IDF kills Hamas commandos involved in Alexander Dancyg's October 7 kidnapping

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.5 findings

The IDF announced that it had eliminated three members of Hamas' elite Nukhba force in separate airstrikes across the Gaza Strip last week, including an operative accused of participating in the October 7, 2023, abductions of Israeli civilians. Ahmed Muhammad Ahmed Baraka was eliminated Thursday in an airstrike in southern Gaza, according to the IDF. The military identified Baraka as a member of Hamas' Nukhba force, the elite unit that played a central role in the October 7 attacks on southern Israel.

According to the IDF, Baraka was among the Hamas terrorists who infiltrated Kibbutz Nir Oz, one of the communities hardest hit in the attack, and participated in the kidnapping of several Israeli civilians, including Alexander Dancyg, a Holocaust educator who was abducted from his home and later died in Hamas captivity. The IDF said Baraka also helped hold several Israeli hostages in southern Gaza during the war, including Nimrod Cohen, an Israeli soldier abducted on October 7.

In a separate airstrike Friday in northern Gaza, Israeli forces eliminated two other Hamas operatives: Omar Awadallah, identified as a Nukhba platoon commander, and Moataz Mahmoud Mohammed Al-Nimr, also a member of the elite force. The IDF said all three men had been involved in planning attacks against Israeli troops and civilians, particularly in recent days, while working to rebuild Hamas' military capabilities. The army described their activities as violations of the ceasefire agreement and said the strikes were intended to eliminate threats posed by the operatives.

Before carrying out the strikes, the IDF took measures to minimize harm to civilians, including the use of precision munitions and aerial surveillance. Israeli forces remain deployed in parts of Gaza under the terms of the ceasefire agreement. The IDF said its troops would continue operations against what it considers security threats.

Read the original article on ynetnews.com

What we found (5)

Ynet reports the killing of three Palestinian men in Israeli airstrikes during the ceasefire almost entirely on the IOF's word. It writes the killings as "eliminated", labels two of the dead as Hamas operatives in its own voice, and states the army's claim that it took care to spare civilians as fact. Its headline ties all the dead to Alexander Dancyg's kidnapping when the body links only one man to it, and only according to the IOF.

Labels people on one side's word
Severe
“two other Hamas operatives”
Why this matters
In its own voice, Ynet calls the two men killed on Friday "Hamas operatives". The army's claim becomes the outlet's description of them.
The impression it gives
A reader takes it as fact that the two dead men were Hamas fighters.
The context
The only basis the article gives is the IOF. Every identification is the military's: it "identified" Baraka, and "the IDF said" what all three men did. No independent source, family or Palestinian account appears.
How we know
- Elsewhere in the article“The IDF said all three men”
- Elsewhere in the article“The military identified Baraka as”
Show it in the article
Written straight
In a separate strike on Friday in northern Gaza, Israeli forces killed Omar Awadallah and Moataz Mahmoud Mohammed Al-Nimr, whom the IOF described as members of Hamas' Nukhba force.
Headline goes beyond the article
Serious
“IDF kills Hamas commandos involved in Alexander Dancyg's October 7 kidnapping”
Why this matters
The headline says that "Hamas commandos", plural, were "involved in Alexander Dancyg's October 7 kidnapping". It states this as fact, with no attribution.
The impression it gives
A reader believes it is established that all the men killed took part in kidnapping Dancyg.
The context
The body links only one man, Baraka, to the kidnapping, and only on the IOF's word. It calls him "an operative accused of participating". The two men killed on Friday are not linked to Dancyg at all.
How we know
- Elsewhere in the article“including an operative accused of participating”
- Elsewhere in the article“According to the IDF, Baraka was among”
Show it in the article
Written straight
Israeli strikes kill three in Gaza; IOF says one took part in Alexander Dancyg's October 7 kidnapping.
Writes the death out
Serious
“Israeli forces eliminated two other Hamas operatives”
Why this matters
In its own voice, Ynet says Israeli forces "eliminated" two men. The word turns a killing into the removal of an object.
The impression it gives
A reader takes the deaths as a technical clearing of a target, not as two people killed by an airstrike.
The context
Two men were killed in an Israeli airstrike in northern Gaza. Ynet's own headline uses the word "kills", so the outlet had the plain word and chose not to use it here.
How we know
- In the headline“IDF kills Hamas commandos”
Show it in the article
“was eliminated Thursday in an airstrike in southern Gaza”
Why this matters
The passive "was eliminated" removes both the killing and the killer from the sentence. The IOF appears only as a source at the end.
The impression it gives
A reader reads of a man being removed, not of the IOF killing him with a bomb.
The context
Baraka was killed by an Israeli airstrike, as the article's own headline says.
How we know
- In the headline“IDF kills Hamas commandos”
Show it in the article
“had eliminated three members of Hamas' elite Nukhba force”
Why this matters
The opening sentence repeats the army's word "eliminated" without quotation marks. It sets the euphemism as the article's term for three deaths.
The impression it gives
From the first line, a reader meets the killings in the army's sanitised language rather than as deaths.
The context
Three people were killed in Israeli airstrikes during a ceasefire.
How we know
- In the headline“IDF kills Hamas commandos”
Show it in the article
Written straight
Israeli airstrikes killed three men in Gaza last week, the IOF said, including one it accuses of taking part in the October 7 abductions.
States one side's claim as fact
Serious
“Before carrying out the strikes, the IDF took measures to minimize harm to civilians, including the use of precision munitions and aerial surveillance.”
Why this matters
Ynet states the army's claim that it minimised harm to civilians in its own voice, with no "the IDF said".
The impression it gives
A reader takes it as established that the strikes were carried out with care and that no civilians were harmed.
The context
This is the IOF's account of its own conduct. The article gives no evidence for it and no independent account of who else was hurt. The sentences around it attribute the army's claims, but this one does not.
How we know
- Elsewhere in the article“The army described their activities as”
Show it in the article
Written straight
The IOF said it took measures to minimise harm to civilians, including precision munitions and aerial surveillance; the article has no independent account of the strikes' effects.
One side gets the space
Minor
“The IDF said all three men had been involved in planning attacks against Israeli troops and civilians”
Why this matters
Every claim in the article comes from the IOF: who the men were, what they planned, that the ceasefire was violated, and why they were killed.
The impression it gives
A reader takes the army's case for killing three men during a ceasefire as the whole story.
The context
No Palestinian voice, family member or independent source appears anywhere in the article, and the army has the last word in S11.
How we know
- Elsewhere in the article“The IDF said its troops would continue”
Show it in the article

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Ynet News (English)

Everything we scored from Ynet News (English)

IDF kills Hamas commandos involved in Alexander Dancyg's October 7 kidnapping

Labels people on one side's word

Headline goes beyond the article

Writes the death out

States one side's claim as fact

One side gets the space

More from Ynet News (English)