Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

7,910 thoughts on “Not Forgetting the al-Hillis continued

1 208 209 210 211 212 231
  • Good In Parts

    The skinny.

    Deconstructing Eric’s pronouncements post LMC seems to indicate that the investigators attribute the ONF1 and WBM sightings to an actor that they are already aware of, who is mis en cause.

    There being no overt signs of investigators searching for an additional mobylette or motorcycle, one could infer that they have thoroughly investigated the sightings of Antoine and Janin and are absolutely certain that they were not relevant. After all, they have had almost four years to do so.

    Thus we are left with walk-in, park and walk or drop-off as ingress options.

    • michael norton

      There could be a slightly different option:
      A walk over.
      The shootist walks up to the spot, remaining hidden, shoots the victims, then walks off, possibly by a different route.

      • michael norton

        Thinking about a “walk over option”
        easily possible, we have been told there was only one shootist and only one gun,
        in many ways this is a good option, the shootist would only appear as a rambler, gun and ammo in small back pack
        but
        if his target was Sylvain Mollier, he would have to set off, say three hours before Sylvain,
        it would work if the targets were all those shot and it was a prearranged meeting of which the shootist had been informed,
        as long as he had three or four hours notice.
        However if the shootist had walked up the hill through the dense forest ( not on the track) he would be calm.
        This shooting seemed maniacal, like there were more targets than the shootist had bargained for.

        So the shootist was most likely the motorcyclist.

  • Good In Parts

    Pink

    You asked “I think we need to know why the whole PD/PB stuff happened at all…”

    My best guesses, and they are guesses are as follows:-

    1) Eric and Co. wanted to give PD/PB and his lady friends annonymity.

    2) It was an attempt to gloss over a cock-up. I guess that the first call was not actioned, that the call handler did not actually despatch as a result of it. It is possible that the caller conveyed doubt or skepticism because of WBM’s “mauvais francais”.

    This may also explain why the handler actually let them go up to the scene, a decision which could easily have cost another four lives. It may also explain the ‘murderous activity’ alert given over radionet. Maybe a provisional alert was given for vehicles out of station, awaiting confirmation from a reliable witness, ie a frenchman.

    incidentally’ we have been here before…

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/not-forgetting-the-al-hillis-continued/comment-page-120/#comment-542098

  • Good In Parts

    Returning for a moment to the “bogus timeline” I outlined on the previous page:-

    Thus we get the timeline as presented by Panny and NE :-

    15:25 ONF1 start descent from Martinet parking
    15:35 ONF2 start descent from Martinet parking
    15:40 SAH arrival
    15:45 WBM arrival
    15:48 emergency call

    Effectively ONF1 moved position, from second to descent to first to descend, but time-wise hardly moved at all. So any additional evidence that les gendarmes came across, such as from cell base station logs or neighbours clocking him arrive home would look consistent.

    However, ONF2 moved position, from first to descent to second to descend, and moved a whopping twenty minutes forward on the timeline !

    How does that work then ? Did they not notice ?

    Did they go along with it because it was useful to them in some way ?

    • michael norton

      O.K.

      can any of you clever people let us know:
      Why hasn’t Eric made clear,
      if he believes there was only ever one motorcyclist?

  • Good In Parts

    Pink

    The shooting nominally started at 15:35 in my working timeline. I think that this is cannon and was mentioned by EM himself, though I could be wrong.

  • Pink

    Well that cant work then they have been shot before they get there , can you put your timelines in one post so as to compare I haven’t tracked closely enough .
    15:25 ONF1 start descent from Martinet parking
    15:35 ONF2 start descent from Martinet parking
    15:40 SAH arrival
    15:45 WBM arrival
    15:48 emergency call

  • Good In Parts

    Pink

    I think I might have misled you. The timeline you quoted (see below) was essentially the timeline as presented by the Panorama and Non Elucide documentaries, which I contend is bogus.

    As you point out “they have been shot before they get there”. The order of the descent of the ONF vehicles is also wrong in my view.


    … the timeline as presented by Panny and NE :-
    15:25 ONF1 start descent from Martinet parking
    15:35 ONF2 start descent from Martinet parking
    15:40 SAH arrival
    15:45 WBM arrival
    15:48 emergency call

    Check out my post on the previous page:-

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/not-forgetting-the-al-hillis-continued/comment-page-209/#comment-615790

    I haven’t time today to post my working timeline in full but here are the key events with my estimated timings.

