Not Forgetting the al-Hillis 22282

The mainstream media for the most part has moved on. But there are a few more gleanings to be had, of perhaps the most interesting comes from the Daily Mirror, which labels al-Hilli an extremist on the grounds that he was against the war in Iraq, disapproved of the behaviour of Israel and had doubts over 9/11 – which makes a great deal of the population “extremist”. But the Mirror has the only mainstream mention I can find of the possibility that Mossad carried out the killings. Given Mr al-Hilli’s profession, the fact he is a Shia, the fact he had visited Iran, and the fact that Israel heas been assassinating scientists connected to Iran’s nuclear programme, this has to be a possibility. There are of course other possibilities, but to ignore that one is ludicrous.

Which leads me to the argument of Daily Mail crime reporter, Stephen Wright, that the French police should concentrate on the idea that this was a killing by a random Alpine madman or racist bigot. Perfectly possible, of course, and the anti-Muslim killings in Marseille might be as much a precedent as Mossad killings of scientists. But why the lone madman idea should be the preferred investigation, Mr Wright does not explain. What I did find interesting from a man who has visited many crime scenes are his repeated insinuations that the French authorities are not really trying very hard to find who the killers were, for example:

the crime scene would have been sealed off for a minimum of seven to ten days, to allow detailed forensic searches for DNA, fibres, tyre marks and shoe prints to take place.
Nearby bushes and vegetation would have been searched for any discarded food and cigarette butts left by the killer, not to mention the murder weapon.
But from what I saw at the end of last week, no such searches had taken place and potentially vital evidence could have been missed. House to house inquiries in the local area had yet to be completed and police had not made specific public appeals for information about the crime. No reward had been put up for information about the shootings.
Behind the scenes, what other short cuts have been taken? Have police seized data identifying all mobile phones being used in the vicinity of the murders that day?

The idea that the French authorities – who are quite as capable as any other of solving cases – are not really trying very hard is an interesting one.

Which leads me to this part of a remarkable article from the Daily Telegraph, which if true points us back towards a hit squad and discounts the ides that there was only one gun:

Claims that only one gun was used to kill everybody is likely to be disproved by full ballistics test results which are out in October.
While the 25 spent bullet cartridges found at the scene are all of the same kind, they could in fact have come from a number of weapons of the same make.
This throws up the possibility of a well-equipped, highly-trained gang circling the car and then opening fire.
Both children were left alive by the killers, who had clinically pumped bullets into everybody else, including five into Mr Mollier.
Zainab was found staggering around outside the car by Brett Martin, a British former RAF serviceman who cycled by moments after the attack, but he saw nobody except the schoolgirl.
Her sister, Zeena, was found unscathed and hiding in the car eight hours later.
Both sisters are now back in Britain, and are believed to have been reunited at a secret location near London.

There are of course a number of hit squad options, both governmental and private, which might well involve iraqi or Iranian interests – on both of which the mainstream media have been very happy to speculate while almost unanimously ignoring Israel.

But what interests me is why the Daily Telegraph choose, in the face of all the evidence, to minimise the horrific nature of the attack by stating that “Both children were left alive by the killers”? Zainab was not left alive by design, she was shot in the chest and her skull was stove in, which presumably was a pretty serious attempt to kill a seven year-old child. The other girl might very well have succeeded in hiding from the killers under her mother’s skirts, as she hid from the first rescuers, and then for eight hours from the police.

The Telegraph article claims to be informed by sources close to the investigation. So they believe it was a group of people, and feel motivated to absolve those people from child-killing. Now what could the Daily Telegraph be thinking?

22,282 thoughts on “Not Forgetting the al-Hillis

1 101 102 103 104 105 743
  • Felix

    Studio training at new Broadcasting House. Amazed everything seems to work. Move in Monday is the tweet. Search on

  • Ricki Tarr

    NBH is in Manchester but is shut down I didnt know it was still in use as they have now moved to the new BBC media city in Salford Quays!

    I wish id have known! whats he doing in Manchester??? he lives in Brighton?

  • Katie

    Yes that’s the first time for me too Peter. TPC, Bioquell, never heard of them.

    So he was there in the early 90’s & liked long holidays, it strikes me the man may have been hyperactive but it was not work,he never really earned any great sums of cash but had access to cash & enough to buy expensive computers, maybe because he didn’t have a wife or family & didn’t have a mortgage for 40 years ?
    What was he doing on his long holiday in Dubai,did we ever find out ?

    Why do I feel this is a chap who deliberately kept a low profile ?
    So after that he went to work for Elektra then SSTL & finally his own company AMS ?

  • Katie

    Yes thank-you Felix I’ve found that but where are his tweets, there’s no commentary on that page ?

    I use Twitter but usually only to forward something.

  • kathy

    @ Thomas

    “Why didn´t she take her exam as UK dentist until now?”

