Public disputes concerning the Hamas-led attacks of October 7, 2023, including prior warnings, security decisions, and subsequent accounts of responsibility.
Published coverage on this page: 4+ cases · 24+ statements. Statements are ordered newest first.
Mamdani mourned Israeli and Palestinian deaths in one October 7 anniversary statement. Walsh, Danon and Alkhatib said the date should focus on victims of Hamas's attack.
Published
Read the case
Published
Published
Labels describe a response to the linked claim or the action explained in the statement summary. Choose one or more.
103 matching statements
Role at the time: White House press office, in an emailed reply to Dispute Index
Statement summary
Asked whether President Trump still holds his November 2025 answer that he does not consider Mayor Zohran Mamdani a jihadist, and whether he agrees with Laura Loomer's description of Mamdani as a jihadist, the White House press office replied by email that it referred Dispute Index to the President's comments. It did not say which comments it meant.
“I refer you to the Presidents comments”
I refer you to the Presidents comments
What this label refers to
The case asks whether Loomer was justified in calling Mamdani a jihadist. Asked whether the President agrees with her label, the press office replied only by pointing to the President's comments, without saying which, and offered no evaluation of its own. That is a redirect, so we labeled it Explicitly stayed out. The closest competing label is Challenged characterization, which matches the President's November 2025 answer; it loses because the office did not restate that answer or say it still stands.
Role at the time: Fact-checking website; Katie Sanders, editor-in-chief, in an email to Dispute Index
Statement summary
PolitiFact editor-in-chief Katie Sanders told Dispute Index that PolitiFact has not gone back to examine related claims about Israeli fire on October 7 and that its November 2023 rating stands. She said the fact check addressed only whether the video Stew Peters posted showed what he said it did, and that a group that geolocates footage found the IDF video was not filmed at the festival site.
“We have not gone back and looked at related claims, and the rating stands.”
What this label refers to
The reference point is Israeli fire on October 7, 2023, under or in the manner of the Hannibal Directive, that put Israeli captives at risk of being killed by Israeli forces. PolitiFact maintains that the video does not show Israeli forces killing festivalgoers and says it has not reviewed broader claims, so we used Challenged the characterization, as for its original fact check. The closest competing label is Explicitly stayed out. It loses because she answers both questions and restates PolitiFact's finding about the video.
Role at the time: Political activist and host of Loomer Unleashed
Response to this claim
Zohran Mamdani is a jihadist.
“Everyone knows Mamdani is a supporter of Islamic terror. I want to see the FBI’s statement about why Mamdani was given a clearance.”
Loomer asserts the terrorism-related characterization as established and uses it to challenge Mamdani's access to classified information.
Role at the time: Israel Defense Forces Spokesperson's Unit, Foreign Media Desk, in an email to Dispute Index
Statement summary
The IDF Spokesperson's Unit told Dispute Index that it has published investigations concerning its conduct on October 7 and would not comment beyond them. Dispute Index had asked about the Hannibal procedure, the number of Israelis killed by Israeli fire, and commentators who say Israel killed large numbers of its own citizens.
“The IDF has published investigations concerning its conduct on October 7th, and beyond that, we will not comment.”
The IDF has published investigations concerning its conduct on October 7th, and beyond that, we will not comment.
What this label refers to
The reference point is Israeli fire on October 7, 2023, under or in the manner of the Hannibal Directive, that put Israeli captives at risk of being killed by Israeli forces. The IDF refers to its published investigations and declines to answer further, so we labeled it Explicitly stayed out. The closest competing label is Challenged the characterization. It loses because the reply does not dispute any account; it only declines to add to the published findings.
Role at the time: Palestinian-American analyst and Atlantic Council senior fellow
Statement summary
Alkhatib says the statement failed to give October 7 victims unconditional compassion and could reduce empathy for Palestinians.
“his statement was tone deaf, inconsiderate, and antagonizing to millions who deserve their trauma recognized on its own terms.”
What this label refers to
Acknowledging Palestinian suffering does not qualify his direct criticism of Mamdani's anniversary framing.
Role at the time: Israel's ambassador to the United Nations
Response to this claim
Mamdani improperly turned the October 7 anniversary into a propaganda attack against Israel.
“an attempt to hijack the anniversary of October 7 and turn it into yet another propaganda attack against Israel.”
He condemns the framing of the anniversary statement itself.
