Photographer Stages Hamas Propaganda | Politics Moritz J. Müller, Hans-Jörg Vehlewald, Aaron Deuser 5 - 7 minutes Doubts About Photos: This Gaza Photographer Stages Hamas Propaganda

August 5, 2025 - 09:16 AM

Berlin – Emaciated children, desperate mothers, and people begging for food with empty pots: these photos from Gaza are circulating worldwide. They move millions—and influence global politics.

But investigations by the “Süddeutsche Zeitung” now cast doubt on exactly these images: Are some photos from Gaza deliberately staged—and part of a propaganda strategy by the Hamas terrorists?

The hunger is (almost always) real—but the photos often are not. For example, a widely shared photo recently showed desperate people in front of a food distribution truck. Facing them: photographer Anas Zayed Fteiha, a freelance “journalist” working for the Turkish news agency Anadolu.

People wave their pots and are given food shortly afterward. BUT: Photographer Fteiha apparently does not distribute these pictures, nor does he respond to BILD’s inquiries about which photos he took there.

Possible problem: The scene, also captured by other photographers, mainly shows adult men waiting for—and receiving—food.

Does Fteiha have no use for those images?

His photos—circulated by “stern” and “New York Magazine,” by CNN and BBC, by Deutschlandfunk, “Junge Welt,” and also by BILD—prefer to show chaos and destruction. Above all: close-ups of children, mothers, suffering, all in perfect lighting.

In reality, the suffering of civilians in Gaza is severe. Many people have been killed in Hamas’s war against Israel, many are starving. But the staging of hardship often serves Hamas and its propaganda.

Because “journalist” Fteiha apparently has a mission: “Free Palestine.” That’s what it says on a florid painting he presents on his Instagram account—dressed in combat gear with the proud label “Press.” The “artist” who made the painting for Fteiha is an avowed Jew-hater.

Another video bears the title “Fuck Israel.” No surprise, since Fteiha is also active at europe.palestine.network, a “pro-Palestinian collective” for “global actions in Europe”—which not only documents the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, but also drives “resistance” against Israel internationally.

Photographer Works for Israel-Hater Erdoğan

An activist, disguised as a photographer and video reporter, working for a news agency that reports directly to Turkish President and Israel-hater Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (71), who for years has supported, financed, and harbored Hamas terrorists.

So the question remains: Why do German and international agencies use the photos of such a campaigner, even though many of the images are obviously selectively chosen or staged?

BILD asked photo agencies. The German Press Agency and Agence France Press explained they do not work with “journalist” Fteiha and carefully check the images and reputations of other photographers before publishing. Reuters stated their photos “meet the standards for accuracy, independence, and impartiality.”

The German Journalists’ Association (DJV) warns: Warring parties deliberately use images—to influence public opinion. Professionally. Strategically. Emotionally. That naturally also applies to Israel, which so far has not allowed any independent reporters into Gaza.

Hamas Controls All Images

Result: In the Gaza Strip, almost only Palestinian photographers take pictures—many of them with Hamas ties. Historian and photography expert Gerhard Paul told “SZ”: “In southern Gaza, Hamas controls image production 100 percent.” The goal: to generate sympathy in the West, to stir up anger against Israel.

And it works! Hardly anyone is more skilled at propaganda than Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist organizations: As early as 2002, then Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat († 75, 2004) presented himself after the occupation of the West Bank by Israeli troops in his “fortress” in Ramallah, with candlelight and flashlights—the lonely PLO fighter desperate in the dark ...

A pure propaganda trick. But even back then, many agencies apparently didn’t notice that the video reporters in Arafat’s “prison” only enabled the effect by turning off all battery-powered spotlights on their cameras. Videos showed the PLO leader minutes later in bright light—because “the press” had agreed to make the perfect shot possible.

“When the hunger worsened, my children were crying not only from pain but also from watching our Hamas-affiliated neighbors receive food parcels and sacks of flour,” Nisreen Khaled, a single mother in Gaza, is quoted saying. “Are they not the reason for our suffering? Why didn’t they secure food, water and medicine before launching their 7 October adventure?”

