**I will send commentary and analysis from the Prime Ministers visit to Washington in the next update**
The Gaza Strip
Notes taken from Ben Tzion Macales and Saul Sadka:
The IDF has increased its control of Gaza from 20% to somewhere between 60%-65%, including perhaps a third of Gaza City and its suburbs, as well as large parts of Khan Yunis and its surrounding areas.
The blue areas are under full IDF control and have largely been cleared. Any return to these areas by Hamas after a ceasefire would be fairly futile.
The light orange area was entirely rubble by the IDF in 2024 and is under IDF fire control, as are several other pockets.
The IDF is inching forward on the northern and eastern edges of Gaza City.
For the first time since the ceasefire ended, IDF forces have begun maneuvering toward Beit Hanoun (which is in the northern part of the Gaza Strip)
Important Statement from Secretary of State Marco Rubio:
Today I am imposing sanctions on UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese for her illegitimate and shameful efforts to prompt the International Criminal Court (ICC) action against U.S. and Israeli officials, companies, and executives.
Albanese’s campaign of political and economic warfare against the United States and Israel will no longer be tolerated. We will always stand by our partners in their right to self-defense.
The United States will continue to take whatever actions we deem necessary to respond to lawfare and protect our sovereignty and that of our allies.
Why Is This Important?
Per FDD, Albanese Accused Companies of Aiding ‘Genocide’ in Gaza: The sanctions follow Albanese’s July 3 presentation of a report to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva in which she accused 60 companies and organizations, including 20 based in the United States, of assisting Israel to wage a “genocidal campaign” in Gaza. Before presenting the report, Albanese reportedly sent threatening letters to dozens of entities worldwide, including to American companies in the finance, technology, defense, energy, and hospitality sectors…Sergey Brin, the co-founder of Google and a former president of the search engine’s parent company Alphabet — one of the companies named in Albanese’s report — denounced the United Nations as “transparently antisemitic” and the report as “plainly biased and misleading.”
Orde Kittrie, Senior Fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) says that Albanese falsely claimed that specific American and other companies, universities, and even Christian faith-based charities are violating international law by engaging with Israel. Albanese also called on the ICC and other courts to prosecute the listed companies and their executives for the crimes of which Albanese wrongly accused them. Albanese’s blatant anti-Israel bias, both prior to her current role and in her performance of it, means that her appointment was, and her service is, contrary to UN ethics rules. Since the United Nations has refused the rightful U.S. demand to fire Albanese, who has instead escalated her lawfare against American companies and their executives, the administration took matters into its own hands by imposing these sanctions.”
Israel/Middle East Related Articles
For Israel, It Pays to Be a Winner by Bret Stephens with the NYT
A core misconception about Israel’s policy since Oct. 7 is that the country has favored military action at the expense of diplomacy. The truth is that it’s Israel’s decisive battlefield victories that have created diplomatic openings that have been out of reach for decades — and would have remained so if Israel hadn’t won.
What has counted is the calculus of force. On Hamas’s side, its growing diplomatic flexibility is almost entirely a result of its proximity to total defeat. According to the BBC, one Hamas official has privately described a situation in which 95 percent of the leadership is dead and Hamas has lost control of 80 percent of its territory.
On Israel’s side, diplomatic flexibility has three authors. The first is the Israeli public’s understandable exhaustion with 21 months of fighting. The second is pressure from Trump to reach a deal — and Netanyahu’s eagerness to please him. But neither factor would have been sufficient if Israel hadn’t achieved its military success over Iran, crowned, from an Israeli point of view, by America’s participation in the campaign.
At a stroke, Israel humiliated its most formidable adversary (and Hamas’s principal patron), demonstrating not only its capacity but also its courage to take on the mullahs directly and survive their reprisals intact.
It advertised its capabilities to Saudi Arabia, which may now be more amenable to joining the Abraham Accords — not out of a softhearted desire for peace but out of a hardheaded interest in cementing military, economic and technological ties with the Jewish state.
