Gaza civil defence agency says Israeli strikes kill 14
GAZA CITY: Gaza's civil defence agency said on Friday that Israeli strikes killed 14 people in the north and south of the war-ravaged Palestinian territory.
The emergency service said fighter jets conducted air strikes and there was artillery shelling and gunfire in the early morning in areas north of the southern city of Khan Yunis.
Agency official Mohammed al-Mughayyir said 10 people were killed in two separate strikes in the Khan Yunis area, with one hitting a house and the other tents sheltering displaced people.
In Gaza's north, four people were killed in an air strike in the Jabalia al-Nazla area, he added.
Media restrictions in Gaza and difficulties in accessing many areas mean AFP is unable to independently verify tolls and details provided by the agency and other parties.
There was no immediate comment from the Israeli military, which asked for exact coordinates to look into the reports when contacted by AFP.
The latest strikes came after Israel said it mistakenly hit Gaza's only Catholic church with a "stray" round on Thursday, killing three and provoking international condemnation.
On Wednesday, at least 20 people were killed in a crush at a food aid distribution centre in the south of the territory run by the Gaza humanitarian foundation.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Is it legal? How to get Internet without paying a subscription?
Techno Mag
Learn More
Undo
Indirect talks between Israel and the Palestinian militant group Hamas began in the Qatari capital Doha on July 6 to try to agree on a 60-day ceasefire after 21 months of hostilities.
The war was sparked by Hamas's attack on Israel on October 7, 2023 which led to the deaths of 1,219 people, most of them civilians, according to an AFP tally based on official figures.
Israel's retaliatory military offensive has killed at least 58,667 Palestinians, mostly civilians, according to the health ministry in Hamas-run Gaza.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
38 minutes ago
- Time of India
The deportation dilemma: How America's immigration overreach threatens its educational ethos
In a quiet yet chilling memo leaked to the press, the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) laid bare a plan that dismantles more than precedent—it dismantles the post-war promise that no human being should ever be forcibly returned to danger. The proposed policy permits deporting non-citizens to third-party countries, even when they lack citizenship ties to those nations. Some of these destinations, such as South Sudan or Libya, remain marred by political instability, civil unrest, or outright violence. The implications are not just geopolitical or legal—they are pedagogical. What message does this send to the students in America's classrooms, many of whom trace their roots to migration, refuge, and flight? The answer is stark: If this policy becomes reality, the United States will not only breach its international obligations but also betray a foundational tenet of its own educational mission—to uphold justice, teach historical accountability, and nurture global citizenship. A retreat from history: Lessons the world agreed never to forget The concept of non-refoulement—the prohibition against returning asylum seekers to countries where they face serious threats—was born from the moral reckoning that followed the Holocaust. It emerged as a universal safeguard, a solemn vow that the world would never again stand idly by while vulnerable people were cast back into the jaws of persecution. This principle underpins the 1951 Refugee Convention, which the United States helped shape and has long endorsed, at least in spirit. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Providers are furious: Internet access without a subscription! Techno Mag Learn More Undo ICE's proposed deportation policy fractures that spirit. It signals a deliberate detachment from historical memory and replaces humanitarian due process with coercive deterrence. For students who are taught that democratic societies are built upon law, ethics, and accountability, this contradiction invites confusion—if not outright cynicism. The mechanics of fear: How the policy works The leaked memo outlines a strategy wherein migrants could be relocated to a third country with which they have no legal, cultural, or linguistic connection. It even contemplates deportation to nations that may not have functional governments or safety guarantees. Critics argue that this is less a logistical necessity and more a psychological tactic, a warning to dissuade future migrants by demonstrating the unpredictability and severity of US immigration enforcement. In effect, this is a weaponization of displacement. And it doesn't stop at borders, it penetrates classrooms, homes, and the emotional core of entire communities. Collateral damage: The educational toll on students While immigration policy is often debated in legal or political terms, its human cost reverberates most visibly in the nation's schools. Behind every deportation order lies a ripple effect—children too anxious to attend class, classrooms disrupted by fear, and educators forced into the role of first responders. In targeting borders, the policy wounds blackboards. Erosion of trust in institutions Education rests upon the assumption that institutions, whether legal or academic, operate with fairness and transparency. When students, particularly those from immigrant or refugee families, witness a government forcibly removing people to dangerous territories, it corrodes their belief in democratic systems. The classroom becomes a site of quiet trauma. Chilling effect on school participation For undocumented students or those in mixed-status families, even the rumor of enforcement action can disrupt attendance, academic engagement, and access to support services. Teachers in sanctuary districts report students suddenly disappearing, relocated, detained, or in hiding. How does one study algebra when terrified of arrest? Contradictions in curriculum Students are taught about international law, the Geneva