Hostage Update (no change)

A few days ago, Hamas released a new video featuring two Israeli hostages Maxim Harkin and Bar Kuperstein. This is the first sign of life from both since they were abducted on October 7, 2023 from the Supernova music festival. The families have asked Israeli media not to publish the footage or details on its contents.

There are now currently 58 hostages taken on 10/7 currently in captivity in Gaza (there are 59 hostages remaining in total)

• 38 hostages were released in the first phase of the 2025 cease fire agreement (including 5 Thai nationals)
• 24 hostages will remain in captivity after Phase I and have not been declared dead.
  • 5 hostages are Americans: Meet the Five American Hostages Still Held By Hamas: Edan Alexander is assumed to be alive, Itay Chen is assumed to have been killed on 10/7, and Gadi Haggai, Judi Weinstein Haggai, and Omer Neutra have been confirmed to have been killed.
  • 4 are soldiers
  • 7 are residents of the Gaza border communities
  • 11 were abducted from the Nova music festival
  • 2 are foreign workers: Bipin Joshi from Nepal and Pinta Nattapong from Thailand
• Link: These are the hostages to be released (and left behind) in the Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal’s first phase – Jewish Telegraphic Agency

• On October 7^th, a total of 251 Israelis were taken hostage.
  • During the ceasefire deal in November of 2023, 112 hostages were released.
  • 193 hostages in total have been released or rescued
    • The bodies of 40 hostages have been recovered, including 3 mistakenly killed by the military as they tried to escape their captors.
  • 8 hostages have been heroically rescued by troops alive
• Of the 59 hostages still theoretically in Gaza
  • 31 hostages have been confirmed dead and are currently being held in Gaza
  • Thus, at most, 28 living hostages could still be in Gaza.
  • Hamas is now holding the body of 1 IDF soldier who was killed in 2014 (Lt. Hadar Goldin’s body remains held in the Gaza Strip)

Watch

EXCLUSIVE: The Family of a Murdered Gaza Protester Speaks Out by Tanya Lukyanova with The Free Press and The Center for Peace Communications

• On March 29, in a neighborhood called Tel al-Hawa in southern Gaza City, Hamas brutally murdered 22-year-old Uday Nasser Saadi al-Rabbay, his family said. After Uday had been tortured and mutilated, his body was thrown off a tall building. His crime? He had spoken out—loudly and publicly—against the terrorists who rule Gaza with an iron grip.
• Until now, the family has been afraid to talk to reporters, worried that their words would be twisted—as many local journalists in Gaza serve as de facto Hamas mouthpieces—or that the remaining al-Rabbay sons would be targeted next.
• But through our partnership with The Center for Peace Communications, The Free Press was able to obtain exclusive interviews with Uday’s mother and father and one of his cousins. This is the first time they’ve spoken publicly about what happened.

Report from the IDF on the Nova Music Festival Massacre

• The Nova music festival took place near Kibbutz Re’im, approximately four kilometers from the Gaza border, with around 3,500 attendees. Despite concerns raised beforehand by Col. Haim Cohen regarding the lack of available troops, the festival was approved by the IDF. However, no IDF units were informed about the event or assigned to provide security.
• By 8:20 a.m., the terrorists had overrun an undermanned police roadblock and stormed the festival grounds. Many attendees, unaware of the danger or believing it was safe to return, were attacked.
• The first organized military force arrived at 11:20 a.m., prompted by a call from an off-duty soldier who had survived the initial attack. This small force engaged the terrorists and secured part of the area. The IDF did not regain full control until 1:30 p.m. Until around 10:00 a.m., more than three hours into the massacre, the IDF General Staff was reportedly unaware of the mass-casualty event. A combat helicopter dispatched earlier did not engage Hamas vehicles due to misidentification and lack of ground coordination.
• The internal IDF investigation revealed a “systemic collapse” in identifying, communicating, and responding to the attack. Key findings included missed early warning signs, delayed military response, poor coordination with law enforcement, and insufficient on-site security. The brigade and division commanders were not informed during the festival’s approval process, no threat assessment was carried out, and the site was not designated as a “vital asset” needing protection.
• The attack resulted in the deaths of 378 people, including civilians, police officers, and soldiers, and the abduction of 44 others. Rescue crews recovered 171 bodies at the site itself, with others found on surrounding roads and fields. The investigation recommended establishing a national protocol for approving and securing large events in security-sensitive areas and a review of the chain of command for authorizing such events.

