Israel releases conversations with Gaza residents amid criticisms of aid delivery system
The Gaza residents, who COGAT — an Israeli says were at humanitarian aid distribution sites, told a CLA officer about how Hamas tries to disrupt the aid system through violence and manipulation. The testimonies reveal that "Hamas fires at Gaza residents near the aid distribution sites, spreads false claims about IDF fire, publishes fabricated data about large numbers of casualties, and circulates fake footage," according to COGAT.
State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce acknowledged Hamas' use of violence to "interfere with aid deliveries to the people of Gaza."
"This is how Hamas operates — they deliberately fire at people and want it to appear as though the army is the one shooting, so that no one will approach the aid distribution areas," one Gaza resident told a CLA officer, according to COGAT's translation.
Another Gaza resident told a CLA officer that Palestinians trying to get aid "encounter thugs on the way" and that "those thugs definitely kill 2, 3, 5 people."
Fox News Digital was unable to independently verify the identities of the residents.
The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a U.S.- and Israel-backed group, has faced backlash over reports of violent and even deadly incidents around its secure sites. In response to the videos released by COGAT, a GHF spokesperson said that "Hamas is working to destroy the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation because our model is working."
GHF has pushed back on claims that Palestinians are being killed at its sites. However, it does say that Hamas has killed some of its staff members, "put bounties on our American workers and threatened civilians for accepting aid."
"To date, there has not been a single casualty at or in the surrounding vicinity of any of our sites. Many of the alleged incidents had no correlation to our sites but deliberate misinformation orchestrated by Hamas-controlled [Gaza] Health Ministry," a GHF spokesperson told Fox News Digital.
Despite the backlash, the GHF is encouraging other organizations — including its critics — to join its mission to bring aid to the people of Gaza while ensuring Hamas does not get its hands on it.
"Ultimately, the solution is more aid. If other groups would join us, we could scale up… We could also collaborate with the U.N. and other groups on other means while ensuring their aid reaches the right people," the GHF spokesperson said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
26 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump Announces Preliminary Trade Pact With Vietnam
President Trump said on Wednesday that the United States had reached a trade deal with Vietnam, one that would roll back some of the punishing tariffs he had issued on Vietnamese products in return for that nation agreeing to open its market to American goods. The preliminary deal will also indirectly affect China, an important trading partner of Vietnam. 'It will be a Great Deal of Cooperation between our two Countries,' Mr. Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social announcing the deal. According to Mr. Trump, the deal imposes a 20 percent tariff on all imports from Vietnam and a 40 percent tariff on any 'transshipping.' That provision is aimed at addressing Trump administration criticisms that countries like Vietnam have become a channel for Chinese manufacturers to bypass U.S. tariffs and funnel goods into the United States. Which products would fall under the higher tariff rate is unclear. It could refer to goods imported to the United States from Vietnam that actually originated in China. But it could also apply to Vietnamese products that use a certain amount of Chinese parts. The deal could include a lower tariff on goods that are made in Vietnam with fewer Chinese parts and materials, and a higher tariff rate for Vietnamese goods that contain many Chinese components. Vietnam was soon scheduled to face a 46 percent tariff rate as part of the 'reciprocal' tariffs that the Trump administration unveiled on April 2. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
CNN
28 minutes ago
- CNN
Wisconsin Supreme Court's liberal majority strikes down 176-year-old abortion ban
The Wisconsin Supreme Court's liberal majority struck down the state's 176-year-old abortion ban on Wednesday, ruling 4-3 that it was superseded by a newer state law that criminalizes abortions only after a fetus can survive outside the womb. State lawmakers adopted the ban in 1849, making it a felony when anyone other than the mother 'intentionally destroys the life of an unborn child.' It was in effect until 1973, when the US Supreme Court's landmark Roe v. Wade decision legalizing abortion nationwide nullified it. Legislators never officially repealed the ban, however, and conservatives argued that the US Supreme Court's 2022 decision to overturn Roe reactivated it. Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul, a Democrat, filed a lawsuit that year arguing that the ban was trumped by abortion restrictions legislators enacted during the nearly half-century that Roe was in effect. Kaul specifically cited a 1985 law that essentially permits abortions until viability. Some babies can survive with medical help after 21 weeks of gestation. Sheboygan County District Attorney Joel Urmanski, a Republican, defended the ban in court, arguing that the 1849 ban could coexist with the newer abortion restrictions, just as different penalties for the same crime coexist. Dane County Circuit Judge Diane Schlipper ruled in 2023 that the 1849 ban outlaws feticide – which she defined as the killing of a fetus without the mother's consent – but not consensual abortions. Abortions have been available in the state since that ruling but the state Supreme Court decision gives providers and patients more certainty that abortions will remain legal in Wisconsin. Urmanski asked the state Supreme Court to overturn Schlipper's ruling without waiting for a decision from a lower appellate court. It was expected as soon as the justices took the case that they would overturn the ban. Liberals hold a 4-3 majority on the court and one of them, Janet Protasiewicz, openly stated on the campaign trail that she supports abortion rights. Democratic-backed Susan Crawford defeated conservative Brad Schimel for an open seat on the court in April, ensuring liberals will maintain their 4-3 edge until at least 2028. Crawford has not been sworn in yet and was not part of Wednesday's ruling. She'll play pivotal role, though, in a separate Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin lawsuit challenging the 1849 ban's constitutionality. The high court decided last year to take that case. It's still pending.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House GOP leaders scrambling to rally holdouts behind Trump megabill
