#Fact Check: Old Video Shared to Fuel Netanyahu Death Rumours
Executive Summary:
A video featuring Sara Netanyahu, wife of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is being widely circulated on social media. In the clip, she is seen attending an online meeting and repeatedly closing her eyes. The video is being shared with claims that it is recent and shows her under the influence of drugs. Some posts also suggest that Prime Minister Netanyahu has died. However, research by the CyberPeace found that the claim is misleading. The video is not recent and has been online since 2020.
Claim:
Social media users are sharing the video claiming that Sara Netanyahu appeared intoxicated following the alleged death of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The clip is also being falsely presented as a recent development. An X user, Christopher Montgomery (@Montgsignals), shared the video with the caption suggesting that Netanyahu may have died and that his wife appeared in a drug-influenced state during a recent court hearing via Zoom.
Fact Check:
To verify the claim, we first examined reports regarding the alleged death of Benjamin Netanyahu. There is no credible evidence supporting this claim. In fact, on March 20, Netanyahu himself addressed the media and dismissed such rumours, confirming that he is alive.
We then analyzed the viral video by extracting keyframes and conducting a reverse search. This led us to the same video posted on a Facebook account under the name Roni Schneider Malia on November 4, 2020. The Hebrew caption associated with the post translates to: “Filmed during a psychological conference on Zoom.”
This confirms that the video is old and unrelated to any recent developments.
Conclusion:
The viral claim is misleading. The video of Sara Netanyahu is not recent but has been available online since 2020. It is being falsely linked to baseless claims about Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s death
Related Blogs
A war in the twenty-first century does not start when the first bullet or missile is fired. It begins much earlier, covertly, and without any official announcement. Cyberspace is this new battlefield. States now use a variety of ransomware, malicious codes, and disinformation campaigns to undermine their enemies' capabilities before launching an offensive. These pre-conflict cyber operations are now the primary frontline of contemporary hybrid warfare, which is changing how conflicts are fought and conducted.
The Birth of a Digital Battlefield
Hybrid Warfare is a blend of conventional military force with nonmilitary tactics like economic coercion, disinformation, and cyberattacks that have evolved rapidly in recent decades. Hybrid methods of warfare are nothing new, as the scale and sophistication of cyber operations in modern conflicts are unprecedented. Russia’s actions in Ukraine demonstrated the capability of digital tools to paralyse the critical systems before its heavy munitions could be deployed for combat operations. Within days of the 2022 invasions, Ukraine faced massive Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks targeting banks, government websites, and energy infrastructures. The digital frontlines have softened the physical defences long before the conventional warfare began.
According to the FP Analytics’ “Digital Front Lines” Project, cyber operations are no longer an auxiliary tactic but a core component of hybrid warfare, blurring the boundary between peace and war. They enable states to exert pressure, gather intelligence, and disrupt adversaries, often without being attributed or held accountable.
Cyber Operations: The modern Prelude to War
The use of digital technologies for surveillance, information network disruption, or critical infrastructure destruction is known as cyber operations. They are especially useful instruments for pre-conflict manipulation because of their ambiguity and stealth. Cyberattacks, in contrast to conventional military strikes, can accomplish strategic goals while providing plausible deniability.
Coordinated cyberattacks that spread misinformation and damaged public confidence disrupted government communication systems prior to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. These sorts of incidents highlight the integrated nature of cyber and kinetic operations, where digital assaults often serve as the initial phases of modern wars.
The Expanding Spectrum of Actors or Threat
Cyberspace has democratized warfare, which once required an army, can now be initiated by a handful of skilled programmers with access to the right tools. The cyber landscape of the present times features a wide spectrum of threat actors, which can be understood as;
- State actors like intelligence or military agencies conduct cyber operations as part of official foreign policy.
- Cybercriminals pursue financial gains, often overlapping with political motives.
- Terrorist groups use cyberspace to spread propaganda for coordinated attacks.
- Cyber mercenaries being hired by both the state and nonstate clients can blur the ethical and legal boundaries.
This diversity can complicate the attribution by determining that anyone who is actively working behind conducting cyberattacks can be notoriously difficult, allowing the states to hide behind “plausible deniability.” This ‘Gray Zone’ of conflict below the threshold of a declared war, above mere diplomacy, has become the preferred arena for modern power struggles.
Civilian Involvement and Ethical Dilemmas
Unlike traditional warfare, where the cyber domain entangles civilians as both participants and targets. Much of the nation’s critical infrastructure, which includes energy grids, hospitals, transportation, and communication systems, is owned and operated by private entities. As a result, the civilian industries and experts are becoming central to both cyber defence and offence.
