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?
Marlin
5 Jan, 2013 – 1:14 am I’ve just popped back in and read yours which in line with my thinking, though that of course proves nothing. However on the post killing side we have PROVED misinformation from the French investigators plus extrordinary reactions by Britain on scene and at his home; on the pre-murder side so MANY connections with war zones, British, American and Iraqi intelligence in the family going back over 70 years that this CANNOT POSSIBLY be just an ordinary crime.
The fact that the French promote hypothesies that studiously avoid or deny clandestine operations; the British are unable or unwilling to accept Al Hilli as an asset whilst not wholly signing up to the French script; whilst Americans and Israelis remain incredibly silent, paints a picture, even if it still lacks perspective and detail.
We still don’t know what the parties were doing there, what connected them or why it was they had to be eliminated in such a public, brutal and theatrical manner. My reading of events is that all those killed were intended targets and therefore all in some way implicated in whatever warranted their demise.
I also think that both Mollier and Al Hilli’s were lured to some kind of meeting with a third party that the former were convinced was not a threat, but that was in fact a front for the killers mission, working to quite sophisticated planning by State or High Criminal (perhaps combining the two) planning.
One of the intriguing questions is why BOTH Al Hillis had to be there and what connects the two. Replicating SAH’s circumstantial evidence, Sylvain Mollier’s is indicative, though not conclusive, of some form of questionable activity. There is replication of recent paternal death; of fathers very active in politics and past national events; of family breakdown or conflict; of connections to top national politics (Mollier through his new Shultz family connections); of inexplicable three year work break; of signals of disaffection and attempts to move location (either back to Iraq or to Britain); big money; connections with sensitive industries and technologies and firms with questionable business links with defence, nuclear energy and middle east contracts.
All this is too big a co-incidence to be accidental I am sure. We have located the “bank”, we have located the “safe”, we have located the “lock”. We just can’t find the exact “combination”.
IF Mollier was an intelligence asset either domestic or foreigh it is unlikely (in contrast to the leaks regarding Al Hilli being watched by MI5) is there anything we can learn from government reaction to him? British sources have said little about him. Does this indicate he was a British asset to keep tabs on dubious Arriva trade links?
The French on the other hand, went out of their way to shield Mollier and his family, although quite prepared to point the finger at Al Hilli and Britain; playing down his role in the crime – insisting he had only “stumbled on the scene”; that no meeting was taking place – until the ballistics and forensics proved otherwise.
Two cyclists similar in profile, one killed one spared. Were their identities confused and the wrong one shot? I don’t think so because Mollier’s route, destination and interaction with Al Hilli’s is so apparent. Also it would have been clear from the first this was a Frenchman and not Briton. Further Martin was quite deliberately spared the same fate.
So the possibility that the French went out of their way to protect Mollier from any association or involvement may indicate he was their, or a British asset working together. This is as far as I am prepared to go. Maybe others may be able to go further.
thanks for those references NR NR
5 Jan, 2013 – 2:54 am. Clinton helps the deal and gets 30 m cashback. a canadian uranium mining company is created out of nowhere. a zazakhstan dictator is probably well rewarded. westinghouse get an assured supply of fuel. russia gets its nose pushed out again. no wonder putin is sulking. where do the french and british get their uranium?
Tim
I agree with your lengthy theory, except that we dont really know how the secret services beling to Mollier.
SAH is pretty clear due to his uncle’s CIA history. However, Saddam was CIA, too. There must have been another reason. Either Hashim worked for the other CIA or Hashim worked for Israel, too.
With all those Jewish names i believe that the involved worked for Israel. Probably they worked for Jewish but opposed the Khazars. That would perhaps be enough and sufficient for considering them being dangerous for the Khazar’s zionism. With all what we have heard about SAH and Mollier/Ginolet families (friends in Marocco and pro PLO and anti-zionism) we could suggest that they were on the Jewish side and opposing the Khazar zionism.
Off topic:
The name of the Swiss shooter is Florian Berthouzoz (33). The name of his uncle whom he shot is Eddy Berthouzoz. His uncle is a keen cyclist who took part in many bike races in the area (a cyclist life is dangerous in that area). His uncle is also listed as a Wallis Mountain guide and member of the mountain safety and rescue staff in Wallis.
Sorensen will be interested in the matter of fact that the Berthouzoz family is Ashkenazi (Khazar).
