The Jerusalem Post, based on data mining of thousands of posts published on the social media platform “X,” has examined the pattern of dissemination of the “false flag” narrative following the Flydubai incident; data showing that the first post concerning Israel’s role was published only 67 minutes after the aircraft sent its emergency signal.
Iran View 24 – World
With the expansion of social media, no longer does it take more than a fraction of a second for any security or aviation incident to become a new arena for a battle of narratives; a battle that, if naturally left to the public conscience and not manipulated by algorithms, can contribute to greater transparency on the global stage.
The reactions of global public opinion to the Flydubai flight incident on the route from Dubai to Tel Aviv, on the eve of the anniversary of Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia, are notable examples of the role of global public opinion in preventing the selective appropriation of events or the construction of scenarios to manipulate public opinion by Israel and its allies.
Before addressing the narratives surrounding Flydubai, it is worth recalling that following the Bondi Beach incident in Sydney, Australia, X users immediately published online polls asking whether the Sydney incident was the work of Mossad, which received more than several million views.
In both incidents—the Flydubai flight incident and Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia—Israel attempted to bring Iran’s name into the discussion, but on the other side, a wave of social media users from around the world independently examined the incident, highlighting the possibility of a “false flag” operation more prominently.
In response to this notable development in global public opinion, the Jerusalem Post published a detailed report describing a significant portion of these reactions as “antisemitic conspiracy theories.” But the report itself, unintentionally, raises a larger question before the audience:
Why are narratives related to false flag operations against Israel reproduced so rapidly in global public opinion, and why can the answer to this question not be found solely in “antisemitism”?
67 Minutes; The Number Emphasized by the Jerusalem Post
According to a report published by the Jerusalem Post citing the Antisemitism Research Center (ARC), regarding the Flydubai incident, the first specific post that identified the incident as an “Israeli false flag operation” was published only 67 minutes after the aircraft sent its first emergency signal.
The Flydubai incident began at 1:21 a.m. U.S. Eastern Time. Israeli media reported at the outset: “A Flydubai Boeing 737 MAX 8 carrying 174 passengers sent an emergency signal after the co-pilot reportedly attacked the pilot and attempted to take control of the aircraft. Passengers and crew were able to subdue the attacker, and the aircraft, after diverting, landed at Tabuk Airport in Saudi Arabia.”
Over a 12-hour period, the center examined 4,136 posts on X in which the phrase “false flag” was used. Of these, 2,963 posts identified Israel, Mossad, Benjamin Netanyahu, Zionists, or Jews as somehow responsible for or connected to the incident.
According to the same report, the volume of this content increased at a significant pace:
• By 3:07, the number of posts monitored concerning Israel’s involvement in the incident had reached 100;
• At 5:42, this type of post had surpassed 500;
• At 7:35, the number of posts considering Israel to be behind the incident had reached 1,000;
• And at 9:36, the number of such posts surpassed 2,000.Between 9 and 10 a.m., another 623 posts were published on the subject.
The Jerusalem Post says that approximately 72 percent of the total 4,136 posts examined emphasized the referenced conspiracy narratives about Israel and Mossad, and this figure reached 82 percent in the final hour.
It should be noted that an independent source also reported that during the first 48 hours after the Flydubai incident, at least 25,000 posts containing the Israeli false flag narrative were published on X, and these posts were viewed millions of times.
This statistic shows an important reality: global public opinion no longer accepts the Israeli narrative of events. Because Israel has a long history of false flag operations and has consistently sought to accuse other countries for war-oriented objectives.
The Jerusalem Post writes: In the early hours, Benjamin Netanyahu announced that Israel would participate in the investigation and, in response to a question about the possibility of Iran’s involvement, said it must be determined whether Tehran was behind the incident.
The Jerusalem Post, in an attempt to correct this trend, which had become anti-Israel, claims that at that time no official and documented claim had been presented by Israel regarding Iran’s involvement and that the investigation was still ongoing.
Why Did the “False Flag” Narrative Take Shape So Quickly?
The Jerusalem Post, citing the Antisemitism Research Center (ARC) and the Combat Antisemitism Movement, claims that such narratives already existed and that the incident merely provided an opportunity for them to become active.
Oliver Marks, a researcher at the Antisemitism Research Center (ARC), has even said that what matters is not only the volume of this content but its speed; from his perspective, this narrative emerged not in response to the incident but according to a “pre-existing script.”