Critics of Israeli policy have argued that the cost of its military victories lies in its isolation on the world stage or in the contempt in which it is held by people like Zohran Mamdani and Tucker Carlson.
Then again, Israel doesn’t exist to placate the feelings of its detractors and defamers. It exists to protect Jewish life and uphold Jewish dignity in a world too intent on destroying both.
[WARNING: GRAPHIC DESCRIPTIONS] Sexual violence was rife on October 7, say new witnesses by Christina Lamb with The Times
Among the approximately 1,200 people slaughtered in the most brutal attack on Israel in its history were found the bodies of young women stripped and tied to trees and poles, shot through their genitals and in the head.
Sexual violence was widespread and systematic during the October 7 attack, rape and gang rape occurring in at least six different locations, according to a report using testimony never heard before now.
The aim of this report, put together by Israeli gender and legal experts and partly funded by the British government, is to counter denial, misinformation and global silence in what it says is one of the most under-reported dimensions of the attacks and to set the historical record straight: Hamas used sexual violence as a tactical weapon of war.
Clear patterns emerged in how the sexual violence was perpetrated, it states, including victims found partially or fully naked with their hands tied, often to trees or poles; evidence of gang rapes followed by execution; and genital mutilation.
What we found makes clear that sexual violence including rape and gang rape took place in multiple locations, Halperin-Kaddari said.
They named it the Dinah Project after the first rape victim in the Bible and the Torah, the only daughter of Jacob, who is raped by a Shechem, son of a prince, after which Dinah’s brothers circumcise and kill the men of his tribe and abduct their women. Dinah’s voice is never heard. In the same way, Halperin-Kaddari says the project aims “to be a voice for those who cannot or can no longer speak”.
…the Dinah Project brings in new evidence from first-hand witnesses — 15 returned hostages who experienced sexual violence in captivity, including Amit Soussana, a lawyer held for 55 days. Two of them were male and one had all their body hair shaved.
They also spoke to a victim of attempted rape at the Nova festival who took 17 months to come forward. “We know from therapists there are more but they are still too traumatised to speak,” she added.
Women found dead, naked and mutilated — with gunshots in their genitalia — and tied to trees. The fact that the same things happened in three to six locations can’t be coincidence but proof this was premeditated.
Many of the witnesses spoke of the victims being shot and them still trying to rape a dead body, she said.
The main aim of the report is to call for justice, providing what Halperin-Kaddari describes as “a blueprint for how to secure justice in cases of mass atrocities when many of the victims are dead and it is impossible to point at a specific perpetrator”.
The report calls for the UN secretary-general to send a fact-finding mission in the light of the testimonies and to include Hamas in the blacklist in the UN’s annual report of those designated for using sexual violence as a weapon of war.
Link: Sexual violence was rife on October 7, say new witnesses
Let Us Not Deceive Ourselves About a Deal to End the War by Azar Gat with The Institute for National Security Studies
Once the Israeli-Iranian exchange of blows ended impressively, the question of continuing the war in the Gaza Strip has returned to the center of public controversy in Israel, inextricably tied to the issue of the remaining hostages still held by Hamas.
At this stage, there is no assurance that continuing the campaign in the Gaza Strip—politically or militarily—holds promise.
We must not deceive ourselves in evaluating the options currently on the table with regard to the proposed deals to end the war in Gaza.
The likelihood that Hamas will disarm or be disarmed as part of this plan is virtually nonexistent.
Since the start of the war in Gaza, I have advocated a declarative Israeli stance supporting the PA’s entry into Gaza on the “day after,” a position that would have greatly improved Israel’s international standing.
The military threat, applied gradually, may help create the necessary conditions for the emergence of a non-Hamas Palestinian authority in the Gaza Strip.
Without military pressure, there is no chance of this happening.