Dopey
5 Jan, 2013 – 4:29 pm if I rember rightly Anders 7777 was the chap early on who appeared to have inside information. just another death. Let’s hope there arn’t suspicious circumstances and someone’s looking after his interests. That’s the scary thing these days. Who is there to do so if some nasty tribe take a serious dislike to what you say. Gareth Williams and others say “Don’t rely on the police will you.”
If true RIP Anders and thanks for your contribution to this topic.
Of course another reason France anxious to Mollier out of it might have been local important/influencial connections having a baring on Maillaud indicated by his comment “family deserve some privacy” (Maillaud has been big on privacy and sparing us from morbid photos of ppl enjoying themselves.) As to Al Hilli’s Saad’s uncle was instrumental in arresting and prosecuting Saadam Hussein, and was tortured by him, Khadim’s family forced to flee as well. There was no love lost there. One could foresse him being a willing intelligence asset for Britain/USA in at least the second invasion. (His father may have helped with the first) He may well have applied specialist interpretational skills to aerial and satellite surveillance. In this he was vaguely alligned with Israel AND Iran who both, for different reasons wanted Saadam gone. However, having assisted with the initial objective, he may have began to change and allegance when he witnessed what was happening subsequently. How this would have panned out on Iran and Syria is difficult to tell because we arn’t sure whether his strident anti-America/Israeli views were genuinely held or merely put there to persuade Israel’s enemies he was their friend and prepared to work traitorously for them. As someone said here previously, spies don’t become blatent in their personally held views without a reason. If you are working under cover it is not a mistake you would make. Someone who does is either not a spy or trying to convince others he might be.
He said he felt like the Gobi desert after he was ousted from here due to complaints, from above all James, who told Jon to delete his posts. This means that James and Jon are complicit in his death.
Tim V 10:57PM As you know we are in agreement of the general outlines of the plot, though somehow I think we don’t quite know where the safe deposit box is – to use your analogy – still a few too many to choose from. Good summary of the unknonwn knowns – for sure some notions have been eliminated (like the crazed lone gunmen and the “innocent” tourist excursion/bicycle ride, among others). A good example of such a “known” is that a meeting was arranged for Al Hilli (not likely by him since he wouldn’t know the martinet to pick out of multitudes of places) and likely for Mollier (new route, deliberate rumors of him taking the “wrong route”, race bike – indicating that perhaps there was reason for extra speed), but the parties setting up the meeting and the ostensible reason for it are, at this time, unknown (and likely to remain so if spying was involved – their handlers are not likely to tell and the the killers’ agency even less so).
But, thinking through the agencies involved, reinforcing your line of thought, the following can be surmised with some confidence:
1. The Brits are involved – likely directly through the person of WBM; Al Hilli mwas their asset at one time, possibly still was but not exclusively so.
2. The French are involved – the cover-up is too intense and obvious to think otherwise. They seem especially keen covering up SM’s role, which means that Mollier HAD a role, and suspicion of that role would be at least embarrassing if not damaging to the french in particular.
3. Both Saad and Sylvain had expressed desire to “leave:. Saad for iraq (may be) Sylvain for Britain. Seems likely both were involved in something that made them uncomfortable and possibly scared. That something is likely to have involved dealings with a third agency.
4. We do not now or have good evidence to indicate who the third agency is (could be a combination of two), But we know it was not the Brits or the French that did the killing – both seem to have been taken by surprise and put in an uncomfortable position publicly of having to pretend to solve a crime but really finding a way to cover up for one.
On to the fork in the road now – there are really just a few possibilities, really (though each has lots of threads leading every which way):
A. Let’s assume that the third agency is say, Iran – SAH having been asked to open a channel to them – maybe offering his satellite imagery/drone skills and Mollier to help secure a delivery of faulty or traceable parts thanks to his access in Areva. Mollier may have been a British asset all along – possibly dormant as it where – their eyes and ears at Areva. The French are however appraised by the brits as to the general plot line, as far as Areva’s role is concerned. Saad on his end, Mollier on his are uncomfortable with the role they are asked to play in line with evidence of wanting “out”.
Then things get a bit murky. Maybe Iranians came to trust Saad who gave them things of value but not Mollier. Perhaps a meeting is arranged for both parties to test their commitment, one to vouch for or out the other, or as a chance for redemption over bad faith prior deliveries. Saad brings his family as a kind of insurance.
