This think tank article pretty bluntly argues NATOids had foreknowledge of Al-Aqsa Flood. Did they have a clear picture of what kind of attack would be taking place? I've never seen a really convincing thorough argument for it, but as a devoted member of the 9/11 fanbase I feel obligated to read all of them. What do you think? If so, was it a strategic error to allow the attacks, considering the price the west ended up paying? I think since True Promise III it's harder to say they're in control of this situation due to the level of losses proportional to MIC production

What strengthens the assumption that there is a comprehensive, premeditated plan is a fundamental question regarding the origins of these developments – specifically, the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel. The question is this: How could a country like Israel – with its extensive intelligence penetration into its regional adversaries, from Hamas and Hezbollah to Iran, and its proven capacity to assassinate highly protected figures (including multiple Hamas leaders, senior Hezbollah officials such as Hassan Nasrallah within one week, and over 30 senior Iranian military commanders and nuclear scientists in a single night) – have failed to detect an operation involving over 1,000 Hamas fighters?

Was Israel, with its surveillance capabilities, truly unaware of such a large-scale attack being prepared – especially given that Hamas had been training for the October 7 assault for more than a year? Could it be that not a single informant existed among those 1,000 fighters, or that Israeli intelligence was unaware of their movements and preparations?

The answer is that yes – Tel Aviv, Netanyahu, and even the United States were fully aware of the impending attack. What they lacked was not intelligence, but a sufficient pretext – a dramatic, high-impact trigger to justify the launch of their broader regional agenda.