Speaking alongside US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Monday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared to acknowledge that Israel did not kill Hamas leaders in its strike in Qatar last week, while putting a positive spin on the outcome.

“It didn’t fail, because it had one central message and we considered it before we launched it, and that is, you can hide, you can run, but we’ll get you,” he said at a Jerusalem press conference.

Israel targeted Hamas leaders last Tuesday in strikes in the Qatari capital that were said to kill five members of the terror group and a Qatari security officer. Israel’s security establishment was said to believe that the attack failed to take out Hamas’s top brass.

The strike elicited fury from Arab governments, including those with full diplomatic ties with Israel. On Monday, the leaders of Arab and Islamic states berated Israel in Doha at an emergency gathering in the wake of the attack.

US President Donald Trump has also expressed his displeasure, while tempering his public statements. He told reporters on Sunday that Israel must be “very, very careful” about how it handles Qatar, which he called a “great ally.”

Trump sounded similar notes shortly after the attack, when he posted on social media that the strike “does not advance Israel or America’s goals,” though he said that eliminating Hamas is a “worthy goal.

In a seeming gesture meant to reduce blowback to Washington in the wake of the strike, Netanyahu stressed at Monday’s press conference that Israel’s decision to act against Hamas in Qatar was a “wholly independent decision.”

“We assume full responsibility,” he said. “We did it on our own. Period.”

Rubio also sought to move past any public disagreement with Israel over the strike, saying, “We are focused on what happens next.”

At the same time, Netanyahu expressed sentiment that could be interpreted as an implicit rebuke of US criticism of the attack, blasting the “immense cynicism and hypocrisy” of those who assailed Israel over the strike.

Netanyahu pointed out UN Resolution 1373, ratified after the 9/11attacks, which says that no country can harbor or give safe haven to terrorists.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks at the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem, on September 15, 2025. (Chaim Goldberg/Flash90)

The prime minister stressed that, after the 2001 attacks, the US “acted very boldly against the terrorist havens that were given to al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. The terrorist haven that was given to the chief terrorist [Osama] Bin Laden in Pakistan.”

Rubio will visit Qatar on Tuesday, The Washington Post reported, citing two American sources.

Rubio met with Netanyahu one-on-one for about an hour and a half before an expanded meeting with aides.

He also met Monday with Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar and President Isaac Herzog.

A ‘concise’ Gaza operation

Rubio’s visit came as Israel gears up for its announced full-fledged invasion of Gaza City. On Monday, Israeli forces continued to bring down high-rise buildings in the northern Gaza metropolis.

Flames erupt from a building following an Israeli military strike in Gaza City, September 14, 2025. (AP Photo/Yousef Al Zanoun)

In recent days, the IDF has instructed Palestinians in all areas of Gaza City to leave for the Israeli-designated “humanitarian zone” in the Strip’s south, ahead of a major offensive against Hamas. Out of the one million Palestinians who were in Gaza City, more than 320,000 have evacuated, according to IDF estimates.

Before his trip, Rubio said he would speak to Netanyahu about Israeli military plans to seize Gaza City, the largest urban center in the devastated territory, as well as the government’s talk of annexing parts of the West Bank in hopes of precluding a Palestinian state.

Rubio earlier said Trump wants the Gaza war to be “finished with,” which would mean the release of hostages and ensuring Hamas is “no longer a threat.”

Demonstrators protest near the Prime Minister’s residence in Jerusalem, calling for the release of hostages held in the Gaza Strip, September 13, 2025. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)

But alongside Netanyahu, he showed firm support for Israel, saying that the “ideal outcome” is for Hamas to simply surrender, but “it may require ultimately a concise military operation to eliminate them.”

“As much as we may wish that there be a sort of a peaceful diplomatic way to end it,” said Rubio, “and we’ll continue to explore and be dedicated to it, we also have to be prepared for the possibility that that’s not going to happen.”

“Every single hostage, both living and deceased,” must be returned home immediately, said Rubio, and Hamas “can no longer continue to exist as an armed element that threatens the peace and security, not just of Israel, but of the world.”

Gazans deserve a better future, he continued, but that can’t begin “until Hamas is eliminated and until all of the hostages, both living and deceased, are home.”

Trump remains “committed firmly” to those goals, he said.

You appreciate our journalism

We’re really pleased that you’ve read X Times of Israel articles in the past month.

You clearly find our careful reporting valuable, in a time when facts are often distorted and news coverage often lacks context.

Your support is essential to continue our work. We want to continue delivering the professional journalism you value, even as the demands on our newsroom have grown dramatically since October 7.

So today, please consider joining our reader support group, The Times of Israel Community. For as little as $6 a month you’ll become our partners while enjoying The Times of Israel AD-FREE, as well as accessing exclusive content available only to Times of Israel Community members.

