The same article refers to Jenin's "heroic resistance" and hails how the city "continues to confront the occupation and storm it with bullets."
Here are some more pictures of the "martyrs."
And another...
One more:
But Quds News isn't telling its readers that Hamas has admitted the four took part in "heroic armed clashes", nor the fact that it described their city as "storming [Israel] with bullets".
And it certainly isn't showing any of those pictures.
This is important because Quds News is seen by leading anti-Israel smear activists such as Ali Abunimah of the Electronic Intifada.
Abunimah shared the Quds News tweet not once, but twice.
It's also been shared by academics and policy analysts influential in anti-Israel circles, such as Dr. Yara Hawari, of Al-Shabaka.
And here's another academic, this time in America, Shabana Mir.
So the half-truth has gone from Hamas-affiliated media outlet to anti-Israel activists, Palestinian academics and now to Muslim American academics.
This is how the Hamas narrative reaches American audiences.
Update: And this video of one of the four also came to light yesterday.
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.
1/ The New York Times doesn’t use the phrase “ethnic cleansing” in its West Bank project.
It doesn't have to.
Selective imagery, distorted data & erased Palestinian terrorism lead to one conclusion: Israel is driving Palestinians off their land.
That claim is false. 🧵⬇️
2/ The article presents a stark moral narrative: “Armed Israeli settlers, often protected by soldiers, harass and attack Palestinian villagers daily, with the undisguised goal of driving them out.”
It describes masked extremists, rampant violence, state backing, and impunity.
It is frightening. It is also profoundly misleading.
3/ This framing rests on three pillars:
• Inflated & distorted violence statistics
• Visual implication without context
• The near-total erasure of Palestinian terrorism
Remove those pillars – and the narrative collapses.