At least 30 people killed in Israeli attack near aid distribution site in Gaza - Hamas-linked media
Israel has offered no immediate comment of the reported attack, which the Palestinian news agency WAFA says left more than 115 people injured.
The reports emerged as a hospital run by the Red Cross said at least 21 people have been killed and another 175 have been wounded as they went to receive aid from the same foundation - which is backed by both Israel and the US.
Eyewitnesses said the deaths came after Israel forces opened fire out a roundabout near the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation hub.
However, Palestinian and Hamas-linked media has attributed the deaths it has reported on to an Israeli airstrike.
It is not yet clear if eyewitnesses and Hamas-affiliated media are giving different accounts of the same incident.
The area where the reported shooting took place is controlled by Israeli forces.
Ibrahim Abu Saoud, an eyewitness, said Israeli forces opened fire at people moving toward the aid distribution centre.
"There were many martyrs, including women," the 40-year-old man said. "We were about 300 meters (yards) away from the military."
Abu Saoud said he saw many people with gunshot wounds, including a young man who he said had died at the scene. "We weren't able to help him," he said.
Mohammed Abu Teaima, 33, said he saw Israeli forces open fire and kill his cousin and another woman as they were heading to the hub.
He said his cousin was shot in his chest and died at the scene. Many others were wounded, including his brother-in-law, he said.
"They opened heavy fire directly toward us," he said as he was waiting outside the Red Cross field hospital for word on his wounded relative.
The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation operates as part of a controversial aid system which Israel and the US claims is aimed at preventing Hamas from siphoning off assistance.
Israel has not provided any evidence of systematic diversion, and the UN denies it has occurred.
The foundation's distribution of aid has been marred by chaos, and multiple witnesses have said Israeli troops fired on crowds near the delivery sites.
UN agencies and major aid groups have refused to work with the new system, saying it violates humanitarian principles because it allows Israel to control who receives aid and forces people to relocate to distribution sites, risking yet more mass displacement in the territory.
Before Sunday, at least six people had been killed and more than 50 wounded, according to local health officials.
0:53
The foundation says the private security contractors guarding its sites did not fire on the crowds, while the Israeli military has acknowledged firing warning shots on previous occasions.
The foundation did not immediately respond to a request for comment following the hospital's claims.
In an earlier statement, it said it distributed 16 truckloads of aid early on Sunday "without incident". It dismissed what it referred to as "false reporting about deaths, mass injuries and chaos".
Meanwhile, the UN's aid system has struggled to bring in aid after Israel slightly eased its total blockade of the territory last month.
3:29
Those groups say Israeli restrictions, the breakdown of law and order, and widespread looting make it extremely difficult to deliver aid to Gaza's roughly two million Palestinians.
Experts have warned that the Palestinian territory is at risk of famine if more aid is not brought in.
The war began when Hamas-led militants stormed into southern Israel on 7 October 2023, killing some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and abducting 251.
They are still holding 58 hostages, around a third of them believed to be alive, after most of the rest were released in ceasefire agreements or other deals.
