the made-up lobby is so powerful that Obama made Israel stop settlement construction, told Jews they need to search themselves if they were to help Israel achieve peace and allowed Israel’s Prime Minister to enter the White House like a thief in the night.

      Nice conspiracy theory, though.

      Reply to Comment
    10. Deïr Yassin

      Yeah, “Historian”. No doubt that YOU didn’t study at neither Harvard nor University of Chicago. Guess that pen name is meant as a joke.
      “It seems that blahblahblah”: I’m pretty much sure that you didn’t read the book. Two confirmed academics using unverified secondary sources, knowing that their work would be scrutinized by the Lobby ? You’re kidding ! You must have mixed up Mearheimer & Walt with “The case for Israel” by the greatest liar west of the Atlantic Ocean, Hasbara-in-chief Dershowitz.
      Funny, I can’t remember them ‘blaming most of the American Jews’ for being member of the Lobby. Would you mind – as a historian – to give us the sources, that is the exact pages ! Keep on spinning – Edelstein has more wool in his basement.

      Reply to Comment
    11. Historian

      Um, how do you know where I studied?

      I read parts of the book and I read and wrote at length about the original articles on which the book was based (which is why I didn’t bother with the book – how much crap can one read from the same source?).

      As for demolishing their work, why don’t you begin by reading Benny Morris who demolishes their paper and is one of the main sources they use in the footnotes which impress you so: http://jeffweintraub.blogspot.com/2006/04/mearsheimer-walt-and-now-for-some.html

      The poor guys actually had to put out a “response” to their critics where they attacked Morris. The joke, of course, is that they quoted and cited him extensively.

      Now to your vaunted pages that you think I can’t produce.

      Let’s take a look at page 120: “These divisions [they’re talking about the different political views of Jewish American organizations when it comes to Israel] notwithstanding, the majority of organized groups in the American Jewish community…continue to favor steadfast US support for Israel no matter what policies the Jewish state supports.”

      Get it? Majority…Jewish…support Jewish state.

      In case you don’t get it, they help you understand. “A notable exception is Jewish Voice for Peace which has called…to suspend military aid to Israel…Indeed given this position, one might argue that JVP is not part of the lobby at all.”

      In other words, the fact they are a Jewish group that deals with Israel automatically makes them part of the lobby. It is only the strength of a particular anti-Israel position that makes W & M consider – not accept, but merely consider – that they are not part of the lobby.

      In other words: Jewish…you’re part of the lobby.

      On page 122, they show they don’t just mean the leaderships of these groups. They write: “…even when both leaders and rank and file of important Jewish organizations..” And to show how underhanded they are, in the upper part of that same paragraph, they quote Jewish leaders speaking not of their membership but of American Jews in general. So they quote Steven Rosenthal saying: “for millions of American Jews, criticism of Israel…”

      In other words, they try to couch their language carefully, but their collective narrative is that all Jewish organizations plus their memberships plus millions of American Jews are all part of this lobby.

      But now you want to argue, “But come on, Historian, you poorly educated lout, you said ‘most of American Jews,’ not just their organizations.

      But you want to see where they “blame most American Jews,” and for that you may go to page 141 of their hateful book. There you will find: “American Jews are relatively prosperous and well educated…they give generously to political parties and have very high rates of political engagement. A SIZABLE MINORITY OF AMERICAN JEWS IS NOT STRONGLY COMMITTED TO ISRAEL [note that it’s not that they’re not committed, it’s that they’re not strongly committed], BUT A CLEAR MAJORITY IS AT LEAST SOMEWHAT ENGAGED…BY THIS ISSUE.”

      Oh, and just in case you want the actual number that represents a majority of American Jews according to these two snakes, it is 64%.

      You know how I know? Because on page 115 of their version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion they write: “…There is significant variation among American Jews in the depth of their commitment to Israel. Roughly a third of them, in fact, do not identify Israel as a particular salient issue. In 2004, for example, a well regarded survey found that 36 percent of Jewish Americans were either “not very” or “not at all” emotionally attached to Israel.”

      But just in case you don’t notice that even among that “third,” some do list themselves in the “not very” category which also means “somewhat,” W & M have another sneaky trick up their sleeve when they then compare (we’re still on page 115) Jewish Americans and their relationship to Israel as “just as many gun owners do not support every policy the NRA advocates and not all retirees favor every position endorsed by the AARP.”

      Get it? Being an American Jew vis-a-vis Israel, even if you’re somewhat or not at all “emotionally attached” is the same as being a gun owner with respect to gun laws and lobbying. You certainly are connected to all gun owners and while you may not participate directly in what the NRA does, you sure are impacted by their lobbying.

      In other words, even American Jews who have no connection to Israel are connected to Israel and its lobby because whatever outcome comes from such lobbying affects them just as NRA gun lobbying affects all gun owners.

      Now you think about that statement for a minute and its full, disgusting implications.

      Okay? Got your page numbers? Got the evidence? You want to quibble or suck it up and apologize?
      Face it, two great universities are diminished by the participation of these two jokers on their faculties.

      Reply to Comment
    12. Deïr Yassin

      Yeah, another Zionist coming along with his chutzpah and self-assurance.
      Does anybody trust anything written by Benny Morris, let’s say, these last 10 years ??
      If you know M&W that well, you know that the article from London Review of Books is simply a working paper.
      Funny, what you say about Harward and University of Chicago having their reputation dimished by M&W. If you think of Harward’s reputation, you better do something to get Dersho sacked.
      Benny Morris in flagrante delicto:
      As I mentioned in a comment there, you can catch him in his lies from min: 12. Someone as sick as that can hardly be trusted in academic matters, and I encourage everyone to read the interview from Haaretz that I linked to too.
      Benny Morris should be interned in the Kfar Shaul Mental Hostital, in the few remaining building of Deir Yassin. They are healing his kind of pathology: paranoia.