Does anyone doubt how the Israeli public would react if the situation in the Gaza border communities and across Israel returns to its previous state?
An Israeli withdrawal under these conditions would be perceived as a resounding failure.
The objective is to further weaken Hamas, eliminate the remainder of its command structure, and dismantle more of its units and infrastructure to a level that allows for the breakdown of its de facto rule in the Gaza Strip.
This chokehold on Hamas must not be relaxed.
Hamas is expected to resume its control over both supplies and the territory itself.
Hamas is indeed willing to give up civil administration of the Gaza Strip. It is not willing to relinquish de facto control, which it enforces through its military force.
Israel decisively ended the Second Intifada in the West Bank and replaced Arafat’s regime and strategic line with that of Mahmoud Abbas.
Any other end to the war will lead to Hamas’s recovery and its return to control of Gaza.
The hostages are Hamas’s greatest asset and today represent the guarantee of its survival.
The maximum—this should have been clear from the outset—meant all the security prisoners held in Israel, about 10,000 individuals, including those who carried out the October 7 massacre.
Not only did Israel pay dearly—again and again, in blood—for these deals, but the abduction of Israelis has since become the central objective of terrorist organizations.
The release of thousands, including those who were the yeast in the dough of Hamas and other organizations—its leadership and veteran fighters—would have massively strengthened Hamas’s infrastructure in Gaza and dramatically increased the blood price of the Israeli offensive.
There is currently an overwhelming majority in Israeli public opinion in favor of a deal to release the remaining hostages, seemingly at any price.
What seems evident is that if and when Hamas returns to power in Gaza as a result of the deal, rebuilds its power, and resumes rocket harassment and deterrence against Israel—whether or not it threatens a massive invasion—no government would survive the wave of frustration and rage over the perceived return to square one.
Continued massive military pressure in the Gaza Strip will enable another hostage deal under terms acceptable to Israel—and perhaps even Hamas’s agreement to the departure of its leadership and a large portion of its fighters from the Gaza Strip.
What must not be allowed is Hamas’s return to power in Gaza and the restoration of its infrastructure.
Limited airstrikes and ground raids will yield very meager results given the vast underground dimension in Gaza, where Hamas, its facilities, and its workshops will vanish.
An IDF withdrawal from the Gaza Strip at this stage would almost certainly lead to Hamas’s return.
Hamas should not be accepted as a de facto ruler of the Gaza Strip.
Link: Let Us Not Deceive Ourselves About a Deal to End the War
The future of the Middle East - Part 2 by Andrew Fox’s Substack
The Abraham Accords, initially signed in 2020, are gaining renewed momentum.
To secure a diplomatic legacy, Donald Trump has been actively promoting an expansion of these normalisation agreements.
Reports suggest that Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have been coordinating on a major deal to follow up the military operations.
According to an Israel Hayom report, they envision a swift end to the Gaza war and then a broad expansion of the Abraham Accords to include major players like Saudi Arabia and even Syria.
For Israel’s enemies, this diplomatic wave is highly concerning.
Normalisation risks isolating Palestinian and Islamist movements, weakening the narrative that Arab and Muslim states will always oppose Israel.
Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran have all criticised the Abraham Accords from the beginning.
Now, with the expansion of the Abraham Accords, similar spoiler attempts are likely to follow.
The Abraham Accords pose an ideological challenge to groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.
These accords effectively marginalise the Palestinian issue in regional politics, at least at the state-to-state level.
The militant camp will respond by attempting to keep the Palestine cause prominent.
Another form of response is the development or strengthening of a counter-alliance.
Iran has recently sought to improve relations with countries like China, Russia, and Turkey, presenting an “Eastern” or Islamic alternative to US-led coalitions.
From Israel’s perspective, expanding the Abraham Accords is partly about diplomatically encircling Iran and its proxies while building a regional coalition for stability that isolates the rejectionists. If Saudi Arabia and others join, Israel gains strategic advantages: overflight rights, intelligence sharing, and potential basing options that could be useful in a future confrontation with Iran.