Role at the time: Former U.S. representative and political commentator
Response to this claim
Mamdani improperly turned the October 7 anniversary into a propaganda attack against Israel.
“Shame on you @NYCMayor. You can't just give one day for Israel to mourn? One day?”
He directly criticizes Mamdani's choice to include other grievances in this remembrance.
Role at the time: Political activist and host of Loomer Unleashed
Response to this claim
Zohran Mamdani is a jihadist.
“He is a full blown jihadist who normalizes killing non-Muslims for the sake of pushing a global intifada.”
Loomer affirms the characterization and supplies an accusation about political violence as her justification for it.
Role at the time: Mayor of New York City
Response to this claim
Honoring the dead requires opposing continuing war crimes and pursuing freedom, safety and dignity for everyone.
“To honor the dead, we must fight for a world in which every person can live with freedom, safety, and dignity.”
His conclusion supplies a justification for combining remembrance with criticism of Israel in the same statement.
Role at the time: Journalist, HonestReporting
Statement summary
Michael Starr said Zeteo misrepresents the Hannibal Directive as an order to kill Israelis, arguing that it removes live-fire safety limits while fire stays aimed at attackers.
Quotation excerpt
“The directive is a removal of safeties that come with the use of live fire, as Americans may be familiar with danger close mortar or artillery strikes. Fire is directed at hostiles, not at hostages, but the safety protocols are essentially…”
“The directive is a removal of safeties that come with the use of live fire, as Americans may be familiar with danger close mortar or artillery strikes. Fire is directed at hostiles, not at hostages, but the safety protocols are essentially removed. You are shooting at risk to friendlies, not at friendlies.”
What this label refers to
The reference point is Israeli fire on October 7, 2023, under or in the manner of the Hannibal Directive, that put Israeli captives at risk of being killed by Israeli forces. Starr disputes the description of the directive as a command to kill Israelis and says reported friendly-fire deaths number about a dozen, while calling the procedure controversial. That rejects how the conduct is characterized rather than arguing it was justified. The closest competing label is Minimized, but he does not play down deaths he accepts; he disputes what the procedure orders.
Role at the time: Founder and editor-in-chief of Zeteo
Statement summary
In a Zeteo article and video published on October 6, 2026, the eve of the attack's third anniversary, Hasan wrote that he agrees with Israeli families who want an independent investigation into October 7. He wrote that Hamas "clearly killed hundreds of Israelis" and should answer for its crimes, and that the Israeli military "should also have to answer for its actions on that chaotic and bloody day" and the Hannibal Directive "needs to be exposed, once and for all."
Quotation excerpt
“A lot of the Israeli families of those killed and abducted want an independent investigation into what happened on Oct. 7, and I agree with them. Hamas clearly killed hundreds of Israelis and committed crimes and abuses, which they should…”
“A lot of the Israeli families of those killed and abducted want an independent investigation into what happened on Oct. 7, and I agree with them. Hamas clearly killed hundreds of Israelis and committed crimes and abuses, which they should answer for. The Israeli military, however, should also have to answer for its actions on that chaotic and bloody day – and the Hannibal Directive needs to be exposed, once and for all.”
What this label refers to
The reference point is the Israeli military's use of fire on October 7, 2023, under or in the manner of the Hannibal Directive, that put Israeli captives at risk of being killed by Israeli forces. Hasan says the Israeli military should have to answer for its actions that day and that the directive "needs to be exposed," and he supports an independent investigation. He also says Hamas killed hundreds of Israelis and should answer for its crimes, but that does not soften his criticism of the Israeli military's conduct. The closest competing label is Challenged the characterization, because much of his argument is about media coverage, but this passage criticizes the military's conduct directly, so we used Condemned.
Role at the time: Writer on terrorism and national security
Statement summary
Kyle Orton called the claim that Israelis killed themselves on October 7 under the Hannibal Directive a "zombie meme" from the aftermath of the attack.
“When Zack Polanski spoke of Israel having "definitely" engaged in "false flag" operations, he specifically mentioned the "Hannibal Directive", this zombie meme from the aftermath of October 7 claiming the Israelis killed themselves.”
What this label refers to
The reference point is Israeli fire on October 7, 2023, under or in the manner of the Hannibal Directive, that put Israeli captives at risk of being killed by Israeli forces. Orton rejects the claim that Israelis killed their own people that day as a meme. That disputes how the conduct has been characterized rather than defending any use of fire. The closest competing label is Defended or excused, but the post makes no argument that such fire was justified.
