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?
Whenever I see/hear of helicopter crashes, plane crashes or suicides of influential military or government personnel I am suspicious these days. That Kazakhstan plane that came down on Christmas Day was hardly reported. Gareth Williams was bang in the middle of two of the richest American and Kazakhstan families. It is not even disputed he was a Brit Intelligence agent. He was fully aware of surveillance info. There was undoubtedly a clean-up operation in his flat yet the heating was turned up and he wasn’t reported missing by his spy bosses for over a week!
Litvenenko it has now been admitted was working for British Intelligence. He was caught between the Russian State and (Spanish based) mafia (the same thing?) and killed with radioactive pollonium 210. In that case the British chose to make public and pursue the alleged culprit despite the political reprocussions.
William Hague denied claims that Neil Heywood – who died in China last November – might have been a member of British intelligence. But then he would wouldn’t he, caught as he was between one of the most influential Chinese politicians and who knows what?
Saad al Hilli who got wiped out with his family, was caught between the British and Iraq/Hezbollah/Iran/Israel parties. Trouble is this time those involved in his assassination could not be more important allies. America in Nato and Afgahnistan, France to share nuclear submarine capability and Arienne rocket launch of (ironically or not?) satellites. Together on Libyan intervention. Together on Syria? So even if they did ruin one of our little spy stories we can’t easily rock the boat can we. Limited to merely pretending to investigate the crime in co-operation, whilst sending out little diplomatic signs of disapproval.
It would appear British clandestine efforts are not working out too weel. Could it be that the “big boys” are putting poor little Blighty in its place? Could it be that Israel which is still run by descendants of the Stern Gang like to give two fingers to the colonialist power that facilitated its creation like a prodigal son. (No returning for him though)
CORRECTION: I meant of course “William Hague denied claims that Neil Heywood – who died in China A YEAR last November” Apologies for that.
Yep James
4 Jan, 2013 – 7:48 pm. Did you see that little map I posted, ostensibly showing distribution of Sunni (various shades of green) and Shia (black) apros pos white hat cowboy and black hat baddie? Its hardly subtle lining up Syria and Iran for the next big military intervention. Thats why Russia and China have supported Assad not because they particularly like him, but because they can see their sphere of influence in an oil rich region deminishing. Assad is a leader scarcely better than Saadam. He played into opposition hands when he reacted with such barbarity. Everything is in the melting pot though and the West cannot be sure what metal will emmerge when the furnace cools.
Maillaud has already found the shooter. It’s the Swiss guy. News around the world are reporting that he fits exactly into the psychiatric profile that Maillaud and his team had established so far.
This guy was in a psychiatric hospital in 2005. He is drug addict and he was totally drunk when he killed his Swiss uncle with whom he had an argument the same day, plus 3 neighbours and one trespasser.
Daillon is “just” 150 km from Chevaline. Although that guy doesn’t have a car and neither does he have a driving licence, it is most likely that he did ride a cow up to Chevaline and across the border. Perhaps he was car hiking. I am sure that Maillaud and his team will find a way to explain us how this guy would have come to Chevaline with his old gun and a lot of ammunition in his pocket, to kill 3 Iraqis and one French guy whom he all didn’t know. He was waiting in the lonely forest in an area he didn’t know, in another country, 150 km from his home, after a long ride on his cow, until several strangers, cyclists or hikers would appear in front of his gun in that lonely forest. Simply because he is a lunatic and he wanted to kill. Case closed …….
We were all of us searching into the wrong direction. It’s as easy as in the Dominici case. The lunatic psycho, but this time he didn’t kill alone but in another country 150 km from his home where he passed the Swiss/fremch border with a gun and ammunition in his pocket! Thank you, Alfred Hitchcock! I wouldn’t even buy this story if it were your movie script. Or was it Agatha or Ms. Marple?
Bluebird.
I refer to my older post…and say “I told you so” !
This guy is “ear marked” for the job. Perfect cover up. Job done.
