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?
We do know that a roadsweeper had been at the crime scene. It probably emptied cigarette butts/poo etc that it had picked up elsewhere.
http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/sweeper-vehicle-drives-on-the-combe-dire-road-on-september-news-photo/151361625
No reason for that pattern unless it was going to and fro.
And Annecy is a “state of the art” hospital on a “green field” site. So its “new” and “spacious”.
OK, driving to it may take time….BUT it has a helipad !
Annecy flying time would have been considerably shorter.
Clear air across the lake. Straight onto the hospital pad.
Also….!
Grenoble Hospital. Is that in a built up area ?
Has it got a helipad ?
In france they don’t like helipads “on” hospital buildings.
They are non to keen on aircraft noise either.
You want to see Nice airport fines for noise ! Its crackers !
Ah, yes it does. Just couldn’t see it.
Missed Approach on that one !!!!!
@ Bluebird
13 Dec, 2012 – 9:32 am the reality is that none of us know the extent and capability of the satellite systems that now circumnavigate the globe. We only know there are literally thousands of them up there either looking down on us or monitoring what goes on in telecommunications. Only those directly involved are in the know as to what does what, when and where. Even this knowledge would be extremely useful to a nation not in the “loop” never mind the technical detail of how things work electronically speaking. There is no doubt both by background, contacts and occupation, SAH would be such a one. The concfuence of SM and SAH has always suggested much more than co-incidence, and both had information that could help principally Iran, but no hard evidence has been thrown up. If there has been contact with that country by either or both, you can be sure as eggs are eggs, the respective intelligence services knew/know about it. The question is, can any of the clever ppl here find a link into Iran that would confirm our suspicions?
There should be two of those I see now it is the filled in gouge thats why it has square ends ,in the orginal story the jouralist was saying there were two large unexplained gouges that the police had filled in and they are what I have been looking for .
So if you look imagine without the turf thats been put in to fill it and two of them .
Forestry equipment I thought of but I dont think they would bother filling them for that ,could be something they used at the scene but also have been during the shooting.
Along these lines we know what the Israeli reaction to the story was: Nothing. The only Jerusalem reportage I saw treated the idea of Israeli involvement as a big joke. Has anyone followed the reaction in the Muslim world though and particularly Iran? I am not naive enough to expect someone to put their hands up (in stark contrast to “terrorists”) but reaction is sometimes an indicator or provides clues.
@Tim V 6:12 PM: regarding the mention of a Guillaum DIDIER on 9/9 – did you happen to see my little comment back on Dec 9 9:28PM on the theory of how the BM 4:10 PD license plate might reveal some logic in the late appearance of Philip Dideirjean – first unveiled at around Sep 10 (I believe, did not double check the exact date but remember it was ‘5’ days later)?
Basically, my theory is (and I know i am off on my own direction on this and kind of repeating myself) is that the hearse with the plate was seen on September 6, and someone who noticed – either in a photo or saw passing by – the plate and that someone – with the French police no doubt, realized a few days later – AFTER BM accounts were publicized – that they needed something to explain the emergency vehicles showing up so soon and perhaps corroborate the scene and give some independent back-up BM’s full-of-holes accounts. So, recalling the plate – or seeing on a news photo splash – he/she note the plate and the BM and time in front, has the brilliant idea of coming up with a PD – and presto! Phillip D shows up, and he meets with BM – why, at around 4;10 PM (and somewhere i believe I saw even a 4:11PM but that could have been my fertile imagination). And there’s the complete story in a nutshell – A BM coming down the road meeting a PD at ‘about’ 4:10PM. Phone call right there and then -say at 4:11PM, what’s not to like? (OK just a few bits, like say, BM sticking to his story of not calling before and that early annoying reference to the 3:48PM call – which could not be expunged. If only BM could have admitted to making it – if not sooner, then later! yet, on Sep 9 or 10 they still had hope they can prevail upon BM to “do the right thing”).
Anyways, a little later as speculation starts up about the photographer Phillip Desmazes (the name attributed on some photos) they decide they now need a first name but where, oh where, to find a good one? And there is right in the office a Didier (and who knows, just down the hall, perhaps a ‘Jean’?) and in a moment of inspiration, our Phillip Diderijean materializes, complete with a full name and not a peep about it “not being his real name” as the early account noted.
Why am I off on this trail? because that license plate really did bother me – too much of a “Happenstance” in a story already way too full of them. What my – admittedly speculative – exercise indicates are a few key elements:
1. There was a real urgent need for a cover-up and the french participate in it big time – in fact, they are given the job of building it up.
