Another bloody day in Gaza. Six dead. Among them, a cameraman for Al Jazeera. The Israeli military says it was targeting a 'militant cell.' The journalists' union says different.
This one cuts deep. Not just another statistic. The cameraman, Ahmed al-Shara, was well known. His images shaped the narrative of this war. Now he's gone. The IDF claims he was 'affiliated with a terrorist organisation.' No proof. Just a statement. The usual script.
The strike hit a residential area. The usual collateral damage. But six bodies mean six families shattered. The international community will call for restraint. Israel will promise an investigation. We've seen this play before.
The timing is notable. Comes as ceasefire talks are rumoured to be stalling. Is this a signal? A message to Hamas? Or just the fog of war? The Lobby will be buzzing. Officials will brief on background. Expect the line: 'Israel has a right to defend itself.' But who defends the truth?
Al Jazeera is no stranger to these losses. Its bureau has been bombed before. Its journalists have been killed before. The network is viewed with suspicion by many in the Israeli government. They see it as a mouthpiece for Hamas. This won't help.
Westminster reaction will be telling. The usual splits: Labour left calling for sanctions. The government offering 'concern' but standing by Israel. Expect a letter to the Foreign Secretary. An early day motion. But no real pressure. Never is.
The cameraman's death is a propaganda blow for Al Jazeera. A recruiting tool for Hamas. And a stark reminder of the cost of this conflict. For those who report on it, the risk is real.
I've covered enough of these stories. The pattern is always the same. Denials. Investigations. Burials. And then the next strike. The next dead journalist. The next statement of regret.
Six dead in Gaza. One of them a cameraman. The footage he captured will live on. His death will be forgotten by most. But not by the Lobby. We'll remember. We always do.