Israel's military campaign has killed over 54,000 people, mostly women and children, according to Gaza's Health Ministry, which does not say how many of the dead were civilians or combatants. The offensive has destroyed vast areas of the territory, displaced around 90% of its population and left people almost completely reliant on international aid.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Inside Iran's Evin Prison - as Tehran says damage shows Israel targeted civilians
It is one of the most notorious and secret places in Iran. Somewhere foreign journalists are never allowed to visit or film. The prison where dissidents and critics of Iran's government disappear - some never to be seen again. But we went there today, invited by Iranian authorities eager to show the damage done there by Israel. Evin Prison was hit by Israeli airstrikes the day before a ceasefire ended a 12-day war with Iran. The damage is much greater than thought at the time. We walked through what's left of its gates, now a mass of rubble and twisted metal, among just a handful of foreign news media allowed in. A few hundred yards in, we were shown a building Iranians say was the prison's hospital. Behind iron bars, every one of the building's windows had been blown in. Medical equipment and hospital beds had been ripped apart and shredded. It felt eerie being somewhere normally shut off to the outside world. On the hill above us, untouched by the airstrikes, the buildings where inmates are incarcerated in reportedly horrific conditions, ominous watch towers silhouetted against the sky. Evin felt rundown and neglected. There was something ineffably sad and oppressive about the atmosphere as we wandered through the compound. The Iranians had their reasons to bring us here. The authorities say at least 71 people were killed in the air strikes, some of them inmates, but also visiting family members. Iran says this is evidence that Israel was not just targeting military or nuclear sites but civilian locations too. But the press visit highlighted the prison's notoriety too. Iran's critics and human rights groups say Evin is synonymous with the brutal oppression of political prisoners and opponents, and its practice of hostage diplomacy too. British dual nationals, including Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe were held here for years before being released in 2022 in exchange for concessions from the UK. Interviewed about the Israeli airstrikes at the time, Ms Zaghari-Ratcliffe showed only characteristic empathy with her former fellow inmates. Trapped in their cells, she said they must have been terrified. The Israelis have not fully explained why they put Evin on their target list, but on the same day, the Israeli military said it was "attacking regime targets and government repression bodies in the heart of Tehran". The locus of their strikes were the prison's two entrances. If they were trying to enable a jailbreak, they failed. No one is reported to have escaped, several inmates are thought to have died. The breaches the Israeli missiles made in the jail's perimeter are being closed again quickly. We filmed as a team of masons worked to shut off the outside world again, brick by brick.
The Independent
4 hours ago
- The Independent
Palestine Action loses appeal hours before terror ban due to start
Palestine Action has lost a late-night Court of Appeal challenge to temporarily stop it being banned as a terror group, less than two hours before it was due to come into force. Earlier on Friday Huda Ammori, the group's co-founder, unsuccessfully asked the High Court to temporarily block the Government from designating the group as a terrorist organisation, before a potential legal challenge against the decision to proscribe it under the Terrorism Act 2000. The move is due to come into force at midnight after judge Mr Justice Chamberlain refused the bid for a temporary block. Lawyers for Ms Ammori took her case to the Court of Appeal on Friday evening, and in a decision given at around 10.30pm, judges refused to grant the temporary block. The Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr said: 'The judge was entitled to take the view that the harm identified… would be the product of an individual's decision not to comply with the order.' She added that there was 'no real prospect of a successful appeal'. Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, made a bid to have the case certified as a 'point of general public importance' to allow a Supreme Court bid. Baroness Carr, sitting with Lord Justice Lewis and Lord Justice Edis, added: 'You are not going to get to the Supreme Court before midnight.' The judge said that any application should be made before 4pm on Monday and refused a bid to pause the ban coming into effect pending any Supreme Court bid. In their 11-page written judgment, the judges said: 'The role of the court is simply to interpret and apply the law. 'The merits of the underlying decision to proscribe a particular group is not a matter for the court…Similarly, it is not a matter for this court to express any views on whether or not the allegations or claims made by Palestine Action are right or wrong.' In his decision refusing the temporary block, High Court judge Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.' Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, for Ms Ammori, told the Court of Appeal that the judge wrongly decided the balance between the interests of her client and the Home Office when deciding whether to make the temporary block. She said: 'The balance of convenience on the evidence before him, in our respectful submission, fell in favour of the claimant having regard to all of the evidence, including the chilling effect on free speech, the fact that people would be criminalised and criminalised as terrorists for engaging in protest that was not violent, for the simple fact that they were associated with Palestine Action.' She also told the Court of Appeal that Mr Justice Chamberlain 'failed properly to consider' that banning the group 'would cause irreparable harm'. Ms Ni Ghralaigh said: 'There was significant evidence before him to demonstrate the chilling effect of the order because it was insufficiently clear.' She continued that the ban would mean 'a vast number of individuals who wished to continue protesting would fall foul of the proscription regime due to its lack of clarity'. Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, told appeal judges that Mr Justice Chamberlain gave a 'detailed and careful judgment' which was 'all the more impressive given the time constraints'. He added that the judge 'was entitled to reach the conclusion that he did'. The barrister said: 'The judge conducted a very careful analysis of all the matters he relied upon.' Mr Watson also said that the judge was 'alive' to the possible impacts of the ban, including the potential 'chilling effect' on free speech. 'There was no error by the judge in concluding that there was a serious question to be tried while at the same time acknowledging that he couldn't, on the material in front of him, say that it had strong prospects of success,' he added.