2. The French bungle the cover-up, making a hash of the Phillip D actor and the mise en scene with BM and PD accounts having way too many contradictions. I believe that was not just french bungling but partly because BM (and no doubt with full permission of the agency that runs him) do not fully cooperate and in fact, in and through BM’s later day account – are indicating a displeasure with something through that very lack of corroboration (surely by the time BM sat for his BBC interview, they could have gotten their stories together. But they didn’t, did they?). Truth is, it would have been so easy for BM to just admit – later – that he did in fact make the call at 3;48PM or attempt to (and let theories run on how and with what it won’t matter – there are those satellite phones, right?).
3. This kind of argues about who the killer(s) were not: BM, for one (he acts too pissed off at something). PD, for another. It doesn’t get us closer to who but does contain hints of a potential ‘third’ agency as suggested before, and that ‘third’ agency being in something of a closer cahoots with the french than the Brits. That too could be hint.
BTW, the French were really scrambling and still are. I also noticed the arrival of the BMW – now at 3;30PM right in time with the “shots heard” (1 min – amazingly – from EM himself). Somebody is reading these and MZT boards and are “trying to help”….just not so effectively.
Pink
13 Dec, 2012 – 9:42 am from DM ref.
“Mr O’Reilly, 41, whose sister Geraldine was married to Zaid until her death from ovarian cancer, said: ‘Zaid is the last person who could be behind this.
He’s a very decent bloke. When my sister was dying from cancer he was hugely supportive and caring. He was devastated by her death and is still coming to terms with it.’ Zaid and Geraldine had one child, Sean O’Reilly-Hilli, 28, a plumber who lives in the Walton-on-Thames house. This would make the 53 year old Zaid 25 when they had their first child in about the mid-eighties. Not much significance to this really except that they or he has incorporated the Irish name suggesting a certain degree of pride in the Irish ancestry perhaps?
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2198777/French-Alps-shooting-Police-question-Saad-Al-Hillis-brother-Zaid-inheritance-row.html#ixzz2Exzdjkyh
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Nor perhaps should we overlook the psychological effects (as previously suggested) of loosing father AND sister-in-law, to Mollier’s own loss of father and first family.
Does the hospital in Grenoble have a Muslim prayer room, like the one in Annecy?
Yes. It has three.
And a church, a Hindu temple, a pagan altar and a Jewish wall.
Just incase they fancy a wail or two !
@James 13 Dec, 2012 – 7:09 pm
“Payments were made by both the British and Spanish secret services to a joint bank account Mr Litvinenko held with his wife”.
From the BBC link above:
“… the inquest should consider whether MI6 failed in its duty to protect against a “real and immediate risk to life”… Mr Litvinenko was … working with the Spanish secret service investigating the Russian mafia shortly before his death.”
Recall that a week or so back we had a small discussion of the Russian Mafia and Irish drug dealers in Malaga, Spain, where SAH’s father lived in his final days.
With the involvement of the intelligence agencies at Annecy and Claygate it’s not improper to suggest a possibility SAH was a British asset working on something like Russian Mafia money laundering.
You have let slip a Great State Secret with mention of all the Martins. Now all foreign agents need do is walk up to a suspected counterpart and inquire, “Is your name Martin?” Pop!
Marlin I saw your idea and clocked it the first time it sounds good to me .
@Tim I know about Sean O’Reilly that’s partly why I wondered about the company Brett Martin in Ireland as when I was watching a video of theirs of a wind turbine being delivered and erected it was delivered by a firm called O’reilly a common enough name in Ireland and probably nothing to do with him but it caught my eye .
Off to bed can’t take the pace another early start . Nite all.
So after the Petraeus ‘resignation’ Rice now withdraws from the Secretary of state bid.
More gagging , will we ever know about the involvement of the CIA there ?
“In a letter to President Obama, Ms. Rice said she concluded that “the confirmation process would be lengthy, disruptive and costly — to you and to our most pressing national and international priorities. The tradeoff is simply not worth it to our country.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/14/us/politics/rice-drops-bid-for-secretary-of-state-white-house-says.html?emc=na&_r=0
James http://www.webfusion.co.uk/virtual-private-servers/?_$ja=kw:vps|cgn:VPS+Only|cgid:3132130933|tsid:6879|cn:WF+VPS|cid:72819973|lid:89784296|mt:Exact|nw:search|crid:14578212493|bku:1&gclid=COKrr9C4mLQCFYXLtAodrVUAIQ ?
James, I am guessing you are frustrated with my earlier intervention. I stand by my decision, which is that constant sniping – mostly from you – is doing a great deal more derailing than anyone’s theories here that you do not like.
If your new purpose is to offer lots of nonsense theories to test moderation policy, then you’ll be derailing even more, plus risking your genuine posts being deleted in the melee. Can I encourage you to get back to the investigation? Thanks.
@Jon
“Trowbridge H Whatever” posted nonsense for ages.
Long rambling posts with regard some personal “legal dispute” or other!
As for myself offering “nonsense theories”, how can they be “nonsense”, when they are merely theories.
