J retweeted
The predicted surge in births in Gaza continues.
According to Gaza Ministry of Health, there were 6,177 births in August and about 6,400 births in September. As usual, the numbers are revised up from the Ministry of Interior preliminary numbers (5,493 / 5,815 for Aug/Sep). July numbers also appear to have been revised up to 5,690.
The numbers align very well with the previously predicted number of births from the number of miscarriages 6 months prior, as discussed in the linked posts, confirming again that the apparently high number of miscarriages during spring was due to a very high number of new pregnancies.
Even assuming 2025-levels of non-war deaths, 6,400 births in September annualized is well over 3% natural population growth. This means Gaza is currently among the nations/subnational areas with the highest population growths in the world.
The birth numbers will likely be even higher in the next months.
xitter.cf/EirikSchr/status/20966…
Official numbers now confirm the predicted surge in births in Gaza.
Gaza Ministry of Health reports 5,119 births in July. Preliminary number for August (published by Ministry of Interior) is 5,493 births. The MoI number is always revised upwards by 8-20%, so August number will certainly increase to 6,000-6,500.
These numbers align very well with the simple predictions in the linked post, which is just 10.4 times the number of miscarriages 6 months prior, see figure. August number is prelim MoI number increased by 13% (the mean difference between prelim MoI number and final MoH number).
It is now indisputably proven that the supposedly high miscarriage rate during the spring is simply due to a surge of new pregnancies after the ceasefire and a failure to take into account the time lag between miscarriages and births.
The number of births in Gaza is already above the peacetime normal (fewer than 5,000 births/month), and will increase even further this autumn. MoH also reports 931 miscarriages in July, suggesting births may even approach 10,000/month in January - twice the peacetime normal.
xitter.cf/EirikSchr/status/20744…
J retweeted
📈How many people died in comparison to births in Gaza between October 2023 and the end of September 2026?
This data is presented in the graph below, with October 2025 ceasefire numbers highlighted.
1. Violent deaths:
This is based 100% on the official Gaza MoH number, directly from their official lists up to September 2026. This includes all terrorists killed in Gaza, the terrorists killed inside Israel on 7 October, those killed by Palestinian internal violence, collaborators and civilians. This violent death number also includes deaths from all accidents that has happened in Gaza during the war, as seen in the latest newly released Gaza MoH 2025 year report. Until Oct 2025 71,252 violent deaths took place and until the end of Sep 2026 the number grew to 73,463.
2. Total births:
This is based on UN birth numbers for 2023 and 2024 and exact monthly birth numbers from 2025 and 2026. UN reported 60,000 births from Oct 2023 to the end of Sep 2024, which gives 5,833 births per month on average across the full 12 months. Then there were exactly 50,224 births during 2025 and during the first nine months of 2026 there has been exactly 35,354 births reported by Gaza MoH. There is not any exact number of births for Oct-Dec 2024 but by looking at pre-war birth numbers and the numbers from 2025 it is clear that these months are historically the ones with highest birth rates during the year, while Feb-May are the lowest (because of the summer heat 9 months earlier).
In December 2024 UN reported that 4,000 births were expected to happen in January 2025 and the actual birth number then became 3,764. This shows that the birth rates were still high. I have therefore estimated 4,000 births per month during Oct-Dec 2024, in comparison to the 5,000/month from Oct 2023 to Sep 2024, the 4,185/month that took place in 2025, the 3,928/month so far in 2026 and the Gaza MoH pre-war average of 4,675 births/month between 2018-2022. The total number of births until Oct 2025 were 105,121 and until the end of Sep 2026 157,578.
3. Natural Deaths:
Estimated based on numbers from Gaza MoH recent report covering 2025. In this Gaza MoH reported a total of 24,650 deaths. This number can then be compared to the 19,420 deaths on Gaza MoH's official lists during 2025 and 18,870 violent death in their 2025 report, were 1,584 deaths actually was accidents. There were a total of 5,780 non-violent deaths during 2025 and those has been used as a baseline to count an approximate average non-violent deaths for the rest of the period (5,780 / 12 = 481 per month and 481 x 36 months = 17,316 natural deaths). It is very likely that large parts of the natural deaths are included in the death toll, but these calculations are made with the assumption that they are not.
