IDF soldiers told to shoot at unarmed Gazans waiting for aid
According to Gaza's Health Ministry, 549 people have been killed and more than 4000 wounded near aid centres and in areas where people were waiting for UN food trucks since May 27, when the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) started operating.
The GHF, which is a new aid organisation backed by Israel and the US, was tasked to take over aid operations in Gaza from humanitarian agencies. It has seen its distribution of aid marred by chaos.
The distribution sites typically open for just one hour each morning. According to officers who served in their areas, the IDF fires at civilians who arrive before opening hours to prevent them from approaching, or again after the centres close, to disperse them.
READ MORE: Labour rebels urged to 'stand firm' over welfare cuts despite Keir Starmer U-turn
One soldier told Haaretz that the IDF's "form of communication is gunfire".
He said: "We open fire early in the morning if someone tries to get in line from a few hundred metres away, and sometimes we just charge at them from close range. But there's no danger to the forces.
"I'm not aware of a single instance of return fire. There's no enemy, no weapons."
The soldier added that he has heard this being referred to by soldiers as "Operation Salted Fish", which refers to the Israeli version of the children's game "Red light, green light".
An officer serving in the security detail of a distribution centre told the paper: "At night, we open fire to signal to the population that this is a combat zone and they mustn't come near.
"Once, the mortars stopped firing, and we saw people start to approach. So we resumed fire to make it clear they weren't allowed to. In the end, one of the shells landed on a group of people."
He also pointed towards other cases: "We fired machine guns from tanks and threw grenades. There was one incident where a group of civilians was hit while advancing under the cover of fog. It wasn't intentional, but these things happen."
Another senior officer told the paper that the normalisation of killing civilians in Gaza has often encouraged firing at them near the distribution centres.
He said: "The fact that live fire is directed at a civilian population – whether with artillery, tanks, snipers, or drones – goes against everything the army is supposed to stand for.
"Why are people collecting food being killed just because they stepped out of line, or because some commander doesn't like that they're cutting in?
"Why have we reached a point where a teenager is willing to risk his life just to pull a sack of rice off a truck? And that's who we're firing artillery at?"
READ MORE: Four arrests after UK military planes damaged in Palestine Action RAF break-in
An IDF spokesperson told Haaretz that troops were "conducting systematic learning processes to improve their operational response" and to minimise, "as much as possible, potential friction between the population and IDF forces".
They said: "Recently, forces worked to reorganize the area by placing new fences, signage, opening additional routes, and more.
"Following incidents where there were reports of harm to civilians arriving at distribution centres, in-depth investigations were conducted, and instructions were given to forces on the ground based on lessons learned."
The number of fatalities near food distribution centres has risen sharply in recent weeks. According to Gaza's Health Ministry, 57 people were killed on June 11, 59 on June 17 and around 50 on June 24.
The UN and other humanitarian agencies have refused to take part in the new system. Thameen Al-Keetan, the UN's human rights office spokesperson, said on Tuesday that "the weaponisation of food for civilians" constitutes a war crime.