    15:12:30 – ONF2 start descent from Martinet parking
    15:25:00 – ONF1 start descent from Martinet parking
    15:31:30 – SAH arrival
    15:35:00 – SM arrival and shooting starts
    15:39:00 – WBM arrival
    15:44:59 – First emergency call

    • michael norton

      O.K. Goodinparts,
      I see u rclaiming that the al-Hilli party got to the parking 3 1/2 minutes before Sylvain Mollier got to the parking:
      this would leave us to conclude that no person in the al-Hilli party was a prime target.
      So we are then led to conclude that the primary target was Sylvain Mollier.

      Now, it has been said that the first shot fired, was into Sylvain Mollier,
      this would lead us to conclude that Sylvain Mollier was the prime target.

      Now, it has also been said, that more bullets were pumped into Sylvain Mollier than any other target, this would lead us to conclude the prime target was Sylvain Mollier.

      Now, only one of the targets was a local man,
      this would make him a more likely target, rather than a foreign family of holiday makers.

      So, from this we are led to ask:
      why does Eric Maillud expect the public to believe that Sylvain Mollier was just a passing cyclist and not a target?

      • michael norton

        Eric Maillaud, new prosecutor in Clermont-Ferrand
        https://www.francebleu.fr/infos/faits-divers-justice/eric-maillaud-nouveau-procureur-de-la-republique-de-clermont-ferrand-1468249096
        54 years old, Eric Maillaud exercised for more than six years in Annecy. He succeeds Pierre seines appointed prosecutor in Nantes.

        The information is published in the Official Gazette dated July 6th. Based in Annecy since February 2010, Eric Maillaud newly appointed prosecutor of Clermont-Ferrand. He will succeed the heart of the summer Pierre seines, appointed in Nantes after four years in the capital of Auvergne.

        Born in October 1961 in La Fleche in the Sarthe, including Eric Maillaud has been under the media spotlight on the occasion of one of the greatest mysteries of the judicial past decade in France: the killing of Chevaline. Married to an Italian and passionate about tennis, the new Clermont prosecutor has a quality that everyone is not within the judiciary: it is a born communicator. We do not complain to us.

  • Good In Parts

    michael norton

    His term limit was presumably up. As I suggested to you in this post :-

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/not-forgetting-the-al-hillis-continued/comment-page-209/#comment-602790

    You noted “I see u rclaiming that the al-Hilli party got to the parking 3 1/2 minutes before Sylvain Mollier got to the parking: this would leave us to conclude that no person in the al-Hilli party was a prime target.”

    Not necessarily, my best guess is that the MC, seen by WBM descending the combe shortly before he reached Martinet parking, stayed the killers hand until it had departed. While the rider was stooging around in an unpredictable manner, (possibly riding briefly beyond the barrier) the killer was constrained in his movements and likely stayed hidden in the woods.

    So, in theory, the killer could have been waiting to attack SAH and family (maybe mistaking the SAH party for PB and les compagnions). However I think it more likely that SM was the prime target and that the departure of the MC ‘masked’ the arrival of SAH. The killer kept his head down and probably did not hear or see SAH arrive.

  • Pink

    Where is 15:44:59 – First emergency call coming from, are you saying WBM’s failed call followed by PD/PB at 15:48 ?

    Don’t know why I am asking its just going to fry my brain all over again it’s beyond me why the timing is even an issue they spent ages calling in a specialist team who cannot even produce a working timeline that make’s any sense .
    On your Timeline ONF whatever number order has cleared the area and we are back to the conversation held between them and confusion on MB’s is that right ?

    My understanding such as it is ONF the first to leave, 1 or 2 whichever you fancy was well clear.

    ONF second to leave was close enough to still be in the area, I base that on the fact that a LWB green vehicle was parked at the bottom of CDI in one of the photos, my assumption was but it’s only a guess that he was taken in for questioning along with WBM and PD/PB ,back in the archive somewhere I pointed out the vehicle,the photo was taken down I think , the convo should still be on here somewhere.