Conversely, Iran’s influence diminishes when Arab neighbours openly align with Israel. Recognising this, Tehran will see the battle for diplomatic influence as existential in its own right. We might observe Iran offering incentives to countries like Oman or Qatar to avoid taking the step towards normalisation. (Qatar, for instance, hosts Hamas’s political bureau; Iran will want it to remain in the anti-Israel camp, and Qatar’s mediation role in Gaza has given it a particular stance.)
Recognising this, Tehran will see the battle for diplomatic influence as existential in its own right.
In the extreme, if Trump’s ambitious plan were realised (for example, a scenario where a post-war Arab consortium takes control of Gaza’s administration, Hamas leaders are exiled, multiple Arab states establish peace with Israel, and even a notional two-state solution is proposed) that would pose a strategic nightmare for Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran.
Israel’s dependence on US intervention during the war (after initially insisting it could act alone) created the impression of a client state dragging Washington into conflict, a perception even American supporters noted. US public opinion has become wary: polls show unfavourable views of Israel rising among younger Americans.
For example, the percentage of Republicans under 50 with negative views increased from 35% in 2019 to 50% in 2025. On the political Left, rising millennial and Gen Z politicians openly support the Palestinian cause; a stark contrast to the ageing establishment’s instinctive pro-Israel stance.
Parallel to the kinetic war that began on 7 October 2023, Tehran and Doha have been conducting an aggressive information campaign. Iran, often collaborating with allies like Russia, has mobilised networks of online bots and fake social media accounts to flood discourse with anti-Israel narratives.
Researchers observed an unprecedented rise in inauthentic activity since the conflict began, with some platforms seeing as many as 25–33% of accounts posting about the war being fake sock-puppets spreading disinformation. These influence operations produce disturbing images (real or manipulated), conspiracy theories, and false atrocity claims at a volume intended to overwhelm fact-based narratives.
None of Israel’s battlefield victories can compensate for this “generational political loss” of support in the West. In Europe, too, public sentiment, especially among youth, has shifted towards scepticism or outright criticism of Israeli policies, diminishing the moral capital Israel once enjoyed as a beleaguered democracy.
Essentially, the expansion of peace threatens to render the conflict axis obsolete, prompting those invested in conflict to strive to reignite it in some form.
See link to Part 1 here
Antisemitism
How Dare Israel Win a Defensive War! by David Horovitz with Seth Mandel
Imagine reading the following headline: “Man shoved onto subway tracks survives, but at what cost?”
This is how the media handles the story every time Israel outwits its enemies and lives to fight another day.
The Times headline is: “The Cost of Victory: Israel Overpowered Its Foes, but Deepened Its Isolation.”
The headline’s claim doesn’t even hold up. Israel had the use of Syrian airspace for its attacks on Iran, and Jerusalem and Damascus are in negotiations over burying the hatchet completely.
Israel’s leadership “accused of genocide and war crimes”? Welcome to the party, pal. Was this article written in 1982 or 2025? The answer is: yes. Most of Israel’s bad press is made of 100 percent recycled material.
Israel’s government is “disdained by some world leaders”? As if that’s a new development. The president of France disdaining the Jewish state is what we call “the status quo.”
All those things were said after Oct. 7, 2023 and before Israel went into Gaza. This point is crucial, because the genocide accusations were leveled after Hamas carried out an explicitly genocidal attack on the Jewish state. Israel is punished for weakness and punished for strength. So it might as well choose the latter, right?
Support for Israel, the Times warns, “has become a fiercely contentious issue in Congress, the subject of angry debates and protests on college campuses and fuel for a surge in antisemitic incidents in the United States and around the world.”