In the last 24 hours, Israeli forces killed at least 72 people in the Gaza Strip. Since October 7, 2023, a total of 56,331 Palestinians have been killed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Tim Davie shouldn't quit over Glastonbury
There probably never has been a time when a governing party much liked its MPs. If you are on a mission, as governments imagine they are, you are always impatient when your own side raises objections. But it is only recently that governments have seemed positively affronted by the idea that their MPs should have a say. This was encapsulated by Sir Keir Starmer when he dismissed Labour's backbench revolt over welfare cuts as 'noises off'. Off what, exactly? Legislators have the sole right to legislate and that includes the right to refuse legislation. Those, like Rachael Maskell, who parade their consciences may be tiresome, but there is no way of governing this country except through parliament (though people like Lord Hermer are striving mightily to alter this). Prime ministers are oddly blind to the ultimate consequence, which is that their MPs get rid of them. Sir Keir's blindness led to his capitulation on Monday night, turning his gigantic majority into his potentially fatal problem. It is always confusing for the BBC to decide what to ban, cut or edit. In 1972, in the wake of Bloody Sunday, it banned Paul McCartney's rather tame song 'Give Ireland back to the Irish' ('Great Britain, you are tremendous/And nobody knows like me/ But really, what are you doin'/ In the land across the sea?') but allowed John Lennon's 'Sunday Bloody Sunday' which attacked 'You Anglo pigs and Scotties/ Sent to colonise the North', complained about 'the concentration camps' (unspecified) in Northern Ireland and regretted that although 'the cries of 13 martyrs filled the free Derry air', 'not a soldier boy was bleeding/ When they nailed the coffin lids'. If you do not have your own moral compass, you will be guided only by levels of public outrage and will find these hard to predict. In the case of Bob Vylan, the story is about management of coverage, not endorsement, of dreadful views. It does not exhibit the monstrous anti-Israel bias daily apparent in BBC documentaries, news reports, BBC Verify, BBC Arabic, Jeremy Bowen etc. It is more a lack of due diligence. I doubt the resignation of Tim Davie would produce visible improvement. He is actually the first D-G even to admit and pursue the anti-Semitism problem. More shocking is the way the Glastonbury crowd (and therefore, unthinkingly, the BBC) rolls with this type of thing. If – unimaginable, I know – an extreme-right popstar had appeared and announced that he hated 'Zionists' and that Israeli soldiers should die, he would have been howled down. But the left has so normalised Islamist extremism that the overwhelmingly white, middle-class establishment audience has no sense of its weirdness. In a passage not widely reported, Bob Vylan announced to the Glastoholics, 'We are not pacifist punks here. We are the violent punks.' Some of them cheered. Was that a tattoo of a guillotine that I saw on his right arm? Does Glastonbury have to suffer the fate of the Manchester Arena before they understand? Ex-prime ministers are sparing in their public interventions. So far as I can see, Rishi Sunak had made only one Commons speech (as opposed to asking questions) since leaving office – on Rachel Reeves's first Budget. Last week, however, he made his second, in Westminster Hall. It began: 'I last spoke on this subject in this very place back in 2016. A lot has changed in the last nine years – notably, ten chief secretaries to the Treasury, seven chancellors and, indeed, five prime ministers – but one thing that has not changed is my view on grouse shooting.' From that good start, Mr Sunak went on to argue that the sport 'is a part of our local social fabric, and… one of the world's great conservation success stories'. He criticised the tendency of 'some conservationists… to act as though farmers and gamekeepers are somehow trespassing on Britain's landscape, but without their hands repairing our dry-stone walls or their dairy cows keeping the fields lush, the rural beauty of our countryside would soon fade. Heather moorland… is rarer than rainforest, and 75 per cent of it is found right here in Britain. It is a national treasure.' The fanatic Chris Packham, who was attending the debate, was seen to hold his head in his hands as he listened. I hope this oration marks the start of Mr Sunak's comeback. Charm is easy to recognise but notoriously hard to describe. Sandy Gall, who has just died aged 97, had it. When he and the tipsy Reggie Bosanquet co-presented ITN News in the 1970s, charm was visible nightly on the nation's screens. It had something to do with being at ease, a lack of self-importance and the sense that the pair were often repressing laughter. Sandy retained these qualities in many dangerous situations covering wars for more than half a century, and into old age. In 2010, when he was 82, we accompanied him to Afghanistan. It was supposed to be a holiday, plus a visit to the charity which he had established to give prosthetic limbs to children injured by the war when he first covered Afghanistan, hidden in Russian-occupied territory, in the 1980s. Sandy's two rules for later journeys there were that he should never have security – it just makes one a target, he said – and that he should always carry a bottle of whisky, which was illegal. It being high summer, he had advised us not to bring waterproofs, but when we flew in a light aircraft to see Bamiyan and the mountainside which held the colossal Buddhas smashed in their niches by the Taliban, we found the place flooded. The airport was on a plateau. Our hotel was visible below, surrounded by water. Undismayed, Sandy ordered ten donkeys to carry us through the inundation and breakfast to eat until these could be found. By the time we had finished the breakfast, the waters had sufficiently receded for the donkeys to be laid off. He was a dear man, neither broken by the horrors of war, nor puffed up by his courage in the face of them – a true reporter.
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Who really built this country?