Whilst they may offer very little in the way of fact based evidence, they are still “theories” and as such are as valid as any other “non fact based” theories that are posted.
With regard the point you make, I was merely acting in such a manner in which “others” may then present that relevant evidence in support of that theory.
In other cases, I have only pointing out the factual “real life” reality (in the case of English Law) that was relevant to a specific subject.
However I accept the point you make. Thanks for the advice.
Cheers
The trouble is Olifant
13 Dec, 2012 – 5:11 pm that the account you post differs significantly from earlier versions of “Philippe Didierjean’s” version of what happened. I would be quite content if his story was consistent but it isn’t. How do we explain this and can it be explained by failures in reporting? I just don’t believe that after at least five days after such an horrific event he would not have been absolutely sure about his timings and sequencing of events. That his story should change with time is suspiciously like trying to fit it to other aspects of the official story line. Leaving aside the fact that originally it was put out that WBM had made the initial call that strangely morphed to Mr Didierjean when the former denied he had, PD was initially quoted that “he APPROACHED CHEVALINE at about 4.10”. That’s too big a difference to calling at 3.48 AFTER meeting WBM to be shrugged off. But the problem doesn’t stop there. Initially he was reported to have phoned AFTER driving and running up to the crime scene, checking Zainab out, walking back to the car before he phoned. These versions cannot be reconciled unless one or all are unreliable. Finally IF Didierjean did ring at 3.48 we MUST deduct at least 20 minutes to allow WBM to do all the things he said he did, for which he would have had to arrive at Martinet at 3.28 i.e. before the shooting actually took place. That drops him into the doo doo good and proper.
Sorry to take so long to get to you Pink
13 Dec, 2012 – 7:12 pm. You pose the question about those tyre skid marks. As far as I can see these are NOT those at the other end of the park (south) by the signs. It appeasr to me to mark loss of traction of a reversing vehicle which I assume is SAH’s car when he started to reverse that ended up in the bank. If this is correct it places the car well forward almost onto the metaled surface. In which case the question arises, “What made him go back?”
Q
13 Dec, 2012 – 7:35 pm yup you might have a good point there. I was puzzled that the arial shots don’t appear to show those skid marks so you might be right and they were created by the lorry trying to get into position. So I am quite happy to withdraw previous theory.
Brian the pedaling pensioner (@Pink 12 Dec, 2012 – 10:52 pm) climbed the 350m from Faverges to the Col du Tamie on 5th Sept. This was the second 5mile leg of his 38mile trip, heart rate was 140pbm during the climb and it took half an hour at a speed of 10mph. (overall average for the 38ml was 14mph)
FWIW google france beta ‘directions’ estimate a 44min walk from Lathuile to Chevaline (2.1ml, 40m alt) and 54 mins walk from Chevaline to Martinet (2.4ml, 260m alt). So google uses 2.9 and 2.7mph for these calculations. In the UK, google ‘directions’ includes cycling – 8.3mph for climbing 40m on a good road and 7.6mph for climbing 270m on a bridleway. If these represent ‘normal’ then Lathuile to Chevaline is 15mins and Chevaline to Martinet is 19minutes. ie about half an hour of ‘normal’ cycling altogether, much less than the 90+ minutes he said.
Or is google using too quick an estimate? Perhaps BM forget to mention he was walking? That would fit better. Otherwise he says 30 minutes,ie a gentler speed of 5mph, half that of Brian. Maybe reasonable if there’s no reason to hurry? Still the questions swirl around – when did he leave, where did he go in the missing half hour, or was that bit of time inflation meant to obscure that he got their earlier, did he go at only half the speed of SM, etc etc.
Oh the other noticeable thing about extract Olifant
13 Dec, 2012 – 5:11 is the reference to “His hands were covered in blood”. HIS HANDS WERE COVERED IN BLOOD! This is the first time I have seen this mentioned. Many many weeks ago I raised the issue of how strange it was that Didierjean had not noticed any if WBM had done as he said – dragged blood covered Mollier. I wonder first when this article was published and whether it was meant to meet that criticism. But second don’t you think it strange that blood was noticed on hands presumably palms? This would be the last thing to notice I would suggest. Blood stained face or clothes but HANDS????????? Just doesn’t ring true to me from either Didierjean or Martin’s perspective especially having rode a bike at speed, hands on rubber grips. Anyway wouldn’t someone with bloodied hands rub them on his clothes? Intended to add credence to his story it actually makes me doubt it more.
