November 1, 2026
The “Lebanon Debate” website learned that the file of the security cell revealed by the General Security in the city of Tripoli is still open, and under the supervision of the competent judiciary, in contrast to the information circulating about its closure. The course of the investigation witnessed new data related to the nature of the seized items and the detainees who were trying to present a story different from the facts.
The security operation in Tripoli resulted in the arrest of more than ten people, most of whom were later released, while three detainees were kept under investigation to focus suspicions on their direct connection to the cell and its activities.
During the investigations, the three detainees are trying to deny any connection to terrorist activity, claiming that the seized weapons and ammunition were intended for pure trade and not for carrying out security or terrorist operations, in an effort to limit the case to the scope of illicit arms trafficking.
This account is subject to intense scrutiny by investigators due to the nature and size of the seizures, particularly military weapons, bombs, detonators, and devices associated with igniting explosives, which raises fundamental questions about the source of this equipment, the actual purpose of its possession, and the parties targeted by it.
The roots of the case go back to October 29, when the “Lebanon Debate” website revealed a pre-emptive security operation carried out by the strike force of the General Directorate of Public Security based on information available about the activity of a cell in Tripoli suspected of being linked to ISIS. This was followed by an official Public Security announcement about the seizure of weapons, ammunition, bombs, and detonators inside a house in the Bab al-Raml area, in addition to the seizure of a drone in a separate raid.
In a related context, General Security – based on the technical inspection of the Lebanese Army Engineering Regiment – corrected the nature of one of the seized items, clarifying that the substance that was described in the first statement as “C4” turned out to be devices intended for igniting explosives and not the aforementioned substance.
Open investigations continue to clarify the circumstances of the case and determine the nature of the connections of the three detainees, while verifying the validity of the allegations of arms trade, and determining once and for all whether the arsenal falls within the framework of illicit trade or is a preparation for security operations, especially since the main beginning of the raids was based on suspicions related to a cell of a terrorist nature.
The pivotal question that the investigations seek to answer remains whether this arsenal was really planned for sale, or whether the allegations of trade are merely a cover to remove suspicions from the real goals of the cell.
