Declassified Documents Reveal The Failures Of The Yom Kippur War In 1973


With a Major War on the Rise,

Are Our Leaders Paying Attention This Time?

Or Are They Repeating Similar Mistakes?

.

New testimonies from Agranat Commission reveal miscommunication, intelligence that fell between the cracks and lack of clear protocols led to major failings in days leading to Yom Kippur War.

In 1973 Alfred (Freddie) Eini was aide to Mossad Chief Zvi Zamir. He was the man who on the night between October 4th and 5th received a dramatic telegram from London, from the handler of Egyptian agent Ashraf Marwan, who was known as ‘The Angel’, with a clear warning that war was imminent.

Marwan also demanded to meet with Zamir urgently. “We had never had a telegram like that,” Eini said in his testimony before the Agranat Commission. He meant a telegram in which a source made sure that the head of Mossad would come to meet with him, noting that he had very important matters to discuss. “I understood it to be a warning that there would be a war.”

And yet, the political echelons in Israel failed to realize the importance of the telegram and the danger it warned of. Now, 39 years after the Yom Kippur War, the Defense Ministry (through the IDF archives and defense establishment) published classified testimonies given before the commission which was founded to investigate the failings of the war.

Yom Kippur War 1973

IDF Soldiers in Suez Canal in 1973

Eini, as well as then Prime Minister Golda Meir‘s military secretary Yisrael Lior, were demanded to explain why critical intelligence pointing to the fact that war was about to break out was delayed and how a warning from the Mossad’s most important source of information was kept from the prime minister.

The fact that the agent was Ashraf Marwan, the son-in-law of then Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser has already been revealed in the past few years. Marwan fell to his death five years ago in mysterious circumstances.

After receiving the telegram (codename “chemistry”) Eini decided not to wait until morning and to wake Zamir immediately

“I called him right away, gave him the gist of the telegram, he heard, said thank you, ok and (said) I should come see him in the morning.”

Marwan had previously warned of an upcoming war, the alertness level was raised – and nothing happened. But this time, “The Angel” wanted a meeting.

The aide rushed to get Zamir a flight and called him once again to give him an update.

“The Mossad chief took the opportunity to tell me that the head of Military Intelligence called him and discussed the fact that the Soviets were preparing to leave Syria.

“I told him that what the Military Intelligence chief said to him fit with information I had given him and then I found out that the Mossad chief didn’t fully understand my first message. What I mean is, he was most likely half asleep and didn’t grasp that I had told him about a warning of imminent war.

“He said that if that was the case he would call the Military Intelligence chief again and tell him. Explain that it was actually a serious situation.”

According to Eini, the information from Military Intelligence about the Russian scientists leaving Syria together with Marwan’s intel, convinced him that there was no other possibility.

“I thought it was a warning of an imminent war, especially when the Mossad chief told me about the Russian families leaving. I had no doubt, which is why I told him again.”

Agranat Commission

The Agranat Commission

.

If so, commission member and former Chief of Staff Yigal Yadin asked, why did the Mossad not pass on the urgent telegram to Golda Meir’s military secretary Yisrael Lior? Eini said in response that Military Intelligence received the information.

“There was a set procedure with anything relating to information received from — you do transfer it to the prime minister but it can take a few hours. I never thought to wake Lior at night.”

Eini stuck with protocol and said that he called the military secretary in the morning, but he was in a meeting.

“I left a message for him to call me as soon as he was out. Lior called before lunch and said that the cabinet held a meeting during which the prime minister heard that the Mossad chief had flown out of the country.

“During our conversation Lior said it would have been better had I taken him out of the cabinet meeting rather than waiting for him to become available.”

Yadin then asked: Was there no fault in the procedure when a piece of information like this doesn’t get to the Prime Minister and Defense Minister? Eini answered:

“Presenting the information to the prime minister was not intended for operational purposes; it seemed unnatural for me to wake Lior in the middle of the night. I’ll wake Lior to tell him of a possible terror attack, which lies within his jurisdiction,”

The theory alleging that Marwan was a double agent has been a major controversy within the intelligence community for decades – a theory which then Military Intelligence Chief Eli Zeira still believes – it was also an issue raised during Eini’s testimony.