4. Population change:
This is calculated 100% on all of the other data and does not account for the fact that many natural deaths, people who have died in other wars, people who are still alive, and similar, all has been found in the official death lists from Gaza MoH. However this is the best estimation we can do on the official numbers out there, even though they are inflated in unknown scale. We see here that the population has grew with 22,325 during the war and in until today 66,799 more children were born than people died. With that said, there is also other data that shows that births could be much higher than my moderate estimations here.
WHO vaccinated 603,000 children under 10 years old between Sep 2024 and Feb 2025. Based on pre-war birth numbers from 2015-2022 we can see around 457,133 births took place in these eight years. That show us that around 146,000 births should have occurred between 2023 and 2024 for these numbers to be true, and that would have likely lead to around 91,250 births from Oct 2023 to Dec 2024 instead of the 87,495 that I counted here.
5. Immigration and conclusion
Then there is the last important factor ignored here in these calculations; people leaving Gaza. In July 2024 UN reported that 110,000 people had left Gaza the first nine months of the conflict. In May 2025 the number had grew to 150,000 during the first 1.5 years. Since then there has been no more update, but the number is certainly bigger than that at this point. 5% of the population had left until July 2024 and more than 7% until May 2025 in addition to the 3% of population that died in Gaza, makes the actual population loss from the war started to today being less than 4%.
This, in addition to the death toll, of course also affects the birth numbers. If we don't count the births during the period the loss in population were around 10-11% and that lines up perfectly with the loss in births in 2025, were the 50,224 births is 10.5% lower than the 2018-2022 pre-war average of 56,138 births per year. Therefore the dip in birth in 2025 is not because of the war conditions, it is because of primarily people leaving Gaza but also violent and nonviolent deaths during the period. The fluctuations in birth numbers during the war has to a large part followed pre-war curve of less births nine months after the summer period.
These last three months we have seen 16,998 births (will likely be revised upwards later as Gaza MoH always does with births). This is 5,666 births per month on average, in comparison to the pre-war 2018-2022 average of 4,676 births per month. The reports of rise in miscarriages has also almost perfectly followed the trend when more children are born 6-9 months after the reports. That shows that they are not signs of bad conditions, only because more women being pregnant.
All of this is more evidence against the genocide narrative.
J retweeted
Yes, analyses of OCHA's full dataset (e.g. by Regavim) found ~90% of 2016-2023 "settler violence" incidents were not settler-initiated attacks on Palestinians. Many were non-violent (Temple Mount visits, hiking, infrastructure), in East Jerusalem, IDF clashes, or Palestinian-initiated cases where attackers were harmed. Actual settler violence occurs but is far rarer; OCHA uses broad definitions including trespass and relies on certain NGO sources.
J retweeted
What he says here is not true. In 2023 and 2024 there were 54 malnutrition related deaths in Gaza registered by Gaza MoH (Image 2), almost exclusively children with pre-existing health conditions. In October 2025 the final number stayed at 461 which means 407 deaths in 2025. However, Gaza MoH also reported a total of 24,650 deaths in 2025, which of 18,870 deaths were violent (including 1,584 accidents). But at the same time the report reported 0.7% malnutrition and metabolic disease related deaths (Image 1). 24,650 x 0.007 = 173 deaths during 2025.
moh.gov.ps/portal/wp-content…
They reported 408 deaths in 2025 from malnutrition (Image 2), but the Gaza MoH's own report show a number that is 58% smaller, even though it also includes the ones that has pre-existing conditions. In the malnutrition related cases list these names are written without any In additional information and is not related to starvation. Only 230 names on their list in total has malnutrition related cause of death. In addition to this, more than a dozen of the names on the list are also on the violent death list were examples can be found that they actually died from war actions, not malnutrition. The highest number of malnutrition related cases came from adults, especially from July 2025 were the fake "famine" period took place (Image 3). The problem with these adults? Well as seen in both the list of names and this pie-chart, they were mostly elderly (image 2 shows whole period, image 4 shows only elderly).