If iranian agents did the killing it would indeed be plausible as revenge for being double crossed, so this line of thoughts gets tidily wrapped up. But there is a problem – a big one: Somehow none of us believes this sits well with Iranian MO- it really beggars the imagination that they would choose that location in France and risk getting caught by a country that is unfriendly to them. It would be crazy risky – and if revenge – or teaching a lesson – was the motive, there are less risky ways to send a message. I don’t mean to be racist here or impugne anyone but cruel subtlety and crooked sense of humor are not common traits of Iranian people – based on everyone I know and much of what i read. For the most part, iranians seem like rather straight forward people – they’ll do what they have to, but those extra little twists in this case are just, well, atypical.
So it’s back to the other leg of the fork –
Iran is still an agency, SAH and SM are asked by handlers to do a job for them, but, the plot gets leaked to a fourth agency, say, Israel. The latter intercept the communications, but failing to process that there was a sting operation organized by the Brits – with or without the French – arrange the meeting – perhaps on surreptitious grounds – and proceed to do the killing. Sure it’s a bit of an over-kill but Mossad has had lately acquired a reputation for caring less for collaterals than they used to. They kill the women simply because they are not sure who all the involved parties are and besides – they don’t like to leave witnesses.
B. There is the the alternative possibility that the third agency is either CIA, Mossad or both working in tandem. They are the ones asking SAH and/or SM (separately) to do “a job” for them and the two individuals, each for different reasons acquiesce or have no choice – with the knowledge of their agencies. the brits are not enthusiastic however and keep a hand in the goings-on. The job may have something to do with Iran again or Russia etc. SAH does his job too well or maybe doesn’t do it at all, sabotaging the effort, in fact. Possibly something similar happens to SM. They are found out or patience has run out with them and both are called to a meeting. The third agency is however quite ruthless and we have bang bang instead of a lecture.
With this possibility WBM’s presence is understandable – he was notified by his asset about the meeting. The killing may be arranged partly for his and his agency’s benefit – that’s what “we” do to uncooperative assets – better provide us with more reliable ones next time because we mean business. The french are, as always, mortified and bend over backwards to do the best cover-up they can. WBM + agency find ways to show their dismay but political considerations don’t allow them to do more.
OK – it’s a long story – but the main difference between possibilities A and B is that in case A both SAH and SM are carrying out their orders though perhaps not so well. In case B, they are reluctant actors – lent out to the third agency under something of a duress.
There are of course, other possibilities, involving eg, more criminal motives. While those cannot be dismissed, they simply don’t sit well with the deep, all out cover-up effort underway. If there was suspicion of criminal elements (say, anything mafia) then there would be no reason not to release pictures of the victims, solicit more forcefully for witnesses, allow more play for the families etc. It is the cover-up not the crime itself that points to the necessary involvement of state agencies. this case has not been treated as an “ordinary” crime from the first second – as many here had said, so we should just accept the facts as we know them and move to more plausible scenarios.
With this long post I would like to honor the memory of Anders7777, whose absence I lament. I don’t think he would have minded the redundancies – ADD was definitely not his problem from what I saw. Very sorry he is gone – good buldog that he was – the common man(and woman)’s cause could definitely use a few more – snarls and all.
Tim V – apologies if i seemed to repeat many of your points – I was just trying to synthesize the information you collated into my own little logic bins – taking some of your highly plausible suppositions as sign posts to better frame potential scenarios. If I failed to credit you or others whose points I borrowed, my apologies – please assume credit is always implied.
@Ricki Tarr
5 Jan, 2013 – 4:42 pm
Heres a bit more on the crash.
http://www.leprogres.fr/france-monde/2013/01/06/un-couple-et-ses-trois-enfants-perissent-dans-le-crash-d-un-avion
@ Pink 6 Jan, 2013 – 7:39 am
“@Ricki Tarr 5 Jan, 2013 – 4:42 pm
Heres a bit more on the crash.”
http://www.leprogres.fr/france-monde/2013/01/06/un-couple-et-ses-trois-enfants-perissent-dans-le-crash-d-un-avion
@ Tim V : Note “Colorado” and “Casablanca” a coincidence or a clue? 🙂
This Franco-Moroccan family had spent the Christmas holiday in the resort of Méribel in Savoie and was returning to Casablanca [via Spain] where the old father, Farid Benson 46-year-old was an important industrialist whose company painting, named “Colorado”, is listed on the stock exchange. He was also the son of Mohamed Berrada, a former head of the Istiqlal Party (independence to the Morocco party) and first Director of the French daily newspaper “The Opinion”, died in Paris two years ago.
