That being said, I am still curious about the claim that was made when requesting the change of venue. 

PM Netanyahu submitted the request to change the location of the court hearing to an underground secure location due to security concerns with the ongoing war. Ever since the drone from Hezbollah that hit his house in Ceasaria he has been super paranoid about his personal security, despite being the most secured person in the country. But that is understandable.

My curiosity is that while it sort of made reasonable sense before, even when the request was submitted, now it seems unnecessary. Since the request was submitted Netanyahu signed a ceasefire arrangement with Hezbollah/Lebanon, and, so far, it seems to be holding. Hamas has been rendered impotent and has not been able to fire rockets in a while, let alone rockets that can reach deep into the country.

What is the threat now that he is worried about that requires special accommodations for securing the hall to be used for the court session beyond what the normally top level security he would be getting anyway as the presence of the Prime Minister?

Is it just another attempt to delay the session as he is hoping they will have difficulty securing it properly and will have to delay again for security considerations or is there a real security concern of some sort beyond what his daily protection can secure?

While perhaps you can never have enough security, I remember he used to scoff at Nasrallah for hiding in the tunnels like a rat and never coming out, but he too barely comes out - even his recent Channel 14 interview was pre-recorded in the "Pit" of the Kirya, he's moved some government meetings to undisclosed secure locations, and this court session has to be underground, etc... what is he so afraid of? 

According to Israel Hayom, they are suing for the negligence and failures of the security services in mismanaging the event considering the security risks.

It seems this is the largest lawsuit ever filed against the State for security failures.

They are claiming that all the State had to do, all the security services had to do was make a phone call to the organizers of the event on October 6 at night saying due to information just received the party must be dispersed.

The permit for the event was requested three months prior. Before issuing the permit the security forces considered concerns about holding this party so close to the Gaza border, but eventually they issued the permit. There was also a specific concern for allowing it on that date specifically because of the holiday - with many soldiers being given leave to go home for the holiday it might be difficult to secure the event properly. Despite the concerns, they issued the permit.

They claim that during the night of October 6 unusual activity was detected and the security forces knew something unusual was going to go down, but they did not update the organizers of the Nova music festival and did not order the dispersal of the party.

This is going to be interesting to watch. The State failed them, as it failed residents of the entire region of the communities and towns near the Gaza border. Before an investigative committee convenes, investigates, and publicizes its finding, how are the people behind this lawsuit going to prove what the army (and other security forces) did or did not know that night about what would happen the next morning? I tremble at the thought that they actually did know what was coming (rather than having general security warnings they probably see every week) and did nothing about it.

Ben Gvir says as the responsible minister it is his right and responsibility to make this decision. Minister of something I am not sure what Benny Gantz is going to bat for Katy Perry saying his entry into the coalition for the unity government was conducted under condition that her term be extended. Does Netanyahu give Ben Gvir the leeway to make this decision as part of the responsibility of his office while breaking another agreement with Gantz or does he put a stop on Ben Gvir to placate Gantz. Either way, this could develop poorly for the stability of the coalition, though Netanyahu will probably solve it by paying one of them off with some other benefit to give in on this. If it matter, MK Aryeh Deri is saying agreements must be kept so the agreement with Gantz's party is primary and Ben Gvir must take a step back. I am not sure why that agreement takes greater priority over the coalition agreement with Ben Gvir himself that gives the right to make this decision.

I have no idea why keeping Katy Perry in this position is so important to Benny Gantz that he conditioned entry into the government on this and is standing by it now. I guess he does not want Ben Gvir to have the ability to appoint one of his people to the position, rather than it being specific support for Perry. 

In general I think Ben Gvir as responsible minister should have the right to make this decision and appointment. Not only that but Katy Perry should have resigned form the position back in 2021 after 6 Hamas prisoners escaped form the Gilboa prison - not right away, but after they were recaptured and the crisis was resolved she should have taken responsibility and resigned. As well, if she disagrees with the responsible minister and refuses to implement his policy, as he claims, she should have resigned a while ago as well (the same way the head of the gun licensing department resigned because of Ben Gvir's policy of easing requirements for gun access).

That being said, we are in the middle of a war and I thought the public policy we are working with is not to change leadership at this time, and to not even talk about the possibility. if we can change such an important position in the middle of the war with security ramifications, why not also change, or talk about changing, who holds other positions and whether they should or shouldnt be replaced?

זה במשמרת שלנו ובאחריות שלנו. הבטחנו מאבק חסר פשרות בטרור וביטחון לאזרחי ישראל וכך בעזרת השם נעשה. הגיע עת מבחן. נעמוד בו בעזרת השם.

תנחומים למשפחות הנרצחים, איחולי החלמה לפצועים, חיבוק גדול לכוחות הביטחון שעושים לעלות כימים למעננו, ותפילה לריבונו של עולם שיסייע בידינו להצליח.

— בצלאל סמוטריץ' (@bezalelsm) January 28, 2023

Minister Betzalel Smotritch tweeted:

Taking responsibility is a good thing and a good first step, unlike Ben Gvir who immediately blamed the Legal Counsel for not immediately approving the house demolition. As necessary as that might be for the purpose of deterrence, that is what the government has been doing for decades and it hasn't really showed itself as overly helpful. That is one minor tool in the fight against terror and if that is all Ben Gvir has up his sleeve, I would be sorely disappointed, considering all his talk in the past about how to put down terror.

On a recent United Airlines flight from Newark to Tel Aviv, a couple of unruly Israeli passengers made a ruckus insisting on self-upgrading their seats to some empty seats in business class, against the instructions of the flight attendants. Refusing to back down while insisting on staying in the business class seats, the crew made a decision to turn the flight around and head back to Newark. The unruly passengers were supposedly arrested upon arrival in Newark. By that time the flight could not continue, and supposedly the rest of the passengers were to be taken care by being put in hotels with food and arrangements made for continuing the trip on alternate flights.

Just the day before this incident an American Airlines flight to London had been turned around due to a passenger refusing to comply with the mask mandate. 

There is no indication that this passenger on the American Airlines flight was an Israeli or a Jew so it seems safe to say that there are idiots and inconsiderate people from a variety of communities and societies who are willing to inconvenience an entire plane-full of passengers for the point they want to make..

I dont know what any of these people are thinking when they do this? As important they think the demand they are making is, have they been living under a rock for the past 2 years, or 20 years (since September 11, 2021)? How do they think they can get away with such behavior on airplanes nowadays? What do they think is going to happen - they are going to be the one person who gets away with it and stands up to THE MAN successfully on an airplane and wins?

This request by Netanyahu has raised the ire of many and sparked a national debate about what to do. As a millionaire on his own, if he feels he or his family is in danger, perhaps he should finance his own security, or maybe the State should provide it even past the allotted amount of time former Prime Ministers normally get protected. 

While the decision revolves around a lot of money as State protection would continue to grant the Netanyahus a  security details including a car and driver among other things, I think the decision should be purely professional. Netanyahu's security needs, if there are any, are not because he was in private business and perhaps ticked off the wrong people. Netanyahu served the State of Israel and it is due to serving in that capacity he feels he needs continued protection.

the considerations should be purely professional, not political. The Shabbak should look into the threats (as I am sure they already are) and decide if extending the protection of the Netanyahus is warranted and necessary due to credible threats or not. If the threats are credible, his security should be funded by the State, as the threats are coming in due to his service of the State. It should not matter whether he is right wing or left wing, liked or reviled, on trial for alleged crimes or being framed - he served the State for a long time and any threats to him and his family are due to that service and for that he should be granted extended protection (if the threats are credible).