Times of Israel, on Gaza, 12 November 2026

7.3out of 10Serious

in strike on south Gaza hospital;

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.8 findingsSee them marked on timesofisrael.com

IDF targets top Hamas commander in strike on south Gaza hospital; 6 said killed

at Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis; military says Hamas brigade commander, other operatives used location as HQ and arms depot

on a hospital in southern Gaza overnight targeted a Hamas brigade commander, the military said Thursday morning, as medics in the Strip reported six killed, including a surgeon, and at least 20 wounded in the attack.

According to the Israel Defense Forces and Shin Bet security agency, the strike shortly after midnight on the Nasser Hospital complex in Khan Younis targeted Muhammad Abu Ismail, the commander of , “along with additional terrorists who were hiding” at the medical center.

The Hamas operatives were targeted to “remove a threat, as they were advancing terror plots against Israeli civilians and IDF troops, after Hamas established a presence on the hospital grounds and turned it into a headquarters for military and terror activities against IDF troops and the State of Israel,” the joint statement said.

Though hospitals are protected sites under international law, they can lose that protection if used for military purposes.

Abu Ismail’s fate remained unclear, and the military and Shin Bet said they were still reviewing the results of the overnight strike. The army also said it took measures to reduce harm to civilians in the strike.

Mahmoud Basal, the spokesperson for Gaza’s , said the Israeli airstrike hit the surgery department of the hospital, causing extensive damage and killing a doctor alongside several other people.

Medics identified the dead surgeon as Rezik Abushira.

Footage from inside the hospital showed extensive damage, with rubble and furniture strewn across rooms and wires dangling from damaged ceilings.

People carried injured patients on stretchers through debris-covered corridors, while others helped the wounded walk through the wreckage. Several bodies were also seen being carried away as firefighters worked outside.

The Israeli military took seven hours to issue its first comment on the overnight strike. News of the attack on the medical center was widely reported by international media throughout the night, while the IDF remained silent.

Only at 7 a.m. did the military issue its first comment on the strike, with an updated statement on the target at 10 a.m.

The IDF Spokespersons’ Unit often waits for the results of a strike before issuing a comment, although it remains unclear why the military did not at least provide some initial response on the attack that targeted a medical center.

In a statement, the IDF and Shin Bet said that the targeted Hamas brigade commander “was responsible for managing the activities of the brigade’s terrorists and directing them in advancing and carrying out terror plots against IDF troops and Israeli civilians.”

The IDF and Shin Bet said Abu Ismail was also responsible for holding numerous hostages in captivity during the war.

His predecessor was killed by Israel in September.

The military said it took measures to reduce harm to civilians in the strike, including by issuing “advance warnings” to the population and by using “precision munitions and aerial surveillance.”

The IDF and Shin Bet said that Hamas had stored weapons inside the hospital complex, conducted “interrogations and torture,” operated command centers from the compound, and used the medical center’s facilities as surveillance posts and shelters for operatives, all of which they say “constitutes a blatant violation of international law and cynical exploitation of civilian infrastructure.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article never says that the military's allegations about Hamas use of Nasser Hospital could not be independently verified, as other coverage of the same strike reported. Without it a reader takes the military's list of uses as established.

How we know

“The IDF and Shin Bet view Hamas’s cynical use of civilian and medical infrastructure for military purposes, while endangering the lives of patients, medical staff, and civilians, gravely,” the statement added.

A Hamas spokesperson condemned the strike as a “full-fledged war crime.”

.

A top Hamas commander was killed in an Israeli strike at Nasser Hospital last year, and Israeli hostages have said they were held at the medical center in Khan Younis.

Another strike on Nasser Hospital last year killed 22 people, including five journalists. The military has claimed that among the victims were six Hamas operatives, including one who took part in the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led massacre in southern Israel.

Earlier this year, the aid group Doctors Without Borders said it had suspended noncritical medical activities at Nasser Hospital due to the presence of armed men at the medical facility. And last year, a doctor who also served as a spokesperson for Nasser Hospital hinted that he had been threatened by Palestinian Islamic Jihad due to his refusal to let the terror group’s operatives enter and use the hospital.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article cites MSF's suspension at Nasser Hospital but not that MSF resumed work there two months later. A reader may think MSF still stays away.

How we know

Israel in recent months has increasingly targeted operatives in Gaza, including , saying they posed a threat to Israeli forces.

According to the military, many of the recent strikes have focused on Hamas operatives involved in building up the terror group’s force and civil control mechanisms in the Strip.

Implementation of US President Donald Trump’s peace plan for Gaza has stalled, with Hamas refusing to disarm and Israel refusing to withdraw from any part of Gaza until that condition is met.

The Times of Israel Community.

Read the original article on timesofisrael.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (8)

The Times of Israel puts the military's claim that it targeted a Hamas commander in its headline as fact, while the six dead, including a named surgeon, are only "said" to have been killed. It tags Gaza's civil defence as Hamas-run, calls the strike precise in its own voice, and states as fact that Israel has offered evidence of hospitals being used as bases, without saying that other reporting found these allegations could not be verified.

