On Sept. 30, 2000, almost seven years ago to this day, Mohammed al Dura was shot and killed in Gaza while cowering behind his father during a clash between Israeli forces and Palestinian militants.
It was described at the time as "an image that will haunt the world."
Israel immediately apologized for the shooting and said the bullets had "apparently" come from their soldiers. But, very quickly, Israel and its supporters began challenging the video and the story.
This week, on the seventh anniversary of the iconic event, the story is making new headlines as Israeli officials are again accusing Palestinians of staging Mohammed's death.
The controversy has been resurrected because of a pending court case in France in which the French television journalist who aired the dramatic footage in 2000 sued a media watchdog who accused the reporter of staging the shooting.
The journalist won the case, but the media watchdog has filed an appeal. Now, the judge in the case has ordered release of the full video in hopes of resolving the legal questions.
But airing the unedited 27-minute video is unlikely to end the controversy.
Those that have seen the raw video have said there is no clear shot of Mohammed's death, but that the father-and-son are clearly coming under fire.
The site of the shooting was quickly razed by the Israeli military -- something that made investigating the case difficult -- and the Israeli settlement where Mohammed was shot was razed itself two years ago when Israel ended 38-years of military rule in Gaza.
In today's Wall Street Journal, Israel's Natan Sharansky calls the shooting a "Palestinian Propaganda Coup."
So, who shot Mohammed Al Dura?
Israeli investigators said it could have been Israeli or Palestinian fire. In 2003, James Fallows wrote a piece for The Atlantic Monthly that raised questions about the Palestinian version of events, but concluded that "the truth about this case will probably never be determined."
Ironically, this shooting is returning to the front pages just as human rights groups are urging Israeli officials to prosecute soldiers for the death of 10-year-old Abir Aramin, the daughter of a Palestinian peace activist who was killed last January when she was caught in the middle of a clash between Israeli Border Police and Palestinian demonstrators near her school.
Palestinian eyewitnesses said Abir was hit in the head by a rubber-coated metal bullet fired by Israeli soldiers who fired on the demonstrators. Israel suggested that the girl might have been hit in the head by a stone thrown by Palestinian protesters.
This summer Israeli prosecutors said they were closing the case for lack of evidence.
"Have we become accustomed to killing children, to military jeeps entering civilian villages and cities and pulling the triggers of their weapons with inconceivable ease?" the Israeli human rights group Yesh Din asks in its appeal.
A similar dispute arose last year when eight Palestinians were killed during a beach picnic after Israel started shelling the Gaza Strip coastline.
As with Mohammed al Dura, a local cameraman captured tragic images of the scene. In this case, the cameraman caught an anguished 11-year-old Huda Ghaliya wailing over her dead father on the dunes.
The footage became another potent rallying cry for Palestinians fighting the occupation. Huda's name is often mentioned along with Mohammed al Dura's when Palestinians talk about martyrs killed by Israel.
As with Mohammed al Dura, Israel initially apologized and then began to raise questions, even though the evidence suggested that the eight Palestinians had been killed by Israeli artillery.
With such potent images, you might think that Israel would invite independent investigators in to settle the matter. But Israel regularly rebuffs attempts by outsiders to look into such cases.
A few weeks after the beach shelling, Israel refused to allow Nobel laureate Desmond Tutu lead a UN team to Gaza to investigate the shelling of a Gaza Strip neighborhood that killed 19 Palestinians.
In that case, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert apologized for the shelling and said it had been caused by a "technical error."
But Israeli leaders voiced no regrets about barring Tutu and suggested that the highly-respected South African archbishop's fact finding team would have been "one sided and cynical."
Since Mohammed Al Dura was killed seven years ago, more than 850 Palestinian children have been killed by Israeli soldiers. (About 120 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians over the same period.)
Because there are no solid, impartial investigations of the various incidents, they live on as rallying cries for those on both sides looking for things to bolster their existing views of the conflict.
As James Fallows wrote of Mohammed al Dura: "the truth about this case will probably never be determined. Or, to put it more precisely, no version of truth that is considered believable by all sides will ever emerge. For most of the Arab world, the rights and wrongs of the case are beyond dispute: an innocent boy was murdered, and his blood is on Israel's hands. Mention of contrary evidence or hypotheses only confirms the bottomless dishonesty of the guilty parties—much as Holocaust-denial theories do in the Western world. For the handful of people collecting evidence of a staged event, the truth is also clear, even if the proof is not in hand..."
"For anyone else who knows about Mohammed al-Dura but is not in either of the decided camps—the Arabs who are sure they know what happened, the revisionists who are equally sure—the case will remain in the uncomfortable realm of events that cannot be fully explained or understood...
"The significance of this case from the American perspective involves the increasingly chaotic ecology of truth around the world. In Arab and Islamic societies the widespread belief that Israeli soldiers shot this boy has political consequences. So does the belief among some Israelis and Zionists in Israel and abroad that Palestinians will go to any lengths to smear them. Obviously, these beliefs do not create the basic tensions in the Middle East. The Israeli policy of promoting settlements in occupied territory, and the Palestinian policy of terror, are deeper obstacles. There would never have been a showdown at the Netzarim crossroads, or any images of Mohammed al Dura's shooting to be parsed in different ways, if there were no settlement nearby for IDF soldiers to protect.
"The images intensify the self-righteous determination of each side. If anything, modern technology has aggravated the problem of mutually exclusive realities. With the Internet and TV, each culture now has a more elaborate apparatus for "proving," dramatizing, and disseminating its particular truth."