the region. our message to anybody, and i can't confirm this report, our message to anybody who seeks to escalate and deepen the conflict, be mindful of how seriously we take our national security interests. 220 palestinians killed in the west bank, 197 since the beginning of the year, and how concerning that netanyahu is opening a new war front in the west bank considering -- >> the president spoke to this himself out in the rose garden talking about how dangerous extremists in the west bank are killing innocent palestinians. it's deeply concerning. each and every one of them is a tragedy, too. >> it's expected the senate will move forward to confirm jack liu as ambassador to israel. how do you see his role and impact on negotiations, is there a way to -- i know why there is concern with israel about fuel, but in terms of power or other of those services, you talked about wanting to see restoration, is there some other package that could be moved forward that you think could provide some relief to civilians, but not undermine israel's military goals? >> i'm not sure what you mean by package. i'll try it this way, you tell me if i'm wrong. we look forward to the confirmation hearing for ambassador to israel, it's a terrific thing, he's more than qualified to be our ambassador to israel and very excited to get him over there so he can get on the ground and start leading our efforts to support israel and their fight against hamas but also to help us integrate and continue to lead the effort to get humanitarian assistance to people of gaza and our expectation is that mr. lui will take the lead on the issues once he's on the ground. question about a package -- >> when i said package, like complement of those different types of utilities or resources that would be beneficial but are not undermining the israeli military capability. is there some way to try to have less of what you are asking for that could be a benefit. >> we would argue and have argued that all of those essential services as i mentioned in my opening statement are critical, all important and all urgent right now. particularly fuel. l and fuel is related to the water problem because they use it to, for the pumps at the desalination plants. we would argue they are all critical and we are working this in realtime. some food got in on the trucks today, bottled water, i'm sorry, water -- some water got in on the trucks today, sorry, no fuel has gotten in. and the existing stocks are dang near down to 0 and that's perilous for the hospital, water pumps, and so we are working hard with israel to make sure we can find some accommodations to get fuel in. i've heard this argument as particularly by, you know, some of the republicans in the house that you know, or even in the senate, by putting fuel in there, we are helping hamas. i want to be very clear on this. we have seen no indication, none, that hamas has gotten their hands on any of the humanitarian assistance that has gone in, none of it. it goes from these u.n. trucks to humanitarian organizations and the u.n. for delivery to the people of gaza, that's what we have seen with every single one of them and the fuel, the fuel existing in tanks that they could tap simply went to existing legitimate humanitarian needs and we will and we have tried to make assurances to the israelis that we will continue to monitor fuel should it go in with the same diligence that we have in our u.n. partners monitoring the food and the water and the medicine. >> netanyahu said the fuel is being withheld by hamas. have you had any kind of confirmation from him or pushback from him trying to get fuel into the gaza strip? >> the israelis have expressed concerns about getting into gaza and we understand where the concerns are coming from because hamas wants this fuel as well to keep their tunnels lit and to support their own needs, their -- for their own vehicle and power need. it's a legitimate concern, no question about that. our argument is that it's also legitimate need of the innocent civilians in gaza who are suffering and desperate need of continued medical care and freshwater to drink and so what we are working on with israel is accommodation, they can be confident that it's not going to go to hamas, and we confident it's going to get in and get to the people in need and we are working on that. i won't talk about our diplomatic conversations in any great detail. i'll tell you we understand concerns, they are not illegitimate and we are working very hard to address those. >> admiral, i believe you have -- the president has, a lot of people have said the information coming from the gaza health ministry is not reliable because it's from hamas. on social media terrible things are happening, presumably to civilians, children in gaza. does the united states have its own estimate of what's happening and how many people in gaza and where should the rest of us get accurate information on that? >> we are doing the best we can to try to get an assessment of the scope of the casualties and you can imagine we are pulling from multiple different sources. we are not taking the ministry of health number at face value, and we are talking to partners on the ground now that we have direct linkage with aid organizations on the ground as the trucks are getting in, we are getting more fidelity on the situation. so we are pulling from multiple sources. and without spouting a whole number here, i can tell you we are convinced that there have been many thousands of civilian deaths in gaza thus far in the conflict and said before and say it again, each and every one of them is a tragedy. each and every one of them we should work to prevent. we know that each and every one of them means there's some grieving family somewhere out there that's going to need support and help. we know that. so we are continuing to monitor as best we can and continuing to stay in touch with our israeli counterparts about the need to reduce and minimize civilian casualties as much as possible. >> back to this blast in northern gaza, what is clear is that there are and will be many, many casualties as a result. the president and everyone on down have made very clear that they are urging israelis to minimize civilian casualties as much as possible. is it clear at this point that that is not happening, that civilian casualties are not being minimized? >> if you are asked about that specific explosion, i don't know. i don't have any -- >> also with that -- >> as i've said repeatedly, m.j., we are not going to react to every event in realtime but certainly recognize that civilians have been