    Or PD/PB was driving a LWB landrover is another possibility but that is difficult to discern with him being on foot or on a bike or driving a van etc or even really existing.

    Or someone driving it who is not any of the above was also there .

    15:12:30 – ONF2 start descent from Martinet parking
    15:25:00 – ONF1 start descent from Martinet parking
    15:31:30 – SAH arrival
    15:35:00 – SM arrival and shooting starts
    15:39:00 – WBM arrival
    15:44:59 – First emergency call

  • Good In Parts

    Pink

    The timestamp of 15:44:59 for the first emergency is noted in this Le Parisien article http://www.leparisien.fr/espace-premium/actu/les-dernieres-heures-de-la-famille-al-hilli-31-12-2013-3450913.php

    “Le cycliste Sylvain Mollier est arrivé sur place en même temps que les Al-Hilli ou juste avant. Il venait tout juste de raccrocher son portable, à 15h32 précisément, après une courte conversation avec son ex-épouse pour évoquer la garde de leurs fils en ce début d’année scolaire, promettant de la rappeler. Le massacre se joue en une poignée de minutes puisque l’alerte aux secours est donnée à 15 h 44 et 59 secondes.”

    You wrote “…it’s beyond me why the timing is even an issue they spent ages calling in a specialist team who cannot even produce a working timeline that make’s any sense.”

    Indeed. This is either epic incompetence or they were misled :-

    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/not-forgetting-the-al-hillis-continued/comment-page-170/#comment-566036

  • James

    Timelines n stuff !

    WBM passes a “large vehicle or 4×4” going down….and so does SAH (via the daughters statement).
    Is this the same vehicle ?

    If “all” the vehicles (apart from ONF’s BMW X5) have been traced, then the “WBM/SAH large vehicle/4×4” has been traced ? (if you exc the possibility that it was ONF1’s X5 ….which it is highly unlikely to be).

    Thus leaving ONF2. Which it can’t be as they say they only saw MCL and SM (no SAH or WBM)

    Leaving the Citreon van ? Which isn’t officially “in the public domain”, other than SAH’s daughter and WBM’s statements.

  • Pink

    Now the way I read that info is if SM managed to arrive before and he was not in the parking where was he,past the barrier ?
    So if past the barrier he gets a call that ends 15:32 heads for home no-one shoots at him until he gets to parking .
    He has a working phone in hand it would make more sense to me if he was the one who made the 15:44 and 59 second call and then was shot just IMO, leaving PD to the later call.
    Which would then point to him as collaterall or possibly knowing perp and intervening.
    Cue next article different spin and so it goes.

    Points from your article
    Reportedly, the Al-Hilli are parked between 15 h 35 and 15 h 40 on the parking of Martinet.

    According to the testimony of Zainab and Zeena, when the family arrived at the end of the forest road of Combe d’Ire, the parking lot was empty.

    The cyclist Sylvain Mollier arrived on site at the same time that Al-Hilli or just before. He had just hung up his phone, at 15h32 precisely,

    The massacre is played in a handful of minutes since the alert relief is given at 15 h 44 and 59 seconds

    http://www.leparisien.fr/espace-premium/actu/les-dernieres-heures-de-la-famille-al-hilli-31-12-2013-3450913.php

  • James

    Pink….

    ….I always forget that !
    SAH arrived….and the car park was empty.

    Confirms the theory. ONF2 could only see SM, at a point where SM is the only one they (can/could have) pass.

    And THEREFORE the BIG question is “Why Did ONF1 Call ONF2 To Ask About The Motorbike” !
    The ONF2/MCL “meeting/telling off/re-direction” had happened “ages” before.

    And that brings me to a “bizarre” theory !
    ONF1 may not have been there….
    …..but his vehicle (or type of) may have been.
    Explains why his story is so bad.

  • Good In Parts

    Pink & James

    “The massacre is played in a handful of minutes since the alert relief is given at 15 h 44 and 59 seconds”.

    Given that I have been banging on about Eric’s strange ‘handling’ of the emergency call, I am certainly open to the idea that we, the great unwashed public, still do not have the whole story.

    So I am open to the idea that someone else actually made the first call, or indeed that the ‘call’ was made directly over radionet. However, les gendarmes must know, mustn’t they?