GOP leaders are scrambling to unite their conference behind the massive Senate bill that would enact President Trump's domestic agenda and get it to the president's desk before the holiday weekend. They have their work cut out for them. Not only are moderate Republicans balking at cuts to Medicaid, which were made larger by the Senate, but conservatives are also up in arms over the massive increase in deficit spending, also increased by the upper chamber. The combination is raising questions about whether GOP leaders can rally enough support to pass the bill, given a slim House majority that allows for only a small handful of defections. 'If you look at the totality of this, I don't believe this delivers what the president, what the administration, were working to deliver on,' said Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), a vocal member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, which is fighting to rein in deficit spending. 'I know why they're going to lobby for it, I know why the president's going to push for it. They want to see it get done, and I get it,' he continued. 'But I think we have more work to do.' The resistance poses a huge challenge for Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and other GOP leaders, who are racing to bring the holdouts on board for the sake of enacting the core of Trump's second-term agenda, including sweeping tax cuts, a crackdown on immigration, a shift away from green energy and huge cuts in federal health and nutrition programs. Some of those House GOP critics — moderates and conservatives alike — had warned in no uncertain terms that they were ready to oppose the bill if it were made 'worse' by the Senate. Now they face the dilemma of either abandoning that position, to give Trump a win, or standing by it to vote 'no' — even if it means sinking the bill. Centrists and hard-liners are now weighing those two forces, and some were quick to acknowledge the pickle they're in. 'Maybe I'll get lucky and have a rough enough landing or something that I'm unable to make [it] to D.C. for a few weeks,' one moderate House Republican told The Hill, underscoring the corner they find themselves in. Hanging over their decision is the president himself, who is pressing hard on Republicans of all stripes to back the legislation — and might encourage primary challenges against recalcitrant lawmakers who oppose the 'big, beautiful bill.' That scenario is not just a hypothetical. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) — who voted against the House version of the legislation in May and is expected to oppose the Senate bill this week — has been the target of a MAGA-backed super PAC fighting to get someone more loyal to Trump into his seat. Across the Capitol, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) also faced the president's wrath after announcing he would oppose the package. A day later, Tillis announced that he will retire at the end of this term. Democrats aren't making it any easier. While they're powerless to block the legislation, they're highlighting the most controversial provisions of the package, which include steep cuts to low-income health and nutrition programs — money Republicans are using to help pay for their tax cuts. Democrats are already honing their attacks on battleground Republicans who might support the bill. 'Republicans claim to be the party of working-class Americans — you are not. You are hurting working-class Americans. This bill won't make life more affordable for the American people. It will make life more expensive,' House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) told reporters Tuesday in the Capitol. 'Why would any so-called traditional Republican, particularly those who are in swing seats all across America, vote for a bill that will aggressively and actively hurt their constituents?' Adding to the pressure, Johnson and GOP leadership are trying to pass the bill by their self-imposed July 4 deadline, which is Friday, a timeline that will require a herculean effort to meet. In a statement right after the Senate vote, the top four House GOP leaders said they would finish their work 'in time for Independence Day.' But later in the day, when talking to reporters in the hallway, Johnson was less sure. 'We'll see what happens in the next 24 hours,' he said. While coy on the timeline, he was clear that he was not thrilled with the Senate's changes — but he suggested the House would not make changes of their own, which would require another vote in the Senate. 'I'm not happy with what the Senate did to our product, but we understand this is the process, it goes back and forth, and we'll be working to get all of our members to 'yes,'' the Speaker said. 'So high stakes, aggressive schedule, and we knew it would come to this moment.' Some lawmakers are skeptical they can get it done in time. 'The changes the Senate made to the House passed Beautiful Bill, including unacceptable increases to the national debt and the deficit, are going to make passage in the House difficult,' Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.), a Freedom Caucus member, wrote on the social platform X. 'I am willing to work through the 4th to make sure this bill is better for America's children tomorrow by spending less today.' The sprint, nonetheless, is already underway. The House Rules Committee convened for a meeting about the bill Tuesday afternoon, marking the first step in the consideration process in the lower chamber. Once the panel adopts a procedural rule, House GOP leaders want to convene the chamber at 9 a.m. Wednesday to begin debating the rule, then hold a vote to adopt the procedural rule, followed by a vote on the underlying legislation. But the first step is already on thin ice. Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), the chair of the Freedom Caucus, said Tuesday on Fox News that he will vote against the procedural rule on Wednesday, warning that it will be stopped in its tracks — a reality that would bring legislative business to a halt. Republicans can only lose three of their own and still advance the rule, assuming full attendance and united Democratic opposition. Two of those defectors are already claimed with Harris and Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.). 'That's exactly why a group of us are not going to vote to advance the bill until we iron out some of the deficit problems with the bills,' Harris said when asked about Elon Musk's criticism of the bill. 'Look, Mr. Musk is right, we cannot sustain these deficits; he understands finances, he understands debts and deficits, and we have to make further progress. And I believe the Freedom Caucus will take the lead in making that further progress.' Trump weighed in on Tuesday afternoon, praising the Senate for passing his agenda and urging House Republicans to follow suit. 'I thought the Senate was going to be tougher than the House. We got there. We got pretty much what we wanted,' Trump said. 'It's the biggest bill ever passed if we get this done.' A senior White House official was even more direct, all but demanding that the House pass the bill in its current form in time to grant Trump a symbolic signing on Independence Day. The official dismissed the idea that the House could make changes to the Senate bill and then have the chambers 'conference' the two versions into one. 'The end of the road is here. The bill is finished. The bill needs to be sent to the president's desk and it needs to be done … on or before July 4,' the official said. 'I don't think we view conference as a productive enterprise.' The White House is whipping hard ahead of the vote, the official added, with a number of top officials working the phones, including Trump; his budget director, Russell Vought; and the heads of the Energy and Treasury departments. Alex Gangitano contributed reporting. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