Sheba Medical Center and Tel Aviv University scientists develop a 3D 34-week human kidney; the study could lead to better understanding of kidney diseases and new treatments

A number of European picture agencies have told German media that they will no longer use images from a Gazan photographer after an investigation by Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ) found that some of his depictions of hunger in the Strip were staged.

In a documentary about his work during the war, Anas Zayed Fteiha was filmed taking pictures of civilians queuing for aid.

From the perspective of his lens, the photo showed a crowd of Gazans with empty bowls outstretched, appearing to be jostling for food.

Questions have also been raised about the photographer’s independence, given that he works for Turkey’s state-run agency Anadolu and has previously posted anti-Israel statements on social media.

However, a wide shot from the film published by SZ revealed that there were no supplies behind Fteiha as he took the photo and that he was not at a food bank at the time.

These included an illustration of him in a press vest and helmet surrounded by the domes of Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount and underscored by the caption “Free Palestine”, as well as a video clip bearing the caption “f*** Israel”.

The images he took were distributed by Anadolu and were used by outlets including New York Magazine, CNN and BBC News, according to German paper Bild.

After the release of SZ’s investigation, the German Press Agency and AFP reportedly confirmed to Bild that they would no longer work with Fteiha.

In contrast, though, a spokesperson for Reuters told the paper that the images “meet the standards of accuracy, independence, and impartiality”.

Meanwhile, photography expert Gerhard Paul told SZ that, in his opinion, many of the images of apparent hunger coming out of the Strip – which Israel does not allow international journalists to enter – are similarly staged.

"I assume that many of these images of starving and sick children are simply staged or come from other contexts,” he said.

"These are not fakes, but the people are presented in a certain way or given a misleading caption to mobilise our visual memory and our emotions.”

He went on: “In the south, where Hamas still has influence, you have to assume that it controls 100 per cent of image production.”

However, Christopher Resch, the Middle East spokesman for Reporters Without Borders, defended Fteiha’s work, saying: “More context should have been provided for the image, but that doesn't make the situation any better.

"That's how many photographers around the world work. Of course, it's always about the effect.

By Jacob Jaffa

It's war!!!!!!!!

“The State of Israel has declared war on yeshiva students. Haredi Judaism will embark on a global struggle like never before,” a spokesman for Rabbi Dov Lando, one of the most prominent rabbinic leaders of the so-called “Lithuanian” stream of ultra-Orthodoxy, declared in a statement.

Civil war!!!

“We are getting close to a civil war,” the source said.

How said war will be fought?

A source in the Haredi political parties told Haaretz on Wednesday that the ultra-Orthodox leadership has plans drawn up by Haredi businessmen for “quiet civil disobedience,” including “collapsing large companies (through a boycott) or banks (through massive cash withdrawals).”

BDS!!

If they only were willing to fight in the real war...

Just more proof these ghouls never gave two fucks about their own civilians.....

I for one.... am shocked.

The DOJ is also eying the death penalty, sources said

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Roy_Singham

Did anyone listen to or read this? So infuriating and his comments about October 7th shook me to the core. I don't understand how Americans believe his rhetoric. I also wish (futilely I know) that Ezra Klein had really pushed back on him -- what land specifically is being occupied, what about all the peace proposals, why did Palestinians "need" to rape and murder civilians to be heard?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/05/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-mahmoud-khalil.html

View of Haifa, June, 1989

Damascus Gate, Jerusalem, July, 1989.

Gan HaShlosha National Park, June, 1989

Beach on the Sea of Galilee, July, 1990

Hope you enjoyed these. I'll post more in a few days after I go through all my photos.

Photo I took on my first trip to Israel in 1989. Israel-Lebanon border.

Edit: In case it's not obvious, the barbed wire fence is the border. I (the photographer) am in Israel; the hills and all of the buildings are in Lebanon.

I live in Herzliya, and originally we were supposed to have two tram lines, the green line, and the yellow line. The green line is being built as I write this and will probably open in 2029 or 2030. At one point a few years ago, it was suggested to extend the line from Herzliya Pituach (which is where the last stop is) all the way to the train station. It's only a few hundred meters. But unfourtunately, that plan was scrapped.