      If you have nothing to say, why do you write so lenghty comments ? Another guy who’s happy to finally see his words in print ? Or maybe you’re paid quantitatively ….

      Reply to Comment
    13. Bosko

      Deir Yassin says …
      “Does anybody trust anything written by Benny Morris, let’s say, these last 10 years ??”
      Translation: Benny Morris used to be our pin up boy, say about 10 years ago when we thought he sang from our hymn book. But now that he no longer says what we want to hear lets just dismiss what he says. No, let’s place him in the looney bin …
      Classic totalitarian sentiments. Stalin would be proud of our Yassin.

      Reply to Comment
    14. Historian

      Um, Deir Yassin, I missed the apology.

      Reply to Comment
    15. Deïr Yassin

      Yeah, your apology: there’s something about ‘a place where the sun doesn’t shine’ …
      Only a real psychopath is able of calling Walt & Mearsheimer’s book “a version the Protocols of the Elders of Zion”.
      You’ve been around a couple of days, and we’ve already had the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ about a highly estimated book, ‘genocidal’ about the PA. Maybe you should read the comment rules: I have the impression that you’re soon going to call someone a Nazi …

      Reply to Comment
    16. Historian

      The writers on 972mag can kick me off any time they like. Their reasoning would be that I proved you wrong with evidence from a book that you said didn’t have this evidence, and that I quoted Palestinian officials who want all Jews out of their future Palestine and refuse to answer what they will do with their gay population.
      I know! I should write that Abbas is a peace-lover. Then I won’t get kicked off this site!
      In any case, you asked for evidence about Walt & Mearsheimer and I provided you with page numbers, direct quotations, clear explanations of what they wrote, analysis of why it’s disgusting and if you read what I quoted carefully, you will realize it is even anti-Semitic.
      And their book is definitely the new Protocols. It is all about how Jews control the most powerful country in the world against that country’s own best-interests.
      I’m Jewish, I live in the US. I don’t belong to any organized group or any organization, but according to their standards I am part of the “Israel Lobby.”
      Oh, and according to them, this Israel Lobby which includes all Jews (just as all gun owners are affected by NRA lobbying and all seniors, including those who don’t support certain initiatives are part of the AARP’s beneficiaries) seeks to advance Israeli interests at the expense of American interests.
      So here I am, a Jew living in America, and apparently because I am this Jew living in America, I am responsible for this undermining of American interests indirectly. If I belong to a synagogue or to any major Jewish group, I am directly responsible for this undermining of American interests.
      Oh, and the Israel Lobby is really, really, really powerful and America goes to war because of it, supports Israel against its better interests, wastes money on Middle Eastern countries and basically does what these Jewish (they do mention Christian Zionists but only waste a little space in their book and articles on Christian Zionists) manipulators want.
      Yes, how dare I call this piece of garbage the new “protocols?”

      Reply to Comment
    17. Historian

      Oh, and Deir, you really need to analyze what in your psyche is preventing you from apologizing when you’ve been proven wrong. Not that I’m surprised, but it is interesting.

      Reply to Comment
    18. Deïr Yassin

      You’re suffering from complex of superiority, maybe ?
      I don’t consider that “I’m proven wrong” on the M&W-book. Your right-wing paranoid world view is not the Truth.
      And it’s not because you post the same crap on two different comment threads that it becomes more true. That’s a typical trolling procedure.

      I posted the denial by Ma’en Rashid Areikat in Huffingtonpost on Larry’s comment thread before you wrote the same crap here.
      He didn’t talk about Jews, but what do you care …. You’re just another Hasbara troll.

      Reply to Comment
    19. Historian

      Areikat did talk about Jews…and gays. Then, caught with his pants down, he adjusted to “Zionists” and went into repair mode. Except that he had already been quoted in an interview with Tablet Magazine saying the same thing. Ouch!

      I post “the same crap” on different conversation because…they’re different conversations. One day somebody will read these discussions and will not have the benefit of seeing every discussion on here, just the one they landed on.

      Am I suffering from a complex of superiority? In relation to you, absolutely. Am I suffering from a “right wing paranoid world view?” Possibly. But you know what they say: Just because you’re paranoid, that doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.

      Being a Jew, I’ve learned long ago to heed that bit of advice. Oh, and I wouldn’t vote for Netanyahu in an election unless the only other candidates were Ahmed Tibi or Avigdor Lieberman. Reading you, I gather you like to vote – once of course, since that’s all you get – for Haniyeh.

      Reply to Comment
    20. Robert Soran-Schwarz (@_No1)

      Yossi, You’ve written a piece from and for idiots, with no additional, useful information compared to the sources that have already reported it all, but filled with with assumptions based on nothing else but your opposition to Israel’s government and institutions.
      This isn’t investigative, but pure instigative journalism with no value add.

      Reply to Comment
    21. Bosko

      Deir Yassin’s mantra …
      “…. You’re just another Hasbara troll, …. You’re just another Hasbara troll, …. You’re just another Hasbara troll”
      Be proud, Historian, she honoured me with that term, numerous times.

      Reply to Comment
    22. Historian

      Sadly, this is no honor. All it means is that the debater is not up to snuff and what they have to say has little substance.

      Reply to Comment
    23. Bosko

      You are right, Historian. It is hard to argue with someone who is reduced to calling you names. But on the other hand, it shows how bankrupt her position is.

      Reply to Comment
    24. Click here to load previous comments