147: Are the allegations in NAZA true?

What you'll learn

• 1 (00:04) **Opening – Why a Skeptical Framework Matters** - Haviv introduces the episode as a response to subscriber questions about the film *NAZA* (*Nezic Agavi*), which premiered at Venice and generated political upheaval in Israel, while noting he hasn’t seen it.
• 2 (03:31) **Clarifying the Legal Framework – Proportionality and Collateral Damage** - Haviv dismantles the online claim that predicting civilian deaths proves murder, explaining that estimating civilian casualties is mandatory under international law for proportionality judgments.
• 3 (05:26) **What the Film Must Show to Be Persuasive** - Haviv outlines the specific evidence needed to prove wrongdoing: unreliable target identification, inflated military value claims, excessive casualties compared to military gain, and ignored feasible precautions at scale.
• 4 (07:47) **Problems with Anonymity and Tendentious Framing** - Haviv critiques the film’s use of anonymous interviewees and its activist framing, citing a review by Raviv Drucker in Haaretz who questioned the film’s fairness.
• 5 (10:16) **Skepticism of the Filmmakers – The 83% Civilian Casualty Claim** - Haviv examines a prior investigation by filmmaker Yuval Abraham and the Guardian that claimed 83% of Gaza war dead were civilians, arguing the headline was misleading.
• 6 (16:27) **How Authentic Information Can Mislead** - Haviv warns that real databases and real officer testimony can be presented to support false conclusions, using the example of a captain horrified by loosened CBE requirements without knowing the broader military context.
• 7 (18:51) **Funding, Editorial Culture, and Incentive Structures** - Haviv discusses how the Guardian’s role and foreign funding shape the film’s editorial judgment, creating incentives to tell a story their audience wants to hear.

+ Full timestamped outline available in the app