Antisemitism

Israel’s PR problem is much bigger than biased BBC coverage by Stephen Pollard with The Jewish Chronicle

• Last week the president of the Board of Deputies met the BBC’s director general. On the very day of the meeting, the BBC apologised for a “serious mistake” that “clearly falls well below our standards” after the Israeli Embassy released a text message from a producer asking the embassy to provide an anti‑Netanyahu speaker for the BBC’s Newshour programme… The BBC was quite wrong to have apologised in this way. Or rather – let me rephrase this – the BBC was quite wrong to have stated in its apology that the behaviour of the producer fell below its standards. It didn’t. It precisely met its standards…
• Phil Rosenberg… was meeting the BBC’s DG, Tim Davie, because “the British Jewish community has long been sounding the alarm regarding BBC misreporting on the Israeli‑Palestinian conflict; not just for years, but for decades.”… Rosenberg’s specific demands… are all measures which the BBC should indeed implement immediately. So I mean no criticism of Mr Rosenberg when I say that the meeting was a waste of time and completely misses the real point—for two interconnected reasons.
• Most obviously, it would need far more than a series of new processes and editorial checks to change the culture that is the real cause of the BBC’s bias against Israel – and, given some of its reporting, of Jews. The problem is the mindset of those involved.
• The BBC’s coverage of an attack in 2021 by a gang of Muslim youths on a bus of Jewish children in Oxford Street was, for instance, so hideously flawed at every stage that I find it impossible to believe it was not based on a particular view of Jews… At every stage of its handling of complaints around its reporting the BBC acted as if it regarded those who were angry with its reporting – Jews, that is – with contempt.
• Not once on the 10 p.m. news report [about the 2022 Texas synagogue siege] was antisemitism mentioned, despite the hostages – a rabbi and three other Jews – being seized in a shul… At no point did the reporter suggest that antisemitism might have been involved. New editorial processes are all very well, but they would not change the mindset of reporters, producers and editors who … do not at any point think the antisemitism of the gunman needs to be mentioned, let alone explained.
• There is an understandable and entirely correct focus on the BBC as we are all forced by law to pay for it, but the real issue is far wider… The vast majority of the journalistic pool… are left‑liberal in outlook – and the default left‑liberal attitude to Israel now is that it is a rogue state which kills Palestinians with impunity… The BBC could introduce industry‑leading, gold‑standard editorial procedures but they would have no impact on this… Israel has, to put it crudely, lost the PR war – that is the real issue, an issue that stretches far beyond the BBC.
• Link: Israel’s PR problem is much bigger than biased BBC coverage

Israel/Middle East Related Articles

How American Aid Has Subsidized Terror by Gregg Roman with Commentary Magazine

• Far from a mere policy dispute, the misuse of U.S. assistance I documented underscores the magnitude of the negligence and, in certain instances, possible criminal collusion within our humanitarian apparatus… Federal foreign aid has funded an array of extremist‑aligned groups overseas—often at odds with American interests.
• Entrenched bureaucrats within USAID and prior administrations have created a labyrinth of sub‑grants and sub‑sub‑grants through which money flows nearly unchecked. Billions of dollars have been lumped under a category called “miscellaneous foreign awardees,” thwarting public scrutiny. Supposed vetting mechanisms exist, but they are poorly enforced or subverted by an ideological agenda.
• According to a Senate Finance Committee report, the evangelical charity World Vision has received nearly $2 billion in USAID grants—and facilitated a sub‑grant to the Islamic Relief Agency, an al‑Qaeda group designated for terrorist financing. Another striking case involves Bayader, a Gaza‑based charity [that] openly collaborates with Hamas officials… Similarly, the Unlimited Friends Association… received U.S. support despite paying stipends to families of “martyrs.”
• Readers need not condemn all foreign aid to see that abuses abound. … Fundamental steps would include total transparency in awarding grants, real‑time audits and forced disclosure of every sub‑award, rigorous and continuously updated vetting for extremist ties, and harsh penalties when either staff or NGOs break the rules.
• The Middle East Forum’s research has identified approximately $164 million in USAID and State Department grants flowing to organizations with extremist ties, with at least $122 million directly benefiting groups aligned with designated foreign terrorist organizations. … Some staff may need to be replaced or face criminal investigation.
• If U.S. assistance does not serve strategic interests and genuinely support threatened populations, it devolves into a slush fund that underwrites our foes or promotes fringe obsessions. … With bold legislative steps, transparent accounting, vigorous vetting, and swift punishment for wrongdoers, the system can be reoriented to its original mission: harnessing American compassion and strategic sense, not abusing them.
• Link: How American Aid Has Subsidized Terror

The Heavy Price of a Hostage Deal “At All Costs” by Professor Hillel Frisch with The Jerusalem Institute for National Security

