Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
Look, I'm open to alternative interpretations, like your proposed interpretation that the "hitter" can be a different entity than the "attacker". I'm willing to admit it's a possible interpretation, although I think it's a flawed use of natural language for the reasons I explained. So it isn't true that I take a "one true way" approach to my reading of the rules.Your post also came across that way to me.
Interpreting a spell that states the caster of the spell makes an attack to mean that the caster of the spell doesn't make an attack, on the other hand, is simply not an acceptable interpretation. It's like saying black is white. It's not. I'm not being "one true way" by saying no, the spell doesn't say that. In fact, it states the opposite.
Furthermore, I agreed with @Mort it would be a reasonable ruling for the DM to make, not based on the text of the spell, but based on other considerations that might be more important to the individual game. But I think I'm correct in asserting that such a ruling represents a change to how the spell works because it directly contradicts the text of the spell. It's a houserule, and there's nothing wrong with houserules.