Welcome to Roya News, stay informed with the most important news at your fingertips.

1
Image 1 from gallery

Netanyahu ex-aide claims PM’s chief of staff tried to alter October 7 records

Listen to this story:
0:00

Note: AI technology was used to generate this article’s audio.

Published :  
10 hours ago|
Last Updated :  
9 hours ago|
  • Gil alleges that Netanyahu’s chief of staff, Tzachi Braverman, instructed the office stenographer to alter the recorded timestamp of Gil’s first phone call with Netanyahu on the morning of October 7.
  • Gil characterized the modification as part of a "criminal pattern of behavior."

Benjamin Netanyahu’s ex-military secretary Avi Gi claimed that Netanyahu gave an incomplete account of the events surrounding the events of October 7 and that Netanyahu’s chief of staff sought to change an official record from that morning.

Avi Gi told “Israel’ Hayom” and Channel 12 that he had stayed silent up until now “in the hope of testifying before a state commission of inquiry.”

“There are too many lies in the air, and the public deserves to know the truth,” Gil said.

“Three years have passed since October 7, and two years since I retired from the IDF. I hoped a state commission of inquiry would be established to investigate everything. Unfortunately, that hasn’t happened, and I doubt it will,” he added.

Gil said that he was suspicious about potential alterations to official transcripts two weeks into the war on Gaza, after claiming that he noticed a “disproportionate collection of material” by Netanyahu’s associates.

He then made contact with Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara and asked her “to clarify the rules about what may and may not be done with official transcripts.”

Three months later, he alleged, a Prime Minister's Office stenographer told him that Netanyahu's chief of staff, Tzachi Braverman, had instructed her to change the recorded time of Gil's first call with Netanyahu on October 7.

Gil called the alleged alteration part of “a criminal pattern of behavior,” and stated that it may have been intended either to “portray Netanyahu as issuing orders from the attack’s outset or to imply that intelligence conveyed during a second call was already known during the first.”

Gil stated that a future inquiry must review original recordings instead of written transcripts, as he suspects the records may have been altered.

He claimed Netanyahu’s report to the state comptroller is incomplete and fails to accurately capture what occurred.