Daily Mail
4 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Palestine Action lose 11th-hour appeal to stop being banned as a terror group after High Court judge refused a bid to temporarily halt them being outlawed
Palestine Action has lost its 11-hour appeal to stop it from being banned as a terror group, less than two hours after losing a bid to halt it come coming into force. Earlier today, Huda Ammori, co-founder of Palestine Action, failed in her bid to get the High Court to temporarily block the Government from classifying the group as a terrorist organisation. This came before a potential legal challenge to the decision to proscribe the group under the Terrorism Act 2000. The ban is set to take effect at midnight after Judge Mr Justice Chamberlain denied the request for a temporary block. In a late twist, Ms. Ammori's legal team appealed the decision at the Court of Appeal on Friday evening. However, around 10:30pm, the Court also refused to grant the temporary injunction, paving the way for the controversial move to proceed. The founder's representative told the court that the ban would have a 'chilling effect on free speech'. But Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr said: 'The judge was entitled to take the view that the harm identified... would be the product of an individual's decision not to comply with the order.' She added that there was 'no real prospect of a successful appeal'. Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, made a bid to have the case certified as a 'point of general public importance' to allow a Supreme Court bid. Baroness Carr, sitting with Lord Justice Lewis and Lord Justice Edis, added: 'You are not going to get to the Supreme Court before midnight.' The judge said that any application should be made before 4pm on Monday and refused a bid for a stay. In his decision refusing the temporary block, High Court Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.' Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, for Ms Ammori, told the Court of Appeal that the judge wrongly decided the balance between the interests of her client and the Home Office when deciding whether to make the temporary block. She said: 'The balance of convenience on the evidence before him, in our respectful submission, fell in favour of the claimant having regard to all of the evidence, including the chilling effect on free speech, the fact that people would be criminalised and criminalised as terrorists for engaging in protest that was not violent, for the simple fact that they were associated with Palestine Action.' She also told the Court of Appeal that Mr Justice Chamberlain 'failed properly to consider' that banning the group 'would cause irreparable harm'. Ms Ni Ghralaigh said: 'There was significant evidence before him to demonstrate the chilling effect of the order because it was insufficiently clear.' She continued that the ban would mean 'a vast number of individuals who wished to continue protesting would fall foul of the proscription regime due to its lack of clarity'. Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, told appeal judges that Mr Justice Chamberlain gave a 'detailed and careful judgment' which was 'all the more impressive given the time constraints'. He added that the judge 'was entitled to reach the conclusion that he did'. The barrister said: 'The judge conducted a very careful analysis of all the matters he relied upon.' Mr Watson also said that the judge was 'alive' to the possible impacts of the ban, including the potential 'chilling effect' on free speech. 'There was no error by the judge in concluding that there was a serious question to be tried while at the same time acknowledging that he couldn't, on the material in front of him, say that it had strong prospects of success,' he added. The proposal for the ban which had been approved by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords earlier this week, will make membership and support for the direct action group a criminal offence, punishable by up to 14 years in prison. High Court judge Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.' Ms. Ammori's legal team was also denied permission to appeal and was advised to take their case directly to the Court of Appeal. Currently, 81 organisations are already proscribed under the 2000 Act, including Hamas, al Qaida, and National Action. During the hearing, Raza Husain KC, representing Ms. Ammori, argued for the suspension of what he called the 'ill-considered' and 'authoritarian abuse of statutory power' until a hearing scheduled for around July 21. Mr Husain told the London court: 'This is the first time in our history that a direct action civil disobedience group, which does not advocate for violence, has been sought to be proscribed as terrorists.' The barrister said that his client had been 'inspired' by a long history of direct action in the UK, 'from the suffragettes, to anti-apartheid activists, to Iraq war activists'. The hearing later in July is expected to deal with whether Ms Ammori can bring a High Court challenge over the planned proscription. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also representing Ms Ammori, told the court that there was no 'express provision' to protect lawyers representing her in the potential legal challenge from criminal consequences if the ban came into effect. She also said that if the ban came into effect the harm would be 'far-reaching', could cause 'irreparable harm to large numbers of members of the public', including causing some to 'self-censor'. Ms Ni Ghralaigh later named Normal People author Sally Rooney, who lives abroad and 'fears the ramifications for her, for her work, for her books, for her programmes' if she shows support for Palestine Action. 'Is the Prime Minister going to denounce her, an Irish artist, as a supporter of a proscribed organisation?' 'Will that have ramifications for her with the BBC, etc?' Ms Ni Ghralaigh asked. In his written judgment, Mr Justice Chamberlain said it was 'ambitious' for Palestine Action to claim it was not 'concerned in terrorism', as the 'action which immediately preceded the announcement of the decision to lay a proscription order was against an RAF base'. He also said that Ms Ammori's arguments 'contain at least one serious issue to be tried, namely that the order is a disproportionate interference with the rights of the claimant and others' under the European Convention on Human Rights. But he ruled that issuing a temporary block on the ban 'even for a short period' would 'deny the public important protections which the order is intended to confer'. He said: 'In my judgment, some of the consequences feared by the claimant and others who have given evidence are overstated.' He continued: 'It will remain lawful for the claimant and other persons who were members of Palestine Action prior to proscription to continue to express their opposition to Israel's actions in Gaza and elsewhere, including by drawing attention to what they regard as Israel's genocide and other serious violations of international law. 'They will remain legally entitled to do so in private conversations, in print, on social media and at protests.' He added: 'It follows that it is hyperbole to talk of the claimant or others being "gagged" in this respect, as the claimant has alleged. 'They could not incur criminal liability based on their past association with a group which was not proscribed at the time. 'That said, there is no doubt that there will be serious consequences if the order comes into effect immediately and interim relief is refused.' In a statement issued following the judgement, the co-founder said the public were being left 'in the dark about their rights to free speech'. She said the 'We are seeking an urgent appeal to try to prevent a dystopian nightmare of the Government's making which would see thousands of people across Britain wake up tomorrow to find they had been criminalised overnight for supporting a domestic protest group which sprays red paint on warplanes and disrupts Israel's largest weapons manufacturer to disrupt the flow of arms to Israel's genocidal war machine. 'We will not stop fighting to defend fundamental rights to free speech and protest in our country and to stand up for the rights of the Palestinian people. 'The Home Secretary is rushing through the implementation of the proscription at midnight tonight despite the fact that our legal challenge is ongoing and that she has been completely unclear about how it will be enforced, leaving the public in the dark about their rights to free speech and expression after midnight tonight when this proscription comes into effect.' She went on to say: 'Hundreds of thousands of people across the country have expressed support for Palestine Action by joining our mailing list, following and sharing our social media content and signing petitions, and many, including iconic figures like Sally Rooney, say they will continue to declare 'we are all Palestine Action' and speak out against this preposterous proscription, demonstrating how utterly unworkable it will be. 'As Justice Chamberlain acknowledged in court today, it is unclear what expressions of support could lead to arrest and potential prosecution with sentences of up to 14 years in prison. 'We would only have only a few hours to disband our entire organisation and dismantle all of our infrastructure, including closing bank accounts and deleting our mailing list and social media platforms. 'This is despite the fact that we have not had the opportunity to defend our fundamental rights in court and challenge this unlawful, authoritarian and utterly absurd proscription. 'If we ultimately succeed in overturning the proscription, we would have to start from scratch, having lost everything we have painstakingly built over five years.' Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, told the High Court there was an 'insuperable hurdle' in the bid to temporarily block the ban of Palestine Action. The barrister also said that if a temporary block was granted, it would be a 'serious disfigurement of the statutory regime'. He said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission, a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Friday's hearing comes after an estimated £7million worth of damage was caused to two Voyager planes at RAF Brize Norton on June 20, in an action claimed by Palestine Action. Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, Jony Cink, 24, Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 36, and Lewis Chiaramello, 22, are accused of conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Kingdom, and conspiracy to commit criminal damage. They were remanded into custody after appearing at Westminster Magistrates' Court and will appear at the Old Bailey on July 18. The hearing before Mr Justice Chamberlain will conclude later on Friday, with the High Court judge expected to give his decision at the end of the hearing. A further hearing to decide whether Ms Ammori will be given the green light to challenge the decision to ban Palestine Action is expected to be heard later this month. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes was 'disgraceful' and that the group had a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage'.
