Readers of this @AP article on Pompeo's arrival in Israel are not fully informed about the situation in Gaza:
1. Incendiary balloons are not simply a bid to pressure Israel to ease the blockade but also part of a longstanding campaign of attacks on Israeli civilian and property.
2. The blockade is maintained by Israel and Egypt together. This should be made clear to readers. While Israel controls land access from two sides and sea access from a third, any blockade depends on all four sides being tightly controlled.
3. If the issue really was purely the blockade, then Egypt would come under attack too. That Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza are targeting Israel alone gives the lie to that theory.
Readers deserve to know.
4. Possibly most important of all, saying that Hamas "took control" of Gaza in 2007 whitewashes what actually happened: It staged a bloody coup, throwing Fatah members of buildings to their death, and with both sides killing innocents and combatants alike until Hamas prevailed.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/10 🧵
Did you know the recent Israel-NGO framework story is being covered very differently depending on the outlet?
Most headlines focus on "restrictions" and "limits on criticism."
But what's the actual policy trying to achieve – and why do some groups comply while others don't? Let's break down the facts calmly.
2/10
In late 2025, Israel rolled out a new registration/vetting system for humanitarian orgs in Gaza & West Bank.
Goal (per official statements): Prevent wartime infiltration by militants into aid groups.
Most organizations signed on quickly. A smaller number raised concerns.
Question: What would you consider reasonable safeguards in active conflict zones?
3/10
Israel reports ~85%+ compliance rate – meaning the vast majority of NGOs met the criteria without issue.
The rules target specific red flags like:
- Documented support for armed groups
- Denial of documented atrocities (e.g., Oct 7)
- Active promotion of boycotts/lawfare against Israel
- Coordination with designated enemy orgs
Not blanket "no criticism" – but focused security checks.
1/ It’s awards season… and while Hollywood hands out trophies for acting, we’re honoring the people who pretended to do journalism. Presenting: Dishonest Reporter of the Year 2025.
Let's find out the winners 👇
2/ 🏆 Winner: The BBC
No outlet worked harder this year to prove that “publicly funded” doesn’t mean “publicly accountable.” Truly a masterclass in bias, blunders & backpedaling. honestreporting.com/exposed-leaked…
3/ Remember that Gaza documentary narrated by… a Hamas minister’s teenage son? The one whose mom got paid? Yeah — that really happened. BBC: Bold. Brave. Or just… 🤦♂️
1/ Since Oct. 7, 2023, major media outlets have repeatedly reported casualty figures from the Hamas-run Ministry of Health (MoH) in Gaza as if they were independently verified facts -- with little to no skepticism.
Let's break down the distorted narratives. 🧵
2/ Headlines citing MoH death tolls were widely amplified without attribution to Hamas, allowing a terrorist org’s figures to become the dominant narrative in global reporting.
3/ This has resulted in repeated blood libels in media coverage -- blaming Israel for high civilian death tolls without critically examining the reliability of the source data.
1/ 🌍Are Israeli women living in a dystopian reality where, year by year, they are being stripped of their most basic rights?
No, because the data and imagery used by @CNN to support that narrative distort reality and mislead audiences. 🧵
2/ 📸 The cover image features a “Handmaid’s Tale”-style protest from nearly three years ago against legal reforms -- not a current reflection of women’s rights in Israel. Context matters.
3/ 📊 CNN relies on the Women Peace & Security Index (WPS Index) without questioning its methodology. The index blends unrelated indicators (e.g., cellphone use, conflict exposure), not a pure gender-rights measure.