Wall Street Journal and Others Grossly Exaggerate Iran’s Role in Hamas’ Attack
On October 8, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) published a story entitled “Iran Helped Plot Attack on Israel Over Several Weeks.” The story was followed by an additional piece entitled “Hamas Fighters Trained in Iran Before Oct. 7 Attacks,” published by WSJ on October 25, claiming that “according to people familiar with intelligence related to the assault,” 500 terrorists from Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad had received specialized combat training in Iran. The WSJ reported that a foreign arm of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Quds Force, “helped plan the attack and agreed that it could go ahead at a meeting in Beirut on Oct. 2 with leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah.”
US government sources also informed media coverage that Iran-backed militias “have already launched multiple drone attacks on US forces in Iraq and Syria,” according to CNN, and that they are escalating the conflict. “White House spokesman John Kirby said Iran was not only spurring on these attacks but also in some cases facilitating them,” wrote Josh Rogin in the Washington Post. “He pledged the United States would not allow Iran to use proxies to attack Americans with impunity. It’s time for the Biden team to match those words with action.”
However, evidence supports that not only the WSJ, but the Washington Post and CNN have exaggerated Iran’s role in Hamas’ attack on Israel. During an October 19 press briefing, Pentagon spokesman Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder stated, "the information that we have does not show a direct connection to [Iran] and the Hamas attacks on October 7th.” Additionally, Veteran staffers on the WSJ national security team “raised concerns” about the October 8 story, according to Semafor. Those WSJ staffers “could not directly confirm the explosive string of allegations.” A former colleague of the lead reporter of both WSJ articles alleged that she “has a history of dishonesty and inventing stories” and that she had been fired from Reuters for this reason.
Ultimately, existing evidence does not suggest Iran was primarily responsible for its attack. While there may be legitimate inquiries into the subject, the WSJ’s story among others grossly exaggerated the causal link between Iran and the October 7th attacks.
Read More:
