IDF Denies Claims in Documentary About Civilian Casualties in Gaza
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has issued a strong denial of claims made in a new documentary titled "N.A." (Accidental Damage), which alleges that the military approved strikes in Gaza that could result in the deaths of 500 civilians. The IDF's official response, published in English on its website and widely shared on social media, unequivocally labels the assertion as "completely false."
The documentary features an anonymous interviewee who reportedly describes a system called "N.A." that maps every building in Gaza and estimates civilian casualties per strike, down to the number of children. The interviewee claims the system counts every infant as accidental damage and that an approval was given for a strike that could kill up to 500 people, though they suggest actual numbers are not subsequently verified.
In its rebuttal, the IDF stated that the film relies on unverified testimonies from individuals whose identities, roles, and military service cannot be confirmed. The military emphasized that the alleged strategy and national military decisions discussed are beyond the scope of junior soldiers' knowledge. Furthermore, the IDF clarified that intelligence personnel claimed to be interviewed are not involved in such situations according to their job descriptions.
The IDF also addressed claims of artificial intelligence use, asserting that all targeting decisions and strike approvals are made solely by human personnel. The military criticized the film's alleged misuse of legal terms by non-legal experts, misrepresenting unintentional harm as intentional. The IDF stressed its commitment to minimizing civilian harm while fighting Hamas, which it accuses of deliberately operating within the civilian population. The military also noted that any suspected violations are investigated by independent mechanisms and that soldiers are obligated to report such incidents, a duty the documentary's interviewees would have had if their claims were true.
The same event, reported separately by each outlet. Open a few to compare what different newsrooms emphasize — and what they leave out.
Not the same event — other stories that share this one’s people, places, or theme: background, reactions, and follow-ups.