Of these 408 registered malnutrition related deaths in Gaza during 2025, the 188 elderly registered mostly had heart attack as cause of death according to the Gaza MoH list of malnutrition related deaths. In all other starvations in history children under five normally are 1/2 to 2/3 of every deaths both according to statistics from other wars, from the experts in this subject and from IPCs own guidelines. But in Gaza from July 2025 and forward, during the "famine period", children were 25% of the deaths (Image 3).
Why is that? Right, because Gaza MoH lied and added the many people who didn't die from actual starvation to spice the numbers up. And even with that Gaza has today since October 2023 had 0.18 deaths per million people per day on average from malnutrition if counted the 461 fake number. United states also has exactly the same number, 0.18 deaths per million people per day on average with their 44,000 malnutrition related deaths during 2023 and 2024.
J retweeted
Hamas & PIJ have confirmed an IDF claim that was widely dismissed: their military operatives deliberately mixed with “aid seekers” to cause havoc. Many of those portrayed as aid seekers killed by Israel were combatants — a fact both groups have now acknowledged. THIRTY examples:
J retweeted
Was Israel Justified in Bombing Hamas Combatants in Their Homes?
Israel is accused of committing war crimes by killing Hamas & Palestinian Islamic Jihad commanders in their homes. With the release of NAZA, critics focus on the fact that Israel knowingly struck Hamas and PIJ combatant while civilians, including children, were present, perhaps even waiting until they returned home and calculated the expected collateral damage. They then pose their supposed decisive question: Would Israel consider it acceptable for its enemies to kill IDF soldiers in their homes?
Once again, Hamas' entire battlefield strategy is erased from the discussion and the question has to be turned back around: Where exactly was/is the IDF supposed to attack Hamas for it to be considered acceptable?
In its 400-mile tunnel network built beneath those same homes, hospitals and mosques? When Israel struck senior Hamas commander Ibrahim Biari in the tunnel network serving as the Jabalia Battalion HQ, it was condemned for causing excessive collateral damage when some buildings fell as a result. This is the prime example cited by NAZA director Yuval Abraham and that strike did not even target a home.
Should Israel attack Hamas in hospitals it used as military bases? No serious analyst denies Hamas used hospitals for military purposes, above and below ground, or that numerous Hamas combatants were killed inside them, confirmed by their own martyr notices, so it’s not credibly disputable at this point. Then the IDF is accused of "targeting healthcare" even as over 100 “healthcare workers” are now confirmed to have been combatants, again, according to their own martyr notices. What about schools, where once again Hamas and PIJ's own martyr notices confirm dozens of their operatives were based? Israel is then accused of targeting education.
I have challenged critics to name a single Hamas military base. Of course no one can do so. Now Google "List of Israel Defense Forces Bases." Everyone knows where they are, which is why Hezbollah was able to precisely strike the dining hall of the Golani training base in Oct 2024, killing four soldiers. Hamas has no conventional military bases, instead its military infrastructure is embedded in hospitals, schools, civilian homes, and mainly in massive tunnels with shafts opening into residential buildings. There is overwhelming documentation of this. At this point only the most committed Hamas apologists will deny it. Hamas combatants also fight in civilian clothes, deliberately erasing the distinction between military deployment and civilian life. They hide weapons under beds, a Hamas leader literally admitted this fact to a New York Times reporter (look it up).
So where exactly can a Hamas combatant be killed? Only when he is standing in an open field holding an RPG? What Israel’s critics effectively demand is no attack. Hamas should enjoy permanent immunity. The human shield strategy must be rewarded. This is one of the main subtexts of NAZA and its promoters.
