Does a new bombshell report answer Charlie Kirk’s questions about the October 7 attacks?
A shocking report from The New York Times highlights long-abounding theories about the horrific terrorist attacks that happened in Israel on October 7, 2023. What is the truth?
Opinion-analysis by Summer Lane | September 25, 2026
A shocking bombshell report from The New York Times this week has drawn attention to the key question surrounding the horrifying terrorist attack on Israeli citizens in October 2023: how could such a tragedy be allowed to happen?
In the new report, the NYT appears to corroborate reporting that was done earlier this month in Haaretz. The initial report alleged that a week and a half before October 7, 2023, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu received a warning from UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed about a possible attack from Hamas, and that the prime minister allegedly dismissed the threat.
The NYT’s report, published Friday, followed up on this story, citing a source who had spoken with Sheikh Mohammed and secondary sources who alleged that the Emirati leader did indeed warn Netanyahu.
It is important to note that the Israeli prime minister has denied this claim.
The NYT’s reporting alleges the following:
“The warning from the Emirati leader, however, never reached the leaders of Israel’s security establishment, according to five former senior Israeli officials. Mr. Netanyahu gathered his security chiefs days later, on Oct. 1, 2023, for a meeting about the situation in the Gaza Strip, and never mentioned the warning, according to minutes of the meeting reviewed by The Times.”
If true, this information would certainly be disappointing – and it would represent a catastrophic misstep on the part of Netanyahu. But is it true?
October 7, 2023
The October 7 terrorist attacks of that day were terrifyingly grotesque. Social media footage from that day filled social media, displaying the worst of the carnage as Israeli citizens attempted to flee from attackers.
It was the worst breach of security Israel has ever had in its modern history. Around 1,200 people tragically died in Israel during those attacks, and many were taken hostage.
Unsurprisingly – and rightfully – people openly wondered how Israel’s border security could have failed so badly. After all, the Israeli border has some of the most advanced technology in the world, utilizing multi-layered defense systems that have created a shield of total impenetrability.
“The threats its border security infrastructure has faced over the past five decades include conventional military incursion, terrorist infiltration, tunnel-based penetration, unmanned aerial intrusion, maritime approach, and large-scale coordinated assault,” writes Tel Aviv Capital, an Israeli DECA-licensed defense firm.
It describes the security ecosystem of the Israeli border as one where “every sensor, every detection algorithm, every barrier system, and every command-and-control platform has been pressure-tested in ways that no other country’s border security can replicate from a standing start.”
Somehow, Hamas terrorists infiltrated the country using rockets, motorized paragliders, bulldozers, and motorbikes. It seems almost ridiculous, but Reuters in 2023 cited an anonymous Israeli security source that claimed that troops near the south Gaza border were “below full strength” and deployed elsewhere – leaving a vulnerability.
Still, most people agree: it seems almost impossible that such an attack could get through.
Charlie Kirk’s important questions
Charlie Kirk, the late Turning Point USA President, was known as a profoundly intellectual person, a great man of faith, and a modern American patriot. Since his assassination, Americans have spent much time reviewing his many debates, speeches, and interviews – recalling his quick thinking and astute observations.
So, it’s worth noting that in the wake of the October 7 attacks, Kirk asked the obvious question while sitting for an interview on the Patrick Bet-David (PBD) Podcast.
“So, I’ve been to Israel many times – the whole country’s a fortress,” Kirk said. “When I first heard this story, I still have the same gut instinct that I did initially: I find it very hard to believe. I’ve been to that Gaza border; you cannot go 10 feet without running into a 19-year-old with an AR-15 or an automatic machine gun that is an IDF soldier, right? The whole country is surveilled.”
Kirk also noted that, in the lead-up to the October 7 attacks, Israel was “on the verge of Civil War – it’s not an exaggeration.”
He cited domestic Israeli unrest over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s political government. According to The London School of Economics and Political Science, Israeli protests in 2023 were massive, preceding the October 7 attacks by at least nine months, with tens of thousands – to hundreds of thousands – protesting weekly against Netanyahu’s government.
“That’s all gone, Patrick,” Kirk said. “Netanyahu now has an emergency government, and a mandate to lead. I’m not willing to…go so far as saying that Netanyahu knew or there was intelligence here, but I think some questions need to be asked. Was there a stand-down order? …Six hours? I don’t believe it. Israel’s the size of New Jersey.”
Kirk said that asking whether there was a stand-down order on the part of the IDF was a “legitimate, non-conspiracy question.”
He said that it was possible that the Netanyahu government was “double-crossed by bad agents” in the lead-up to the October 7 attacks. He also suggested that Netanyahu could have had traitors in his government who could have contributed to the disaster. Thirdly, Kirk said that it was possible that the Israeli government “might have gotten a tip” but didn’t take it seriously enough.
“The fact is now, Bibi and the Israeli hard-right government has a mandate – I gotta be careful the way I say this – they’re going to try to ethnically cleanse Gaza,” Kirk remarked. “I mean, I don’t use that term lightly…there are some serious questions here, Patrick, and let me tell you. My pattern recognition, over the last five years, has become pretty sharp. Covid, Maui fires, you know, Epstein – when I see a story, and it doesn’t click, our guts are usually right.”
What does this mean?
Sometimes it’s hard to believe the worst about people, particularly those in positions of power. The reporting on Netanyahu this week is alarming, of course, and it seems to suggest that Charlie Kirk’s gut instinct was likely right on the money – as usual.
It’s striking, too. Netanyahu recently delivered a speech at the UN General Assembly, in which he compared October 7, 2023, to “sixteen 9/11s,” stating that the death of 1,200 Israelis was equal to the death of 40,000 Americans.
The comparison was certainly a distasteful one. The deaths of innocent Israelis and Americans shouldn’t be used as political fodder, and yet, Netanyahu has done exactly what Kirk said: he has led Israel into an all-out retributive war against Gaza, Lebanon, and now, with the help of the U.S., Iran.
War is always a tragedy, even if done in the name of justified retribution.
It’s worth noting that the Israeli prime minister, whether one agrees with it or not, has been charged with multiple war crimes in the International Criminal Court. He is also facing re-election in October. It’s not a stretch to observe that a wartime president often collects a little political capital along the way, and perhaps that’s what Netanyahu has been carefully accruing.
At the end of the day, what do any of these things mean? If, for argument’s sake, Netanyahu knew that Hamas would attack in 2023, and he allowed that warning to skate by, does it change anything?
Would the U.S. have joined with the Israelis in launching a war against Iran? Certainly Israel wouldn’t have had the “mandate” that Charlie Kirk described to go in and attack Gaza. Would the world be a little more stable if October 7 hadn’t happened?
The answer is: probably. If nothing else, the allegations about October 7, if proven true, will simply be another vindication for the instincts of the late, great Charlie Kirk.
Photo: Adobe Stock