To help in their investigations, technicians of the Institute of criminal identification are also moved to make samples and examine the debris of the aircraft.
In early evening, the consul of Morocco in Paris also went to the scene of the accident and a lying-in was installed in the gymnasium of Saint-Étienne-de-Saint-Geoirs.
@Kenneth Sorensen 6 Jan, 2013 – 2:18 am
“He said he felt like the Gobi desert after he was ousted from here due to complaints, from above all James, who told Jon to delete his posts. This means that James and Jon are complicit in his death.”
I only overlapped with Anders7777 for a few days. He made some good points, and was quick to pick up on an off-topic comment I made, peripherally related to the Jimmy Savile biz.
But he did seem strange with his repeated, lengthy and duplicate posts which he wanted on Craig Murray as an archival back-up in case something happened at Icke. I was thinking why doesn’t he back them up elsewhere?
But now we understand that he wanted them in an accessible place, as he likely realized his time was short. I think James and Jon were justified in blocking him, though if we’d known his situation, someone might have offered a back-up, with assurance to repost here or elsewhere if they disappeared from Icke.
RIP Anders7777
An excellent job by all in summarizing the situation and the possible alliances and motives of the SAHs and SM and BM.
Still, there’s an outside possibility that it wasn’t a state ordered hit, but a lone nutter/robber (or even a state sponsored nutter like a Raymond Davis – a rogue, a loose cannon, a cowboy – the CIA particularly is plagued by them, some mafias too) that upset a careful plan for some transaction at Martinet.
If I might name drop, there was an important project involving Head of State X and his local rep, when something went wrong because of a machine failure.
Plan B was to secure a spare part and rush to fix it, when who, at that very moment, should intervene but no less than Her Royal Highness, Queen Elizabeth II, in all her personal splendor. It could only have been better if she’d been in her golden coach with footmen instead of a limo.
We were totally blocked in our progress, and X’s rep is desperately reminding us of the torture job that awaits him if this fails and he returns home. Luckily we had a plan C, involving a duplicate machine at another location, and he did not meet a bad fate.
At the time I thought it was just an awful piece of bad luck, but seeing how HRH worked with Bond recently, I can envision him beside her, urging the driver, “I see them, go, go, the fiends must be stopped at all costs. Hang on mum!”
Note to all SISs. This had nothing whatsoever to do with security or defense or state secrets. It involved an entertainment that X planned for his guests, and he would have been hugely embarrassed if it had failed.
Come to think though, what if that was the intent of HRH & Bond. If they humiliated X perhaps that would have been sufficient for BP to have an edge in bidding for resources.
NR
http://www.corporateinformation.com/Company-Snapshot.aspx?cusip=C5046MG00
There has been a couple more air accidents in recent months.
Article published the Saturday 25 August 2012
Four Swiss citizens died when their light airplance crashed near Montbéliard, eastern France, on Friday evening. Local people say the plane was struck by lightning….
http://www.english.rfi.fr/visiting-france/20120825-four-swiss-die-plane-crash-east-france
……….
Article published the Saturday 10 November 2012
Rescue workers were searching a remote mountainous area of France on Saturday for the bodies of two passengers of an Algerian military plane that crashed on Friday. Four corpses were found in the wreckage of the plane but six passengers had been on board……
http://www.english.rfi.fr/africa/20121110-two-bodies-missing-after-algerian-bank-plane-crashes-french-mountains
…..
And latest one.
Published on 06/01/2013
Isère. A couple and their three children die in plane crash….
http://www.leprogres.fr/france-monde/2013/01/06/un-couple-et-ses-trois-enfants-perissent-dans-le-crash-d-un-avion
Sounds like chain murders
and this one
Wednesday 03 October 2012
A Taiwanese pilot has died in the crash of a French air force fighter plane. The Mirage 2000-5 went down in a ball of fire, according to eyewitnesses.