And Tim, you say…
“The only real power was in the hands of the Americans at that time. He said cryptically to his brother he had used his contacts, or words to that effect”.
Never a truer word written. And therein is the truth me thinks.
Tim V 8:13PM – I have seen your comment on Saad before and was going to pipe in at the time but things came up (they always do – those “things”…). Didn’t have any new substance to add other than voice an agreement with the general direction Saad’s activities point to, as you suggested, going back at least to to 2001. From the 2001 citizenship to that “helping UK against Saddam in 2003 (referenced here and there) to that visit in 2004 where he amazingly recovered his home – it all points to Saad being an asset of british Intelligence. It could however be that somewhere along the way he was made to work for other intelligence agencies (James suggested that – the passing of agents from one outfit to another – and you did too), which we can surmise must be the CIA (and possibly that somewhat rogue part of the CIA that serves a front for Mossad, ie, BB’s “bad”).
There are a few vague things that add up pointing in that last direction – and the fact that Saad was not perhaps overjoyed at being passed from one hand to another. Like the brother’s point that this past year Saad was troubled, talking about “maybe going back to Iraq”. Not very logical unless he was getting increasingly scared. What would he be scared of? probably the activities he was asked to participate in were getting more dangerous looking – he must have been feeling like being out on a limb. Or, he kind of messed up on something that was assigned to him – possibly deliberately since his heart wasn’t in it (boy, am I out on a limb on this one!).
One of my hunches (and that’s all it is – a hunch) is that this supposed anti-Israel, anti-America chat room ranting activity reported (only) by Gary Aked, may have been something he was either put up to by his new handlers, or had reason to mention it to good old gary. Chatroom activity is something agents do to get the online credentials among Arabic speakers, identify a few like-minded Jihadis etc. Maybe someone was setting him up as part of a sting. We don’t know Saad’s true leanings (where are those chats anyway?) but chances are that he would be rather more careful voicing his thoughts if he was an asset or made to work as an agent and it is doubtful he would have confided in a “friend’ quite so readily, unless he was directed to do so.
Then there were those early references about a trip to Qoms in Iran, a “pilgrimage” it was said, couple years ago or so. I don’t think there was ever confirmation of that but we do know Saad was from a Shiite background, so such a trip is not out of the question. he may have been put on some job or another to ferret out Iranian secrets, connect with agents or to pass on information. His increasing state of anxiety – reported by several sources – would have been understandable if he had to work as a sort of a “double agent”. It is possible that at some point he did something useful for the other side, or failed to follow exact orders or whatever – and it was interpreted as a serious screw-up. That would give the “third” agency (possibly bad-CIA/Mossad) reason to take him out. And in revenge, the rest of his family as well. That would sit well with the names etymology, no?
This is an alternative to your hypothesis, Tim, that Saad may have come into possession of some truly damning information, eg, on 9/1 – or some satellite or drone related activities that the PTB don’t want to see come to light.
Either way, indications are strong that Saad was being yanked in more than one direction, and obviously one of those directions was deployed by an agency sufficiently annoyed that they decided to end the ‘relationship” quite permanently. How does Mollier fit in this I obviously don’t know but he must have been critical not only to the operation but to the French participation in the subsequent cover-up. May be SM was another agent that fell afoul of the same dastardly agency’s standards of performance? then it would really be Combe d’Ire, and slaughter of horses (or mules), wouldn’t it?
BUT, these scenarios aside, I have a parallel set of sign posts for extraction (partial or whole) as well. Just in case. Alas, in this case I have a harder time conjecturing which agency is on which side – I keep messing up the logic. But then we all recognize that this is, at best a more complicated scenario.
Marlin…
I like your comments.
May I also add the old saying “the sins of the father…..”
Agencies do use and re use people. That is a known fact.
I to am not sure how Mollier fits in here, but then does he need to?
Operations ongoing do not mean things are clear. They may be a “catch up”.
