RSS
Haaretz Accused Israeli Soldiers of a Horrific Blood Libel — But Twisted the Truth
English and Hebrew editions of the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
On June 27, Haaretz published an exposé claiming that “IDF officers and soldiers told [the media outlet] they were ordered to fire at unarmed crowds near food distribution sites in Gaza, even when no threat was present.”
These are serious allegations indeed, and it didn’t take long before the story migrated into Western media, including Reuters, CNN, and NPR, among others.
Let’s examine the serious flaws in the reporting, as well as the agendas behind the story.
Massacre Libels
The past few weeks have seen plenty of Palestinian claims that the IDF is “massacring” unarmed Gazans while they wait for food being distributed by the US and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.
These claims have been found to be, at best, questionable, and at worst, outright lies.
HonestReporting board member Salo Aizenberg has addressed the various charges on X:
Gaza “aid massacres” are fake, a Hamas ploy to harm the GHF, amplified by willing media 1/
Hamas killed Gazans in many confirmed cases
— Aizenberg (@Aizenberg55) June 23, 2025
Military expert Andrew Fox has written a comprehensive takedown of the most recent Haaretz story and makes the following point:
“The army has deliberately fired at Palestinians.”
A grim and damning line, if true. However, the story soon begins to collapse under the weight of its contradictions. A quoted soldier allegedly describes the IDF creating a “killing field,” complete with heavy machine guns, mortars, and grenade launchers. Yet this supposed “killing field” results in — wait for it — just one to five casualties per day. That’s not a massacre; well, not of Gazans. Perhaps of journalistic standards by Haaretz.
Fox rightly points out that if IDF soldiers were really that bloodthirsty and were employing heavy armaments to target Palestinians, the death toll would be significantly higher. Ultimately, the charges are meant to demonize the IDF by attributing evil intent to its soldiers.
It is also important to note that in many of these stories, the source of the casualty figures is Mahmoud Basel, the head of Gaza’s Hamas-run civil defense organization, who has also been identified as a Hamas operative by the IDF.
Throughout this war, footage from Gaza has found its way onto social media courtesy of Palestinians armed with cellphones. While the GoPro footage of Hamas’ October 7 rampage was an all-too-accurate window on reality, much of the subsequent imagery coming out of Gaza has been highly questionable and has been used to create false narratives and blood libels.
The lack of footage of the so-called “massacres” taking place near aid distribution centers is therefore puzzling. If such bloodshed was taking place, how is it that it has not been documented, particularly given the narrative advantage this would give the Palestinian side were it to be true?
Deliberate Mistranslation
More lies from Haaretz: @YairElsner caught that the English version claims IDF soldiers were told to fire *at* Palestinians at Gaza aid sites.
Conversely, the original Hebrew version says they were told to fire *toward* masses congregating near the sites to “keep them away.” pic.twitter.com/ZhElul1Ym4
— Eitan Fischberger (@EFischberger) June 27, 2025
There’s a significant difference between the English version’s firing “at” Palestinians, which implies deliberately targeting them — as opposed to the original Hebrew firing “toward” crowds in an attempt to keep them from approaching.
It may be subtle, but this linguistic sleight of hand changes the entire framing of the story. One is effectively shooting to kill or injure, while the other amounts to warning shots.
Who is Deliberately Shooting at Palestinians?
Aizenberg highlights that Hamas is responsible for shooting at Palestinians. And when we say “at,” not “toward,” we mean it.
Critical confirmation that Hamas has killed many Gazans to pin blame on Israel and disrupt GHF: PA’s official newspaper Al-Hayat Al-Jadida reported on June 19 that Hamas Al-Sahm “death squads” shoot civilians, citing locals, to maintain control of aid. 2/ https://t.co/dFtAjrqUjN
— Aizenberg (@Aizenberg55) June 23, 2025
Haaretz, however, does not consider the possibility of Hamas firing at its own people, nor that terrorists could be present within the mass of Gazans.
Fox addresses this:
The author admits they don’t know who is shooting at civilians near these aid distribution centres. Still, rather than consider the possibility that, for example, Hamas might be involved, the article shifts with the loaded line:
“The IDF does not permit armed individuals in these humanitarian zones without its knowledge.”
Get it? If someone’s firing, and the IDF doesn’t permit any shooters other than themselves in the area, well… wink, wink. Conspiracy complete.
There’s no mention of the possibility that gunmen (Hamas, criminal gangs, or rogue actors) could infiltrate these chaotic areas without IDF permission, nor is there any curiosity about how IDF soldiers are getting wounded near those same food sites. Not exactly an idle question, especially in light of some of the video footage released in recent weeks showing Hamas opening fire on their own people.
In a glaring discrepancy, Haaretz’s subheader also refers to IDF soldiers being “ordered to fire at unarmed crowds near food distribution sites in Gaza, even when no threat was present,” giving the impression that there are no terrorists or potential assailants in the vicinity. Later, however, we learn that “there were also fatalities and injuries among IDF soldiers in these incidents.”
So, if IDF soldiers were being killed and injured, who does Haaretz think is shooting at them?
