Stampede, stabbing kill twenty at GHF aid site, instigators believed to be Hamas
More than 20 Palestinian civilians were killed on Wednesday at a Gaza Humanitarian Food (GHF) site in Khan Yunis, most of them appearing to have been trampled, according to the aid agency.
GHF said, "We are heartbroken to confirm that 20 people died this morning in a tragic incident at SDS3 in Khan Younis. Our current understanding is that 19 of the victims were trampled and one was stabbed amid a chaotic and dangerous surge, driven by agitators in the crowd."
This is the first time that GHF has admitted to deaths occurring on its grounds, though in its early days in May, it admitted to some injuries and incidents where Palestinian civilians overwhelmed parts of the food facilities.
NGOs, the UN, and Gaza groups have claimed many other such deadly incidents, but GHF has said the other incidents were either fake news or occurred outside of the facility between the IDF and Gazaans, often accusing Hamas of being involved.
As of Tuesday, GHF has said it has distributed 76 million meals to Palestinians to date since May.
GHF added regarding the Wednesday incident, "We have credible reason to believe that elements within the crowd – armed and affiliated with Hamas – deliberately fomented the unrest. For the first time since operations began, GHF personnel identified multiple firearms in the crowd, one of which was confiscated. An American worker was also threatened with a firearm by a member of the crowd during the incident."
It was unclear if GHf had additional signs of Hamas involvement beyond the firearms or what happened to those who brought firearms into the GHF site.
"This horrific event follows a deeply troubling pattern in recent days. False messages about aid site openings, including at SDS4 (Wadi Gaza) and the long-closed SDS1 (Tal Sultan), have circulated widely on Telegram and other platforms, fueling confusion, driving crowds to closed sites, and inciting disorder. Just last night, GHF issued a warning in Arabic via Facebook urging aid seekers to ignore these misleading messages, and to only refer to official GHF channels for updates on our operations," said GHF.
However, critics have said that a critical problem with the GHF sites in general is that there are too few of them and they inherently draw too many Palestinians at once.
In contrast, under the UN and other food aid NGOs, there were dozens or more localized sites for distributing food aid.
The plus of the GHF is that it has been breaking Hamas' control over food aid in central and southern Gaza, where it operates so far.
It has not yet operated in northern Gaza, where the UN and the NGOs still run the food aid operations.
GHF stated, "We mourn the lives lost today, and we remain committed to providing humanitarian aid as safely and responsibly as possible. GHF exists to serve the people of Gaza with compassion and integrity, and our mission has never been more urgent or more challenged."

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
24 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump's 50-day Ukraine ultimatum is doomed to fail
President Trump campaigned on a promise to end the Ukraine war within 2 4 hours of returning to the White House. Now back in the White House, he finds himself hemmed in by the realities of great-power politics. Trump's self-confidence has collided with the entrenched dynamics of a grinding conflict. Frustrated, he has turned to familiar tools of coercion: threats, pressure tactics and a new flow of advanced weapons to Kyiv. Trump's latest initiative gives Moscow a 50-day deadline to end its war in Ukraine. He has threatened secondary sanctions on Russia's key trading partners and opened a fresh weapons pipeline to Kyiv, hoping this twin-pronged approach will force Russian President Vladimir Putin's hand. But like Trump's earlier attempts to employ brute pressure as a substitute for diplomacy, this initiative reflects impatience more than strategic clarity. Trump once believed that his personal rapport with Putin, coupled with a dealmaker's instinct, could bring about a ceasefire. But six months into his new term, his peace push lies in tatters. Russia continues to press its territorial ambitions, while Ukraine, bolstered by Western military support, shows little interest in making major concessions. Instead of a breakthrough, Trump faces a deepening quagmire. The irony is unmistakable — the president who pledged to end America's entanglements in ' forever wars ' is now escalating