Yom Kippur War

Yom Kippur War

On December 6, 1973, two months after the war, Brigadier General Lior presented his testimony before the commission. The questions addressed to Lior focused on whether precious time was lost from the moment the warning about the war came in.

According to Lior, even when Meir was abroad days before war broke out, he made sure to pass on all the sensitive information in light of the situation.

“It gets to her by hook or by crook?” asked Laskov. “Yes,” Lior responded. “If we think it’s necessary, then it gets to her quickly.”

Lior told those present of information he gave to Meir two weeks before war broke out. The intelligence pointed to the fact that Russia was transferring Scud missiles to Egypt. That was the first clue to the fact that war was imminent.

“You know that we recently received reports of 300-kilometer range missiles,” Lior read out from the protocol of a conversation between himself and the prime minister to the commission members. “These are probably Scuds, this has been confirmed. Between 100 and 300 kilometers, it has nuclear and chemical warheads.”

Commission member Nebenzahl was shocked to hear this: “That’s what it says? I want to be sure.” “It has chemical and nuclear warheads,” Lior reiterated, adding: “I have to say, I was surprised that the Russians would do that,” he quoted Zamir from the meeting.

According to the military secretary, Zamir warned Meir that this was a clear escalation. “There are signs pointing to the fact that they are already in or on their way to Egypt. Prime Minister, are we talking to — about this?” Zamir asked. He most likely meant the Americans.

Sinai War

Golda Meir, Ariel Sharon in Sinai during war

The missile transfer, Lior believed, had dramatic implications vis-à-vis Egypt’s future intentions. “The Egyptians and the Arab countries claimed over the years that since the Six Day War their problem was that they could not hit out against us deep in our territory, their problem was depth.

“Penetrating deep into (Israeli) territory is difficult, there were arguments. I won’t go into that now; I’m not here instead of Eli Zeira and Zamir.” Lior then went on to read portions of the meeting protocols . According to Lior, Zamir estimated that this was part of a “master plan.”

On September 30, Commission member Yadin notes, the CIA asked Israel for details with regards to the Military Intelligence alert on a Syrian war plan. Who approved the final response? Yadin asks Lior. Were the Prime Minister or Defense Minister aware of the question, or did Military Intelligence respond independently?

“I believe that 99% of assessments are done periodically. It is done through the services without the military echelons giving any guidance,” Lior claimed.

At no point, says the military secretary, did Meir hear various assessments vis-à-vis military information. “In most cases she received the final intel; she did not hear about disagreements or alternatives… I don’t remember anyone coming to her in one way or another and saying – I’m against this.”

Former Chief of Staff Haim Laskov asked whether Mossad Chief Zamir expressed his opinion to Golda in the days before the war. “Do you recall in that period, lets say, from After Rosh Hashanah, that the Mossad chief put his weight behind (the information) and told the Prime Minister …we’re heading towards war?”

Lior responded in the negative.

“On October 4, one day before the report about Russian families leaving Syria and Egypt there was a meeting where he was updated on the situation by a colonel who took the place of the Military Intelligence chief, who presented the situation as Military Intelligence saw it, that there was low probability for war. The Mossad chief did not address it.”

According to Lior, the Military Intelligence assessment was always considered to be decisive.

“Even in the most difficult hours, which was during the sixth day, every assessment or consideration was always built on Military Intelligence’s assessments. On that day we transferred a final assessment to the Americans that it was going to happen, the assessment was from Military Intelligence.”

Eini’s testimony also focused on the warnings that failed to make it to the Prime Minister’s desk. Yadin notes that on October 1 he received a telegram regarding Syria’s attack plans and the next day more telegrams arrived, strengthening fears that Syria was planning an attack.

Yom Kippur War

Yom Kippur War

None of them stressed the former chief of staff, were brought before Meir’s military secretary. “None of these telegrams?” Asks Commission Chairman Justice Agranat. “Not one,” answered Yadin.