The pilot, who was training with the French air force at the Luxeuil-les-Bains airfield in the east of the country…..
http://www.english.rfi.fr/asia-pacific/20121003-taiwanese-pilot-french-mirage-crash
I’m very sorry to hear about the death of Anders7777. My condolences to his family.
“Her Royal Highness, Queen Elizabeth II”, NR at 11:23am on 6.1.13.
Pedantic, I know. And I’m a republican. But of course, it ought to have been, ‘Her Majesty…’ As the monarch, she is higher than a ‘Highness’.
Bluebird
6 Jan, 2013 – 12:32 am Cycling appears to be hazardous everywhere and not just from heavy lorries. Remember Gareth Williams?
Kenneth Sorensen
6 Jan, 2013 – 2:18 am if you are being serious, that’s a very extreme and hurtful thing to say Kenneth. I’m afraid in my book that seriously undermines the position you take here on in. I would suggest you apologise and withdraw that one!
@ Suhayl Saadi 6 Jan, 2013 – 5:51 pm
““Her Royal Highness, Queen Elizabeth II”, NR at 11:23am on 6.1.13.
Pedantic, I know. And I’m a republican. But of course, it ought to have been, ‘Her Majesty…’ As the monarch, she is higher than a ‘Highness’.”
You are correct. Learn something every day. However, I’m in good company getting it wrong — it’s a common error. Thousands of HRH II references, many from “reliable” sources. Must be a holdover from when HM was HRH as a princess.
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f273/the-thames-diamond-jubilee-pageant-3-june-2012-a-33153-4.html
“The Queen arrived, looking absolutely beautiful. She was warmly welcomed by the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall, not to mention the cheering crowds. Not sure what brooch she’s wearing, but looked like Jardine Star to me.”
“Her Majesty The Queen and His Royal Highness The Duke have arrived.Did anyone hear the BBC commentator refer to the Queen as ‘Her Royal Highness,Queen Elizabeth II’ ?”
“I did, and actually loudly corrected him (more like yelled, really). I thought only DM gets the title wrong sometimes and calls the Queen “Royal Highness”, instead of “Her Majesty”.”
Hope the folks at The Royal Forums don’t read Craig Murray or I’m in trouble.
What if the SAHs or SM irked Her Majesty by wrongly addressing her and she yelled, “Off with their heads!” What with President Obama having his little kill list with 2500 names, wouldn’t Her Majesty have one too? Except hers would be on a parchment scroll with names added or struck off by the Calligrapher Royal. Then she’d seal it with sealing wax and her seal, and put it in a royal dispatch box and have it hand delivered to Bond over at LegoLand.
To drop HM’s name one last time, I was party to a select group in receipt of one her dispatch boxes, fine wood lined with purple velvet. Treated with reverence and awe. We should have had a footman with white gloves at our end to remove the contents.
I’ve done it again; forgot to turn off italics, and to say above way off-topic. Hope Jon doesn’t have a three strikes policy. I promise not to try and fancify things anymore and stick to ” and ” in the future.
Marlin
6 Jan, 2013 – 4:36 am and the substantive earlier one – thanks for the credit. I read it with interest. I agree with your reasoning. We have very firm evidence of SAH’s nervousness both in Britain and France. It may well have been the prospect of the trip caused him anxiety though not sufficient to prevent him going. Did he do it under duress of British Intelligence, someone else or in spite of it?
You know the sort of thing – carrot or stick. “You owe us. Without our help you wouldn’t have got your property back in Iran”. Maybe “We have actively protected you and your family in the past”. Or “If you want our protection in the future you will play ball” or “You do this for us we will give your mother in law permission to stay/citizenship” or “We have so much stuff on you if you don’t we’ll throw you to the wolves” (loup réserve en Haute-Savoie) or “Do this one last job for us and we’ll let you retire and keep that money in Switzerland”.
Or was he going to France despite the threats, contrary to the advice of British Intelligence? He certainly didn’t tell the school despite the start of term which on the face of it would appear out of character. He told a couple of neighbours and associates it seems. Why keep the school in the dark? Did he fear officialdom and the waves that teachers may cause? He could not have been so naive to think he was off the radar even if not actively working for British Intelligence. His movement out of the country would have been flagged up somewhere as would his electronic/telephonic communications. Whatever he was going to Chevaline for, you can be sure someone in MI5/6 knew about it.
