[Sal]

So you're saying perhaps Waleed wasn't trying to distract the psycho as claimed by Anonymous (who was allegedly there), but was actually trying to warn Anonymous to hold still.

IOW Anonymous probably got his story wrong because that story doesn't hold up, but we should still accept it as he presents it, except with enough corrections to make it a little more believable.

Is Anonymous a trustworthy source or not? Is it possible that what took place was different from his rendition?

[mimaw]

All I’m saying is the theory I presented is possible. The action I proposed would have been done so as not to draw attention of gunman. In other words maybe Waleed quited student to save both of them. If I had been the one to survive I would feel his gesture drew the fire and might have saved my life. Is this theory so unbelievable as to make Anonymous a liar?

[RS]

“Anonymous probably got his story wrong because that story doesn’t hold up”

Curious ... since the entire story appears to be -
“He believes he would have been shot dead were it not for Waleed’s “protective movement” that distracted the gunman.”

Just what part of that dosen’t hold up ?