Sometimes the lows to which some NGOs stoop to attack Israel are truly breathtaking. After a Palestinian man crashed his car into a checkpoint near Jerusalem in 2020, it was abundantly clear that his actions were deliberate. But apparently not to journalists at the Guardian and Sky News, who are taking a malicious, tendentious anti-Israel ‘investigation’ far too seriously.
Before directly addressing the reporting and the original investigation by Forensic Architecture titled “The Extra-Judicial killing of Ahmad Erekat”, funded by the radical anti-Israel group Al-Haq, it’s worth taking a moment to watch a video of the incident.
Footage of the incident clearly shows Erekat’s car speeding up at the last moment, and simultaneously suddenly veering rightwards — directly at a group of Israeli border police, one of whom is sent flying through the air by the force of the impact.
Within moments of the crash, the driver hastily exits his vehicle and the startled troops shoot him in self-defense before he could continue the attack.
Join the fight for Israel’s fair coverage in the news
Before proceeding any further, it should be pointed out that there is a recent history of Palestinian terrorists using cars to ram Israeli troops, police officers, and civilians. In one horrific case, a three-month old baby was killed. There has also been a pattern of such attacks proceeding to a secondary stage, in which assailants have exited their vehicles and then used knives to attack Israelis.
Back to the incident analyzed by the Forensic Architecture ‘study.’ According to Sky News‘s Mark Stone, “The video showed him exiting the car and walking backwards with his arms raised as he is shot several times.”
That’s a spectacularly misleading, false description. Erakat was not “walking backwards.” He exited his car swiftly and in a manner that was taken to be aggressive, especially given what had happened a second earlier. In the video above, Erekat car door opens at 0:05, and he plants a foot on the ground at 0:06. Within two seconds, he is on the ground having been shot multiple times (0:08). Those are facts. The statement that he was “walking backwards” is not.
It is abundantly clear that, fearing for their lives, the border police officers made a split-second decision to act in self-defense before Erekat could get any closer. In being confronted at short range, Erekat instinctively moves his hands upwards but by this point the soldiers’ self-defense mechanism had fully kicked in, and it was too late for them to even begin processing the possibility (however low) that this was an accident. Somehow Stone casts this fight-or-flight reaction as if the Israelis deliberately shot a man who was walking backwards with his back turned. That’s quite simply untrue.
Later on, Stone uncritically describes how Forensic Architecture had “concluded that, contrary to the authorities’ assertion the vehicle accelerated into the checkpoint, it maintained a constant speed until just before the impact.”
One does not need to consult with a forensic collision expert to see that this is utter nonsense. The vehicle visibly speeds up in the crash.
Stone similarly repeats FA’s analysis that (emphasis added), “Erekat might have braked at the last moment.”
Whereas Stone, to his credit, notes that the investigation was supported by Al Haq and mentions claims that “its director, Shawan Jabarin, has links to the PFLP, internationally recognised as terrorist organisation,” a similar article appearing in the Guardian fails to note Al Haq’s PFLP connection.
Titled, “Israeli checkpoint killing of Palestinian was an execution, report claims” Guardian writer Oliver Holmes’ piece manages to not only omit this inconvenient fact, but also the essential background that, since 2016, Palestinian terrorists have used cars to ram Israeli troops, police officers, and civilians on over 40 separate occasions.
A third article, by the Independent‘s Bel Trew, “Family of Palestinian man shot dead by Israelis call for his body to be returned eight months on,” is accompanied by the ominous subheadline, “New investigation finds Ahmed Erekat posed no threat before being shot.” This article totally fails to mention Al Haq’s funding of the study, much less its terror links.
Important evidence neglected by ‘study’ and media reports
While Stone and other journalists lend the Forensic Architecture analysis credence, the truth was obvious enough for Gaza-based terror groups to recognize, as researcher Joe Truzman noted:
I completely disagree with this assessment. The salafi-jihadist groups in #Gaza recognized it as an attack and lauded it. They also included it in a video published last year about successful operations against Israelis. https://t.co/jFHotSJKKU pic.twitter.com/CJA3gIO37b
— Joe Truzman (@Jtruzmah) February 23, 2021
Similarly, not a single report in the British media mentioned a much-talk about ‘suicide video’ recorded by Erekat. Whereas there was some debate as to when exactly it was produced, (some say on the morning of the attack, others believe earlier that month,) it clearly is relevant and indicates a possible motive. That’s a highly significant piece of evidence in a ‘forensic investigation’ like this, yet it was neglected altogether.
Forensic Architecture’s Anti-Israel Propaganda Machine
The content of the report should not be in the least surprising to those acquainted with Forensic Architecture – a research lab with a heavy anti-Israel bent.
Forensic Architecture describes itself as a “research agency, based at Goldsmiths, University of London, investigating human rights violations including violence committed by states, police forces, militaries, and corporations.”
On its face, Forensic Architecture appears impressive and serves as an important contribution to human rights worldwide. However, a little digging reveals that Forensic Architecture has conducted 69 investigations so far. 17 have involved Israel. This isn’t a lab investigating human rights failings – it’s a political lobby under the guise of ‘research’ available for rent by extremist groups such as Al-Haq, an NGO with ties to the PFLP, designated as a terror group by the US, EU and many others for its waves of plane hijackings, shootings, and bombing campaigns targeting Israelis and Jews around the world.
This is not the first time that Forensic Architecture is responsible for a politically-motivated “investigation” resulting in negative news coverage for Israel.
This is the research agency behind the front-page revelation in the New York Times in December 2018 that a Palestinian medic was killed by mistake after a bullet fragment tragically ricocheted into her, but nevertheless managed to suggest that her killing was perhaps not accidental. Forensic Architecture claimed to have collected and analyzed more than 1,000 photos and videos – proof that collecting masses upon masses of data is not the same as thoroughness, let alone basic honesty.
It’s also the research agency whose director prompted an astonishing story in the Financial Times attacking Israeli shrubs and trees for “erasing memory” of other peoples. And the organization apparently spent 16 months investigating Israel’s use of herbicide on the Gaza border, eventually decrying Israeli crop dusting as a sinister activity, a story which ended up being covered by The Guardian.
It’s worth noting, too, that the organization is run by Eyal Weizman, an Israeli expat who also conducted research on behalf of B’Tselem on the “planning aspects of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank,” and who has close ties to multiple radical left-wing organizations operating in Israel. He has also been declared a “security threat” by the United States and denied entry to the country.
B’Tselem, for example, has been accused of “major omissions and distortions,” using figures that are not reliable, and failing to present definitive evidence that would justify its allegations that Israel violated international humanitarian law during the 2014 war against Hamas in Gaza. More recently, it has produced a report which describes Israel as practising apartheid — a move so obviously false that even the Guardian was moved to call it “a deliberate provocation”.
Forensic Architecture has also undertaken “research” for Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Doctors without Borders (MSF), the Red Cross (ICRC) and the United Nations — all organizations with dubious records when it comes to Israel.
This may not be the first time it has produced a scandalous ‘investigation’ that repeatedly fails to abide by basic journalistic standards, but in working hand-in-hand with an organization with document terror links, Forensic Architecture has sunk to a new low.
Back when I studied at university, I was told by a professor to never design research in such a way as to prove a theory correct. Instead, I should be guided to my conclusion by the facts. Sadly, for all Forensic Architecture’s glitzy graphics, large budget and academic pretenses, the research it has conducted falls well short of those standards and is a lamentable demonstration in sheer intellectual dishonesty.
That multiple major British media outlets have failed to see through the charade, neglected to ask tough questions, and elected to give this study uncritical coverage is a sad indictment of the state of journalism today.