And that is why NAZA actually demonstrates the opposite of what its promoters claim. The IDF's attempt to carefully calculate expected civilian casualties before striking Hamas commanders, even in their homes, is precisely a key element of the proportionality assessment required by the Laws of Armed Conflict. Perhaps striking a Hamas commander in his home, with known and assessed collateral damage, was preferable to striking him in a tunnel network and bringing down surrounding buildings. There is no doubt many civilians have been killed in Gaza, a tragic consequence of the war Hamas started and refused to end by surrendering and returning the hostages, and it is reasonable to assess and critique this.
Yet nobody promoting NAZA as evidence of Israeli war crimes or genocide will ever seriously examine Hamas' battlefield strategy or the alternatives available to the IDF. They condemn strikes on homes, tunnels, hospitals, and schools without ever explaining where Hamas should have been attacked instead. They demand that Israel distinguish Hamas combatants from civilians while ignoring that Hamas deliberately organized its entire military strategy to make that distinction virtually impossible to make cleanly, because it viewed civilian deaths as a strategic benefit as its leaders openly and often admitted (again, only the most committed Hamas apologists will deny this).
Now, back to the comparison with the IDF. Yes, it WOULD be acceptable for Israel's enemies to target IDF soldiers in their homes if the following were similarly true: (1) IDF soldiers did not officially transition from civilian life to military deployment as normal militaries do (2) IDF soldiers remained in civilian clothes and engaged in combat in civilian clothes (3) IDF soldiers never deployed to military bases (4) The IDF did not utilize clearly marked, sole-purpose military bases and buildings, but instead co-located them within or beneath civilian structures (5) The IDF stored military equipment in homes and rockets in schools instead of weapons depots at military bases (6) The IDF used hospitals and synagogues throughout Israel for direct military purposes. (Putting aside of course that Hamas would murder every Jew on earth if they had the ability, as if they wouldn't attack a home).
Expect the same theme to continue: the complete erasure of Hamas from the battlefield analysis.
J retweeted
BREAKING: Palestinians themselves just shattered the media narrative that Israeli ‘settlers’ randomly attacked innocent olive harvesters.
They’re so proud of their attack that they just released a video of them undertaking it.
J retweeted
They are such liars!!!😡
Both Gaza MoH, Hamas and Al Jazeera (Image 1). Gaza got more food than any other place on earth per capita for one full year now after the ceasefire in October 2025.
450 food trucks per day in comparison to 73 food trucks per day on average pre-war between 2015-2022 and that pre-war level (Image 2). That made Gaza one of the healthiest places on earth with extremely low rate of malnutrition (0.8% GAM by WHZ among children under five in 2019) and the fifth lowest natural death rates in the world in 2022.
In May 2026 the malnutrition rate had gone down to 0.5% GAM by WHZ, lower than Germany, Finland and almost every place on earth. Every store, market, warehouse and restaurant is filled to the brim with food items today. So much that they regularly destroy a lot of it.
Hamas started the $3,500 tax against truck imports (Post bellow) on 14 October 2026, just for them to then be able to accuse Israel of starving Gaza again. This when it is their own merchants that are the ones affected, not being able to afford the new tax and being threatened or injured when complaining about it to Hamas.
The food price inflation are right now -80% (Image 3) and that is in comparison to the prices in October 2025, which already was 80% lower than October 2024.
HOLYSHIT, wtf!?
Hamas introduced a tax of $3,500 per truck entering Gaza yesterday. That resulted in the private sector merchants not wanting to deliver food anymore and Hamas escalating threats against merchants inside Gaza who refuse to cooperate.
AP: Ignores Hamas in the headline and calls Gaza hungry territory, even though Gaza since the war ended has been among the least hungry places in the world with 450 food trucks per day on average entering Gaza since October 2025, in comparison to the pre-war baseline of 73 food trucks per day.
J retweeted
The land was not stolen. It was for sale.