U.S. involvement in one that is deflecting American attention away from more-pressing strategic challenges, including from China, which is seeking to supplant the U.S. as the world's foremost power. Trump's new Ukraine strategy bears an eerie resemblance to his Iran policy, when he tried to bomb Tehran into submission, only to end up entrenching animosities further and weakening U.S. leverage. There is no doubt that ending the war in Ukraine is in America's strategic interest. The conflict has absorbed vast U.S. resources, diverted diplomatic bandwidth and strained transatlantic cohesion. More importantly, the war has delayed Washington's ability to focus on the key Indo-Pacific region — the world's emerging economic and geopolitical nerve center. The pivot to the Indo-Pacific is not merely aspirational. A leaked memorandum titled 'Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance,' signed by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, identifies China as the Pentagon's 'sole pacing threat.' The Trump administration is seeking to reorient the U.S. military posture to prepare for a potential showdown in Asia over Chinese aggression against democratic Taiwan. The war in Ukraine, by draining American attention, resources and capabilities, undermines this rebalancing. Seen from this angle, Trump is right to seek an end to the conflict. But his approach — escalating arms transfers while threatening punitive sanctions on countries that do business with Russia — is unlikely to yield peace. If anything, it risks prolonging the war by reinforcing the belief in Kyiv that Washington remains committed to a military solution. In fact, Trump's threat to impose harsh penalties on Russia's trading partners lacks credibility. Such sanctions would trigger a U.S. showdown with China, which trades nearly $250 billion annually with Russia, including major oil and gas imports. Sanctioning India could upend America's Indo-Pacific strategy aimed at maintaining a stable balance of power. History offers little support for the notion that coercion alone can deliver durable peace. Military pressure may bring parties to the table, but diplomacy is what cements outcomes. The Dayton Accords, which ended the Bosnian war, and the Camp David Accords, which brought peace between Egypt and Israel, were both products of tough negotiations rather than deadlines and threats. Trump's maximalist tactics risk backfiring on multiple fronts. Sanctioning Russia's trading partners could alienate crucial 'swing' nations in the global contest with China. These states are already wary of U.S. unilateralism, and some of them could be pushed into Beijing's orbit. Moreover, punitive economic measures often fail to change state behavior, especially when national security interests are at stake, as is the case for Russia in Ukraine. Meanwhile, a flood of advanced new U.S. weapons to Ukraine may boost short-term battlefield performance but will do little to bridge the wider diplomatic impasse. Putin, faced with increased Western backing for Kyiv, is unlikely to scale back his goals. Instead, he may double down, calculating that time and attrition are on his side. The real path to peace in Ukraine lies not in deadlines or ultimatums, but in a forward-looking diplomatic initiative that recognizes the legitimate interests of all parties while seeking to uphold Ukraine's sovereignty. The Biden administration made limited overtures in this direction, but Trump, who claims to be a great dealmaker, has an opportunity to go further. Instead of trying to impose peace through pressure alone, he must find ways to bring both sides to the table — with credible inducements and face-saving compromises. This will require working with international partners — not just NATO allies, but also influential neutral states like India and the United Arab Emirates that can serve as mediators. It will also require a nuanced understanding of Russia's domestic political constraints and Ukraine's security concerns. None of this is easy, but it is more likely to succeed than a strategy built on coercion and deadlines. Despite promising to end the war quickly, Trump now finds himself caught in the same bind as his predecessor. His failure to secure a ceasefire has deepened America's involvement in the war — the very entanglement he vowed to end. Unless he pivots toward a more diplomatic course, his 50-day ultimatum to Moscow will go the way of his 24-hour pledge: unmet and quietly shelved. Deadlines don't make peace. Diplomacy does.