And if terrorists are firing at the IDF, is it not possible that innocent Palestinians are being caught in the crossfire as well as being deliberately targeted by Hamas for daring to take food aid from an Israeli-backed organization?
And are all those Palestinians in the crowd unarmed? Only in the past few weeks, the IDF killed two Hamas terrorists disguised as women. No wonder IDF soldiers are nervous about their own security under these trying circumstances.
Double Standards
It would be naive to suggest that every soldier in the IDF or any other comparable army behaves in an exemplary fashion. Only last September, The New Yorker published a database of what it said is the “largest known collection of investigations of possible war crimes committed [by the US military] in Iraq and Afghanistan since 9/11—nearly eight hundred incidents in all.”
Some of the alleged crimes are shocking. All of this is not to claim that the IDF is necessarily more moral than the American military, although there is certainly a good case to be made. The point is that nobody would condemn the entirety of the US Army as an immoral entity that brings shame to its country because of the behavior of a minority of its troops.
And, like the US Army, it’s a sign of a military that respects the laws of war and humanitarian law that the IDF has already launched investigations into the allegations made in the Haaretz story.
As Fox says:
Could some soldiers accidentally miss and hit someone? Yes. That is tragic and warrants investigation. However, the article itself acknowledges that the IDF is already examining those incidents. To jump from that to “deliberate killing fields” is not responsible reporting. It is narrative laundering.
The IDF is not perfect. It is also not meant to be a police force or responsible for crowd control. When Fox refers to “chaotic areas” around the food distribution sites, he is highlighting the need for IDF soldiers to maintain some semblance of order on the ground, both for their own safety and for that of the Palestinians seeking food for themselves and their families.
Israeli soldiers are effectively being asked to carry out crowd control duties in the middle of a war zone — something that they have not been trained to do. There may be plenty of criticism of this to go around, but it further adds to the likelihood that any deaths of Palestinians are a result of mistakes and not deliberate targeting.
But Haaretz is Israeli. Why Wouldn’t It be Accurate?
This is not the first time that an irresponsible and agenda-driven Haaretz story has created international headlines and resulted in opprobrium against Israel.
In 2014, we highlighted the agenda of Haaretz owner Amos Schocken, who openly admitted that his newspaper is anything but objective. Unable to exercise any meaningful influence on domestic politics, Haaretz uses its English-language website and print newspaper to encourage external pressure on Israel.
— Aizenberg (@Aizenberg55) June 28, 2025
While Haaretz is a product of Israel’s vibrant democracy and press freedom, it also plays a major role in the demonization of Israel.
Its “killing field” story, sadly, confirms this.
The author is the Managing Editor of HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
The post Haaretz Accused Israeli Soldiers of a Horrific Blood Libel — But Twisted the Truth first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
US Stops Visitor Visas for People from Gaza
Palestinians walk past the rubble of buildings, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip, February 27, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ramadan Abed/File Photo
The US State Department on Saturday said it was halting all visitor visas for individuals from Gaza while it conducts “a full and thorough” review, a move that has been condemned by pro-Palestine groups.
The department said “a small number” of temporary medical-humanitarian visas had been issued in recent days but did not provide a figure.
The US issued more than 3,800 B1/B2 visitor visas, which permit foreigners to seek medical treatment in the United States, to holders of the Palestinian Authority travel document so far in 2025, according to an analysis of monthly figures provided on the department’s website. That figure includes 640 visas issued in May.
The PA issues such travel documents to residents of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The department’s website did not include a breakdown for the two territories.
The State Department’s move to stop visitor visas for people from Gaza comes after Laura Loomer, a far-right activist and an ally of President Donald Trump, said on social media on Friday that the Palestinian “refugees” had entered the US this month.
Loomer’s statement sparked outrage among some Republicans, with US Representative Chip Roy, of Texas, saying he would inquire about the matter and Representative Randy Fine, of Florida, describing it as a “national security risk.”
The Council on American-Islamic Relations condemned the move, saying it was the latest sign of the “intentional cruelty” of the Trump administration.
The Palestine Children’s Relief Fund said the decision to halt visas would deny access to medical care to wounded and sick children in Gaza .
“This policy will have a devastating and irreversible impact on our ability to bring injured and critically ill children from Gaza to the United States for lifesaving medical treatment—a mission that has defined our work for more than 30 years,” it said in a statement.
The US has not indicated that it would accept Palestinians displaced by the war. However, sources told Reuters that South Sudan and Israel are discussing a plan to resettle Palestinians.
RSS
South Africa Distances Itself From Army Chief’s Pledges of Military, Political Support to Iran
Iranian Major General Amir Hatami and South African General Rudzani Maphwanya meet in Tehran to discuss strengthening military cooperation and strategic ties. Photo: Screenshot
South Africa’s army chief has faced domestic backlash after pledging military and political support to Iran during a recent visit, prompting government officials to distance themselves from his remarks over concerns they could harm Pretoria’s efforts to strengthen ties with the United States.
Members of South Africa’s governing coalition have denounced Gen. Rudzani Maphwanya, chief of the South African National Defense Force (SANDF), for his trip to Tehran earlier this week, describing his remarks as “reckless grandstanding.”