    We know that they checked SM’s phone, because they found the phone call from his ex. Mind you that was a year after the event !
    .

    The “WBM/SAH large vehicle/4×4” is ONF1… (when you undo the ONF swap).

    “And THEREFORE the BIG question is “Why Did ONF1 Call ONF2 To Ask About The Motorbike” !
    The ONF2/MCL “meeting/telling off/re-direction” had happened “ages” before.”

    Because claiming that he called his workmate to ask about someone he had glimpsed hanging around in the undergrowth, or whatever, would have earned him an unfortunate accident in le foret by now.

    Essentially he has to claim that he called about something plausible that wasn’t the real purpose of the call. So, we can be sure that he did not call about the hefty motard with a goatee. Who, incidentally, he did not see, as is clear when you undo the ONF swap. For ONF1, the goaty motard was the outcome of the call.

    So just a little scene shifting to avoid some embarrasment. Still the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

    Currently I am leaning towards a drop-off, though ‘another motorcycle rider’ still seems to be in play.

  • Good In Parts

    James

    “And that brings me to a “bizarre” theory !
    ONF1 may not have been there….
    …..but his vehicle (or type of) may have been.”

    Just now I also had a bizarre thought :-

    What if James is right, was right, and continues to be right ?

    We could end up with LMC being an invention of first the ONF2, then re-envisioned by ONF1, then re-fabricated by EM. All done without ONF1 being there at all ! And thinking about it, the X5 is obviously the work of a fabulist… Who’s left ?

    • michael norton

      Well, I would like to know,
      who is now leading the investigation.
      I would like to know, why after more than two years have passed, since five persons were arrested for the killing of
      Nicole Communal-Tournier, six days after the release of the E-FIT-SKETCH, William Brett Martin, the apparent discoverer of the slaughter – near neighbour

      have not yet made a public court appearance?

      • michael norton

        Sorry, i got interrupted, I hadn’t time to finish my post.

        It would seem Eric Maillaud has split the crazy scene.
        So, either a new person has taken over
        or the french state has allowed this investigation to die but that would be strange, this massacre happened just as
        Francois Hollande was grasping the reins of power in France.
        French President Francois Hollande said “I expressed my emotion earlier today to the British people in relation to the terrible deaths. Both the French and the British family have been impacted by this terrible event and we will do our utmost to find the perpetrators, to find the reasons behind that event. Our police are co-operating and everything that is found will be shared.”

        So although only hanging on by his fingernails, for the time being Hollande is still President of the Republic of France, presumably he sticks to what he agrees?

        Now, almost from the off, Eric Maillaud, claimed Sylvain Mollier was just a passing cyclist and not a target,
        the target was one or more from the party al-Hilli, that is where he thrust his questions.
        In a few weeks time, four years will have elapsed, with no locked up killer.

        It seems the party al-Hilli got to the site before Mollier, yet Mollier was shot first and the most times.

        Prima facie it would seem that Sylvain Mollier was a target.
        But at least publicly Maillaud has not admitted Mollier was a target.

        A new brrom, would have to back to square one, to get to the truth.
        It is obvious to me that Sylvain Mollier was a target, he was either the prime target or a joint target with one or more persons from the al-Hilli Group

        but what is clear, he was not just a passing cyclist caught up in a slaughter of the al-Hilli group

        as Maillaud has been professing.

        Maillaud has been a malign influence on this investigation,
        but why?

        • michael norton

          A new broom, (prosecutor) would have to go back to square one, to get to the truth.

          So the BIG question is:
          Why has Eric Maillaud spent four years
          MISDIRECTING the investigation?

  • Good In Parts

    Pink

    It would make more sense to me if the GG was the one who made the 15:44 and 59 second call.

    Think about it, he was the closest witness as the crow flies at the time of the shooting. He claims that he heard the shots whilst on the other side of the valley, implying that he was at least part way up that side of the valley and thus more likely than SM to have a decent mobile signal at the time the shooting started if he had a mobile phone with him.

    But, he apparently ignored the shots and the call was actually made by the ‘first two witnesses’, and thus implicitly by PB at the behest of WBM.

    If we were told that the call had been logged at say 15:35:59 then that would be a different matter.

    Would the investigation have turned out differently if the alarm had been raised that much earlier ? How about if WBM had got a signal when he tried to phone for help ?