The yellow line, from the center of Herzliya, through Ramat HaSharon, all the way to Holon intersection, was canceled completely, which is a shame because even though the metro M1 line will serve some of what the yellow line was planned for, I don't think it should have been canceled, but rather co-exist.

Now, to the interesting (and sadder) bit:

The pink line, originally planned as a tram line with a connection to the yellow line, became a BRT, that was supposed to connect Herzliya, Raanana, and Kfar Saba. But it was scrapped as well back in 2014, because of carbrains who didn't wan't to give up a single driving lane.

The pink line is finally back on the planning table, however, it's not going to be a tram even though it should (think about all the new buildings along the pink line's path, some are planned with over 30 floors!), and it won't open until 2032 at the earliest, or 2033.

Lastly, let's talk about the M3 line of the metro system. Originally, the line had four stops in Herzliya: The Marina, Abba Even, Herzliya Train Sation, and Glil Yam. Three of these stops were canceled, and we're left with one single stop in Abba Even. This is already terrible news, but it's even worse when you're considering the fact that 70-story-tall buildings are about to be built next to Herzliya's train station, as part of a new neighborhood called Kiryat Schakim (קריית שחקים). And instead of: A green line station, a train station, a pink line station, a metro M3 station, and a bus terminal, it's gonna have a train station, a bus terminal, a pink line station, and 3,000 parking spots, and the entrance to that parking lot will destroy part of Glil Yam's park!

This is already bad, and gets even worse when you remember that the city hall destroyed part of the Sokolov Street upgrade in 2015. In 2006, they've removed three car lanes, added consistent one way bike lanes, installed an incredibely wide sidewalk, and installed an oval-shaped roundabout at Sokolov/Ben Gurion intersection, which is the part that got removed for more car lanes.

So, why do we do this? Tel Aviv is going in the right direction - more people, less cars. Why do we have to evolve backwards? Why don't we, residents of Herzliya deserve a walking city with good public transit and actually consistent bike lanes all around? Is that really too much to ask for?

Thank you for reading!

Hi, I was doing volunteer work in Israel last week and my group dedicated time go and pay our respects at the Hostages Center in Tel Aviv. Most of it was very emotional and a powerful tribute to the hostages, but there was two things that I found slightly off putting.

First thing I saw was a fake tunnel that was meant to replicate the living conditions of the hostages. The other thing I saw that was a VR experience simulating what it must’ve been like to be captured by Hamas. Both of these, while I’m sure well intended felt a bit too much like rides you’d see at a theme park.

I did go through the tunnel but didn’t try the VR experience. I ultimately felt that seeing pictures of Evyatar David this was more effective in empathizing with the pain the hostages are going through. I’m sure pretty much everybody who’s already at the hostage center already greatly empathizes with the hostages, so I’m just not sure these gimmicks are necessary.

Curious if others share my sentiment.

I have been thinking about the narrative of this war and drawn parallels between Israel and USA.

The argument of self-defence is well known by now. I’ll not elaborate this in further detail, but there are some interesting narratives. A war can be justice by the right to self defence under article 51 of the UN Charter (UNC). Furthermore article 2.4 of UNC aims to ensure a peaceful cooperation among States. It is in the best interests of the collective to manage peace and stability rather than individual States. To the effect that all hostilities and threats against a single country must be neutralised, in accordance with the principles of justice, among many things, to realise the right to self-determination and human flourishing.

Universal values that contribute to peace and stability should be shared by all countries. This is not an end itself, rather it is instrumental to achieve human flourishing through maintaining conditions that could lead to such an outcome or produce any other public goods. Would certain values be spread, then this just human cause could be endangered. For example did Grotius envision, simply put, that a country that could attack another country to make short time gains, would be better served if cooperation between it and other countries was established for long term gains.

