Daniel Seaman and Mohammed Al-Dura affair

The letter sent by Daniel Seaman, the director of the Israel Government Press Office (GPO), already made a lot of noise in the media - both the establishment and the blogosphere. However...

But first let me state loud and clear:

1. I would love to see it proved that Mohammed Al-Dura wasn't in fact killed by IDF and that the story of his death is a staged production
2. I would love to see IDF exonerated in this affair, and I am in total agreement with Mr Seaman when his says: "Israel was accused of murdering a small child after the event by the world press and his image has been burned into the collective Arab memory as a symbol of the brutality of the Zionist state."
3. Even if it may seem too late (seven years), I would love to see Hamas, Fatah and all the assorted terrorist gangs stripped off that icon that served them so faithfully in the propaganda war.

Saying the above, I would like to understand what is really going on with that sudden vortex of activity and its timing.

...a group of Israeli lawyers, the Israel Law Center, has repeatedly petitioned the Israel Government Press Office to revoke France 2’s press credentials. The press office’s director, Danny Seaman, denied the latest request, but in his response to the lawyers, accused the French network of manipulating its footage and harming Israel.

Why the heck has Danny Seaman chosen the moment to issue that accusation now? To remind you some salient facts:

• There is a lot of indications that the video of the boy's death was staged
• None of these indications, even taken together, constitute sufficient legal proof as to the video being faked
• IDF has indeed petitioned the French court to allow it to see the uncut video, and indeed "Last month, a French court ordered France 2 to release unedited 7-year-old footage of Al-Dura's death for renewed investigations into the incident. "
• But the video has not been released yet, and there is absolutely no certainty that it would provide the sufficient proof (although I hope it will)
• The video is supposed to be viewed in the court in mid November

So why the heck has Daniel Seaman felt the urge to come out (after seven years of waiting with almost no new relevant information in hand) with a statement that is called "official" by many hasty journalists and bloggers, while not being official at all? Just look at this:

The Prime Minister's Bureau said it was not informed of Seaman's letter, nor did it grant its approval.

Daniel Seaman is indeed heading the GPO, but GPO is not a mouthpiece of PM or any ministry. GPO's role is defined quite clearly here and does not include issuing official government statements.

It is clear that this statement will be exceedingly damaging if the famous uncut video does not provide legally acceptable proof of the scene of death being a fake. It is also clear that the whole brouhaha could not have come at a worse time. So why?

Any ideas anyone?

P.S. Yes, I do not like Daniel Seaman. So?

***