  1. States one side's claim as fact

    Serious

    “Israel has repeatedly offered evidence of the regular use of Gazan medical facilities by Palestinian terror groups as bases of operations due to their protected status”

    Why this matters
    In its own voice the outlet says Israel has "offered evidence" of "regular use" of medical facilities. It places this straight after the Hamas war crime charge.
    The impression it gives
    That the military's case for striking the hospital is proven and the war crime charge is answered.
    The context
    Other coverage of this strike says the allegations about Hamas activity inside the hospital could not be independently verified. The outlet gives the reader no such qualification.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Israel says Palestinian armed groups regularly use Gaza's medical facilities as bases; these allegations about Nasser Hospital could not be independently verified.

  2. Labels people on one side's word

    Serious

    “numerous terrorists who took part in the October 7 assault”

    Why this matters
    In its own voice the outlet calls people Israel has targeted in recent months "terrorists".
    The impression it gives
    That those killed in these strikes are established attackers.
    The context
    The article's only basis is the military's account of who it targeted. No independent source is given.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“According to the military, many of the recent strikes”

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Israel has in recent months increasingly struck people in Gaza it says are operatives, including some it says took part in the October 7 attack.

  3. Headline goes beyond the article

    Minor

    “IDF targets top Hamas commander”

    Why this matters
    The headline states "IDF targets top Hamas commander" as fact, with no attribution.
    The impression it gives
    That a Hamas commander was established to be at the hospital and was the target, as a settled fact.
    The context
    The body gives this only as the military's account, and the commander's fate is unknown. The claim needs attribution in the headline.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“targeted a Hamas brigade commander, the military said Thursday morning”
    • Elsewhere in the article“the military and Shin Bet said they were still reviewing”

    Show it in the article

    “6 said killed”

    Why this matters
    The words "6 said killed" hedge the deaths and name no killer. This sits beside the military's unattributed claim in the same headline.
    The impression it gives
    That the six deaths are less certain than the military's claim about its target, and the headline does not say Israel killed them.
    The context
    The article reports an Israeli airstrike that killed a doctor, names the surgeon, and describes bodies being carried away. Only the dead get a hedge in the headline.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“Medics identified the dead surgeon as Rezik Abushira.”
    • Elsewhere in the article“Several bodies were also seen being carried away”

    Show it in the article

  4. Doubts one side's dead and not the other's

    Minor

    “Hamas civil defense says surgeon among dead”

    Why this matters
    In its own voice the outlet calls Gaza's civil defence "Hamas civil defense" when it gives the death of the surgeon.
    The impression it gives
    That the report of a dead surgeon comes from Hamas and should be discounted.
    The context
    Other coverage of the same strike names the body as Gaza's Civil Defence agency. The Israeli military's statements in the same article carry no matching credibility tag.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    “Hamas-run Civil Defense agency”

    Why this matters
    The outlet attaches "Hamas-run" to the civilian rescue service whose spokesperson reports the killing of a doctor.
    The impression it gives
    That the account of the strike hitting the surgery department is a partisan claim.
    The context
    The article's own footage description matches the damage the civil defence reported. The "Hamas-run" tag adds doubt to the Palestinian account alone.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  5. States one side's claim as fact

    Minor

    “An Israeli precision strike”

    Why this matters
    The outlet calls the attack a "precision strike" in its own voice.
    The impression it gives
    That the strike was narrow and controlled.
    The context
    "Precision" is the military's own description of its munitions. The article itself reports the strike hit the surgery department, killed a surgeon and others, and left patients carried through wreckage.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“The military said it took measures to reduce harm to civilians in the strike”
    • Elsewhere in the article“People carried injured patients on stretchers through debris-covered corridors”

    Show it in the article

  6. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “the terror group’s Khan Younis Brigade”

    Why this matters
    The outlet uses "terror group" in its own narration, inside a sentence otherwise attributed to the military.
    The impression it gives
    That the strike's target is beyond question a legitimate one.
    The context
    The label repeats the military statement's language, which the article quotes separately.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“the joint statement said”

    Show it in the article

  7. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article never says that the military's allegations about Hamas use of Nasser Hospital could not be independently verified, as other coverage of the same strike reported. Without it a reader takes the military's list of uses as established.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

  8. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article cites MSF's suspension at Nasser Hospital but not that MSF resumed work there two months later. A reader may think MSF still stays away.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Times of Israel

  1. 12 NovIDF says overnight strike on Gaza hospital targeted top Hamas ...6.0
  2. 12 NovIsraeli strike on southern Gaza hospital kills 6, Hamas authorities say3.0
  3. 12 NovOne said killed, several wounded in Israeli strike on vehicle outside Gaza’s Shifa Hospital0.0
  4. 12 NovIsrael confirms target of Gaza hospital complex strike was ...6.0
  5. 12 NovIDF took 7 hours to issue first comment after widely reported deadly strike on Gaza hospital overnight3.0

Everything we scored from Times of Israel

See how 80 outlets covered this story