    She was in the process of training for her British exams at a dentist in Baker Street, London. I posted the link to their website which had a tribute to her (but no photo!) on the last thread. Unfortunately, the tribute has now disappeared from their site. As someone else said, she probably delayed it while she was having kids.

  • Ferret

    Has anyone looked at WBM’s signatures yet, on the five sets of accounts which are available at companies house?

    If you want to see something jaw-dropping, pay £5 and get the set…

  • Felix

    @Katie – I wrote his twitter address at 2.05 above. You can scroll back on it. Or even send him messages.

  • Ferret


    No, not everyone – I just want one other to take a look and corroborate, independently.

    More are welcome, of course.

    And no, I don’t have shares in Companies House!!!


  • Kenneth Sorensen

    Ferret – i have asked you to stop using this yeallow sign! There is a reason why yeallow is used in warning signs! It simply is too disturbing for the eyes. so now you are going to change it, understand! It is no use if you somehow think you have independent thought. I TOLD YOU to stop using it! OK? so from now on you stop using it.

  • Katie

    So Ferret why can’t you C&P them here ?

    I’ve done a bit of graphology, so it would be good to see them.

  • Felix

    @Ferret – I’ll have a go.
    Meanwhile, it’s a wonder how anybody finds the phone no of GC – try googling it.
    The Fax number throws up a new firm on the 2nd floor,
    Anderson & Sherman

    Great web site (not)
    Ooops, just dissolved
    Another one who sleeps at the office.

  • Ferret


    I want someone else to get it from the horse’s mouth so no one can cast any doubt on its authenticity.

    That’s interesting that you’ve done some graphology – what background and qualifications do you have?

  • Kenneth Sorensen

    Ferret! I have noticed that you continue to use this yellow sign that I have warned agaisnt. What am one to think of it? Here you just go about using a sign that I have said YOU SHALL NOY USE. I really don’t see how this is going to improve relations between us.

  • Katie

    No Quallies, Ferret, just a hobby sometime ago.
    One should never judge from a signature alone, but there are still tell tale signs on character.

  • Q


    Always thus. Much information to be found here on the previously-discussed oil-for-food, and connections to France, oil companies, etc.

    I wonder about SAH being under surveillance in March 2003. The obvious is what happened to Saddam. Less obvious: watching for money transfers? Or was SAH in a witness protection program by then? Surely he would have noticed a car with strangers parked in his neighbour’s driveway every day. Maybe they weren’t strangers.

  • James

    Fifty Five Solubility Gate.
    After all, nothing seems to dissolves faster !

    Is it the 2011 Accs (2010’s Mark’s in Bill’s !)

    Off !
    Prefix with the “F” word.
    You’re an unbelievable Nazi.

  • Q

    Question regarding Imperial College Dental Surgery located at Prince’s Gardens, London. Does anyone know if Ikbal/Iqbal spent any time training there?

  • Peter

    Q 12 Oct, 2012 – 5:24 pm

    I wonder about SAH being under surveillance in March 2003.

    There is surveillance (surreptitiously watching a target person in order to find out what he is up to) and “surveillance” (ostentatiously watching a target person in order to let him know that you haven’t forgotten about him, that you are observing his every move, and that he might as well forget about doing whatever you suspect him of planning). IMHO, *if that story should indeed be true*, parking in a neighbour’s driveway, telling that neighbour that you are watching the Al-Hillis down the road, tailing the target’s car on the way to work every morning etc. would definitely fall under the latter heading – putting the frighteners on SAH, trying to discourage him from doing something.

    As far as I know, the witness protection programmes run by the UK intelligence services only come in either of two flavours: relocating witnesses and their families to Jersey (short- and medium-term) or sending them off to the US (long-term).

  • Thomas

    12 Oct, 2012 – 5:24 pm

    “I wonder about SAH being under surveillance in March 2003.”

    Could it be connected to his marriage to Iqbal? They married 2003. It was also both the brothers that was under surveillance 2003. But could the main reason for the interest in the family, be Iqbal?

    “Last night it was also claimed that Mr Al-Hilli and his family, from Claygate, Surrey, were under surveillance by Special Branch who followed him and his brother.
    Neighbour Philip Murphy said police asked if they could use his driveway to spy on the massacre victims’ house.

    The retired finance director said: “They were watching Mr Al-Hilli and his brother. I thought they were from Special Branch. They would sit there all day in their parked car. When Mr Al-Hilli came out and drove off, they would follow them. It was all very odd. I never told the family they were being watched.”

  • Peter

    @ Katie

    What “Jersey connection”? This is not something that I can provide links for, merely something that I have heard several times from people who really ought to know. Moreover, it is something that at least prima facie makes a lot of sense to me: What safer place could there be to hold endangered witnesses than an island, a UK crown dependency at that, where entries and exits are closely monitored, big enough for new faces not to be immediately conspicuous, yet small enough for everybody to know pretty much everybody else?

1 101 102 103 104 105 743

Comments are closed.