  • Pink

    GIP Thanks what would they have been tasked with up there ?

    I don’t know who made the call I was only using the paticular article when I said that as in if SM (WAS) up the road with phone working he could have,it could have been the people in the BMW or GG or anyone around hearing shooting out of season and annoyed ,as for the radionet I have never got clear what it means I would have thought that would mean ONF using a radio to call in I really don’t know .
    I have no tie to any scenario because I can never pin down enough facts to work one out, I read somewhere the other day the shooter was behind the BMW when it was near the sign which would be the the bit of wood between the lay-by and the road above my thinking was if someone SM knew was being threatening in french and he could hear he may have phoned it in and ridden down to intervene.
    One reason I was thinking along those lines was because it seems possible that SM rode there with a purpose which may have just been the climb which would make sense, it may have been another purpose say to find someone he suspected or knew of being in that place.
    I have no idea about the ONF1 and 2 m’larky and what that’s about and I am totally lost on the James “bizarre” theory somone is going to have to spell it out for me .
    Can we decide on what didn’t happen at all that might narrow down my options 🙂

  • Good In Parts

    Pink

    A little while ago James suggested that EM’s apparent discovery of LMC was a subterfuge by the investigators and that they had not actually done so. The announcement was a ploy to put pressure on the ONF ‘team’, who presumably were (and still are) under covert surveillance. The ‘reality’ in this scenario being that there was no LMC, the ‘sighting’ was simply a self-serving invention.

    Nextly James suggested another “bizarre” theory, to wit that “ONF1 may not have been there….”

    I merely added his theories together and took them to their (il)logical conclusion.

    • michael norton

      Let’s guess that these facts are true:

      The al-Hilli party from England were on holiday in the area,
      they drove up to the parking at Le Martinet a few minutes before local man
      Sylvain Mollier cycled up to the spot,
      Saad and the older girl were outside their car,
      at this time nobody was under the impression that they were under threat.

      Shortly after Sylvain Mollier arriving, he was shot, then Saad and the older girl were shot, the other adults were shot inside their car.
      The elder girl was bashed in the head with the gun, the younger girl was not physically harmed.

      If the al-Hilli party were at the parking, with Saad and his older daughter outside of the car but not shot
      until after Sylvain Mollier arrived,
      we can assume Sylvain Mollier was a target.
      If Sylvain Mollier was the first to be shot we can assume S.M. was a target.
      If Sylvain Mollier was shot the most times we can assume he was a target.
      As the al-Hilli family were on holiday from England and Sylvain Mollier was a local, it should at the very least have occurred to the French Investigators that S.M. was a target.

      As far as we have been told, the French Team have never said Sylvain Mollier was a target – not once.

          • Trowbridge H. Ford

            Hershkpvitz went to Israel to work on a recruiting program for its covert government, especially the Mossad, and then went missing for awhile.

            When he returned, he was a completely changed person, having nightmares, pounding the walls, and fighting with everyone, especially his mentor who he ultimately killed, and then the Israelis killed him to close the book on the whole fiasco.

            You are totally ignorant of what happened to Hershkovitz.

          • michael norton

            Well if you want to talk ignorance, why spell the person’s name in two different ways.

            If you have no interest in Sylvain Mollier of the family al-Hilli
            why post?

      • michael norton

        I would say that the slow riding motorcyclist who descended, as William Brett Martin was ascending, was either the shootist or the companion of the shootist.
        As William Brett Martin did not say that a motorcyclist overtook W.B.M. as he was ascending, the motorcyclist must have been higher up the combe than W.B.M., at the time of the massacre.

        The police has not shown “their” motorcyclist, so we have no way of knowing if he looked like the E-FIT-SKETCH.
        The police have never said if they thought there was only ever one motorcyclist or there was more than one motorcyclist.

        Why be unclear?

    • michael norton

      If you think you know who the slaughterer is, why not drop a line to Francois Hollande, he was once quite keen to get it sorted out?

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    I don’t write governments anymore because of the trouble they entail and risks yo me which result.

    If either the French or UK governments want my ideas about this mass, mistaken assassination, all they have to do is consult threads on this site, The Local in Sweden, codshit.com, flyingcuttlefish picayune, etc.

