Alon Ben David:

"There were those in Israel who mistakenly thought that the effect of the bombing in Beirut would curb Hezbollah, and might shake Nasrallah's seat, in practice - the opposite happened." https://t.co/ubQvGbR0Gl

"After 14 years of blessed peace the northern border, tension is back.

Build a barrier in place of the 40-year-old fence, and set up a border system managed remotely, with scanners remote-controlled firing stations and special forces"

https://t.co/GFVkCEAgZS

Will do a small thread (in a few) about WikiLeaks and the accusations of Hezbullah buying ammonium nitarte.

It will unfortunately start with explaining to most what is WikiLeaks and how it works.

To put it in the simplist way possible, WikiLeaks is not an it. WikiLeaks does not speak about itself or in its name, WikiLeaks does not claim or say anything.

WikiLeaks posts what it was able to leak from embassies, think tanks, etc. Therefore no one can say WikiLeaks said. 1/

Therefore when we deal with WikiLeaks we deal with it according to who said it, aka who they leaked from.

Like the Saudi leaks about Lebanon or the Syrian leaks, they all need a context. I was able to use them in a huge thread about May 7, that i'll up in its anniversary. 2/

For example once in a WikiLeaks Saudi cable, the KSA embassy was talking about Hezbullah training camps in Al Arz.

Unironically their informant mistook Hezbullah training camps to Lebanese Forces camps. It happens and that's a claim that shouldn't be considered a fact. 3/

And in the light of the Beirut explosion, after no credibile data was available to connect Hezbullah to that exact shipment, anti Hezbullah think tanks made a personal crusade that started with an article about Iran sending Hezbullah 700 t in ammonian nitrate through the port. 4/

Then an article about the real owner of the ship that carried the ammonian nitrate (2013) to a Hezbullah bank in Cyprus, and finally an old WikiLeaks leak from 2010 from Stratfor think tank.

Regarding the first, it was through unnamed western intellegence sources. 5/

Sources that not only were unnamed, but happen to have connected the shipment to Iran. Hezbullah somehow bought the shipment from Iran, contrary to what the old and current narrative is of Hezbullah being bankrolled and supplied free by Iran.

The shipment came through Syria.6/

Aside from the absurd claim that Hezbullah who is bankrolled by Iran is now paying Iran for ammonium nitrate, and how they made sure to subliminally connect the substance to the Beirut explosion, they made the mistake of claiming they had access to paper proof of this deal.8/

Having paper proof of shipment will be a bold claim that they, the western intellegence, had spies and informants in IRGC and Hezbullah who have access to such papers

That aside, the mere existence of a receipt is weird. Why would Iran sell Hezbullah and produce a receipt.9/

That aside, Hezbullah and Iran don't deal with banks. So the transaction was done by cash. Now we are back at the same delimma of Iran sending Hezbullah cash in pallets only to get them back in the form of purchase. Amazingly in Euro.

That's all superficial questions.10/

What actually contradicts, is their claim of having a paper that talks about the shipment but end up saying words like"the paper says it arrived from Syria or by sea" or "is believed" and "likely an Iranain private jet". 11/