Was the team in Paris specifically deployed as back-up for this operation, if so why were they not physically closer? Or were they there for a different purpose but deployed just the same? Whatever the reason, with British military deployed both in France AND Britain there can be little doubt exceptional circumstances prevailed. I suggested a forensics man in the aerial might be holding a geiger counter. Very sophisticated equipment and bomb squad was deployed at his Surrey house. Was this proportional and demanded by the circumstances or a ruse played out in the full glare of the worlds press?
The transfer of heavy metals at the scene is contra-indicated by virtue of the mode of Mollier’s transport. Technical information would be quite a different matter. The fact that Mollier was apparentl seached BEFORE the police arrived is very significant as was Martin’s decision to move the corpse to a different position. Even the police were warned off intervening with the scene, yet this “unrelated tourist who had stumbled on the scene” felt no such compunction! A man with military training did less than an average man would have done (caring for a little child) yet did conversely did far more (interfering with a crime scene and dead bodies when it wasn’t necessary) The fact that with virtually no sure information the French put it out that Martin was the hero, when he might have been regarded as a suspect, is further confirmation of clandestine role.
The Franco-Moroccan family spent the Christmas holidays in Meribel Savoie and returned to Casablanca where his father, Farid Berrada, aged 46, was an important industrial company whose painting, called “Colorado” is listed. He was also the son of Mohamed Berrada, a former head of the Istiqlal (Independence Party in Morocco) and first director of the French daily newspaper “L’Opinion,” died in Paris two years ago.
Berrada graduated from Bordeaux Management School in 1964 . He was appointed Minister of Finance in 1992 to 1993 in the government Lamrani V 1 , having taught in the faculties of law and economics of Rabat and Casablanca . Between 1994 and 1999 , he was appointed ambassador to France and Delegate of Morocco to the UNESCO . Between 1999 and 2001 , he became Director General of the Office chérifien phosphate (OCP), then CEO of the company Royal Air Morocco (RAM) 2001 to 2006 .
He is currently professor at the University Hassan II in Casablanca , and member of the Higher Education Council and the Steering Committee of the Royal Institute for Strategic Studies .
NR, 11:23AM yes, the possibility of the cowboy his definitely still on the table. Was it BB and/or James that suggested the “good’ vs “bad” CIAs? Unfortunately, I doubt we’ll know anytime soon whether there was a direct state order or not. That BTW is one reason I keep referring to “agencies”. Those should be taken as related to states but not necessarily completely aligned with officially sanctioned actions.
Your story about the orders from HH is entertaining. It is, as you imply, also suggestive of a scenario where something – possibly an agreed upon exchange/delivery of information – had to be stopped at all costs. The possibility of Saad having come into possession of information that had to stay hidden (like say, on 9/11) has been suggested. Contact with Russians – perhaps through SM – has also been proposed, as has the potential interception of the transaction plan by yet another agency, possibly through a double cross. None of these possibilities can be eliminated at this stage based on what we know. All we can do is list the various speculations and may be group them according to some decreasing plausibility ranking (noting that it’s always easier to eliminate something than to prove something when one is not in possession of all the pertinent facts).
Perhaps off topic, perhaps not.
This is a pretty good conspiracy regarding today’s new Aurora shooting.
The victims as well as the suspect are all conservative Christians, working for Christian children projects and for a very conservative christian church and missionary. Also working for Angels Unaware.
http://m.conspiracy-cafe.com/site/mobile?dm_path=%2Fapps%2Fblog%2Fshow%2F21889107%2Dpure%2Dconspiracy%2Din%2Daurora%2Dshooting&fw_sig_session_key=cc0c
Off topic(?) addition to the above conspiracy.
The Gotham Building Flatiron Towers in NY is locked for 10 years from commercial use for the Sorgente Group. Will they wait that long? What will Batman do to create a quicker commercial use? The Paris Eiffel tower is owned by Sorgente Group, too. Who’s the insurance group for both buildings?
http://therealdeal.com/issues_articles/sorgente-storms-the-city/
http://www.sorgentegroup.com/index.php?lingua=eng
I submit this article, dated January 6, 2012, for your review:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19509641
Whatever Saad al-Hilli’s role was in aiding China to use satellites for monitoring the world’s oceans, it would not have escaped the attention of the agencies that monitor such things.
Sorry, that’s September 6, 2012, one day after the Chevaline incident.