@ Tim V 4 Jan, 2013 – 8:25 pm
“Hi James at James 4 Jan, 2013 – 2:56 pm : Oh I should have mentioned the shenanicans relating to Kazakhstan ie huge bribes from CIA sources to secure oil and exclude the russians that has been rumbling on ever since but firmly supressed.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/17/clinton-sergei-kurzin-opinions-contributors-sidorov.html
What’s the significance of this?
Difficult to tell, but if Sylvain was helping Iran — and had expressed potical intent in this direction — that could be a further reason for their animosity towards him, [as well as a reason why the daughter chose him as a ‘protest’ against her parents].
On the other hand, he could be helping Israel as a double agent by pretending to be willing to sell stuff to Iran or he could previosly have supplied faulty stuff, and wanted ‘one last go’, and the Iranians could have discovered his bluff and dicided to take him out. [The general outline of this ‘mission’ would have the support of Morange family, as he was on the ‘righ’t side in the ME conflict, although of course highly dangerous stuff, and they didn’t approve of it one bit, but if he were to die, he at least died serving the ‘right’ side.] This could explain claire’s nervousness before his fatal meeting in Martinet, as he could have disclosed to her that he was onn to some dangerous rendez-vous, but that he did it for her and the family,
It is also possible that Israel chose him [some years ago] as an agent, because he was not Jewish, and engaged to a Jewish woman, and so in Israel’s eyes not anyone you’d wish to spare.
But Clair didn’t approve of this murky business, and decided to become pregnant in the Fall of 2011, as a way to lure him back into more peaceful activities, but he decided to have one final go for Israel as a double agent lruing SAH to Martinet, and there he encountered his fate as Iranian agents were waiting for him.
As I’ve said all along, whether or not Israel killed him directly or not, they did so indirectly, because Iran would-nt have had an incentive to these nuclear activities, if it weren’t for Israel.
I believe he is today viewed as some kind of a hero in the morange family, as he died serving the only Jewish State in the history of mankind, serving to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, and the Morange family know that he did it in order to get finances to support both Claire, but also his two teenage sons from a previous marriage and his former wife, Lydia ringot.
He wasn’t a hero before – because they didn’t approve of her choice of a man (this man 20 year older and non-Jewish) — but after his death, he 1) has given Claire the possibility of a fresh start (this time with a Jewish man) and 2) he died heroically trying to procure funds for his family and at the same time helping Israel.
With reference to “The only Jewish state in the history of mankind”, we all know today why previous rulers in the last 2000 years didn’t think it was a smart thing to have, and it is also only påossible due to the possesion of the cruelest weapons in the history of mankind. This is food for thought i think. because if it only can exist due to this, it shouldn’t.
@ Kenneth Sorensen 5 Jan, 2013 – 9:33 am
I’ve suggested we should keep an open mind re who SAH was really working for – if he was working for anyone – and that group may or may not be where his heart was. He may have been coerced to do it.
Either way, what he told Gary Aked and his cousin in Canada about hating Israel and the US, may be true or a cover if he was working for Israel.
Put together with your suggestion that SM was aiding Israel it’s a possibility that both of them were on that side, which would give the opposition – Iran ? / Russia ? – a motive for taking them both out. Neither was an innocent bystander who happened there by accident.
There’s this story we were discussing above:
“@ Tim V 4 Jan, 2013 – 2:12 pm
“NR 4 Jan, 2013 – 5:55 am
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/19/world/middleeast/19lebanon.html
“For 25 years, Ali al-Jarrah managed to live on both sides of the bitterest divide running through this region. To friends and neighbors, he was an earnest supporter of the Palestinian cause…”
“To Israel, he appears to have been a valued spy, sending reports and taking clandestine photographs of Palestinian groups and Hezbollah since 1983.”
@ Bluebird : For fun: How the Illuminati spent Christmas.
“Rebekah Brooks faces three sets of charges linked to her time at Rupert Murdoch’s media empire.” [And received 17,000,000 pounds upon leaving.]