hurt, civilians have been hurt to the tune of many thousands, that infrastructure has been damaged by these airstrikes. we recognize that. we observed that and we are not accepting of any single civilian death in gaza. they are all tragedies, and we continue to work and will continue to work with the israelis about the need to respect human life and to try to limit civilian casualties. what i said yesterday, though, needs to be repeated. that unlike russia and ukraine, and unlike what hamas did on the 7th of october, the killing of civilians is not a war aim of israel. i'm not denying that it's happening. of course it is. and it's tragic. but it is not the goal of israeli forces to go out and deliberately take innocent civilian life and they have tried to make efforts to minimize that. >> but would you go as far as to say that israel is not successfully minimizing civilian casualties in gaza? >> i would say -- what i said to you before. it's obvious to us that they are -- that they are trying to minimize. >> secretary blinken said today u.s. officials are in close communication with americans stuck in gaza wanting to leave, phone calls, emails, via whatsapp. what's being communicated to those americans in those messages? >> i would refer you to the state department to speak to that more specifically than me here at the nsc, but we understand it's to keep them informed about the efforts to try to get them out and know we are not tiring and we are going to keep trying to do that. >> you have specific guidance on where they should go -- >> i don't. you have to talk to state department about that. they are in direct contact. >> john, hamas is claiming they will free some foreign hostages in the next few days. has the u.s. been alerted to this by official channels? >> first i'm hearing that report. we have to see whether it pans out or not. obviously we want that to be the case. >> are you hearing about the crossing into egypt opening tomorrow to allow some injured palestinians out? >> i've not heard that report. >> given the airstrikes in, on the refugee camps near gaza city, would now be the time for a humanitarian pause? i know you've said u.s. position is no ceasefire, you don't support a ceasefire. but would now be the time for humanitarian pause? >> without getting into the specific moment we are in right now or litigating this from the white house podium, we do believe humanitarian pauses could be of value but they have to be -- you have to have -- has to be credible support on both sides here for where to do it, when to do it and what purpose. and we are working with partners in the region, including those with a direct line of communication with hamas to see if that's possible. the goal would be to get aid in, to maybe get people out that want to evacuate, and also valuable humanitarian pause every now and then would be valuable if there is a serious effort to get hostages out. you need a pause on the fight to think do that safely. >> can you talk more about the humanitarian aid and the flow and what is keeping more and more, larger numbers of trucks from going in? is it israel and egypt, not agreeing to allow that to happen, and is it -- >> there's and a myriad -- there's been a myriad of factors here. i mean, part of it is, you know, there's got to be an inspection regime for each truck so that everybody can have confidence in what is in those trucks. so that they have to be opened up, be inspected, and that obviously slows things down. it's not like october 6th, it's now a war zone, and there are belligerents here and make sure that what's going in is legitimately humanitarian assistance. and because it's a war zone, you know, it's not -- the trucks themselves, their travel in country is potentially dangerous and strikes on roads and infrastructure that may alter how they get to the destination and making sure there are people on the other end to receive the material and get it to people desperately in need. just like a natural disaster, i'm not trying to minimize this, but in times of a natural disaster, delivery of essentials just getting harder and it's harder. a lot of factors in here, but we are working through all that and again, while we admit it's a trickle and not good enough, it still seems to be on the upper trajectory day-by-day, and that's a good thing. and we do think, hope that within, you know, coming days we can get up to 100 trucks a day. still not going to be enough, but a lot more than what we are doing right now. >> mr. kirby, thousands of palestinians have fallen so far, including 160 of my own relatives. how many palestinian civilians need to be killed before the united states calls for a ceasefire? >> first of all, my condolences to you and your family. are you in touch with some -- >> well -- not as much as i can. >> not as much as you would like to be. i'm very sorry to hear that, sorry to hear that, i can see it's obviously personal for you. it's personal for the president, too. we don't want to see any more civilian casualties so in terms of a ceasefire, our concern with that is that hamas benefits to the tune of being able to refit, renew themselves, plan and execute additional attacks. and as i said yesterday, right now is not the time for a general ceasefire. it is, however, the time to consider pauses in the fighting long enough so that folks like your relatives and family members can get this incredibly needed humanitarian assistance and perhaps a way to get out if they want to get out. so we are supporting that, and we'll see what we can do. but again, my deepest condolences. >> another question if i may. now, you know, you talk about creating a safe corridor where gazans can leave if they want to. does the united states guarantee it's not going to be like 1948, and they are not allowed to return? >> as i said in my opening statement, our policy is not to have some sort of permanent settlement outside of gaza for the people who call that home. we want them to be able to go back home and do so safely and effectively. we are not calling for them -- their permanent refuge from the country. >> and during the weekend prime minister netanyahu referenced a malachite, talking about the genocide in the biblical times, is that a concern for the u.s. administration? >> i'm afraid i'm not qualified to speak on biblical history here, but obviously i think we have been crystal clear, not only there, but around the world on our concerns about genocide about by any leader and that's not what we are seeing israel desire to do. they are going after hamas terrorist, after their leadership, that attacked their country on