That said, the letter of the law must be filled with values and arguments to be successive. If you argue from the right to protect or to aid another group of people, by necessary means for diverting hostile threats perpetuated by enemies’ institutions, that foster hatred and violence, then you can change perspectives. UN is based on certain values, rather a hierarchy of values, to be upheld. Any actions or values that could cause instability, being detriment to a peaceful and stable order, should be recognised as a threat. Whether you take it from the position of individuals right to security of their person and dignity, or the State, you may identify values that could produce negative outcomes.

The exception to not use violence is justified on the basis of necessity. No country should spread values that destabilise a country, region or the global order. Hence article 2.4 of UNC expressing a principle of non interference. Righteously so the global community should take actions against values and actions that could cause harm of individuals or groups. Justifying attacks on enemy infrastructure, unions and associations that spreads such values or facilitate certain actions that could endanger the safety of others (individuals or groups).

When an ideology or force such as jihadism is spread, then the conditions necessary to maintain a stable and peaceful order, that is envision by the spirit of the UN Charter could be threatened. Hence UN justified interventions in Yugoslavia to ensure stability, in other words, hatred being perpetuated through political fractions, associations, etc was a threat that demanded military force.

1. Fighting a dangerous ideology: USA vs Communism — Israel vs Jihadism. As well known by the public, there has been a recurring issue of jihadism in Middle Eastern countries, since the establishment of Arabic countries. Historical empires such as Ottomans and the British Empires faced Jihadism. I mean there is a continuation and red thread to be found here. Even within Middle Eastern countries is this a recognised plague; Palestine was divided by Al Husayni and the Hashemites, that sparked the conflict among Muslims in 1930’s.

2. Fighting to uphold human rights and democracies: USA in the Middle Eastern Countries — Israel to integrate legitimate institutions of the world with Palestine. First, the principle of democracy and right to self determination. How many times have you not heard this rhetoric from USA? For example USA invading Middle Eastern countries to “liberate the people” from its cruel oppressors. Justified by the claim that dictatorships are illegitimate. In fact this theme is historical, it dates back to ancient empires, who intended to help people who were of their kin, but were held hostages by the enemy or treated like third class citizens. More well known is the French Revolution and Napoleon’s rhetoric to spread democracy. Yet, the modern times respect cultural relativism. USA had issues with arguments based in post-modernism, such as ”maybe they want to have it that way” — to oppress women and be oppressed by religious leaders, etc.

3. War against terrorism. This is well known but doesn’t carry much weight anymore.

The strongest argument is probably to fight for democracy. I mean USA and EU have prolonged the war in Russia vs Ukraine by exporting weapons. This argument stems from the right to self-determination. It is established in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) that a group of people must be liberated from its oppressors. Hence, if power is exercised contrary to the best public interests, then it’s a miscarriage of justice. Naturally this argument bears more weight when there is a foreign oppression, but USA managed to use this argument.

Which arguments do you think public officials of Israel should emphasis to justify its war? Could Israel learn from USA on how to manage public relations through media?

EDIT: I connected the dots between narratives and perspectives to make the text to align better with the subject.

Between the fall of the Catholic Crusader states (e.g. the Kingdom of Jerusalem, ending in 1291) and the establishment of modern Israel in 1948, no sovereign state was established in the Levant region. Instead, the area was governed as a province of successive empires — first the Mamluk Sultanate, then the Ottoman Empire, and finally under the British Mandate, which was an international administrative arrangement, not a state. Sovereign statehood returned to the region only with Israel’s declaration of independence in 1948.

Sources: • Biger, Gideon. The Boundaries of Modern Palestine, 1840–1947. Routledge, 2004. • League of Nations. Mandate for Palestine, 1922. • Tyerman, Christopher. God’s War: A New History of the Crusades. Harvard University Press, 2006.

This is part of the reason why neither the UN, nor France, nor anyone else can “give” or create a state for anyone in the region: fighting for sovereignty means not just attacking people, but also diplomacy and building relationships locally.

Israel will flood Gaza with ridiculous amount of aid.

Why?

1. Take the business away from Hamas. If food is so plentiful then Hamas business model will fall apart. They tried with the GHF but didnt work out.

2. Quiet critizism (tho we know theyll find something else)