During the Russia–Ukraine War, the volunteer hackers from around the world were many of whom are being coordinated through the app Telegram, which is termed as ‘IT Army of Ukraine’, are known for conducting digital strikes on Russian networks. Conversely, the Russia-affiliated hacker groups like Conti had vowed to retaliate against any nations that supported Ukraine.
This civilian participation raises profound legal and moral questions, over a private company’s role in defending their networks of becoming a combatant, or the impact of retaliatory cyberattacks on civilian infrastructure war crimes. International law has yet to provide a clear answer, which can leave dangerous gaps in the governance to counter cybercrimes.
Susceptibility of Contemporary Society to Cyber Warfare
Cyberwarfare can impact an entire global digital ecosystem due to its interconnectedness. Power grids, hospitals, air traffic systems, and even automation devices can be compromised. While the NotPetya ransomware, which was cloaked as ransomware, caused billions of losses and caused worldwide economic damage from shipping companies to pharmaceutical companies, the WannaCry ransomware attacks in 2017 paralysed hospitals throughout the UK's National Health Service.
When taken as a whole, these incidents have also shown that cyberattacks are no longer limited to espionage situations and can have real-world consequences comparable to those of conventional warfare. The consequences of cyberattacks could increase dramatically as our dependence on technology increases. Because these effects are profoundly psychological in nature and seek to sow fear, mistrust, and social disintegration, they are not merely technical or economic in nature.
The Future: Permanent Cyber Frontlines
Technological developments have made cyberspace a permanent theatre of conflict, joining the land, sea, air, and space. Countries are currently making significant investments in cyber capabilities for deterrence as well as defence. According to security experts like Eriksson and Giacomello, societies are now inherently fragile due to our increasing reliance on information technologies.
Cyber operations in this context are about strategic dominance in a globalised world, not just digital espionage. Who controls the networks and algorithms that run contemporary civilisation will determine the future of war, not just who controls the skies or the seas. As per the new reality, before the drop of the first bomb, a silent war in cyberspace will already be underway.
References
- https://digitalfrontlines.io/2023/05/25/the-evolution-of-cyber-operations-in-armed-conflict/
- https://theses.ubn.ru.nl/server/api/core/bitstreams/9d74149e-fb9a-402f-aa65-a90445ad7603/content
- https://cybersecurityguide.org/resources/cyberwarfare/
- https://re.public.polimi.it/retrieve/e0c31c0b-ce6c-4599-e053-1705fe0aef77/21%20Century%20Cyber%20Warfare.pdf
A video circulating widely on social media claims that Defence Minister Rajnath Singh compared the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) with the Afghan Taliban. The clip allegedly shows Singh stating that both organisations share a common ideology and belief system and therefore “must walk together.” However, a research by the CyberPeace found that the video is digitally manipulated, and the audio attributed to Rajnath Singh has been fabricated using artificial intelligence.
Claim
An X user, Aamir Ali Khan (@Aamir_Aali), on January 20 shared a video of Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, claiming that he drew parallels between the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Afghan Taliban. The user alleged that Singh stated both organisations follow a similar ideology and belief system and therefore must “walk together.” The post further quoted Singh as allegedly saying: “Indian RSS & Afghan Taliban have one ideology, we have one faith, we have one alliance, our mutual enemy is Pakistan. Israel is a strategic partner of India & Afghan Taliban are Israeli friends. We must join hands to destroy the enemy Pakistan.” Here is the link and archive link to the post, along with a screenshot.
Fact Check:
To verify the claim, the CyberPeace conducted a Google Lens search using keyframes extracted from the viral video. This search led to an extended version of the same footage uploaded on the official YouTube channel of Rajnath Singh. The original video was traced back to the inaugural ceremony of the Medium Calibre Ammunition Facility, constructed by Solar Industries in Nagpur. Upon reviewing the complete, unedited speech, the Desk found no instance where Rajnath Singh made any remarks comparing the RSS with the Afghan Taliban or spoke about shared ideology, alliances, or Pakistan in the manner claimed.
In the authentic footage, the Defence Minister spoke about:
" India’s push for Aatmanirbharta (self-reliance) in defence manufacturing
Strengthening domestic ammunition production
Positioning India as a global hub for defence exports "
The statements attributed to him in the viral clip were entirely absent from the original speech.
Here is the link to the original video, along with a screenshot.
In the next stage of the research , the audio track from the viral video was extracted and analysed using the AI voice detection tool Aurigin. This confirmed that the original visuals were misused and overlaid with a synthetic voice track to create a misleading narrative.