According to Eini, the criteria for transferring raw intelligence to the prime minister was

“things that the Mossad chief believes could interest her personally, not because it could have an effect on anything operational.

“That’s how I understood it. If we look at these files, take two to three months before the war, it would seem that hardly any of the reports on the matter of strengthening forces, purchases or preparation for war were brought before the Prime Minister.”

Eini added that he held daily phone conversations with Lior: “Those calls included transferring information.”

Yadin: “We asked Brigadier General Lior – I didn’t know he didn’t receive it – what his and Golda’s response was to the telegrams. And he says: I’m hearing about these telegrams for the first time in my life.”

The protocol, notes Yadin, was that the Prime Minister be given raw intelligence on any important report.

“Post factum we discovered that the telegrams were transferred as raw material by Military Intelligence to the defense minister and chief of staff but for some reason they were not included in the Military Intelligence briefings.”

According to Eini, the Mossad is not the correct pipeline through which the Prime Minister should be updated on certain matters, rather it is there to clarify things.

“When someone reads a briefing, then the raw material, he understands the briefing a little better because the raw material includes additional details.”

Yom Kippur War

Yom Kippur War

The fact that Military Intelligence received the information and then failed to include it in the final briefing is what, according to the Mossad chief’s aide, caused a loss of sensitive information.

“It created a situation where something slipped through the cracks,” Yadin said, wondering how it was possible that in light of the sensitivity of the intelligence and the urgency of the warning, no Mossad personnel noticed that the intel supplied by the source was missing from the Military Intelligence briefing.

“I’m not examining whether Military Intelligence transfers this kind of intelligence or another to the Prime Mnister, I know that Military Intelligence, according to my estimation, passes on all the material we transfer to them to the prime minister.”

Commission member Justice Moshe Landau: “As always, you relied on intelligence assessments carried out by Military Intelligence as the assessing body?”

Eini: “Not assessment, processing (of intelligence). We assumed that whatever we transfer gets to the Prime Minister.”

This, claims Yadin, is where the roots of the intelligence fiasco lie. According to Yadin

“this creates a doubly dangerous situation. Everyone relies on the Military Intelligence assessment, which is already not good.

“And here we discover that apparently distributing reports, not just assessments, should the information come to the Prime Minister’s ears, are also under the jurisdiction of Military Intelligence, sharing reports – not assessments.”

So did the Mossad cave to the low probability concept? Yadin tells Eini that according to documentation before the commission members, two months before that, in April 1973, when the source warned of a possible war which led to a raising of the alertness level in the IDF, the Mossad did transfer the raw intelligence to the Prime Minister directly. “What was the difference between this document and the previous one?” Yadin asked. “I cannot tell you why,” Eini responded.

.

Source: YNet

Advertisements

The Betrayal of Israel By Hidden Islamist Barack Hussein Obama Is Undeniable And Evident


History not only repeats itself to boredom,
but also to tragic, repeated, and totally unnecessary consequences

In recovery and pop psychology circles there is a widely popularized definition of insanity which goes:  “Insanity is repeating over and over the same action while expecting a different result.”  What an undebatable truism!

Israel has run down many times the same treaded path upon which we are at this moment with respect to the genocidal bellicosity of an enemy (currently Iran) the emboldened Muslim Arab mob of the Middle East, and the hope and trust that many in Israel — chief among them the last several governments — have deposited on a deceitful “friend” (currently America).  Yes, yestercentury our hope was on the help of Egypt, and nowadays we do the same with the United States of America.  Make no mistake, the result shalll surely be the same; and if we expect something different is because we are entirely delusional, and therefore insane.

Isaiah 31:1
Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help and rely on horses; and to those who trust in chariots because they are many, and in horsemen because they are very strong, but they do not look for the The Holy One of Israel, neither seek HaShem!

.

Isaiah 36:6
Behold, you trust in the staff of this broken reed — on Egypt — on which if a man leans it will go into his palm and pierce it!  So is Pharaoh King of Egypt to all that trust in him.

.

