I appreciate you seeking something substantive, but in this case, doesn't that simplistic assertion still effectively discredit government claims?
I remember reading US government claims re Afghanistan and Iraq - where they were under much less pressure than the Israeli government today: Did that strike kill civilians? The answer was always 'no' until someone could prove 'yes' - you learn that the 'no' didn't mean anything.
https://twitter.com/idfonline/status/1745158775567175764 This tweet contains an Islamic Jihad document listing another journalist as a member
even if you don’t trust the IDF, you could easily verify if those are the photos of the same journalist by looking at them.
People are easily misled by those things, including you and me. We don't have time or skill or resources to do the verification. But one efficient solution is for someone to develop those skills and resources professionally, and to spend the time to use them. Those people are called journalists, among other things.
Stop reading X, which we can't interpret accurately (as is extremely well demonstrated billions of times) and start reading something professionally verified. That's my advice, at least.
If you are pro-Israeli, realize that Hamas uses X to mislead and influence public opinion. If you believe there is truth to Israel's position, then X - probably the world's leading mechanism for disinformation and misinformation - is a threat to Israel.
Psychological warfare campaigns are usually done under false flag, so I doubt this is the case
Look at the images and judge for yourself
I generally think that militaries and governments in international relations, and especially regarding warfare, are not trustworthy; they will lie if it helps them. Israel in particular focuses on information for the Western public (which I'm sure they would agree to; they even have a word for it, and especially in this war (they are well-organized and there is plenty of recent journalism about it). I don't think Israeli - or Hamas - claims are credible on their own.
Is there some other basis for this claim?