Conventions, and America's role in post-war moral leadership. But if they simultaneously observe their government acting in direct opposition to those principles, the contradiction undermines the legitimacy of the curriculum itself. This is not a theoretical concern, it is cognitive dissonance embedded into the lesson plan. Ethics in exile: The role of higher education Colleges and universities, long considered bastions of critical inquiry and human rights advocacy, now face a moral test of their own. Will they speak out, protect at-risk students, and incorporate this moment into civic learning? Or will they retreat into bureaucratic neutrality? Some institutions have already begun to resist. Sanctuary campuses have emerged, legal clinics have expanded, and student-led movements are demanding institutional clarity on deportation policies. Yet the stakes are escalating. If deportations to unstable third countries proceed, higher education will need to reimagine its role, not merely as an academic space, but as a line of last defense for decency. What this teaches the next generation Ironically, ICE's deportation gambit has become a civics lesson in itself. Students are witnessing, in real time, the tension between legal power and moral restraint. They are seeing how fragile human rights can be when political expediency eclipses historical conscience. But there is also an opportunity. This moment can inspire a deeper engagement with the ethics of governance, the function of international treaties, and the duties of citizens within a democracy. It can foster resilience, resistance, and reform. History is watching, and so are students America's schools do more than teach, they model. Every policy implemented, every promise broken, every life uprooted becomes part of the hidden curriculum students internalize. If we permit a return to cruel, lawless removals under the guise of border control, we are not just failing migrants, we are failing our students. The deportation memo is more than a document. It is a mirror. And in that mirror, the United States must ask: What kind of nation teaches justice in its classrooms while practicing brutality in its courtrooms? Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
Malaysia: Protest outside US embassy over appointment of ‘alpha male' as ambassador
Nick Adam's postings fiercely condemning Islam and supporting Israel's military war in Gaza have enraged Muslims in Malaysia, sparking a rare protest against a foreign diplomatic appointment in the Southeast Asian country. read more Malaysian protesters display placards during a demonstration against the US envoy nominee Nick Adams outside the US embassy in Kuala Lumpur. AFP On Friday, dozens of people gathered outside the US embassy in Kuala Lumpur to oppose the proposed nomination of Nick Adams, a self-described 'alpha male' influencer, as the US envoy to Malaysia. Last week, President Donald Trump chose outspoken author and political commentator Adams as the White House's pick for ambassador to Malaysia. Adams, a naturalised US citizen originally from Australia, has developed a macho social media image, employing macho, 'alpha male' branding to comment on cultural themes and appeal to a primarily young male audience. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD His postings fiercely condemning Islam and supporting Israel's military war in Gaza, however, have enraged Muslims in Malaysia, sparking a rare protest against a foreign diplomatic appointment in the Southeast Asian country. The outrage comes at a critical moment for Malaysia, which has until August 1 to secure a trade agreement with Washington or face a 25% tax on its exports to the US. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim told reporters on Friday that it was too early in the process to decide on Adams' appointment, but that his administration will give it careful consideration. 'At the same time, we will seek to protect the good relations between Malaysia and the United States,' Anwar said, according to a recording of his remarks provided by his office to Reuters. Protesters chanted 'Reject Nick Adams' and 'Destroy America' and held up posters depicting Adams with a red cross over his face. Other placards read: 'No space for racists and Islamophobes in Malaysia.' The protestors, organised by the youth wings of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's Pakatan Harapan (Alliance of Hope) coalition, submitted a memorandum to the embassy near the centre of Kuala Lumpur. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The memorandum cited 'divisive rhetoric' used by Adams, and characterised his postings as insensitive towards Malaysia's multi-cultural society. They urged the US government to withdraw Adams's nomination and 'consider a candidate who is more professional, moderate, and attuned to the importance of Southeast Asia's regional stability'. Malaysia, which has a majority of mostly Muslim ethnic Malays alongside significant ethnic Chinese and ethnic Indian minorities, has long been a staunch supporter of the Palestinian cause. 'An ambassador's task is to be the bridge between two countries and we don't want that person to be someone who destroys that bridge instead,' said Muhammad Izuan Ahmad Kasim, a member of Anwar's People's Justice Party. The embassy and Adams' office did not respond to requests for comment. The protestors also called on Malaysia's government to exercise its right under international norms to reject Adams' proposed appointment. Under the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations, host countries have discretion to accept or reject ambassadorial appointments without having to provide a reason. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Government spokesperson Fahmi Fadzil said on Tuesday the cabinet had not yet received any formal notice of Adams' appointment to Malaysia. Adams' nomination has not yet been approved, but he is widely expected to be confirmed by the Republican-held US Senate.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
Netanyahu is considering calling an election in Israel. But can he actually win?