Role at the time: Political commentator for Channel 12 News and columnist for Israel Hayom
Statement summary
Commentator Amit Segal wrote in Hebrew that, even if one supposes a long call, a very specific warning and a fully accurate Haaretz account, Eldar and Yuval would have urged economic benefits for Gaza rather than targeted killings. He wrote that the book rests on two shaky sources, both aging senior Fatah figures, that responsibility for the tragedy rests fully on the decision-makers, and that Eldar and Yuval are not exempt from a searching self-examination. He also listed three side details of the report that he said were quickly refuted, among them that Egypt did not personally warn Netanyahu.
Quotation excerpt
“And suppose there was a long phone call between the Emirati leader and Netanyahu. And suppose even that a warning was delivered, and that it was very specific. Suppose the entire report by Shlomi Eldar and Ruti Yuval is true ... If…”
“And suppose there was a long phone call between the Emirati leader and Netanyahu. And suppose even that a warning was delivered, and that it was very specific. Suppose the entire report by Shlomi Eldar and Ruti Yuval is true ... If Netanyahu had told the cabinet about the call with the Emirati ruler, and if Shlomi Eldar and Ruti Yuval had been ministers, they would have proposed one thing: economic benefits, and under no circumstances assassinations. ... When you scrape away the many anonymous sources, you find that the entire book rests on two shaky sources, two aging senior Fatah officials ... And so, responsibility for the tragedy lies entirely with the decision-makers, but Eldar and Yuval are not exempt from serious soul-searching. (Translated from Hebrew. Original: ונניח שהיתה שיחת טלפון ממושכת בין מנהיג האמירויות לנתניהו. ונניח אפילו שנמסרה אזהרה, והיא היתה ספציפית מאוד. נניח שכל הפרסום של שלומי אלדר ורותי יובל נכון ... אם נתניהו היה מספר לקבינט על השיחה עם שליט האמירויות, ואם שלומי אלדר ורותי יובל היו שרים, הם היו מציעים דבר אחד: הטבות כלכליות, ובשום פנים ואופן לא חיסולים. ... כשמגרדים את שלל הגורמים האנונימיים, מגלים שהספר כולו נשען על שני מקורות רעועים, שני בכירי פת״ח מזדקנים ... ולכן, האחריות לטרגדיה מוטלת במלואה על מקבלי ההחלטות, אך אלדר ויובל אינם פטורים מחשבון נפש נוקב.)”
What this label refers to
The reference point is whether Netanyahu received the reported warning from the UAE president and failed to relay or act on it. Segal does not deny the call. He proceeds on the supposition that the report is fully accurate, argues that the reporters' own preferred policy would not have differed from Netanyahu's, disputes the reliability of the book's sources, and places full responsibility on the decision-makers. Because these positions are combined and the argument rests on an express supposition, we used mixed or conditional rather than defends or excuses. Most of the piece is a critique of Eldar and Yuval and of their sources rather than a view on whether the warning was relayed, so the label reflects only its hypothetical stance on the reference point.
Role at the time: Member of the Knesset for Yesh Atid
Response to this claim
If Netanyahu received the reported warning and failed to alert security leaders or take action, that failure constituted extraordinary or criminal negligence.
Quotation excerpt
“Netanyahu's propaganda machine has spent enormous effort over the past two weeks trying to distance him from the shocking revelation by Shlomi Eldar and Ruth Yuval in Haaretz. This evening The New York Times is also publishing a…”
“Netanyahu's propaganda machine has spent enormous effort over the past two weeks trying to distance him from the shocking revelation by Shlomi Eldar and Ruth Yuval in Haaretz. This evening The New York Times is also publishing a comprehensive investigation on the subject. Netanyahu was warned by a number of sources in Israel and abroad, Netanyahu ignored it - 1,200 Israelis were murdered and killed on October 7, 2023. Unforgivable. (Translated from Hebrew. Original: מכונת התעמולה של נתניהו השקיעה בשבועיים האחרונים מאמצים כבירים, על מנת להרחיק אותו מהחשיפה המטלטלת של שלומי אלדר ורות יובל בהארץ. הערב גם ניו יורק טיימס מפרסם תחקיר מקיף בנושא. נתניהו הוזהר על ידי מספר גורמים בארץ ובחו״ל, נתניהו התעלם - 1,200 ישראלים נרצחו ונהרגו ב-7 באוקטובר 2023. בלתי נסלח.)”