The Israelis, without regard to Tel Aviv’s hateful policies, describe these claims as part of a conspiratorial pattern against Jews.
But an issue that the Jerusalem Post discusses less is that if the speed at which conspiracy theories spread is to be examined, a natural question must also be raised: Why do such theories about Israel find an audience so quickly?
Whether regarding the 2025 incident in Sydney or the recent Flydubai incident, much of the public naturally raised the question: Who benefits from the incident? As The Independent writes, many independent journalists regarding Flydubai believe that this incident benefited only one person: Benjamin Netanyahu.
In fact, the Israelis cannot simply erase the issue by accusing others of antisemitism or infiltration operations.
Historical memory knows well that Israeli intelligence and security institutions have a long and well-known history of conducting covert terrorist operations in other countries, even against Jews. Mossad is known as one of the intelligence organizations that has been involved in many terrorist and targeted operations, and may well have been involved in operations whose details may later be revealed in the media or documents.
Therefore, today’s public does not receive narratives concerning Israeli intelligence services in a historical vacuum.
The audience also takes past conduct into account in its judgment.
The Point the Jerusalem Post Unintentionally Reveals
The Jerusalem Post seeks to show how the Flydubai incident became a platform for spreading anti-Israel narratives in less than an hour, but the data in the same report can also be evaluated from another angle.
These figures show that trust in Israeli narratives is facing a crisis within a significant part of global public discourse.
The fact that some users raise such a possibility is a real social and media phenomenon and cannot simply be explained by labeling it “antisemitism.”
To understand this phenomenon, a combination of factors must be taken into account: Israel’s history of intelligence-terror operations, Israel’s crimes in the Gaza war, crimes in the Lebanon war, crimes in Iran during the 12-day and 40-day wars.
The official archive of Israel’s Ministry of Defense/War regarding the famous Lavon affair explicitly describes Operation Susannah as a false flag operation. According to this official document, in 1954, a network of Egyptian Jews recruited by Israeli military intelligence was tasked with bombing American and British cinemas, libraries, and educational centers in Egypt so that responsibility for the attacks would be attributed to the Muslim Brotherhood, communists, or Egyptian nationalist groups. The operation failed and became one of the major political and security crises in Israel’s history.
Based on these historically proven experiences and according to credible polls, Israel today is, from the perspective of the majority of global public opinion, an undesirable and untrustworthy entity.
The findings of the Pew Research Center survey, conducted from February 8 to May 13, 2026, show that the majority of people across various continents hold an unfavorable view of Israel, with some of the figures as follows: Canada 65 percent, the United States 60 percent, Sweden 78 percent, Spain 78 percent, the Netherlands 76 percent, Italy 75 percent, Germany 73 percent, Poland 70 percent, the United Kingdom 69 percent, France 68 percent, Greece 65 percent, Hungary 54 percent, Pakistan 95 percent, Malaysia 89 percent, Indonesia 86 percent, Japan 83 percent, Australia 79 percent, Bangladesh 79 percent, Singapore 72 percent, South Korea 70 percent, the Philippines 64 percent, Thailand 59 percent, Sri Lanka 41 percent, India 28 percent, Turkey 97 percent, the West Bank 85 percent, South Africa 58 percent, Kenya 47 percent, Nigeria 41 percent, Ghana 36 percent, Chile 60 percent, Mexico 59 percent, Colombia 56 percent, Argentina 55 percent, Brazil 52 percent, and Peru 50 percent.
According to the data from this survey, the lack of confidence in Netanyahu in 2025 and 2026 and the extent of change are as follows: South Korea from 64 to 76 percent (12 percentage-point increase), Italy from 80 to 88 percent (8 percentage-point increase), Hungary from 57 to 65 percent (8 percentage-point increase), Argentina from 55 to 63 percent (8 percentage-point increase), Germany from 76 to 83 percent (7 percentage-point increase), Indonesia from 76 to 83 percent (7 percentage-point increase), Poland from 70 to 77 percent (7 percentage-point increase), the United Kingdom from 68 to 75 percent (7 percentage-point increase), the United States from 52 to 59 percent (7 percentage-point increase), Nigeria from 38 to 45 percent (7 percentage-point increase), Sweden from 78 to 84 percent (6 percentage-point increase), Australia from 72 to 78 percent (6 percentage-point increase), and Canada from 66 to 72 percent (6 percentage-point increase).