“Two weeks ago it emerged that Mr Cameron had met his old friend at a pre-Christmas party organised by Tom Astor, great-grandson of the American heiress Nancy Astor.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2257106/David-Cameron-admits-having-Christmas-chat-Rebekah-Brooks-insists-big-deal.html
You (or maybe it was me quoting an article) commented a while back: “Pilgrim Society. The Pilgrims had recently included David Astor, John Jacob Astor 8th, and William Waldorf Astor 3rd.”
No, I deem it impossible that SAH was working for Israel. If that were the case he would be an enemy to all honest Arabs.
I believe the al-Jarras are Sunnis? They are very close geographically to the Palestinian conflict [and Lebanon have seen a great influx of Palestinian refugees, and many believe that these refugees had a negative impact on the Lebanese Civil war 1975-1993; its fair to say that Israel wouldn’t have invaded in 1978 and again 1982-2000 if it weren’t for the Palestinian activities, so obviously many Lebanese resent that], whereas SAH is Shia from a very prominent, I guess you could call it aristocratic family. For this prominent Iraqie family, there could be no question of anything other than strong support and emphaty for the plight of the Palestinians, especially when you consider how the shioas themselves were persecuted under Saddam. Saddam was also strongly supportive of the Palestinian — indeed this was one of the sick motives for — according to the sick Israeli mind — to “take him out”.
Sorensen
What about the name BRUN ? 🙂
I think that both Marlin’s as well as Sorensen’s theories are reasonable theories.
However, it would be too easy to say that all Jewish stick together and that all non Jewish are tgeir enemies. There are Brotherhoods who consist ofboth Jewish and non Jewish members and their support for each other is stronger than the support for their tribes or religions.
SAH could have worked for Israel since i suggested that the Iraqi cleaning in 1969 did not target Shia at that time but Jewish Iraqis and those who worked for Mossad. This was a consequence of the Israel- Arab war but not an idea of Saddam as some uninformed ones might suggest. I was laughed at when I suggested that the al Hillis were crypto Jews. Those are Jews who pretend to belong to another religion for their own safety. This would all fit very well with 1969 and what we know about Hashim. Actually it were the Mizraim/Sephardi Jewish who did rule economy and government in Iraq pre 1969. In Iraqi government the relation between Jewish and Arab prior 1969 was 2:1 in favour for the Jewish. In business and factories and industry it was 9:1 in favour of the Iraqi Sephardi/Mizraim Jews. This is a natter of fact but ignored by media. Most Iraqis who left Iraq in 1969/1970 were Jewish or crypto Jews.
Now Sorensen, the Sephardi are the real Jews descending from Jewish tribes. However, the Ashkenazi are Khazar tribes, descending from the Hunns and Mongols. They originally lived east and north of the Black Sea. Then they moved West all over Europe. Today they are the zionists who want Israel to grow. The real Jewish (Sephardi) are in their majority no zionists and they would love to live in peace in their homes in iraq, iran, syria and north africa. They dont need Israel. They hate zionists.
The Khazars are a historic matter of fact and a great tragedy for the real Jewish tribes. The Khazars seek power and world ruling. The Sephardi want peace.
There were Sephardi/Mizraim presidents and Generals in Israel who were elected, however, their governments were short because either they were killed or jailed because of sex “scandals” like Assange. Shortly after, the Khazars took power in Israel once again. In reality we would need to rewrite Jewish history, but that is impossible because they have too much power and own the media. The world has to suffer the Khazars world ruling from a people who just pretend to descend from Jewish tribes. They have as much in common with the Holy Land like you and me. We live in a faked world.
Summary: SAH could or could not be Sephardi and he could have worked for Israel. Chances > 50%
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/facts2.htm
Here are links for the above post. You can also find a lot on youtube when you search for Khazar.
There are many lies in our world history. Those lies are the basement for wars and bloodshed in our current times. Sadly enough we, all of us, do have to suffer from those lies.