Conclusion
The CyberPeace concluded that the viral video claiming Defence Minister Rajnath Singh compared the RSS with the Afghan Taliban is false and misleading. The video has been digitally manipulated, with an AI-generated audio track falsely attributed to Singh. The Defence Minister made no such remarks during the Nagpur event, and the claim circulating online is fabricated.
Introduction
The year, 2022 has been a year of transition and change for the gaming industry. This year esports and gaming including the industry’s greater increased acceptance by the sports authorities and higher prize pools for top players, has been more commercial than ever, according to research by the year 2025 the industry will witness growth by 5 million dollars and around 420 million active gamers from India. Since, India is on the way to become world’s largest gaming market, with revenue earned in 2021 increasing by up to 28%, or 1.2 billion dollars, and predicted to reach 2 billion dollars by 2024 as a result of the COVID-19 expanding internet access throughout the country.
After a lengthy debate, the government has finally decided to bring online gaming under the purview of the law. The President of India has changed the rules governing e-sports and requested that the Sports Ministry and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) include e-sports in multi-sport competitions. India’s gaming sector has reached new heights this year, with the country winning its first bronze medal in the first esports event organized by this year’s Commonwealth Games, and this is only the beginning.
Indian government takes on E-sports
The Indian government has given esports a huge boost. It has been introduced into the traditional sports disciplines of the nation. Droupadi Murmu, the President of India, changed the regulations governing eSports using the authority “conferred by clause (3) of Article 77 of the Constitution,” and requested that “e-Sports be included as part of multi-sports events” from the Ministries of Electronics and Information Technology and Sports. Some crucial points will clarify the government’s position on e-sports.
- E-sports were added as a demonstration sport to the 2018 Asian Games in Jakarta, which meant that medals earned in the sport were not counted in the official total of medals.
- There is a greater desire for Esports to be integrated with school curricula.
- E-Sports (Electronic Sports) have been acknowledged by the Indian government as a component of multi-sport tournaments.
Why is e-sports important?
The Indian Esports Industry has worked hard to distinguish Esports from the broader category of “Gaming.” Esports is a competitive sport in which esports athletes compete in specific video game genres in a virtual, electronic environment using their physical and mental prowess, according to the industry.
According to studies, as individuals have gotten more screen aware and online gaming has become a part of their life, internet gaming not only improves fine motor skills but also sharpens the mind. The industry has the most users and stakeholders, and it has become critical to governing it; consequently, legislation is required to regulate it.
The online regulation bill 2022
The Online Gaming (Regulations) Bill, 2022, was recently filed in the Lok Sabha to create an effective regulatory mechanism for the online gaming business to prevent fraud and misuse of things related to or incidental to it. There are 20 sections spread throughout three chapters. It intends to establish an Online Gaming Commission, the authority, mandate, and jurisdiction of which will be specified by the Bill. An online gaming server will be licensed, relinquished, revoked, or suspended by the Commission’s key highlights of the bill to make it more clear
- The Bill establishes a regulating agency, the Online Gaming Commission (“OGC”), comprised of five members chosen by the Central Government, each with at least one specialist in the fields of law, cyber technology, and law enforcement experience.
- The OGC will be able to oversee the functions of online gaming websites, issue periodic or special reports on Online Gaming issues, recommend appropriate measures to control and curb illegal Online Gaming, grant, suspend, and revoke licenses for online gaming websites, and set fees for license applications and renewals.
- Without a website and a non-transferable and non-assignable license, the Bill proposes to make online gambling illegal. Anyone operating an online gaming server or website without a license risks up to three years in prison and a fine. The permission will be good for a six-year term.
- The license intended to be given under the Bill may be terminated or canceled if the licensee violates any of the license’s requirements or any of Bill’s provisions. However, the Bill does not apply to anybody providing backend services in India, including hosting and maintenance for any international gaming website situated outside of India.
- The bill also mentions the Foreign Direct Investment and Technology Collaboration in Online Gaming
Few misses in the bill that can be addressed to make it stronger and a better version
- The law does not address Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements, customer complaint procedures, advertising and marketing restrictions, user data protection, responsible gaming guidelines, and other concerns.
- In the bill, there is no clear distinction between money involved in the game. This is a matter of concern and needs to be addressed so the money laundering aspect can be determined.
- The distinction between “games of chance” and “games of skill” is not addressed in the Bill. Furthermore, the Bill does not specify whether its prohibitions apply only to for-real-money games or to free games.
Conclusion
Despite the bill’s flaws, it has offered optimism to the burgeoning gaming sector, which desperately needs a robust regulatory and legal framework free of ambiguity, allowing players to play safely, and encouraging entrepreneurs to enter the field with safety and security. An improved regulatory framework will increase job prospects while also assisting the government. A transparent framework will also aid in the protection of the rights of actors and stakeholders.