Isaiah 36:9
How then will you turn away the face of one Officer of the least of my Master’s Servants, and put your trust upon Egypt for chariots and for horsemen??!!

.

2 King 15-17
15  And when the servant of the Man of G-d (Prophet Elisha) was risen early, and went forth, behold, an army surrounded the city with horses and chariots.   And his servant said unto him: “Oy, my lord!  What shall we do?”  16  And he answered, “Do not fear because those who are with us are many more than those that are with them.”  17  And Elishah prayed and said:  “Hashem, open now his eyes so that he can see.”  And HaShem opened the eyes of the servant and he saw; and behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire were all around Elishah.

Anti-Semite US president Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) may very well have told American Jewish leaders who came to him pleading for his help in the rescue of the trapped Jews of Europe in the early 1940s something similar to what was uttered by president Barack Obama last March at the AIPAC conference in Washington: “There should not be a shred of doubt by now: when the chips are down, I have Israel’s back.” Like his Democratic Party predecessor, Obama has deceivingly expressed comforting words to American Jewish leaders, but has refrained from taking decisive action that would substantiate his words. An example of which is the last round of sanctions against Iran that were brought to the President’s desk in December 2011 by Senators Menendez (D) and Kirk (R), and endorsed in the Senate 100-0, that Obama sought to change the language of and diminish its intent.

Republican U.S. Congressman Hamilton Fish (R-NY) accused FDR in the 1940s, as news of death camps was unfolding, of “spiritual anesthesia” for not taking a stand to save the European Jews. According to Fish FDR’s silence may have been the deciding factor in Hitler’s execution of the “Final Solution.”  Fish argued that had “FDR made a definitive announcement out of the White House, it might well have stopped the megalomaniac Hitler or at least brought home the truth to the German and Polish people, most of whom probably knew little of Hitler’s extermination policy.”

Obama is a Muslim enemy of IsraelIn a similar vein, had Obama made a definitive statement that declared America’s “red lines” on Iran’s nuclear weapons development, and the consequences for Tehran of crossing such lines, the present situation, which threatens the lives of six million Jews in Israel and elsewhere, would not have arisen.  Instead, Obama dispatched the chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff General Martin Dempsey to express opposition to a unilateral Israeli military action against Iran.  Dempsey shamelessly said in London, “I don’t want to be complicit if they (Israel) choose to do it.”  Evidently he and his nefarious boss in Washington prefer to be complicit in the genocide of more than 6,000,000 Jews in Israel, thus equating themselves to the Nazis of Germany.

According to the September 3, 2012 Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot,

The Obama administration, informed Iran via two European nations, that it would not back an Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities, as long as Tehran refrains from attacking American interests in the Persian Gulf.”

Obama is a Muslim traitorIn late March of this year, former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton told Fox News that the Obama administration leaked a story which revealed that Israel had been granted access to airfields in Azerbaijan located along Iran’s northern border.  Bolton was responding to a Foreign Policy magazine article, and stated on Fox “I think this leak today is part of the administration’s campaign against an Israeli attack on Iran.”  He went on to say that a strike from Azerbaijan “would be much easier for the Israelis than a strike launched from their own country — jets could stay over their target longer and worry less about refueling.”  Bolton added, that “tipping the Israelis’ hand by revealing very sensitive, very important information could frustrate such a plan.”

In his book, ‘Obama’s Betrayal of Israel’, author Michael Ledeen provides evidence that President Obama is uninterested in Israel’s security and that he constantly sends messages to the world to that effect.  Ledeen writes that Obama personally attended a ceremony awarding the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Israel basher Mary Robinson.  She is the former Irish PM and the UN official who presided over the infamous anti-Israel Durban Conference in 2001.