Couldn’t agree more with your analysis Marlin
13 Dec, 2012 – 8:41 pm as my many previous posts have indicated. I think you are probably spot on.
NR
13 Dec, 2012 – 9:00 pm the Litvinenko and Pat Finucane cases place in the public domain what we already knew. That ex-pats are nature targets to recruit as spies and that even the British Government is capable of colluding in murder. Do I think SAH was an MI6 asset? Yes. “He was known to the Secret Service for twenty years” the Daily Mail euphemistically put it. As I have ofter said, nor do I think it was accidental he was afforded British Citizenship only months before the invasion of Iraq. In what capacity he worked it is impossible to say but it is easy to surmise he would keep the government informed about developments in the critical area of satellite development and particularly what the Americans and Europeans were doing. And although absent from Iraq since he was seven or eight he could still be a very useful contact with the scientific and political community there and in Iran. But agents have a habit of adopting the prefix “double” (Agent Zig Zag recommended) Was it this that elicited the extraordinary response both in Annecy and at his Surrey home? Given his internet outbursts, British Intelligence (who must have been monitoring them) must have been concerned to say the least. It seems to me his French trip was at the behest of someone. Was it organised and orchestrated by MI6 only to be sabotaged by our “friends” the Americans and French? The conveniently created “Didierjean” in Oliphants article introduces that line “We noticed his blood stained hands”. “Blood on his hands eh? A not too delicate allusion to British Secret Service involvement would you say? The Brits pissed off but not able to protest publicly without spilling the beans and implicating themselves. Whatever treachery lurks in the corridores of power, responsibility for the safety of one’s own is taken fairly seriously I believe.
Jon
13 Dec, 2012 – 10:39 pm not wishing to interfere with your moderation of your site, whilst keeping us on track I’m sure you would agree this is a broad church that can cope with fairly robust comment sometimes. As long as its objective and not personally offensive I’m sure you agree its important our comments and theories are all subject to “peer group review”. If people say silly things or contradict themselves they must expect to be challenged reasonably. I would certainly expect that of my contributions here. James is too valuable a contributor to loose and I hope he returns to his old style soon.
Very useful factual calculations and questions Olifant
14 Dec, 2012 – 12:26 am. A lot depends on what WBM calculates as the “climb”. Does he measure it from the 3km sign or from the village – perhaps another kilometre. For arguments sake lets settle on two miles. All the early reports said Mollier passed him on the way up so if that were true Martin’s speed would have to be significantly less than 10mph I would guess. (Later the story changed to passing him as he left Chevaline – presumably to allow a gap) 5mph for Martin a regular cyclist I agree seems a bit on the slow side. At eight miles per hour two miles would take only a quarter of an hour I guess and he would need to have travelled at only 4 mph – quite unrealistic for him. As usual nothing adds up.
Tim.
A. Thanks for your comment/support.
B. Zig Zag (agent) is a good example of the “world of spies”.
Often they swap sides (numerous examples available) and the fact that they first of all “change” sides is an indication of “how” they work.
Indeed it might be the case here.
Dubai is a “hot bed” of not only the West meeting the Middle East (and the closed part of the Middle East) but also other “fractions”.
Sa’ad “appears” to have been there for sometime.
Certainly long enough to feel comfortable to meet and date a “local” woman.
Which side(s) may he have been working for ? Who knoows.
One and then the other ? Both ? I don’t know.
But it surely is complicated !
Tim
Re the timings etc.
I agree. It is very “strange”.
But (and I believe it is very relevant and not mentioned/covered by the press or investigators) where were they going ?
Mr Martin could answer that (his route). Was he to turn around at “the top” (the carpark) ?
Mr Mollier can not answer what he was doing or where he was going.
It is said he was following a new route…but had made a mistake.
Is that true ? If indeed you had gone wrong, then surely you would stop ? And how “wrong” can a “local lad” go ?
Just a thought.
Tim
THIS is the guy I have been trying to find (the first guy).
( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLT8UjF7ZYY )
Somehow, I think “this” case is all tied up with what he is trying to explain.
Israel (the “friend” of America) are hell bent (as they have been for years) in keeping the Middle East area “on the brink” of war.
It serves their purpose.
Now the biggest thing in that area right now is “Iran”.
No one (apart from Israel) wants a war. It will be terrible.
Actually forget “terrible”, think world ending !
Our world at least.
Whilst Israel trys to find this “tipping point” there are those in america that are trying to keep their foot on the brake.
Hence the “internal” CIA war we are seeing. Others are trying to hit the gas, so to speak.
Somehow. For some reason. I think SAH was tied up with this.
Or…
to put it another way. I magine if Iran had nuclear weapons, would they use them ?
Probably not. The response (nuclear) from other countries would mean that Iran would commit suicide.
I doubt they want to do that.
But what if it was without doubt Iran did not have nuclear weapons.
What then ?
Moreover, in whos interest would it effect (not serve) if it was stated that Iran did not have nuclear weapons ?
America ? (some yes, some no).
Iran (no).
Israel (has be be a big yes).
Israeli foriegn policy would be greatly effected by a statement/proof of something like that.