The reference point is whether Netanyahu received the reported warning from the UAE president and failed to relay or act on it. Beliak states as fact that Netanyahu was warned and ignored the warnings, and calls that unforgivable. That is an express criticism of the alleged conduct, so we used condemns rather than a conditional label.
Role at the time: Host, The Tucker Carlson Show
Statement summary
Interviewing Max Blumenthal, Tucker Carlson asked whether the Hannibal Directive was a real concept and whether Israeli forces killed hostages on purpose, then remarked that it was "so evil."
“Come on. They killed the hostages on purpose?”
What this label refers to
The reference point is Israeli fire on October 7, 2023, under or in the manner of the Hannibal Directive, that put Israeli captives at risk of being killed by Israeli forces. Carlson responds to Blumenthal's account with incredulous questions and then calls it "so evil," without stating his own conclusion about what happened. His judgment depends on the account being true. The closest competing label is Condemned, but his remarks are framed as questions about whether the account is real.
Role at the time: President of Israel, in an interview on Kan News
Statement summary
In a Kan News interview, President Isaac Herzog said, in Hebrew, that the UAE president spoke with him several months before October 7, 2023 about Israel's judicial dispute and expressed concern about the situation. He said this was outside the context of any warning that may or may not have been given to the prime minister, which he called the heart of the dispute.
Quotation excerpt
“The article mentioned that the president of the Emirates, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed, known as MBZ, spoke with me and expressed concern about the situation. And it was important to me to explain that this is outside the context of any…”
“The article mentioned that the president of the Emirates, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed, known as MBZ, spoke with me and expressed concern about the situation. And it was important to me to explain that this is outside the context of any warning that may or may not have been given to the prime minister, which is, after all, the heart of the dispute ... He spoke with me explicitly, several months before October 7, about the legal dispute that is tearing Israeli society apart, at the height of the protests and demonstrations (Translated from Hebrew. Original: בתוך המאמר הוזכר שנשיא האמירויות, שייח' מוחמד בן זאיד, המכונה MBZ, שוחח איתי והביע דאגה על המצב. והיה לי חשוב להסביר שזה מחוץ לקונטקסט של התרעה כלשהי שאולי ניתנה לראש הממשלה ואולי לא, שזה הרי לב הוויכוח ... הוא דיבר איתי כמה חודשים לפני 7.10 בצורה מפורשת על הוויכוח המשפטי שקורע את החברה הישראלית, בתקופת שיא המחאות וההפגנות)”
What this label refers to
The reference point is whether Netanyahu received the reported warning from the UAE president and failed to relay or act on it. Herzog describes whether a warning was given to the prime minister as the heart of the dispute and expressly leaves it aside, so we used explicitly declines rather than a label that would assign him a view on it.
Role at the time: Daughter of hostage Chaim Peri; bereaved-family advocate
Statement summary
Noam Peri, daughter of hostage Chaim Peri, who was killed in Hamas captivity, said at a Tel Aviv press conference that no commission of inquiry has been established, as families released a dossier naming the reported UAE warning among warnings Israeli leadership is accused of ignoring before October 7.
“A commission of inquiry has not even been established.”
What this label refers to
Peri, whose father was killed in Hamas captivity, condemns the lack of an official inquiry into warnings ignored ahead of October 7, of which the reported UAE warning is a named example in the families' dossier.
Role at the time: Former IDF Chief of Staff (2005-2007)
Statement summary
Former IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz said he believes the reported Mohammed bin Zayed-Netanyahu warning call took place, accused Netanyahu of concealing what he knew, and said ultimate responsibility for the failure rests with the prime minister.
“What could be simpler for the Emirati prince than to say there was no conversation if there was no conversation?”
What this label refers to
Halutz explicitly credits the MBZ-Netanyahu warning account, accuses Netanyahu of concealing what he knew, and calls for his removal — a direct condemnation of Netanyahu relative to the case's central question.
Role at the time: Former U.S. secretary of state, interviewed on Morning Joe
Statement summary
Clinton treated the reported UAE warning as evidence of Netanyahu’s failure of leadership and protection of Israelis. She said she did not know his thinking.
