Hamas has a history of threatening and intimidating journalists in Gaza.

https://cpj.org/2025/05/gaza-journalists-speak-out-about-ham...

Gaza is also an active war zone. It is dubious that western media could just walk into Gaza and report freely even if the IDF allowed that. In theory media could have crossed into Gaza from Egypt before Israel occupied the Philadelphi corridor and the border crossing but none did. So Egypt (and/or the Gazan authorities) e.g. also did not allow journalists into Gaza.

So this statement is sort of true but there's more to be considered here.

My understanding of "actively killed" is thy have been the explicit target of an attack and not casualties in general.

Given the unconscionable number of journalists who died at the IDF's hands, it seems like Israel is indeed using the transparency info from journalists to locate and target them with airstrikes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_journalists_killed_in_...

Israel is the side with Datalink, in case this chart doesn't make it clear.

The context is a protest: "Haruf says he was attacked without cause after leaving a prayer protest broken up by Israeli security forces in the Wadi Joz neighborhood." not the journalistic activities.

I'm not justifying this FWIW, just that it doesn't prove what you're trying to prove. If anything the publication of this article in Israel shows Israel has freedom of press.

also: "The Border Police later announced that it had suspended the two officers involved in the incident and that the Department of Internal Police Investigations has opened a probe into the matter."

There is also followup (again in Israeli press): https://www.timesofisrael.com/border-police-said-to-reinstat...

"The Union of Journalists in Israel condemned the incident and said it was “shocked by the violent attack” on Haruf.

The union said the incident was “the 37th attack on Arab journalists since the beginning of the war” on October 7, when Hamas-led terrorists launched their murderous assault on southern Israel, killing 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and taking some 240 hostages of all ages.

The union, in a December 15 statement, said “most of the attacks [were] carried out by the security forces. This is a reality that dramatically harms freedom of the press and the ability of journalists to perform their duties.”"

Is this perfect? no. Is Israeli press generally free, attacks/criticizes the government, brings to light bad things that happen, and follow up on them? yes.

And this is how we know Israel does not believe in democracy and is not a democracy itself, since a free press is a requirement of democracy.

Democracy isn't just having elections. Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Russia has elections, too.

This demonstrates my point perfectly.

Please rather than take this point as an affront to your position and go and research both positions and compare. Then at least you can be confident in your own position and talk into it with authority.

Everything is very nuanced.

Shooting starving people should be one of those moments of clarity that cuts through the narrative.

One of those facts might be intent or misheard orders. It might just be that this actually happened (as a war crime) but it is probably too early to tell.

Regardless of what happened, it helps to wait until more info comes out.

"Look, children may be dying and maybe we're killing them but we need to verify and we need more time. Because first of all what were they even doing there? Oh and also this is our Land anyways and there were no deaths nobody died there aren't even any children in gaza!"

Every case needs to be investigated thoroughly and punished accordingly.

Which is the exact reason you should be concerned. Israel has zero accountability for their actions, many of which are documented war crimes.

And who exactly do you propose should do that? The Israeli govt?

ICC would be nice but the geopolitical gorilla in the room knocked them down.

It's a cop out and putting one's head in the sand to the real atrocities of zionistic ambitions of usurping Palestinian land.

In America, if someone trespasses into one's home and the home owner kills the trespasser, the vast majority of the time, the owner is justified and there are numerous court cases we can point to. Recently, it has become clear to me that Palestinians are simply trying to defend their own property/land/humanity.

Israel's trespasses are finally seeing the light in the latest set of conflicts and folks reading this comment that are unsure should spend 30 minutes looking up the videos of the conflict.

Israel blocking aid, murdering medical personnel with impunity, the before/after of Gaza, the list of crimes perpetuated by the government is undeniable at this point.

Interesting. . . do you have a page for the project or anything?

"There is ample evidence and this is not a new accusation, so your request to wait and see rings hollow and appears to be a de facto request to not pass judgement on Israeli crimes" is neither morally nor intellectually dishonest.

The story told by the data is that these journalists are overwhelmingly killed by Israeli forces, in some cases with prior notice of the press being where it was.

So if the IDF wants the press to tell the true story on the ground maybe let them do their work without killing them? The quesrion is: at which point do we have to stop assuming incompetence and start to assume malice (at least in parts)? For me personally that point has been months in the past.

This will be a stain on Israel for the rest of history.

This information didn't just appear out of nowhere. It took time to collate, source and verify.

Could you try to rely less on using vague innuendo on HN? If you have reasonable doubt in a theory and/or additional/missing information that isn't purely anecdotal that lead you to your statement consider sharing it on here. If you don't have any information consider the option that your opiniom might not be as much supported by the ground truth as you probably like it to be.

Journalists like these are professionals that are paid to work in a conflict zone, if they are killed, of course their death will be noted. It works like this in literally every conflict on earth and there are international organizations that monitor violence against journalists because they are an fundamentally important pillar of any free society.

The question is why the technologically advanced IDF kills journalists at rates higher than in any other conflict zone on earth. This isn't a statistical anomaly that can be simply hand-waved away. It describes the nature of this conflict with numbers that are written with blood.

Anybody who defends the killing of journalists in a war zone is on the wrong side of history, period.

Don't want to keep you from your hobby though. I don't think many comments in this thread do reach any sensible HN standards for that matter.