• Paying “any cost” for the hostages’ release effectively means accepting Hamas’s continued effective control over Gaza, accompanied by the lifting of the blockade and the extensive release of Palestinian terrorists from prison. Hamas would be able to portray such an outcome as a significant achievement and as proof of the legitimacy of the jihadist project… This message will bolster support for Hamas and its methods not only within the Palestinian arena but throughout the Muslim world.
• After signing the agreement, tens of thousands moved unhindered along the coastal road northward… Hundreds… were terrorists whose weapons were concealed… The monitoring carried out by American inspectors was clearly insufficient… The inspection area lacked a pit from which personnel could examine the undersides of vehicles to prevent weapons from being smuggled underneath them.
• By the seventh stage of the first phase of the deal… Israel had released more than 300 prisoners sentenced to life imprisonment—more than were released in the Gilad Shalit exchange… Some of these murderous terrorists are viewed as the elite of Palestinian society… To gauge the meaning of the release of such prisoners, one has only to recall the importance of those released in the Shalit deal in 2011 in the execution of the October 7 massacre.
• An important document published by Al‑Jazeera lists seven supposed strategic achievements by Hamas. According to the document, the foremost achievement is the release of senior prisoners… Hamas anticipates the deal’s subsequent stages will result in the release of all 600 prisoners sentenced to life, including prominent leaders such as Fatah’s Marwan Barghouti and Ahmad Saadat… Hamas’s true objective is to rebuild its leadership and senior command ranks—severely weakened during the conflict—by drawing from this substantial and “high‑caliber” pool of released prisoners.
• From Israel’s standpoint, the influx of terrorists and weapons… recreates the strategic conditions that prevailed prior to the October 7 massacre… Hamas will fortify its positions—potentially forcing Israel to contend with combat conditions similar to those during the initial breach… In that first month alone, 89 soldiers fell in combat, compared to an average of 22 per month in subsequent months.
• From Israel’s standpoint, the influx of terrorists and weapons, together with the re‑establishment of a densely populated environment in northern Gaza, recreates the strategic conditions that prevailed prior to the October 7 massacre … In that first month alone, 89 soldiers fell in combat, compared to an average of 22 per month in subsequent months.
• The required forces included approximately 300,000 soldiers, mostly reservists… the direct monthly cost of a reservist called up under an emergency order averaged NIS 29,000, compared to only NIS 3,374 for active‑duty soldiers… indirect economic costs are significant, given that this high‑caliber workforce is engaged in combat rather than productive economic activity.
• To mitigate these heavy costs, Israel must leverage its available assets: control over aid supplies to Gaza; the capability to deploy substantial military force against Hamas; the capacity to obstruct Gaza’s reconstruction; and President Trump’s support for Israeli measures aimed at pressuring Hamas over hostage releases.
• Link: The Heavy Price of a Hostage Deal “At All Costs”

Casualties (no change)

1,853 Israelis have been killed including 846 IDF soldiers since October 7th (no change since Sunday)

• The South: 407 IDF soldiers during the ground operation in Gaza have been killed
• The North: 132 Israelis (84 IDF soldiers) have been killed during the war in Northern Israel
• The West Bank: 63 Israelis (27 IDF and Israeli security forces)
• Additional Information (according to the IDF):
  • 2,585 (+1 since Wednesday) IDF soldiers have been injured during ground combat in Gaza, including at least 498 (no change since Wednesday) who have been severely injured.
  • 5,752 (+4 since Wednesday) IDF soldiers have been injured since the beginning of the war, including at least 855 (no change since Wednesday) who have been severely injured.

• The Gaza Casualty Count:
  • According to unverified figures from the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry, 62,614 total deaths have been reported, with a civilian/combatant ratio: 1:1.
  • [MUST READ] Report: Questionable Counting: Analysing the Death Toll from the Hamas-Run Ministry of Health in Gaza by Andrew Fox with The Henry Jackson Society
  • On October 7th, Ohad Hemo with Channel 12 Israel News – the country’s largest news network, a leading expert on Palestinian and Arab affairs, mentioned an estimate from Hamas: around 80% of those killed in Gaza are members of the organization and their families.”
  • Read this well documented piece from Tablet published in March: How the Gaza Ministry of Health Fakes Casualty Numbers
  • The Associated Press, an outlet with a demonstrated anti-Israel bias, conducted an analysis of alleged Gaza death tolls released by the Hamas-controlled “Gaza Health Ministry.” The analysis found that “9,940 of the dead – 29% of its April 30 total – were not listed in the data” and that “an additional 1,699 records in the ministry’s April data were incomplete and 22 were duplicates.”
• The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs publishes official details on every civilian and IDF casualty.

Regular sources include JINSA, FDD, IDF, AIPAC, The Paul Singer Foundation, The Institute for National Security Studies, the Alma Research and Education Center, Yediot, Jerusalem Post, IDF Casualty Count, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Institute for the Study of War, Tablet Magazine, Mosaic Magazine, The Free Press, and the Times of Israel