The Hill
24 minutes ago
- The Hill
Third Biden aide refuses to answer Oversight questions: Comer
A third aide who served former President Biden while he was in the White House has refused to testify before a congressional panel, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform chair James Comer (R-Ky.) said on Friday. Comer in a post on X said it was 'unbelievable' that Annie Tomasini, who served as deputy director of Oval Office Operations, and others refused to answer 'basic questions about … Biden's fitness to serve.' 'It's apparent they would rather hide key information to protect themselves and Joe Biden than be truthful with the American people about this historic scandal,' Comer said. 'There needs to be transparency and accountability, and we will continue to pursue the truth and examine options to get the answers we need,' he added. Comer said Tomasini invoked the Fifth Amendment when asked if she was instructed to lie about Biden's health or the handling of classified documents found in his garage. She was also asked if the former president or anyone in the White House instructed her to conceal or destroy classified material found at Biden's home or office, and if she ever conspired with anyone in the White House to hide information regarding the Biden family's business dealings, the Republican lawmaker added. Earlier this week, Anthony Bernal, informally known as former first lady Jill Biden's 'work husband,' refused to testify before the Oversight panel as did Kevin O'Connor, Biden's former doctor, earlier this month. The White House and Comer allege that Biden staffers helped cover up the former president's cognitive decline at the end of his term in office. Both Biden and Bernal have rejected the accusations. 'Most recently, the Committee seeks Mr. Bernal's testimony based on a purported controversy regarding use of the autopen at the conclusion of President Biden's term. President Biden has already confirmed that he personally made all decisions concerning his grants of clemency,' Bernal said in a statement sent to The Hill. 'While the Committee only recently began its autopen investigation, the Chairman has already declared that this matter is ' the biggest scandal in Oval Office history,'' he added. The former president shared similar sentiments during an interview published Sunday by The New York Times. 'Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency. I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn't is ridiculous and false,' he told the news outlet.

USA Today
24 minutes ago
- USA Today
WSJ report marks latest twist in Trump-Epstein saga: Recent developments, explained
President Donald Trump is threatening to sue the Wall Street Journal over a report that a birthday card bearing his name was sent to Jeffrey Epstein more than two decades ago, marking the latest twist in the saga over supposed files on the sex offender. According to the Journal, a letter addressed from Trump to Epstein for his 50th birthday in 2003 was part of a leather-bound book including dozens of other cards. The Trump letter ends with 'Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret,' the Journal reported July 17. Trump denied writing the letter and said in a social media post the story is "false, malicious, and defamatory." The report comes amid political tensions over Epstein's supposed client list, which the Department of Justice and FBI said on July 7 never existed, despite past comments from Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi to the contrary. Here's what to know about recent developments in the saga. July 7: DOJ denies Epstein 'list' exists In a memo released July 7, the Justice Department and FBI said they found no evidence that Epstein kept a "client list." The review also found no evidence that Epstein blackmailed prominent people as part of his actions or that he was murdered while in custody, according to the memo. The announcement came after Bondi had seemingly confirmed a client list existed when she was asked about it during a February Fox News interview: "It's sitting on my desk right now to review," she said. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said July 7 that Bondi's past remarks referred to "the entirety of all of the paperwork" in the Epstein case, not a list of clients. Trump supporters, others question handling of Epstein case After the July 7 memo, some politicians and Trump supporters alike have called into question the administration's handling of the Epstein case and the assertion that a client list doesn't exist. Epstein fallout Mike Pence urges Trump to 'release all the files' on Jeffrey Epstein 'What changed?' Popular podcaster criticizes JD Vance over past Epstein comments "No one believes there is not a client list," U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) posted on X July 8. Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson said in a July 15 interview, "We should put everything out there and let the people decide." "I'm going to go throw up, actually," right-wing radio show host Alex Jones said in a July 7 video in response to the memo. On the other side of the aisle, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said on July 15, "If you're not hiding anything, prove that to the American people." Trump has lashed out at supporters who have questioned the handling of the case. 'Jeffrey Epstein hoax': Trump lashes out at supporters July 17: Did Trump write a birthday card to Epstein? What WSJ report says The Wall Street Journal on July 17 published a report detailing a lewd letter bearing Trump's name that was sent to Epstein for a 2003 birthday album. The letter contained text inside a hand-drawn outline of a nude woman, with Trump's signature displayed as "a squiggly 'Donald' below her waist, mimicking pubic hair," the Journal wrote. Trump denied writing the card in a series of social media posts, calling it "FAKE" and saying, "These are not my words, not the way I talk. Also, I don't draw pictures." He also said he plans to sue the newspaper over the publication of the story, adding that its editors were "warned directly" by him. July 17: Bondi says she will release Epstein grand jury docs After the Journal report, Trump said in another social media post he is directing Bondi to reveal more Epstein documents. "Based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval," he said. "This SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats, should end, right now!" Bondi responded on July 17 that "we are ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts." Contributing: Zac Anderson, Joey Garrison & Aysha Bagchi, USA TODAY Melina Khan is a national trending reporter for USA TODAY. She can be reached at