Those lies are the reasin for 2 CIAs and for 2 different Israeli politics. One is the zionist idea of the Khazars, the other one is the Jewish peace politics of the real Jewish descendants, the Sephardi/Mizraim.
Yeah, I saw the Brunn name 😉
With regards to the Jews who left Arab lands, it is important to remember that they did so AFTER Israel had exciled 750,000 palestinians in 1948, and again 200,000 in 1967 plus some 80,000 Syrians.
It’s important to understand whats cause and effect in this chain of events. It’s probably the most prominent argument that Zionists have in their stable (about ‘those cruel Arab states who threw Jews out’). This says something about the quality of the rest of their arguments.
I’d say: You could peel any of their arguments away one by one, and what they are left with is a several thousand year old argument about a God given right to the territory.
I don’t know how many times I have countered this ‘argument’ about the Jewish refugees from Arab lands, and pointed out the the real cause and effect.
But all the time younger people and new generations comes along who perhaps are lured by this ‘argument’. Which needs to be refuted, and that’s why we must never tire of spelling out the true line of events, so that also younger generations can understand that all their arguments really are bogus, and its kind of effective to start with pulling this their most prominent argument apart.
Sorensen
Regarding your last comment;
PLEASE make a difference between Khazars and Jewish tribes. The real Jewish descendants had always to suffer from Khazars world order politics. They are more victims than the Arabs. The Jewish tribe descendants are no zionists in their majority.
James
I would not wonder when the rifles of the Swiss psycho shooter would have been used in France. Case closed.
His army weapons were already removed and destroyed in 2005 when he was in a psychiatric hospital for some time. Relatives say that they were surprised that he had weapons because his uncle (a retired police officer) was very careful at him to prevent him to do stupid things. But now he got weapons although his relatives did not believe that he had any guns?
OK, he could have stolen them. On the other hand, perhaps somebody gave him an old army Luger on September 7th?
I am not surprised when the Luger were the same in france and in switzerland.
For those of you who do not know what crypto jews are and why:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto-Judaism
http://www.cryptojew.org/who_we_are_and_who_we_are_not.html
http://www.shoah.org.uk/2012/08/19/the-saudi-royal-family-are-crypto-jews/
Sorrenson…. you need to swot up on your history, by that I mean to go way back not just look at events during your lifetime.
Next, you need to remember that many Arabs themselves were/are Jews the way you talk about ‘Arab lands’ is risible.
I suggest you go back to the beginning of Islam & see how Mohammad treated the Jews who were already successful businessmen by the time he arrived & how so many were forcefully converted or driven out by him.
Also the archaeological digs which have found Jewish arteacts in those very lands & recently too in Afghanistan.
You’re constantly trying to mislead with your limited knowledge of the past.
The incontroversial truth is there for all to see………
Hi all
Glad to see you all still plugging away on this. I thought I’d post just to let those know who remember him that Anders7777 is believed to have passed away on Christmas Day 🙁
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=232417
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-20921206
Dopey,
Thanks for posting about Anders on here, I didnt know and hadnt been on here or Icke today which is very unusual for me since……well since the Al-hilli shooting and my interest in the case primarily because of Anders. Without him, there is no way that my eyes would have been opened to how we shouldnt just believe what the mainstream media says.
I feel I owe Anders a lot and though we had never met, we were brought up quite close to each other. I regretted when he was banned from posting here and would send him posts from time to time when I thought we had made a ‘major discovery’. In hindsight they dont seem such a breakthru now.
My sympathies go to his family and friends and they should know that I feel blessed to have met him, even though it is just thru this and the David Icke boards. He really had done an amazing job on David Icke in keeping the focus on the Jimmy Savile investigation and that only finding a few has-been celebrities guilty will in no way be enough when this goes right to the very top of society.
Dopey, that is sad to hear. Explains why he had been so little in evidence the past couple of months, whereas I saw him post a lot earlier.
RIP