Arutz Sheva / Israel National News, on Gaza, 26 October 2026

8.7out of 10Severe

in Gaza strikes

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.5 findings

The IDF and ISA on Monday announced the elimination of a commander in Hamas’ military intelligence apparatus and an engineering commander in Hamas’ military wing Two days ago, on Saturday, , a commander in Hamas’ military intelligence apparatus. IDF spokesperson In a separate strike on Thursday, the IDF , engineering commander in the Hamas’ military wing.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article reports Israeli strikes in Gaza announced on Monday but never says that Israeli attacks killed five Palestinians, including a seven-year-old girl, that same day. Without it, a reader is left with the army's picture of precise strikes on commanders only.

How we know

"Throughout the war, and particularly in recent times, these terrorists advanced attacks against IDF troops and Israeli civilians and operated to restore the military capabilities of the Hamas terrorist organization, ," the IDF stressed, adding that the terrorists "were eliminated in an aerial strike to remove the threat they posed." "Prior to the strikes, ."

Read the original article on israelnationalnews.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (5)

Arutz Sheva reports two killings in its own voice as "eliminations" and never uses the word killed. It calls both dead men terrorists on the word of Israeli occupation forces alone, and its headline drops the attribution the body gives. It ends on the army's unverified claim that civilian harm was mitigated, with nothing set against it.

  1. Writes the death out

    Severe

    “IDF eliminates”

    Why this matters
    The headline uses "eliminates" for two killings by Israeli occupation forces.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes in a clean, technical removal rather than two men killed by airstrikes.
    The context
    Two men were killed in air strikes. The Times of Israel, reporting the same announcement, writes that the military "had killed two commanders". The word killed appears nowhere in this article.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “the IDF struck in Gaza City and eliminated”

    Why this matters
    In the outlet's own voice, "eliminated" describes the killing of Mohammed Halawa in a Gaza City strike.
    The impression it gives
    A reader learns of a strike and an elimination, never of a man killed.
    The context
    The same coverage says the strike on Saturday in Gaza City "killed Mohammed Halawa".

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “struck and eliminated”

    Why this matters
    The outlet again uses "eliminated" in its own voice, this time for Thursday's strike on Ahmed Zahir Fuad Abu-Odeh.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes a second death as an operational outcome rather than a killing.
    The context
    Other coverage of the same strike says plainly that it "killed Ahmed Zahir Fuad Abu-Odeh".

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Israeli occupation forces said they killed two men they identified as Hamas commanders in air strikes on Thursday and Saturday.

  2. Labels people on one side's word

    Severe

    “terrorist Mohammed Halawa”

    Why this matters
    The outlet calls Mohammed Halawa a "terrorist" in its own voice, outside any quotation.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes it as established fact that the dead man was a terrorist.
    The context
    The only basis the article gives is the army's own statement. Nothing in the piece independently supports the label, and even the army's account is reported elsewhere as what the military "said".

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “the terrorist Ahmed Zahir Fuad Abu-Odeh”

    Why this matters
    The outlet labels the second dead man a "terrorist" in its own voice.
    The impression it gives
    A reader accepts that his killing was the killing of a terrorist, settled and beyond question.
    The context
    The article's only source for who he was is the military's claim, which it quotes in S3 and S4. It offers no independent basis.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“the IDF stressed”

    Show it in the article

    “The eliminated Hamas terrorists”

    Why this matters
    The caption line groups both dead men as "terrorists" and as "eliminated", with no attribution.
    The impression it gives
    A reader sees the label fixed on both men before any claim is attributed.
    The context
    The label comes only from the Israeli army's announcement. The article gives no other source.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“The IDF and ISA on Monday announced”

    Show it in the article

  3. Headline goes beyond the article

    Minor

    “IDF eliminates two senior Hamas commanders”

    Why this matters
    The headline states as fact that the two dead men were senior Hamas commanders, with no attribution.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes the men's identity and rank as established.
    The context
    The body presents this as something the army and the ISA "announced". The headline drops that attribution and turns a military claim into a fact.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“The IDF and ISA on Monday announced the elimination”

    Show it in the article

  4. Gives a contested claim the last word

    Minor

    “measures were taken to mitigate harm to civilians, including the use of precision munitions and aerial surveillance”

    Why this matters
    The article ends on the army's claim that it protected civilians and adds nothing after it.
    The impression it gives
    A reader leaves believing Israeli strikes in Gaza are precise and spare civilians.
    The context
    Same-day coverage reports Israeli attacks killing five Palestinians, including a seven-year-old girl, while the army said it was "unaware" of activity in al-Mawasi. Civil defence reported 13 killed in 24 hours.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “in systematic violation of the ceasefire”

    Why this matters
    The quoted charge that the dead men violated the ceasefire is the article's only mention of the ceasefire, and nothing is set against it.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes it that only Hamas is breaking the ceasefire.
    The context
    The same day's coverage reports Israeli fire and airstrikes killing 13 people and wounding about 60 in 24 hours. The article reports none of the killing done by Israeli occupation forces during the ceasefire.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  5. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article reports Israeli strikes in Gaza announced on Monday but never says that Israeli attacks killed five Palestinians, including a seven-year-old girl, that same day. Without it, a reader is left with the army's picture of precise strikes on commanders only.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Arutz Sheva / Israel National News

Everything we scored from Arutz Sheva / Israel National News