    Or they can google items like William Hershkovitz, al-Hilli assassinations, Mossad, recruitment program.

    Or they can call me at 203-535-0489.

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    Of course, they would, as they don’t want to risk being seen as anti-semitic.

    That;s why the Mossad gets away with any assassination it fancies, like that of German politician Jurgen Mollemann, Royal Cadet Steve Hilder, Dr, David Kelly, Jorg Haider, Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh, etc., ad nauseam.

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    Ask where the resident Mossad kidon, which was not permitted to carry firearms, was on the night Kelly was murdered.

    As for Westminster, I would look for his finance adviser who told him not to worry about Brexit, and how he reacted to the billion pounds he lost when the UKIP won.

  • Trowbridge H. Ford

    Can you believe that the coroner in Westminster’s case has already ruled that he died of a naturally induced heart attack without mentioning that he suffered from cardiovascular disease, and not mentioning that there are a host of drugs which can cause an unnatural death.

    Think the trust that the Duke had for all his assets which were not his personal property should be investigated to see if some administrator is left holding the bag for the billion pound loss for the UK voting for independence.

    People have suffered unexpected deaths for having lost far less.

    • Trowbridge H. Ford

      Don’t forget that the al-Hilli family was British, and the Surrey police should have some interest in what happened to it, especially since Michel Hecht is just a convenient fallguy that the French authorities have finally dredged up.

      The Brits have a terrible record in such cases, though. Just look at the murders excused, the ones forgot about, and those ruled either natural or suicides.

  • Pink

    An interesting observation by Straw4berry way back was she doubted the family would have driven from Uk without the required amount of car seats and if you remember the reason they didnt find Zeena was because there was only one car seat indicating one child, she raised the possiblity that Zainab arrived in a different car ,now a few days ago I read yet another story that caused me to doubt SAH was out of the car at the same time as Z but got out to try and retrieve her ,so how about Z and unknown arrive in not yet known vehicle argument breaks out between driver and killer SAH arrives trys to rescue Z,it might explain why she was hit rather than shot did the killer hit her to focus on shooting at the arrivals ,
    It makes me think about Stan does anyone remember Stan?

    The BBC timeline said WBM arrived 15:50 and made call at 16:00 give or take a couple of minutes thats ok ten minutes messing around with the crime scene and getting signal ,if we move the shooting to a much earlier time then the amount of time he was there has to be explained .

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-19506889
    “When did the crime occur?

    The British cyclist arrived at the scene at 15:50 (13:50 GMT) on 5 September. The car’s engine was still running and he recognised Mr Mollier as a cyclist who had overtaken him on the road. After tending to Zainab, who was outside the car with horrific head injuries, the British man phoned emergency services at 16:00. When police arrived they did not see Zeena. She was only found at midnight when forensics officers opened the car.”

  • Pink

    Stan.

    . 163.Posté par Mila le 28/11/2015 19:31 | Alerter

    De son vrai nom Christian Maillaud

    Ancien garde du corp de Jacques Chirac
    Ancien sous officier de gendarmerie,
    Ancien parachutiste dans une unité spécial.

    Stan Maillaud, avec un bon pourcentage de sang basque, descend, par sa grand-mère maternelle, d’une famille de redoutables Bandits corses

    Ce Stan Maillaud est un agent des renseignements généraux , portier de boîte de nuit et patron d’une agence de sécurité privée, sur l’Ile de la Réunion

    Ce type est très soutenu par les sites d’extreme droite et crypto-sionistes

    Dans la fausse dissidence, la majorité sont des mafieux qui travaillent pour l’état.

    Google translate

    163.Posté by Mila on 11/28/2015 7:31 p.m. | To alert

    His real name Christian Maillaud

    Former bodyguard of Jacques Chirac
    Former deputy police officer,
    Former paratrooper in a special unit.

    Stan Maillaud, with a good percentage of Basque blood, down by his maternal grandmother, a family of fearsome Corsican Bandits

    This is Stan Maillaud one General information nightclub doorman and owner of a private security agency, on Reunion Island

    This type is supported by the extreme right websites and crypto-Zionists
    ………………………………………………………………………………
    http://www.egaliteetreconciliation.fr/+-Stan-Maillaud-+.html

1 208 209 210 211 212 231