Ynet News (English), on Gaza, 25 October 2026

Ynet tells this story entirely in the Israeli military's words, calling four Palestinian men it reports as killed "terrorists" in its own voice with nothing but IOF statements behind the label. The headline states as established fact the funding claim the article's own first sentence calls an accusation, and the article never tells its reader that the strikes happened during a ceasefire, a point the Israeli military itself raised and other outlets reported.

9.4

Severe

out of 10

What we found

  1. Labels people on one side's word

    Severe

    “two terrorists”

    What the words do
    The headline brands the two dead men terrorists in Ynet's own voice.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That it is established the men killed were terrorists.
    What is actually the case
    The only basis given anywhere in the article is the Israeli military's own announcement, which the article itself describes as an accusation.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“accusing them of transferring millions of shekels”

    Show it in the article

    “it had killed two terrorists”

    What the words do
    Repeats the label in the outlet's own narration of the killing.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That Ynet has itself established the status of the men, not merely relayed the army's claim.
    What is actually the case
    The same sentence shows the characterisation comes from the IOF announcement; no independent basis is offered.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“According to the IDF, both men”

    Show it in the article

    “The first terrorist”

    What the words do
    Names a killed man and attaches the label directly to him in Ynet's voice, with no attribution in the sentence.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That Alaa Ibrahim Nimer Arshi's identity as a terrorist is a matter of record.
    What is actually the case
    Everything about him in this article comes from the military's statement, as the following coverage of the same announcement also shows.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “the deaths of two additional terrorists”

    What the words do
    Extends the label to two further killed men in a line Ynet writes itself.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That four men confirmed as terrorists were killed.
    What is actually the case
    The same sentence sources the deaths to an IOF statement, and the article offers no check on who the men were.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“whom the military identified as a member”

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Israeli occupation forces said they killed two men in airstrikes in Gaza City and Nuseirat last week, naming them as Alaa Ibrahim Nimer Arshi and Karam Riyad Hassan Abu Butaihan and accusing them of moving money to Hamas. The claims about the men have not been independently verified.

  2. Headline goes beyond the article

    Serious

    “who funneled millions from Iran and Turkey to Hamas”

    What the words do
    States the funding claim as settled fact and drops the attribution the body gives it.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That it is established the two men moved millions from Iran and Turkey to Hamas.
    What is actually the case
    The body attributes this to the Israeli military twice, once as an accusation and once as "According to the IDF".

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“accusing them of transferring millions of shekels”
    • Elsewhere in the article“According to the IDF, both men played a role”

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    IOF says it killed two men it accuses of moving millions from Iran and Turkey to Hamas.

  3. States one side's claim as fact

    Serious

    “destroying a weapons depot used by Hamas to store military equipment”

    What the words do
    Writes the military's description of the bombed building as fact in Ynet's own voice.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That what was destroyed was confirmed to be a Hamas weapons store.
    What is actually the case
    The next sentence shows the account of the contents comes from the military, and no independent source for the building's use is given anywhere in the article.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“according to the military”

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    The IOF and Shin Bet said they struck a building in central Gaza that they described as a Hamas weapons depot containing rifles, a launcher and rockets.

  4. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Serious

    What is missing

    The article never tells its reader that a ceasefire was in force when these airstrikes were carried out. Other reports of the same announcement say the Israeli security agencies themselves framed the men's alleged activity as a ceasefire violation. Without this a reader believes these strikes happened in open warfare rather than during a declared ceasefire.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

  5. One side gets the space

    Minor

    “The announcement follows an IDF statement last week confirming the deaths”

    What the words do
    Builds the article out of successive military announcements with no other voice present.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That the military's account is the whole account.
    What is actually the case
    No Palestinian source, medic, family member or health authority appears anywhere in the article, and nothing is said about anyone else hit in the strikes.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“According to the IDF, both men”

    Show it in the article

Every underline is part of a finding. Press one to see why.

IDF kills

The IDF announced Sunday that in separate airstrikes in the Gaza Strip last week, accusing them of transferring millions of shekels from Iran and Turkey to Hamas' military wing throughout the war. According to the military, the funds were used to help the terrorist organization rebuild its military capabilities and prepare attacks against Israeli soldiers and civilians. , Alaa Ibrahim Nimer Arshi, a cell commander in Hamas' military wing, was killed in an airstrike in the Gaza City area. The second, Karam Riyad Hassan Abu Butaihan, a Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorist who helped transfer money to Hamas, was killed in the Nuseirat area in central Gaza. According to the IDF, both men played a role in channeling funds to Hamas throughout the war, including money originating from Iran and Turkey. The military said the financial transfers had recently supported Hamas' efforts to restore its military infrastructure and advance attacks against Israeli forces and civilians. In a separate operation last week, the IDF and Shin Bet security agency carried out an airstrike in central Gaza, . The facility contained Kalashnikov rifles, a launcher and rockets, according to the military. Additional terrorists killed in Gaza strikes in separate strikes. One was Akram Bassam Shaaban Yassin, a senior member of Hamas' General Security apparatus in the Gaza Strip. The other was Tamer Mohammed Ibrahim al-Sabbagh, whom the military identified as a member of the terrorist cell responsible for abducting and murdering German-Israeli citizen Shani Louk during the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on Israel.

Read the original article on ynetnews.com (opens in a new tab)

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Ynet News (English)

Everything we scored from Ynet News (English)