Anyone who has visited Canada or Australia in recent years might have noticed an interesting new tradition. This is the trend for issuing a 'land acknowledgement' at the start of any public event. Before discussion gets under way, some bureaucrat or other will get up and note that we are all fortunate enough to be on the land of X, and then garble the name of some not-especially-ancient tribe. The moment gives everyone a feeling of deep meaning and naturally achieves nothing. Even our King indulged in some of this in May when he opened the latest session of the Canadian parliament. Before getting down to the meat of his speech, Charles said: 'I would like to acknowledge that we are gathered on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg people.' You would have thought that by dint of his being King and addressing a parliament the land had been very much ceded. In any case this is the modern routine. Every-body pays tribute to an extinct or almost extinct tribe, giving the sense that anyone other than the members of the said tribe is an interloper and that indigenous peoples are everywhere and always to be revered. Their ways are forever understood to be the ways of peace. Their customs, habits, crafts and learnings are to be discussed as having a connection to some ancient wisdom, long lost to our own wretched materialistic societies. One interesting thing is that concern for indigenous rights has exceptionally firm borders. The delineation of those borders are clear. All indigenous peoples must be allowed to have rights, just so long as the people in question are not white and do not originate from our own continent. The brouhaha over last weekend's Glastonbury festival nicely clarified some of this. Pascal Robinson-Foster, singer of the rap group Bob Vylan, has been much commented upon because of his 'death to the IDF' chant. But another of his charming ditties got far less attention. This one consisted of him jumping around screaming: 'Heard you want your country back. Ha. Shut the fuck up.' As he repeated this, things like 'This country was built on the backs of immigrants' flashed up on a screen at the back of the stage. I'm not sure that anyone could come up with a more irksome and divisive message if they tried. The taunt is clear: 'If you are English and think this is your country then I have news for you. Nope. It's ours now.' Others have been ratcheting up a similar message. At last year's general election, a man called Shakeel Afsar ran as an Independent in Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley, and was only a few thousand votes away from becoming the area's MP. He is the sort of person who is usually described by local media as a 'firebrand'. I'm not sure that does him justice. His public life has mainly consisted of insisting that Birmingham will not allow the inventor of Islam – Mohammed – to be in any way criticised or ridiculed. Afsar is also not a fan of Prime Minister Modi of India, for obvious sectarian reasons. In a recent interview, he was asked about the line that a few brave souls have had the temerity to utter in recent years: that if you want to bring your Third World beliefs to our country and replay the same failed playbook here, then perhaps there are other countries – including your family's country of origin – in which it might be better for you to live. This was how Afsar responded: 'Our forefathers were instrumental in rebuilding this country after the second world war. It was our grandfathers who worked in the factories 20 hours. It was our grandfathers who came here and ran the infrastructure. It was our grandfathers who brought you the lovely curry which is your national dish. So how can you tell us to go? We're not going nowhere. We're here to stay. We're not here to take part. We're here to take over.' That would seem to me to be almost the definition of a threatening statement, and one almost perfectly designed to stir up the worst sentiments of the human heart. Personally I feel these sentiments throbbing through me when I hear statements like this, or those Mr Robinson-Foster decided to project from the stage at Glastonbury. Keir Starmer, Danny Boyle (who directed the 2012 Olympics opening ceremony) and others have long insisted that this country was effectively built by the Windrush generation. If they had pitched this ball a little shorter they might have been on to something. If they had said that our country had a rich and distinct history and that we owe 'something' to those who came after the last war then they might have brought more people along with them. But the suggestion that the British were an essentially uninteresting and bad people until the noble migrants came to rescue us is a story that is not only false but insulting. So back to the retort that this new type of anti-British demagogue inevitably wishes to provoke. They want a backlash along the lines of: 'Actually this is not your country. It's mine. Your grandfathers may have done something, but mine did far more for a lot longer and to much greater effect. The benefits of the recipe for curry we might litigate another time. But I prefer everything that was already ours.' And so the language of indigenous rights that has been pushed on our friends in Australia and North America finally comes back around to the people it was never meant to assist. Yes – many feel they would like their country back. Many do not wish their country to be taken over. We were here first, they'll think. That's how it works, right?