So what I’m reading here is that when an Egyptian man in Colorado burned alive an 82-year-old Jewish woman, it’s on Israel’s head—not the man who murdered her, not the mouth-foaming activists and politicians yelling “globalize the intifada” and other slogans encouraging people to burn Jews alive, and not the city, state or country that didn’t protect her.
Another way of saying this: How dare the Jews survive! Our survival only causes the world to keep trying to kill us!
Those masses gathering on college campuses around the country (and the Western world) waving Hamas and Hezbollah flags? They were mobilizing the moment—and I mean the moment, the very second—the Hamas attacks were carried and while the attacks were still ongoing and therefore long before Israel had formulated a response of any kind.
Then we’re told that Israel’s “violence has strained the good will of the country’s allies and neighbors.” Reminder that before Oct. 7, 2023, Israel’s neighbors included Hezbollah and Bashar al-Assad’s Syria.
Well if they just feel threatened I suppose it’s not much to worry about. But perhaps it is, in the words of the band Boston, more than a feeling? Perhaps it is, say, a pogrom in Amsterdam, the city where Anne Frank hid in an attic?
All of this is because Israel fought a defensive war. Well actually, it’s because Israel won a defensive war. And its enemies and critics are struggling to cope.
Wikipedia citing anti-Israel group ‘outrageous, not surprising,’ say nonprofits the site shuns by Aaron Bandler with Jewish News Syndicate
The widely used online encyclopedia Wikipedia deems the Anti-Defamation League and NGO Monitor to be “generally unreliable” sources to cite when discussing Israel and the Palestinians, but it maintains that an organization with a documented history of antisemitism, including lauding the Oct. 7 terror attacks, “can be cited as an opinion source” on Israel and the Palestinians.
The group, whose founder and chairman praised the Oct. 7 attacks and which has accused Israeli soldiers of harvesting Palestinian organs, has been cited 95 times on Wikipedia.
“It leads to bias, and in these cases, worse—the perpetuation of misinformation, disinformation and blood libels,” Mariaschin said. “If you are the one writing and editing these entries, and you are a fellow traveler in the anti-Israel realm, you can be an ultimate arbiter of ‘truth.’”
“Wikipedia’s decision-making process, especially on highly disputed arenas like the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, amplifies prevailing ideological biases and agendas,” Steinberg told JNS. “Advocacy NGOs and their allies have invested years in attempts to silence NGO Monitor research. This is far from preservation of knowledge.”
Richard Falk, the chair of Euro-Med Monitor, is a “conspiracy theorist known for publicly supporting terrorist attacks on civilians and producing a ceaseless stream of false justifications for theocratic fascists and nihilistic killers—provided, of course, their bombs detonate in the general direction of Washington or Jerusalem,” according to Vladislav Khaykin, executive vice president of social impact and North American partnerships at the Simon Wiesenthal Center.
The group’s reports “read more like releases from the Hamas press office rather than sober human rights assessments,” he added. “Credible human rights organizations don’t circulate modern-day blood libels accusing Israel of harvesting Palestinian organs, which is precisely what Euro-Med did in the wake of Oct. 7.”
“Wikipedia’s acceptance of Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor is another victory for terrorist-tied organizations, but it’s also another sign of the demise of Wikipedia,” May said. “Editors at the collaborative encyclopedia have launched a coordinated campaign to spread an anti-Israel narrative. The dramatic turn for Wikipedia, once widely regarded as a neutral source, will poison people against the Jewish state and its supporters, the Jews.”
“Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor is not a credible human rights organization,” Ostrovsky said. “It serves as a propaganda arm for Hamas, whose founder openly celebrated the Oct. 7 massacre and which routinely spreads antisemitic blood libels under the guise of human rights.”
“To deem such an extremist group a reliable source, while casting doubt on respected organizations like the ADL and NGO Monitor, is not neutrality,” he added. “It is complicity in legitimizing terrorist propaganda that also severely undermines Wikipedia’s own credibility.”