october 7th in a gross and barbaric fashion. they are not interested in genocidal activity to the people of gaza. now again, we recognize there have been many thousands of casualties. way too many, should be 0, we understand that. but their war aim as i said earlier is not to target the innocent civilians of gaza. their war aim is to go after hamas. >> thank you, john. the people in this country making violent anti-semitic threats, are they domestic terrorists? >> i don't know that we are classifying people as domestic terrorists for that. i mean, that's really a question better left to law enforcement. i'm not aware that there's been such a characterization of that. >> ok. the fbi director said today the ongoing war in the middle east has raised the threat of attack in the americans to the united states to a whole other level. has the white house considered the possibility that a terrorist could be in the country right now after crossing the southern border? >> peter, we are always concerned about the potential presence on u.s. soil of terrorists, coming from overseas. something we are always worried about. >> but there was this bulletin last week, c bp in san diego, said militants may be encountered. 600,000 known got-aways just in the last fiscal year. >> yeah. >> is there any heartburn about leaving the border in such a condition that one of those 600,000 could be a terrorist? >> let me just break this down for you just a little bit here. first of all, i can't speak to this intelligence report that was leaked to the media. i would not do that. i can tell you that we are constantly monitoring as best we can all ports of entry to the country for the potential arrival of anybody who might wish us harm. and one of the things the president asked for in this supplemental was additional funding for border security, for like 1500 more border patrol agents and better technology at the border. i mean, so again, we would urge congress to take a look at that supplemental request and pass it. but if the general gist of your question are we taking the potential threat seriously, of course we are. >> is it possible somebody who wants to commit a terrorist attack during an elevated threat crossed the southern border into the united states already? >> i couldn't possibly answer that question, peter. all i can do is tell you that we have remained vigilant to that potential threat. >> john, can you give us an update how talks with the qataris are going to help the hostages get out? >> what i can assure we are having discussions with our partners in the region and qatar has been useful in that regard. discussions about getting the hostages out. >> following up on m.j.'s question. >> idf confirmed the attack on the refugee camp and the hospital was an israel one. how do you square with what you are saying about israel trying to avoid civilian deaths? >> again, you are getting me unawares here, jeff. i didn't see that comment or that report. so i -- i don't want to speculate about what might have happened -- >> john: all right, so we are going to jump out of the white house briefing, we have trey yingst up live in southern israel and more information on what the idf confirms was a strike at jabalia refugee camp, densely populated area of gaza. what do we know? >> yeah, john, i'm going to step out of the frame here and have my cameraman push in here. you can see the israelis have fired a flare over the northern part of gaza. we are learning more about the strike that took place earlier today on the jabalia refugee camp. israelis say fighter jets targeted the commander of hamas's central battalion, he was responsible, according to the israelis for a number of attacks and you can see more flares fired there, that will illuminate the sky so you can see the area. and explosion there in the distance. as i'm giving you this information here, john, some sort of firefight taking place in the northern part of the gaza strip beneath where the flares are fired. heavy machine gunfire and targeted airstrikes, israelis appear to be calling in some air support. as for the response, though, from the israeli military following palestinian media report that states many civilians were killed, israelis said they were targeting a senior hamas commander who leads the jabalia battalion, and they say they killed more than 50 operatives in the northern part of the strip. active how the fighting is and challenging, and john kirby, his statement, it's a challenging spot for the americans to be in. the question is how many civilian casualties is considered acceptable in war, and war is incredibly messy, it is tragic, and there are so many innocent lives that are lost as a result. and so the israelis have to make a calculation of their own, when they go to take out a senior commander that is surrounded by a civilian population. that's a calculation that the israelis make and it is a calculation they will be criticized for as the war continues because they have killed a number of top hamas officials and commanders but many civilians have died as a result. john. >> aishah: trey, you are right. john kirby was asked directly about the camp attack and he actually said he had not seen the report so did not want to answer. but you so eloquently described what he also said. i want to ask you, though, you've got some palestinian sources on the ground there that you talked to pretty much every day. this camp is in the northern area that the idf has been constantly telling the palestinians there, the civilians there to get out of. do we have any sort of reporting or indication that those civilians would have left this refugee camp? >> so we have been talking with palestinian sources inside the gaza strip since this war erupted and our understanding is that many did heed those warnings and head south. the problem is, some just didn't leave. they said they didn't have the that they were going to stay despite the warnings by the israeli military. remember, the israelis for days dropped leaflets in tha leaf le intended for gaza, the majority did land in the gaza strip but you can see in arabic, there are instructions for the palestinian civilians and jabalia is about right here on the map, and arrows saying to go south, the valley that separates the north and the south, and humanitarian zone, israelis say they are not going to strike. we should note, despite the calls for civilians to go south, the israelis are continuing their airstrikes in the southern part of the strip but their focus remains on the north, just behind us over the border, where earlier today we actually saw israeli forces operati