Day 77 of 599 of מלחמת העצמאות MILḤEMET HAʾAẒMAʾUT (War of Independence)

The later institutional history describes sixty-one fighters leaving עין זיתים EIN ZEITIM with explosives, communications equipment and supplies. The objective included demolishing twenty houses and striking fighters in the village. The full study, הפלמ״ח HAʾPALMAḤ raided سَعْسَع SAʿSAʿ., examines the midnight attack, reported civilian deaths and competing interpretations of its purpose.¹

The march belongs to the sequence beginning on 14 February. The midnight demolitions fall on the next civil date and on 5 Adar I, which had already begun at sunset. Keeping those stages distinct makes it possible for this rundown to describe preparation without assigning the casualties to an invented daytime attack.

The diary of 15 February records a late-evening cable about bridges attacked the preceding night: Sheikh Hussein Bridge, two bridges near מטולה METULA, and a bridge near Tarbikha. The same cable mentions سَعْسَع SAʿSAʿ. JTA's 16 February bulletin instead describes three bridges, one completely destroyed and two badly damaged, using relative expressions that require the original dispatch to resolve.^{2 3}

These accounts support a northern demolition campaign around the night of 14–15 February. They do not prove that each source counted the same structures or that all six bridges in the broader plan were destroyed. Nor should a bridge on a supply route be confused with a report of every road becoming impassable. Site-by-site operational records remain necessary.

The diary of 14 February discusses a larger harbor or improvements to existing facilities at תל אביב TEL AVIV, with a cost estimate of £750,000. This was planning and expenditure discussion, not a completed harbor or a transfer of imperial authority. It shows leaders treating future maritime access as a practical requirement alongside immediate defense.⁴

Both the raid preparations and the harbor discussion demonstrate active choices by institutions of עם ישראל AM YISRAʾEL. Their proposed effects must be tested against subsequent action, rather than presumed accomplished on the day of discussion.

This is Day 77 of the 599-day civil-date series: 1948-02-14. The register maps its daytime portion to ד׳ באדר א׳ ה׳תש״ח 4th 𝑜𝑓 Adar I, AM 5708; after local sunset the Hebrew day changes to ה׳ באדר א׳ ה׳תש״ח 5th 𝑜𝑓 Adar I, AM 5708. This is a calendar conversion convention, not evidence that every reported act happened in daylight.

The harbor discussion is recorded on 14 February. The سَعْسَع SAʿSAʿ reconstruction explicitly identifies the night of 14–15 February; midnight is routed to 5 Adar I in its separate Event. The bridge cable, recorded on 15 February, refers to the previous night and supplies a bounded reconstruction rather than precise individual hours. JTA's 16 February issue is later reportage.^{5 6 7}

• Which actions were carried out, and which were proposals or later reports?
• How do the named people and institutions clarify what was at stake?