Khaykin, of the Wiesenthal Center, told JNS it is “digital malpractice” to consider the ADL unreliable when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“As we warned in our 2025 Digital Terror and Hate Report Card, Wikipedia has become a breeding ground for anti-Israel bias, where truth is distorted, hate is amplified, and Jewish voices are censored,” Khaykin said.
Link: Wikipedia citing anti-Israel group ‘outrageous, not surprising,’ say nonprofits the site shuns
[MUST READ] Beijing’s Shadow: How China Weaponized U.S. Pro-Palestinian Activism by the Jewish Onliner
In the wake of the October 7th Hamas attacks on Israel, the United States witnessed a surge in pro-Palestinian activism—campus sit-ins, mass protests, and a wave of online campaigns. But beneath the surface of what appeared to be organic grassroots mobilization, a new report from the Program on Extremism at George Washington University reveals a far more orchestrated effort.
According to the report, authored by Jennifer Baker, Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-linked networks have played a pivotal role in shaping, funding, and amplifying these movements, leveraging America’s social fissures to advance Beijing’s own geopolitical interests and weaken the United States.
Through a complex web of financial and ideological ties, Chinese interests have embedded themselves within radical U.S. groups, weaving anti-American narratives into the Pro-Palestinian cause, strategically utilizing movement incubators and alternative media outlets to amplify anti-Israel and anti-American narratives.
At the core of these influence operations, according to the report, is Neville Roy Singham, a U.S. businessman residing in Shanghai.
Money is funneled through nonprofits such as the United Community Fund and Justice and Education Fund, both of which have minimal public presence.
The report has identified several organizations as primary vehicles for this influence. These groups champion anti-American, anti-Imperial, anti-Colonial, Socialist/Communist messaging and have combined these rallying cries with pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel movement post October 7th.
In the aftermath of the October 7th Hamas attack, the Singham Network quickly mobilized to form Shut It Down for Palestine (SID4P), a hybrid protest movement blending online and offline actions. Just days after the attack,SID4P, funded by organizations tied to Singham’s donor network, has since led direct-action campaigns, including infrastructure blockades and campus disruption.
The Singham Network exploits regulatory loopholes in the American nonprofit sector, allowing for the anonymous transfer of large sums to activist groups. These funds are routed through a series of shell companies, fiscal sponsors, and alternative media outlets, effectively masking their true origin and intent.
Donor-advised funds are used to obscure the source of millions of dollars, and these funds have been traced back to Singham’s Shanghai-based operations and, by extension, to CCP-linked interests.
Central to the Singham network's influence operations is BTN, a media outlet that acts as its primary propaganda arm. BTN promotes pro-CCP, anti-American, and anti-Israel narratives.
Notably, the report also cites Gordon Chang’s analysis on China’s use of TikTok’s in promoting pro-Hamas content and inciting unrest on U.S. campuses, calling it an "act of war."
The report concludes that China’s involvement in U.S. pro-Palestinian activism is part of a larger global strategy. By creating, capitalizing from, and promoting division after the October 7th Hamas attack, Beijing aims to weaken American social cohesion by amplifying divisive issues and fueling distrust within the country.
Link to Full Report: CCP Influence in US Pro-Palestinian Activism
Hostage Update (no change)
There are now currently 49 hostages taken on 10/7 currently in captivity in Gaza (there are 50 hostages remaining in total)
Of the 50 hostages still theoretically in Gaza
28 hostages have been confirmed dead and are currently being held in Gaza
Thus, at most, 22 living hostages could still be in Gaza. It has been reported that only 20 are actually alive.
Hamas is now holding the body of 1 IDF soldier who was killed in 2014 (Lt. Hadar Goldin’s body remains held in the Gaza Strip)
20 hostages remain in captivity and have not been declared dead.