“This was a failure of leadership.”
What this label refers to
Clinton expressly condemns Netanyahu’s alleged failure to protect Israelis after the reported warning. Her uncertainty about his motive does not soften her conclusion that his handling was a leadership failure.
Role at the time: Fatah Reform Democratic faction spokesperson, statement to the Jerusalem Post
Statement summary
Diliani rejects Likud's allegation that Mohammed Dahlan engineered the Haaretz report or interfered in Israeli elections.
“ludicrous and misleading”
What this label refers to
The statement contests the alleged provenance and political purpose of the report, not independently whether the UAE warning occurred.
Role at the time: Haaretz institutional legal response, public announcement headline
Statement summary
Haaretz rejects Netanyahu's legal demands and says it will defend its reporting concerning the alleged UAE warning.
“Won't Hesitate to Expose the Truth in Court”
What this label refers to
This is the newspaper's own response to a claim that its report is false, not routine news reporting assigned to the outlet as a stance.
Role at the time: Morning Joe co-host and former Republican U.S. representative
Statement summary
Scarborough accused Netanyahu of receiving the warning and failing to act. He pressed for an official inquiry and insisted that discussing Netanyahu’s responsibility did not erase Hamas’s responsibility for the attack.
“He knew. He froze. He did nothing all day.”
What this label refers to
Scarborough directly criticizes Netanyahu’s alleged response to the warning and demands accountability. His simultaneous condemnation of Hamas is compatible with, rather than a qualification of, that criticism.
Role at the time: Official office of the prime minister of Israel
Response to this claim
The Prime Minister’s Office says its review of Netanyahu’s call log and office visitor records found no documentation supporting the reported call or an Emirati representative’s visit.
“A thorough examination of the Prime Minister’s call log does not show any supporting entry.”
The office offers a specific record-based challenge to the alleged call. The record review is the office’s assertion and has not been independently audited in the available sources.
Role at the time: Political commentator and strategist, writing on X
Statement summary
Webb criticized Netanyahu’s alleged receipt of multiple warnings, including the reported direct UAE warning, and his alleged failure to brief security chiefs.
“THIS IS DAMNING”
What this label refers to
Webb’s emphatic criticism concerns the warning and alleged failure to relay it—the conduct disputed in this case. His rejection of a benign missed-warning explanation is part of that condemnation, not a defense of the alleged conduct.
Far-right political activist, commentator, and ally of President Donald Trump.
1 case and 4 statements
Palestinian American analyst and senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.
1 case and 1 statement
Danny Danon is an Israeli diplomat and Likud politician serving as Israel's Permanent Representative to the United Nations (2015-2020 and since 2024). He previously served in the Knesset and held cabinet posts including Deputy Minister of Defense and Minister of Science and Technology, and chairs World Likud.
1 case and 1 statement
Former Republican U.S. Representative for Illinois (2011-2013); political commentator and podcast host, now a vocal Trump critic. Not to be confused with the Eagles guitarist of the same name.
1 case and 1 statement
Zohran Mamdani is the mayor of New York City and a democratic socialist politician.
2 cases and 1 statement
Michael Starr is an Israeli-Canadian journalist and former Jerusalem Post correspondent who works on investigations for HonestReporting, a media-monitoring organization based in Jerusalem. He also contributes to The Algemeiner.
1 case and 1 statement
Mehdi Hasan is a journalist, political commentator, and founder and editor-in-chief of Zeteo.
2 cases and 2 statements
Kyle Orton is a British writer and independent researcher on terrorism, national security and the Middle East. He writes the newsletter It Can Always Get Worse, which covers terrorism, geopolitics, history and espionage.
1 case and 1 statement
Israeli political commentator and journalist. He is the political analyst for Channel 12 News, writes a weekly column for Israel Hayom, and publishes a newsletter and a podcast.
1 case and 1 statement
Israeli politician, accountant and lawyer who is a Knesset member for the Yesh Atid party and sits on the Knesset Finance Committee.
1 case and 1 statement
Sami Abu Shehadeh is a Palestinian politician and historian who leads Balad, the National Democratic Assembly party in Israel. He was a member of the Knesset from 2019 to 2022 and previously sat on the Tel Aviv-Jaffa City Council.
1 case
Conservative political commentator and host of The Tucker Carlson Show.
1 case and 1 statement
