* Those who adhere to this scenario: This seems to be the favorite position of many who have examined the evidence enough to register how unlikely scenarios 1 and 2 are (e.g., James Fallows) and of most who have read or seen their analyses. It appeals especially to those who do not want to raise deeply troubling and politically incorrect scenarios (Scenario 4) or be accused of conspiracy theories (scenario 5). It includes some mainstream journalists who have investigated, as well as Jewish and Israeli leaders. It constitutes the minimalist position of those who have looked at the material: the Israelis almost surely did not do the shooting.
FOR
– Most of the recorded gunfire seems to come from the Palestinian side: The AP filmed a Palestinian policeman shooting from directly behind the Al-Durahs’ position, and the boy’s gaping stomach wound suggests an exit wound, so it’s possible that this gunfire hit Mohammed.
– Palestinians tend to fire wildly, even when they can’t see where they’re shooting, over fences or into holes in walls (see Pallywood movie).
– The two shots that hit the wall by the barrel near the Al-Durahs seem to come from the Palestinian position, based upon the following: Ballistic tests show that bullets coming from the angle of the Israeli position that day would have produced large clouds of dust kicking off behind the barrel at angle to the wall, but bullets shot from head on would produce small round circular dust clouds before the wind blew them away. These two identifiable shots filmed hitting near the Al-Durahs, which might explain the terror on the faces of father and son, come from the Palestinian side, possibly the “pita.”
AGAINST
– Fire from head-on seems deliberate: The two shots filmed hitting the wall are individual, not the product of “wild machine gun fire”, and the Palestinian gunmen who shot them would have had to miss their mark by almost ninety degrees in order to have shot them by accident. Jamal variously claimed that eight or 12 bullets hit him and three or four shots hit Mohammed.
One or two bullets is an accident; 12 to 15 fifteen shots grouped to an area indicates intentional targeting.
– The weight of the evidence that indicates that the boy was not shot during any of the the footage released by France 2: see Scenario 4 “against” or Scenario 5 “for.”
Share