2 hostages are Americans: Meet the Two American Hostages Still Held By Hamas:
Itay Chen died on October 7 defending civilians living in an agricultural area near the Gaza borde
Omer Neutra was killed when his team drove two miles to the border, where Hamas militants ambushed his tank with rocket-propelled grenades.
On October 7th, a total of 251 Israelis were taken hostage.
During the ceasefire deal in November of 2023, 112 hostages were released.
38 hostages were released in the first phase of the 2025 cease fire agreement (including 5 Thai nationals)
202 hostages in total have been released or rescued
The bodies of 47 hostages have been recovered, including 3 mistakenly killed by the military as they tried to escape their captors.
8 hostages have been heroically rescued by troops alive
Casualties (+6)
Staff Sgt. Meir Shimon Amar, 20, from Jerusalem
Sgt. Moshe Nissim Frech, 20, from Jerusalem.
Staff Sgt. Noam Aharon Musgadian, 20, from Jerusalem.
Staff Sgt. Moshe Shmuel Noll, 21, from Beit Shemesh.
Sgt. First Class (res.) Benyamin Asulin, 28, from Haifa
According to the Times of Israel: According to an initial IDF probe, the infantry soldiers were hit by a bomb planted on the side of a road shortly after 10 p.m. on Monday, during ground operations in Beit Hanoun. The soldiers were operating on foot, and were not inside a vehicle. The initial blast struck the patrol, and as fellow soldiers rushed to assist their wounded comrades, a second device exploded—followed shortly by a third. The military says the area where the attack took place was targeted from the air ahead of the troops’ operations in the area. As reinforcements rushed in to evacuate the injured, Hamas militants ambushed the unit with gunfire. A firefight ensued, lasting nearly an hour and involving aerial support. Only then were helicopters able to land and evacuate the wounded.
Master Sgt. (res.) Abraham Azulay, 25, was killed during an abduction attempt by terrorists who also attempted to snatch his body in the southern Gaza Strip, the Israel Defense Forces announced Wednesday. According to an ongoing IDF probe, several Hamas gunmen emerged from a tunnel and attacked Israeli troops in southern Gaza’s Khan Younis. During the attack, gunmen attempted to abduct Azulay, who had been operating an excavator. He “struggled with them and the terrorists shot and killed him,” said the military. The gunmen then tried to make off with Azulay’s body, but other Israeli forces guarding the area opened fire on the operatives, thwarting the attempt, the army said.
1,940 Israelis have been killed including 889 IDF soldiers and police since October 7th
Iran: 28 Israelis have been killed in Israel from missiles attacks from Iran
The South: 450 IDF soldiers during the ground operation in Gaza have been killed. The toll includes three police officers (two of which were killed in a hostage rescue mission) and two Defense Ministry civilian contractors.
The North: 133 Israelis (85 IDF soldiers) have been killed during the war in Northern Israel
The West Bank: 66 Israelis (27 IDF and Israeli security forces)
Additional Information (according to the IDF):
6,076 (+19 since Sunday) IDF soldiers have been injured since the beginning of the war, including at least 906 (+4 since Sunday) who have been severely injured.
2,781 (+11 since Sunday) IDF soldiers have been injured during ground combat in Gaza, including at least 536 (+2 since Sunday) who have been severely injured.
The Gaza Casualty Count: According to unverified figures from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry, 57,680 total deaths have been reported, with a civilian/combatant ratio: 1:1.
[MUST READ] Report: Questionable Counting: Analysing the Death Toll from the Hamas-Run Ministry of Health in Gaza by Andrew Fox with The Henry Jackson Society
Regular sources include JINSA, FDD, IDF, AIPAC, The Paul Singer Foundation, The Institute for National Security Studies, the Alma Research and Education Center, Yediot, Jerusalem Post, IDF Casualty Count, algemeimer, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Institute for the Study of War, Tablet Magazine, Mosaic Magazine, Commentary, The Free Press, The Jewish Institute for Strategy and Security, and the Times of Israel