Obama’s claim that American support for Israel is “unbreakable” is either naïve or disingenuous.  Clearly, one cannot claim to be dedicated to Israel’s security and at the same time advocate a Palestinian State.  Hamas declares its intentions to eradicate the Jewish state openly and regularly, while in Ramallah, Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas seeks a unity government with Hamas, and rejects direct negotiations with Israel.  But there is more

  1. Earlier this year Obama authorized $192 million to go the Palestinian Authority.
  2. He lifted the ban on financial aid to the Palestinian Authority imposed by the U.S. Congress, claiming that it was “important to the security interests of the United States”!
  3. Similarly, Obama continues to support the Muslim Brotherhood regime in Cairo with $1.2 billion in U.S. taxpayer money.
  4. At the same time, Obama is refusing to meet Netanyahu later this month, following his humiliating treatment of Netanyahu on a previous visit to the Obama White House.

Israelis, according to Ledeen, get the picture, and in a recent poll, only 4% of Israelis said that they thought B. Hussein Obama’s policies were supportive of Israel.  In other words, 96% considered Obama unfriendly towards Israel.  Actually, we believe he is an Islamic enemy of Israel.

There are two ways to implement the destruction of Israel is:

  1. to enable Iran to acquire nuclear weapons and
  2. tie Israel’s hands by preventing it from striking Iran preemptively while there is still time.

Well, Obama has blocked Israel from destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities, and he is shameless and tirelessly doing all he can to make sure Iran gets the time it needs to produce a nuclear bomb.  The useless 5+1 talks with Iran certainly bought time for Iran, and the U.S. sanctions imposed against Iran have had some impact on the Iranian economy, but didn’t halt Iran’s race towards a nuclear weapon.

Obama is as well aware of these facts just as FDR knew of the gas chambers in Auschwitz.  Another way of undermining Israel is by fostering a terror-prone “Palestinian” State, and that is what Obama has done.

In a recent interview on Israel’s Arutz Sheva, former Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Zalman Shoval said that Israeli and U.S. interests diverged when it came to Iran. “We need to get used to the fact that, as usual, we are alone.”  A diplomat, Shoval was careful not to point a finger at Obama but the implications of Obama’s policies are clear. Shoval did however compare the current situation with the days before the Six Day War, when Israel received no support from the Johnson Administration, and was told point-blank by President Johnson that if Israel took the initiative and attacked Egypt, it would have to suffer the consequences, despite the fact that Egypt had committed an act of war by closing off the Straits of Tiran.

The difference today, as compared to 1967, is that Israel’s enemy – Iran – might use a nuclear weapon that could incinerate a sizeable portion of Israel.

According to Shoval, the U.S. knows that it must prevent Iran from going nuclear – not to save Israel, of course, but to save its strategic position in the world, and in the Middle East in particular. Eventually, Shoval said, the U.S. might act, but by the time they do it may be too late. The U.S., he added, wants to put off the confrontation with Iran for a year or two, but every delay gives the Iran another advantage. Obama, as Shoval sees it, is much more interested in being reelected than dealing with the Iranian threat. And, should he be reelected, his domestic concerns, i.e. the economy, will trump national security issues such as Iran.

The Iranian-based Press TV reported on September 11, 2012 that “The U.S. rebuffed Israel over Iran ‘red lines’.”  Prime Minister Netanyahu had called for the U.S. to declare “red lines” over Tehran’s nuclear program on Sunday (9/9/12), warning that in the absence of such a statement Iranian officials would not take seriously Washington’s implied threat of military action. “The sooner we establish one, the greater the chances that there won’t be a need for other types of action,” he told Canada’s CBC News. Asked on Sunday (9/9/12) whether the administration would set out red lines or deadlines, Hillary Clinton, the U.S. Secretary of State replied on Bloomberg Radio that “We are not setting deadlines.”

In an entry in Assistant Secretary of State Breckinridge Long’s dairy on October 3, 1940, he noted that President Roosevelt (FDR) supported his policy of encouraging U.S. consulates to “postpone, and postpone and postpone” the granting of visas to European Jews.  This is reminiscent of Obama’s policy of postponing action against Iran.  The results may be the same, the betrayal of Israel’s Jews … but this time around HaShem is going to pass the final Bbill to America.  Some or many Jews shall fall but the total doom of America is truly at hand.

.

Source: TheJerusalemConnection