By 1947, Jews held about 463,000 acres. Most of it bought. 73% of the plots were purchased from absentee landowners living in Cairo, Damascus, and Beirut.
John Hope Simpson walked the country in 1930 and wrote the sentence the slogans cannot survive: the Jews paid high prices, and then paid tenants to whom they were under no legal obligation to pay a dime.
In 1944 as the Holocaust raged, Jews were paying $1,000 to $1,100 an acre for sand and marsh. For comparison, Iowa black dirt that year was going for $110 an acre.
King Abdullah later wrote in his memoirs that the Arabs were as prodigal in selling as they are in weeping.
It was all the rage to sell worthless land to Jews for exorbitant prices. The mayors of Gaza and Jerusalem sold land to Jews. Members of the Muslim Supreme Council sold land to Jews. As’ad el-Shukairy, the father of the first PLO chairman, took Jewish money for land.
The nationalism came after the check cleared.
J retweeted
HOLYSHIT, wtf!?
Hamas introduced a tax of $3,500 per truck entering Gaza yesterday. That resulted in the private sector merchants not wanting to deliver food anymore and Hamas escalating threats against merchants inside Gaza who refuse to cooperate.
AP: Ignores Hamas in the headline and calls Gaza hungry territory, even though Gaza since the war ended has been among the least hungry places in the world with 450 food trucks per day on average entering Gaza since October 2025, in comparison to the pre-war baseline of 73 food trucks per day.
J retweeted
📣 Important announcement‼️
Due to unresolved issues with the original host, the video at the link @MaxNordau provides in his post is deactivated. Full debate video is now available on my @YouTube channel at the link below. Please spread the word. TY! ⤵️
youtu.be/wlw_z5TdcoM?is=TINl…
BREAKING: Remember the UN report that bizarrely accused Israel of genocide?
The UN commissioner who signed it debates @BrianCox_RLTW to defend the report, and he couldn't even explain the "genocidal acts" that he alleged.
Chris Sidoti signed the UN commission’s report accusing Israel of genocide. One of its genocidal acts: the destruction of Gaza’s largest IVF clinic.
His commission told the UN General Assembly the clinic was hit by “air strikes.” Six months later, it told the Human Rights Council it was “most probably a shell fired from an ISF tank.” Neither report mentions the change. They don't even know what happened, and they're using it as evidence.
0:32 “I’ve not looked at this now for two years”
0:54 “It was a tank shell”
1:07 “I’m stumbling, and I know that I shouldn’t be stumbling”
2:51 Asked about the airstrike version: “I have no recollection”
The commission’s own witness testified there was “no evidence of an airstrike,” and that 2,000 specimens were lost before the attack, when the clinic ran short of liquid nitrogen. The next day, the commission called it genocide, with genocidal intent “the only inference that could reasonably be drawn.”
Full debate: youtu.be/C-ZFiVIFdyU
🧵
J retweeted
The UN accused Israel of genocide, and one of the 3 commissioners behind that accusation just admitted, in front of a live audience, that they never independently verified one of the most explosive statistics in their own report.
Chris Sidoti insisted that his commission conducts independent investigations and doesn't simply rely on media reports.
Except paragraph 21 of their official genocide report claims that 83% of those killed in Gaza were civilians. The footnote cites The Guardian.
When asked whether the commission had actually verified that figure, Sidoti admitted:
“No, we didn't… we literally do not know.”
Now watch how this works.
The Guardian publishes a statistic. The UN cites The Guardian. TIME and other media orgs then repeat the statistic while reporting on the UN's genocide findings, giving readers the impression that they're looking at an independently established fact.
The media quotes the UN, the UN quotes the media, and somewhere along the way a newspaper's claim gets transformed into an authoritative finding of international investigators.
This is how information gets laundered. Each new citation adds another layer of credibility without necessarily adding a single piece of independent evidence.
But the commissioner himself admits they never verified the number.
We're talking about an official UN report accusing the Jewish state of the gravest crime in international law, circulated around the world as authoritative evidence, while one of its own authors acknowledges that they literally do not know whether a central statistic they published is accurate.