I hope you realize that this would be genocidal rhetoric. The kind of thinking that lead to the worst atrocities humanity has ever committed. But hey as long as it is happening to the dehumanized subhumans it is okay, right?

Many of the journalists in Gaza are Hamas operatives until they die. When suddenly their twitter or fb account is used to claim they’re a journalist.

You’re being lied to on a regular basis about nearly everything that comes out of Gaza. Aside from 3rd party medic accounts we have zero evidence of any of these supposed crimes. This is the most filmed war in history and yet after 3 weeks of claims by Hamas that GHF is shooting and booby trapping aid there is literally zero actual evidence to support that.

In such a conflict both sides have incentives to twist reality, but since the names of the killed journalists are public you can do research and provide a valuable service to the public by ensuring the truth is out there. But this means "trust me bro" isn't going to cut it.

Haaretz is a (far?) left, anti-current-government newspaper. It's not outside the mainstream or anything - it is considered largely credible, and its articles are taken seriously - but most people in Israel would find it funny that you assume it wouldn't be biased against Israel. Lots of Netanyahu supporters routinely consider it a "traitorous" publication.

I think its articles should be taken seriously, but you can't simply assume it's automatically right and not "biased". Think of it the way an American Democrat would think of Fox or something - the news org definitely has a viewpoint.

The bias of a mainstream publication that's considered "traitorous" by genocidal authoritarian ethnonationalists is, given historical consideration, likely to be toward justice.

I.e. your claim that it is leftist requires some justification.

Yeah, sure, if you are a Nazi, everything to the left of you is going to look "left", and likewise if you are a Communist, everything to the right is going to look "right", that doesn't make your viewpoint reality, however.

I'm a leftist - I identify far more with what Haaretz is doing than most other news orgs. I'm personally very angry that other orgs, even ones that are "centrist" or "anti-current-government", are not covering the stories that Haaretz is covering, and barely covering the tragedies happening in Gaza. It's common in most countries during wartime, but it's deeply wrong IMO.

That all said, saying Haaretz is on the left is like saying Fox News is on the right. It's common knowledge.

And here, I just looked it up, this is from Haaretz's own About section:

"Haaretz has built a reputation for in-depth reporting, insightful analysis, and a liberal and progressive editorial stance on domestic issues and international affairs."

So they are framing themselves as liberal and progressive.

1. If by "verified" you simply mean that the Israelis are admitting to what they did then you're right they're still lying about what they're doing everyday. Only verification are the videos, photos and dead bodies themselves of course.

2. The Israelis are out in force on these message boards, IDF. Personally I'm at the point where if I'm seeing any illogical support for the murderous regime of Israel I assume it's the IDF at this point, most real humans no matter what their political beliefs can at least agree that murdering innocent children is not good, only the Israelis struggle away with the way to justify it.

3. Lol, "wait and see..." This was the same attitude of the Nazis in world war II! "Just more time.. we just need more time so we can verify..." Amazing that the IDF is now using the same playbook that was used against them in world war II, I guess you guys figure if it works once you can work again!

By avoiding to admit this you are indeed defending the attacker.

And how dare you make accusations along those lines. Your attitude contributes to the problem.

Oh you can't answer that easily without trivializing these deaths yourself. Accusing others, that are suspicious of all of this, of "attitude" is easier.

As for enforcement and prosecution the ICC warrants were justified and the situation that remains is tragic. You can thank the US for throwing a spanner in those works.

I’m not sure why you keep trying to put words in my mouth. Perhaps to justify your partisan position rather than my entirely neutral one? Sure feels like it.

We do need to really consider the source of the information. War is often filled with propaganda and lies, that's just how it is, that's part of war, propaganda. I think we need to look at Israel's long history of humanitarianism, and look at Palenstine's history of terrorism, to get an idea as to who is right and who is wrong here. My belief if the article is a piece of fiction, a hit piece.

Anyway, some more history to consider: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2017-11-17/ty-article/.p...

Credulity is boundless, even (especially) in this world of open information warfare. Messages that require side-channels and discrimination with intentionally limited information are guaranteed to be misperceived and likely to have harmful memetic impact.

Agreed though, earnestness is one of our most urgent shortages.

The source is one of the biggest Israeli newspapers, by the way.

I think that's a bit misleading. Per Wikipedia, it has a ~5% readership, as opposed to the bigger papers that have a ~22% readership. It is one of the older and most established papers though, that is true.

Anecdotally, I don't think Haaretz is very widely read among the "average" populace, though I think it has a lot of cachet in intellectual (and of course Leftist) circles.

The world has been watching for over 2 years the atrocities occurring in Gaza and Israel and its people have has lost its credibility to its victimhood on the world stage.

This article is simply 1 extra reporting on a million of Israel’s offenses in the name of terrorism.

Why do you say its "unverified" ? The commander in question: Brigadier General Yehuda Vach is formally under investigation for several crimes already: https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-said-to-launch-probe-into-...

This nutcase general has faced consistent accusations from soldiers under his own command over the last year for over a dozen incidents alone. What is your holy threshold for evidence ? How can you "wait and see" if the press is not allowed at the food distribution site ? Basically, you are saying "wait and sweep it under the carpet".

Since October 7th sources from within Palestine have been accurate regarding deaths and actions. Often being attacked first and then quietly acknowledged later.

There is no reason to doubt the reporting of Israel’s paper of record, which though considered left wing writhing Israel, supports Netanyahu’s attacks on Gaza and applies rigorous journalistic standards.