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Sir Keir Starmer will struggle to recover from this position of weakness
SIR – It is difficult to comprehend how, with a majority of 156, Sir Keir Starmer has become a lame-duck prime minister (' Starmer's benefits Bill turns to farce ', report, July 2). Weak leaders become weaker when their backbenchers taste blood. Christopher Hunt Swanley, Kent SIR – The Prime Minister's authority is broken. Backbench Labour MPs now know that they can stop attempts at reform, whether to the welfare system, the NHS, the public sector or any of the other sacred cows. The state will continue to expand, supported by ever-increasing taxes, as long as Labour is in power. John Hicks Manchester SIR – Just when we think it can't get any worse living under this Labour Government, another disaster appears over the horizon. Watching the chaos unfold, and knowing the huge cost implications of the watered-down welfare bill – for the country and for me as a working man – I have now realised that I am simply not rich enough to be a socialist. Simon Perks Poughill, Devon SIR – The UK is living beyond its means, with fewer taxpayers expected to support an ever-expanding welfare state. In recent days, we have heard repeatedly that Labour MPs were anxious to consult their many disabled constituents, with whom we all have proportionate sympathy. But none of those Labour MPs appear to have consulted their taxpaying constituents – able or disabled – who are heartily fed up with the unaffordability of our benefits system. William Crawshay Tasburgh, Norfolk SIR – Kemi Badenoch is probably right (' Welfare system needs strong leadership to work properly… and Starmer is too weak ', Commentary, July 2), but it's a bit rich coming from the party that introduced the calamity that is Universal Credit, and cultivated a claimant population. The welfare budget is a monster of the Tories' creation. They will have to be ready to tame it in four years' time. Michael Heaton Warminster, Wiltshire SIR – George Finch, Reform UK's young Warwickshire councillor, has more personality, commitment and common sense than Sir Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves put together ('' I'm taking on the Blob': the 18-year-old running a £400m council for Reform ', Features, July 1). I will vote Reform at the next election because of people like him. I attended a party meeting in Towcester some time ago, and everyone I met was a decent, intelligent person who simply wanted to get the UK back on track. Barbara Marshall Helmdon, Northamptonshire Glastonbury chants SIR – One of the main arguments against suppression of free speech and thought is that it drives certain groups underground. At Glastonbury, they were fully and unashamedly on display (' Davie fights for job after Glastonbury hate chant ', report, July 2). Kelvin Trott Heckington, Lincolnshire SIR – I'm British and not Jewish, but I have had Jewish friends all my life. They and I have always supported the existence of Israel, but none of us support the killing of civilians. I deplore what the Israeli Defense Forces are doing to the people of Gaza, but I also want free speech here in Britain. Let bands sing and play their music. Most of us can decide what we think for ourselves anyway. Rosie Collingwood Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland SIR – As one of the boomer generation who protested against the Vietnam War, I have to take issue with the appalling behaviour of Bob Vylan and their execrable lyrics (Letters, July 2). Sixties protest songs were both eloquent and melodious, and the message was easily understood. Rap is none of these things. I am not against protest, just lousy music. Nick Kester Wattisfield, Suffolk Number plate cloning SIR – Recently, a friend had their number plate cloned (Letters, June 30). Despite being presented with a clear photograph of the person using the cloned plate at a petrol station, the police would not take action, telling our friend that it was not a crime. Perhaps we should just dispense with the police. John Archibald London N20 Timely tribute SIR – No doubt construction of the approved memorials to Queen Elizabeth II will take a long time. The glass balustrade for St James's Park looks particularly impressive. Along with putting a statue on The Mall (Letters, June 30), could we not rename it Queen Elizabeth II Avenue? Involving minimal cost to the nation, this would be popular with the public, and provide an immediate and powerful tribute to our much-loved late Queen. Mike Gilbert Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire SIR – One of the saddest moments of the Queen's funeral was the sight of her groom standing, head bowed, beside her favourite horse on the Long Walk up to Windsor Castle. This would make a wonderful statue, on the site where he was standing, and would reflect how completely bereft we all felt. Barbara Whitaker Halton, Buckinghamshire Music by torchlight SIR – Glyndebourne's Saul is not the only performance to have suffered from a power cut (report, July 2). I was conducting Benjamin Britten's Saint