How many other claims in that report have been through the same process?
J retweeted
Same event, two reports, two methods of “destruction.”
In its report to the UN General Assembly, the Commission of Inquiry described the destruction of Gaza’s main fertility clinic as the result of airstrikes. Yet, in its later report finding Israel “guilty of genocide,” the Commission claimed that an Israeli tank shell directly hit and deliberately targeted the clinic to “prevent births.”
But based on the evidence, it looks more like a false flag by Hamas.
In any case, as @BrianCox_RLTW noted during the debate, even if the shell was fired by an Israeli tank, that fact alone does not establish genocidal intent, even under the relatively low standard of “reasonable grounds to conclude” used by the Commission. It does not remotely demonstrate that the intention was to prevent births, and the Commission’s conclusion that this was the only reasonable inference goes far beyond what the evidence establishes.
1/19 INVESTIGATION ABOUT THE GAZA WAR:
Dead Embryos at the Al Basma Clinic (April 2024)
On the 17,th of April 2024, the news broke worldwide of that Israel has destroyed a fertility clinic in Gaza. This is a very significant accusation since it forms the basis for an important part of the genocide allegations discussed by a group of three individuals from the UN in a widely circulated UN-report that came out last month.
In the report they say that the clinic “suffered the most damage compared to the buildings adjacent to it” and that there was “an absence of any credible threat from within the clinic.”
Was anything of this proof of Israel targeting this clinic? In this thread we will find out that it isn't the case...
There are MANY things in this story that doesn't really match the description in the news and other things that defies logic.
Let's start this investigation... Firstly, here is an image showing the damage to the tall building next to the clinic in comparison to the damages to the clinic bellow it:
J retweeted
Listen to how the UN Commission of Inquiry got around the legal requirement for genocide when "concluding" that Israel is "committing genocide" in Gaza.
"If we accept that the goal of the Israeli authorities in Gaza has been the destruction of Hamas, that does not preclude the possibility of genocide being the strategy by which their goal is going to be attained."
Chris Sidoti acknowledges that Israel’s goal may be to destroy Hamas, then argues that this does not rule out genocide being the “strategy” used to achieve that goal.
Genocide requires specific intent (dolus specialis) to destroy a group, in whole or in part, as such. The problem with Sidoti's argument is that when genocidal intent is inferred from circumstantial evidence, it must be the ONLY reasonable inference from the facts, not merely a possible explanation or a “strategy” for achieving another goal. The existence of a clear intent to defeat Hamas automatically makes genocide a legal impossibility.
J retweeted
OPINION | When accusations become accepted as fact, they can have real-world consequences. Read how the rhetoric surrounding Gaza has fueled antisemitism, normalized hostility toward Jews, and contributed to a growing climate of intimidation and violence.
jpost.com/opinion/article-90…
J retweeted
Chris Sidoti—a UN commissioner who co-authored the report that bizarrely accused Israel of genocide—explains that proving genocidal intent takes “a very, very high test,” one “higher than the criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt.”
But then, later, he contradicts himself. Explaining the standard his commission actually uses: “It’s not a high standard.” The UN’s own definition of it: “gobbledygook.”
Asked to apply beyond reasonable doubt: “No...We are not a court.”
His commission found genocidal intent “on reasonable grounds,” the standard he calls “not a high standard.”
The reality is that there is no standard.
J retweeted
BREAKING: Remember the UN report that bizarrely accused Israel of genocide?
The UN commissioner who signed it debates @BrianCox_RLTW to defend the report, and he couldn't even explain the "genocidal acts" that he alleged.
Chris Sidoti signed the UN commission’s report accusing Israel of genocide. One of its genocidal acts: the destruction of Gaza’s largest IVF clinic.
His commission told the UN General Assembly the clinic was hit by “air strikes.” Six months later, it told the Human Rights Council it was “most probably a shell fired from an ISF tank.” Neither report mentions the change. They don't even know what happened, and they're using it as evidence.