Thank you,
David Horovitz, Founding Editor of The Times of Israel

Join Our Community

Join Our Community

Already a member? Sign in to stop seeing this

The killing of Charlie Kirk is sparking debate about political violence in the U.S., as well as the kinds of professional repercussions employees who speak out about the conservative activist’s death — and other hot- button issues — might face.  

A number of businesses and other organizations have shown employees the door this week because of their public remarks about Kirk, who was assassinated on Wednesday while giving a speech at Utah Valley University. Among those to lose their jobs or face other sanctions: a political pundit, a university employee, a sports reporter and a U.S. secret service agent.

Private employers have the law on their side when it comes to removing a worker who makes public statements that the business views as potentially harmful, according to legal experts.

“A private company can generally fire an employee for public comments, even political ones, if those comments are deemed to harm the company’s reputation, violate workplace policy or disrupt the business,” workplace attorney Marjorie Mesidor told CBS MoneyWatch.

Multiple firings

Employees in a range of industries, as well as in academia, are finding themselves in hot water over remarks they made about Kirk’s death or his political beliefs. 

PHNX Sports, an online sports news site focused on Arizona, announced the firing of reporter Gerald Bourguet after he said on social media on Wednesday, in a since-deleted post, that “Refusing to mourn a life devoted to that cause is not the same thing as celebrating gun violence.”

“Truly don’t care if you think it’s insensitive or poor timing to decline to respect an evil man who died,” he added. 

Bourguet declined to comment when reached by CBS MoneyWatch.

MSNBC said it cut ties with analyst Matthew Dowd after he said in an on-air conversation that Kirk had pushed incendiary speech and that “hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions.” In a public statement, Comcast accused Dowd of making “an unacceptable and insensitive comment about this horrific event.” 

“That coverage was at odds with fostering civil dialogue and being willing to listen to the points of view of those who have differing opinions. We should be able to disagree, robustly and passionately, but, ultimately, with respect. We need to do better,” Comcast executives said.  

Dowd, the former chief strategist for Republican President George W. Bush, apologized in a Substack post on Friday, saying he hadn’t meant to imply Kirk was to blame for the violence that killed him, the AP reported. But Dowd, a long-time political analyst at ABC News before joining MSNBC in 2022, also accused the network of caving to pressure to fire him. 

“The right wing media mob ginned up, went after me on a plethora of platforms, and MSNBC reacted to that mob,” he wrote on Substack. “Even though most at MSNBC knew my words were being misconstrued, the timing of my words forgotten … and that I apologized for any miscommunication on my part, I was terminated by the end of the day.”

Middle Tennessee State University said in statement that it had fired a university employee over “inappropriate and callous comments on social media concerning the horrific and tragic murder of Charlie Kirk.”

Nasdaq, in a statement posted on X, said it dismissed an employee over social media posts related to Kirk’s shooting that the stock exchange said “were a clear violation of our policy.”

In a Facebook post, the U.S. Secret Service said it placed an agent who it said expressed negative opinions about Kirk on leave. “The U.S. Secret Service will not tolerate behavior that violates our code of conduct. This employee was immediately put on administrative leave, and an investigation has begun,” a U.S. Secret Service spokesperson said in a statement.

United Airlines told CBS News that it took action against employees who the company said had publicly commented on Kirk’s death. “Our mission at United Airlines is to connect people and unite the world. So we’ve been clear with our customers and employees that there’s zero tolerance for politically motivated violence or any attempt to justify it,” the carrier said in a statement to CBS News. 

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy applauded United for “for doing what’s right by placing pilots celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk out of service. They must be fired,” in a statement on X. 

“There’s no room for political violence in America and anyone applauding it will face the consequences. ESPECIALLY those we count on to ensure the safety of the flying public,” Duffy wrote. 

Few protections 

First Amendment protections are generally limited for workers in the private sector, according to attorneys. 

“Employers often have a strong legal basis to terminate an employee if their public comments, especially on a high-profile and sensitive topic like a murder, cause reputational damage or customer backlash,” Mesidor said.

Some states — California, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, South Carolina and West Virginia — do have laws to protect employees from being fired for their conduct off the job, including their political speech and activity, but most do not. Maynard Nexsen attorney Andrew Kragie told CBS MoneyWatch that workers at private employers typically have little protection from punishment for their public comments.

“If someone says, ‘Thank goodness this person was assassinated,’ then generally their employer can fire them,” he said. That’s because most workers are employed at-will, meaning either party can terminate the contract at any time, for any reason, he explained. 

“So, most employees in the private sector can be disciplined based on what you say on social media, even if your account doesn’t identify you as an employee,” Kragie added.

The Associated Press

contributed to this report.