Nicolas on a snowy December night in 1976, when we had a similar problem. It was in a large Oxfordshire church, which was cold and gloomy. At the words 'Darkness was soon on top of them', the overworked electricity system gave up. Some of the audience were convinced that the effect was deliberate. We managed to continue with the help of torches. Handling the heat SIR – After reading that the NHS had warned people to stay indoors on Tuesday because of the warm weather (report, July 2), I checked the Met Office website. It forecast that the maximum temperature in Manchester would be 22C. In Qatar it was 46C, and a check on some websites there showed that life was proceeding as normal. The NHS should stick to its knitting – diagnosing and treating illness. Kevin Duffy Manchester The windscreen test SIR – I too would take issue with Bob Shute's assertion (Letters, June 30) that the absence of insects on car windscreens is down to the improved aerodynamics of modern vehicles. I regularly drive to the south-west of France. Within an hour of crossing the Channel, I find it necessary to stop and clear the insects off my windscreen. I never have to do that in Britain. Patricia Deacon Fairford, Gloucestershire SIR – Glider pilots are well-qualified to comment on windscreens and insects. The front part of a glider wing, when 'bugged up', has a draggy effect on the flow of air over the rest of the wing. I can usually reach up to 5,000 feet at Didcot and return to my club, south of Basingstoke, in a straight glide. This year, however, I am finding that I often need to top up at Newbury, such is the effect of all the bugs on the wing. The last time it was this bad was in 1976. David Watt Lasham, Hampshire Lessons in nutrition SIR – In the late 1960s, among eight other subjects, I took an O-level called Food and Nutrition (Letters, July 1), which taught all the basic cooking techniques, coupled with education on food groups, vitamins and so on. It has served me (and my family) well. In contrast, our daughters did Food Technology, and the nearest thing to cookery I remember them doing was designing a box for a takeaway pizza. Wendy Thompson Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire SIR – Content is key in cookery classes. I suffered them at my grammar school in the 1970s. Making soused herring and blancmange from first principles are not skills I have used since, and the results at the time tested my father's acting abilities to the limit. Susan Sinagola Antrobus, Cheshire When introducing predators leads to disaster SIR – I was astounded to read that Tony Juniper, the head of Natural England, is keen to introduce wild lynx to our country, with the objective of reducing rabbit and deer populations (report, July 1). Sadly, lynx cannot be trained to do as you wish, and may find slower-moving sheep, domestic animals and ground-nesting birds much easier targets. The introduction of stoats in New Zealand to control the rabbit population ended in near disaster, with a ground-nesting parrot pushed close to extinction. Now, every effort is being made to eradicate the stoat population. If there are too many deer in this country, then issue licences to shoot them. This would be a more humane end than being mauled to death by a pack of lynx. Terry Lloyd Derby SIR – In the UK, we already have stalkers, gamekeepers and huntsmen who could control rabbit and deer populations – if only they were allowed to. Instead of 're-wilding' an animal that has been absent for 1,000 years, why not try some 'de-wilding' of species such as the grey squirrel and the mink, both of which have been introduced here relatively recently? The grey squirrel has endangered our native red, and mink have decimated water vole populations. Grant Hawkins Oundle, Northamptonshire Why farmers are giving up on crop production SIR – There is a straightforward way to stop farmland being covered with solar panels (Letters, July 1): either pay a competitive price for food, or subsidise farmers to produce it. A solar farm is now being built on part of our farm, by a company that rents the land for a sum equivalent to four times the gross margin of crop production. This year, the benefit is even greater, with expected low yields following waterlogging and drought. What would other businesses choose in similar circumstances? Jeremy Chamberlayne Gloucester SIR – Rather than covering lakes and reservoirs with solar panels (report, July 1), it would be cheaper and easier if a law was passed stating that planning permission would be automatically refused for any building that didn't have solar panels on the roof. As things stand, councils often refuse developers' planning applications on the grounds that solar panels would detract from the local ambience. Buildings are then erected without them, and the new purchasers install their own panels, partly funded by a government department. Letters to the Editor We accept letters by email and post. Please include name, address, work and home telephone numbers. ADDRESS: 111 Buckingham Palace Road, London, SW1W 0DT EMAIL: dtletters@ FOLLOW: Telegraph Letters @LettersDesk