0:32 “I’ve not looked at this now for two years”
0:54 “It was a tank shell”
1:07 “I’m stumbling, and I know that I shouldn’t be stumbling”
2:51 Asked about the airstrike version: “I have no recollection”
The commission’s own witness testified there was “no evidence of an airstrike,” and that 2,000 specimens were lost before the attack, when the clinic ran short of liquid nitrogen. The next day, the commission called it genocide, with genocidal intent “the only inference that could reasonably be drawn.”
Full debate: youtu.be/C-ZFiVIFdyU
🧵
J retweeted
Never forget: a senior U.N. official who was on the ground in Israel in the aftermath of October 7th revealed how the strategy of international organizations was to decide in advance on the crime for which they would accuse Israel. “I was there, and I was absolutely stunned.” 🧵
J retweeted
Why does deaths from civilian attacks in Judea Samaria / The West Bank get so much more media attention when it is "Palestinians" that dies in comparison to Israelis?
As seen below the UN data during the war, from 7 October 2023 to 10 October 2025, shows that 36 Israelis died from "Palestinian" civilians during those two years (Image 1). In comparison 20 "Palestinians" died from "settler violence" (meaning Israeli civilians), during the same period (Image 2).
J retweeted
Yes, the official Gaza fatality count includes 10/7 Hamas attackers portrayed as victims of “genocide.” I have so far identified 364 killed 10/7 attackers by name and 80% are on the list, corroborating the analysis below.
Identities of bodies returned to Gaza, and what it proves about the GMH casualties list.
After the ceasefire, Israel returned ~400 bodies of Palestinians to Gaza. For identification, Gaza Ministry of Health (GMH) have published pictures of the bodies, plus names of those already identified.
A total of 396 bodies are listed by GMH - of those, 91 people (excluding one duplicate) have been identified.
All 91 identified people can be found the GMH casualties list since June.
Of those 91:
- All are men 18-60 years.
- 63 (69%) have a listed date-of-death as Oct 7th 2023. 76 (84%) have DOD within Nov 16th 2023.
- Of the remainder, 12 (13%) have a listed DOD after the start of the ceasefire. Since the bodies have been dead for a long time, this likely just means the DOD is unknown and listed as the date received. Only 3 (3%) have DOD between 16.11.2023-10.10.2025.
- At least 23 (25%) have so far been announced as martyrs by Al Qassam (Hamas) or Al Quds (PIJ) brigades.
- 54 (59%) are found on lists prior to 2026. 35 (38%) were found on lists prior to the ceasefire. Some had been removed before the ceasefire, but 26 (29%) were still present on the last list before the ceasefire, i.e. before the bodies were returned.
This shows that most of the returned bodies are of terrorists killed inside Israel while participating in the Oct 7th terror attack.
It also confirms the claim (see linked post) that terrorists killed inside Israel on Oct 7th are systematically included in the GMH casualties list.
About a third were already on the casualties list before the bodies were returned. This proves Gazans can report presumed deaths without a body or even knowing the exact location of the body, and that these are included in the list.
But there is something very interesting about this data: At least 68 (75%) of them are registered on the "Genocide in Gaza" (Gigaza) website - and every single one of them is claimed to have been killed in airstrikes inside Gaza, which is obviously not true (Israel was not inside Gaza on Oct 7th and could not have taken possession of the bodies).
This confirms my suspicion that the Gigaza website formulaically claims death by airstrike unless other information is available - which explains why nearly all (94%) of the ~50,000 deaths registered on Gigaza are claimed to be from airstrikes. Claims from Gigaza of death by airstrike should be treated with skepticism from now on.
63/68 of those listed on Gigaza have DOD Oct 7th, including 7 people who are registered with post-ceasefire DOD in the GMH list, suggesting that most/all those with post-ceasefire DODs died while participating in the Oct 7th attack.
xitter.cf/EirikSchr/status/20911…