To win another term, Benjamin Netanyahu would have to spin a narrative of victory on three fronts: securing the release of the hostages, defeating Hamas and delivering regional security. It is a tall order read more One of Israel's ultra-Orthodox Jewish parties, Shas, has announced it will resign from prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government. The party said its decision was made due to the government's failure to pass a bill exempting ultra-Orthodox students from military service. Its exit increases the political pressure on Netanyahu. Days earlier, six members of another ultra-Orthodox coalition partner, the United Torah Judaism party, also quit the government citing the same concerns. The moves leave Netanyahu with a minority in parliament, which will make it difficult for his government to function. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Opposition leader Yair Lapid says the government now 'has no authority', and has called for a new round of elections. But even before these developments, Netanyahu was reportedly considering calling an early election in a bid to remain in power despite his unpopularity. Spinning the narrative To win another term he would, in my view, have to spin a narrative of victory on three fronts: securing the release of the hostages, defeating Hamas and delivering regional security. It is a tall order. In his visit to Washington in early July, Netanyahu emphasised his pursuit of a ceasefire in Gaza that facilitates the return of the remaining hostages held by Hamas. Israelis have grown increasingly weary of the war, with recent surveys showing popular support for ending it if this brings back those still held captive. A ceasefire that sees hostages released would probably help Netanyahu generate support during an election campaign. But Netanyahu has insisted that, while he wants to reach a hostage-ceasefire deal, he will not agree to one 'at any price'. This indicates not only Israel's refusal to compromise on security but also that any deal Netanyahu does make – whether or not it sees the release of all the hostages – will be presented as a victory to Israeli voters. To provide the electorate with further hope of an end to the fighting, Netanyahu will also have to claim that the military campaign in Gaza is nearing its goals. Senior military officials stated recently that they have 'almost fully achieved' their objectives – namely, defeating Hamas. Netanyahu has, so far, prolonged the war to remain in power. But he will now need to spin the military campaign as a victory if he wants to win votes. This will be especially hard as critics like Yitzhak Brik, a retired Israeli general, claim that the number of Hamas fighters is now back to its pre-war level. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD People take part in a protest demanding the end of the war and immediate release of hostages held by Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government in Tel Aviv, Israel, Saturday, July 5, 2025. (AP Photo) The hard-right members of Netanyahu's government add another dimension to this equation. His two ultranationalist coalition partners, Jewish Power and Religious Zionism, oppose ending the war entirely. They insist on fighting Hamas to the finish. Netanyahu will most likely want to keep his options open during an election campaign to then form a coalition with whatever he can pull together at the time. He may calculate that a short-term pause in fighting to free hostages can be spun as a victory to win votes, after which military operations could resume to appease hardliners if he needs them. A final part of Netanyahu's electoral strategy will be to push the message that he has delivered regional security. He has declared the war with Iran in June a success, saying 'we sent Iran's nuclear program down the drain'. And Israel has also continued its campaign of strikes to assert its military dominance in the region, the latest in Syria and Lebanon. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD What about Palestinians? Observers warn that Netanyahu's approach is about political survival, and will come at the expense of long-term peace prospects for Israelis and Palestinians. According to New York Times, he seems to be 'kicking the Palestinian issue once again down the road'. Indeed, part of Netanyahu's mooted strategy for claiming victory in Gaza involves supporting a constrained political outcome for the Palestinians that ends the fighting without Israel conceding on core issues. Palestinians make their way with belongings as they flee their homes after the Israeli military issued orders for evacuation from eastern Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip, May 19, 2025. Reuters In this scenario, the Gaza Strip would be carved up and demilitarised under prolonged Israeli security oversight. Some areas would be annexed by Israel. Remaining parts of Gaza, along with fragments of the West Bank, would be handed over to an interim authority to create the appearance of a nascent Palestinian state. The goal would be to declare that Israel has facilitated Palestinian statehood – but strictly on Israel's terms – while eliminating Hamas's rule in Gaza. The reality would probably be a designed chaos to force as many Palestinians as possible to leave. Such a state, lacking full sovereignty and territorial continuity, would fall far short of the independent state that Palestinians seek. Crucially, this imposed outcome would also bypass substantive negotiation of issues like borders, refugees and Jerusalem, which both Israel and Palestine claim as their capital. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Palestinian leaders would almost certainly reject a curtailed state. And if they did not then ordinary Palestinians – reeling from the war's devastation – are unlikely to view it as a just peace. A new cycle of violence would probably begin and the Palestinian population will have been heavily concentrated into restricted spaces that would be wide open to Israeli bombardment. As Netanyahu weighs pulling the election trigger, he is effectively writing the next chapter of the Israel-Palestine conflict. The outcome of this manoeuvring is highly uncertain. If his three-pronged victory narrative convinces Israeli voters, he could return to power with a fresh mandate and perhaps a retooled coalition. He might seek a broader unity government after an election, sidelining his most hardline partners in favour of centrist voices to navigate post-war diplomacy. But if the public deems his victories hollow or indeed false, an election could sweep him out of office. This would open the door for opposition leaders who may take a different approach to Gaza and the Palestinians. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Brian Brivati, Visiting Professor of Contemporary History and Human Rights, Kingston University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