The Democratic Alliance (DA), South Africa’s second-largest party in the governing coalition, has called for Maphwanya to be court-martialed for breaking neutrality and violating military law, saying his comments had gone “beyond military-to-military discussions and entered the realm of foreign policy.”
“This reckless grandstanding comes at a time when South Africa’s relations with key democratic partners, especially the United States, are already under severe strain,” DA defense spokesperson Chris Hattingh said in a statement.
“The SANDF’s job is to lead and manage the defense forces, not to act as an unsanctioned political envoy. Allowing our most senior military officer to make partisan foreign policy pronouncements is strategically reckless, diplomatically irresponsible, and economically self-defeating,” he continued.
“South Africa cannot afford to have its international standing further sabotaged by political adventurism from the military’s top brass,” Hattingh said.
Iran and South Africa held high-level military talks earlier this week as both nations seek to deepen cooperation and strengthen their partnership against what officials called “global arrogance and aggressive colonial approaches.”
During a joint press conference with Iranian Maj. Gen. Amir Hatami, Maphwanya called for deeper ties between the two nations, especially in defense cooperation, affirming that “the Republic of South Africa and the Islamic Republic of Iran have common goals.”
“We always stand alongside the oppressed and defenseless people of the world,” the South African general said.
He also criticized Israel over the ongoing war in Gaza, expressed support for the Palestinian people, and told Iranian officials that his visit “conveys a political message” on behalf of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s administration.
However, shortly after Maphwanya’s remarks drew media attention, the South African government moved to distance itself from his comments, with the Foreign Affairs Ministry stating that his comments “do not represent the government’s official foreign policy stance.”
The Defense Department, which described Maphwanya’s comments as “unfortunate,” confirmed that he is now expected to meet with the Minister of Defense and Military Veterans, Angie Motshekga, upon his return to provide explanations.
Ramaphosa’s spokesperson, Vincent Magwenya, clarified that the president was neither aware of the trip nor had he sanctioned it.
“The visit was ill-advised and more so, the expectation is that the general should have been a lot more circumspect with the comments he makes,” Magwenya told reporters during a press conference on Thursday.
“It is crucial to clarify that the implementation of South Africa’s foreign policy is a function of the presidency,” he continued. “Any statements made by an individual, or a department other than those responsible for foreign policy, should not be misinterpreted as the official position of the South African government.”
Maphwanya’s trip to Iran came after the Middle East Africa Research Institute (MEARI) released a recent report detailing how South Africa’s deepening ties with Tehran have led the country to compromise its democratic foundations and constitutional principles by aligning itself with a regime internationally condemned for terrorism, repression, and human rights abuses.
RSS
Democrat Pete Buttigieg Toughens Stance on Israel, Says He Backs Arms Embargo Following Left-Wing Pressure
Former US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg speaks during an appearance on the “Pod Save America” podcast on Aug. 10, 2025. Photo: Screenshot
Former US Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, a Democrat considered by many observers to be a potential 2028 presidential candidate, has recalibrated his stance on Israel, moving from cautious language to a far more critical position after facing backlash over recent comments on the popular “Pod Save America” podcast.
In his podcast interview on Sunday, Buttigieg called Israel “a friend” and said the United States should “put your arm around” the country during difficult times. He also sidestepped a direct answer on whether the US should recognize a Palestinian state, describing the question as “profound” but offering little elaboration beyond calls for peace.
That measured approach drew sharp criticism from progressives and foreign policy voices who argued that his words were too vague amid the ongoing war in Gaza and a shifting sentiment within the Democratic party base regarding Israel. Evolving fault lines within the Democratic Party over US policy toward its staunch Middle Eastern ally signal that the issue could loom large in the 2028 presidential primary.
Following Sunday’s interview, US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) urged Buttigieg to show “moral clarity,” while Ben Rhodes, former White House aide to President Barack Obama, said he was left uncertain where the Cabinet official stood. Social media critics accused Buttigieg of offering platitudes that dodged hard policy commitments.
In a follow-up interview with Politico published on Thursday, Buttigieg took a decidedly tougher line. He said he supports recognizing a Palestinian state as part of a two-state solution and ending the decades-long practice of providing military aid to the Jewish state through sweeping, multi-year packages. Instead, he called for a case-by-case review of assistance, while emphasizing the need to stop civilian deaths, release hostages, and ensure unimpeded humanitarian aid to Gaza.
Perhaps most significantly, Buttigieg indicated support for a US arms embargo on Israel, saying he would have signed on to Sen. Bernie Sanders’s recently proposed resolution to prohibit arms sales to the Jewish state.
The shift places Buttigieg closer to the party’s progressive flank on foreign policy, a notable change for a figure often viewed as a bridge between the Democratic establishment and younger, more liberal voters. For a likely 2028 contender, the move reflects both the political risks of appearing out of step with an increasingly skeptical base and the growing influence of voices calling for sharper limits on US support for Israel.
Recent polling shows a generational divide on the issue, with younger Democrats far more likely to back conditioning aid to Israel and recognizing Palestinian statehood.