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?
Tim V feb 10 10:37 PM. Thanks and reciprocated.
As to what you said,
(warning: pop philosophy coming up). We, the public, who want to know and to see justice done, do not feature in this whole killing affair at all. The outraged people everywhere, SAH and SM’s families, the justice systems in both countries, apparently mean absolutely nothing in the world of those who seek to rearrange the world just to prop up their own interests. WE get to be a greek tragedy chorus, but that’s about it. But to know and to recognize this state of affairs is the beginning of a long process to wrestle back a measure of control over our lives and those of our descendants. Ultimately, all power, even that of tyrants and/or tyranical systems (such as the corporatocracy) derives from consent of the governed who are far more numerous than the “rulers”. That’s why perception management by elites is so critical. And that’s why it’s so essential to poke holes in it.
I agree that this board is one small place in which to do just that, and I would really like to thank Craig Murray again for continuing to make it available. Hope he doesn’t get in trouble if we end up getting a bit too close for comfort.
@Marlin
10 Feb, 2013 – 10:06 pm
Thanks for your explanation Marlin I understand now it could be why the girls have not been returned to the family too ,which I still find disturbing when the family have not been implicated it would be good to clear up what the position is regarding the children ,I wonder if the press will follow it through .
Now here’s a blinder. French slaughter/eat lots of horse. Lot of inconvenience being caused by horse in Findus + problem. Who’s going to lose out? Is it subtle way MI6 is getting its own back?
This is off topic it came up on one of my searches I don’t know anything about him but it looks interesting.
http://annecy.kazeo.com/
Its an interview with John Perkins in 2009
“The Conscience of a Contract Killer Economy”
An exploding Luger is none starter or “false starter” Straw44berry
10 Feb, 2013 – 5:40 pm.
but right on this one Straw44berry
10 Feb, 2013 – 5:47 pm
Do you REALLY think a caring dad with Al Hilli’s background Pink
10 Feb, 2013 – 6:09 pm would park up neatly on seeing a man lying on the ground in a pool of blood, and then get out to take a look and not say to his precious daughter “You stay here.”? No despite all the warning signs screaming at him, to take his daughter to check him out? I don’t think so do you?
NR
I agree. I meant 9/11 as a bigger thing than just the 9/11 event. This event was just the starter for a bigger plan that is going on still today.
Some of the many symbols setup on 9/11 were:
1) Diabolism for Islam and all muslims being the evil on earth and guilty for everything (similar to what the Germen setup as their propaganda regarding the Jews in early 1930)
2) war on “terror” making it possible for a supervision and control like Orwell did predict in his 1984.
3) War on “terror” to excuse real wars for no other reason than imperialism and for commercial interest.
4) Legalising torture, rendition and assassination for literally everybody on earth (without legal procedures and without justice) for literally every human individual on earth who might be a present or future threat to the financial elite.
5) Making formerly free media financially and ideologically dependent on the financial and political mafia, deliberately supporting the evil and supporting false flag operations by knowingly telling us lies. Free western media are a joke today. They are worse than the Pravda was in 1968.
9/11 was a starter for a big fascist plan and Iraq, Afghanistan and Syrian wars are logical part of that bigger plan.
TIMMMMMM and @All
“Zainab by now have watched his TV appearance and recognised him as the attacker?”
Is that plural ? An attacker ?? Or The attackers ?
IF a “prof”, there would NOT be ONE.
Reality must dawn at some point. even if ONE was a shooter, there would be “others” as a safeguard (by the mere expression “it had to be prof’s).
Pink
10 Feb, 2013 – 7:52 pm that is rather old news. (17.9.12) See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/9748567/French-cyclist-in-al-Hilli-murder-was-in-bitter-inheritance-dispute.html for seven times. (16.12.12)
8/10 for that one Marlin
10 Feb, 2013 – 10:06 pm. Child actors a step too far tho even for MI6.
Pink
10 Feb, 2013 – 11:11 pm – Good one! http://annecy.kazeo.com/
“Well, the company I worked for was called Chas. T. Main in Boston, Massachusetts. We had approximately 2,000 employees, and I became their Chief Economist. I had 50 people under me. But my real job was to do business. I granted loans to countries, huge loans they could not repay. Any provision of the loan – say $ 1 billion to a country like Indonesia or Ecuador – was that the country should return 90% of the loan to U.S. companies to rebuild infrastructure, companies like Halliburton or Bechtel. These are large companies. These companies then built electrical networks or ports or highways that served as some of the wealthiest families in those countries. The poor in these countries found themselves ultimately with incredible debt that they could not possibly pay. A country today like Ecuador devotes 50% of its national budget just to pay down its debt. And he can not do it. So we want to throat. If we need more oil, we will see Ecuador and we say, “Well, you can not pay us, then give our companies the Amazonian forests teeming with oil. “This is what we do today and we destroy Amazonian forests, forcing Ecuador to give them to us because of this debt. Thus, we give this big loan, most returned to the United States. The country is left with a huge debt of more interest and it becomes our servant, our slave. It is an empire. It works like this. It’s a huge empire. Which has been very successful. AG : (…) You say that you have long delayed writing this book because of bribes and other reasons. What do you mean by that? Who tried to buy or what are the bribes you accepted? JP : Well, in the 90s, I pocketed half a million dollars to not write the book. AG : Who? JP : In a large construction company. AG : Which one? JP : It was the company Stoner-Webster. Legally, it was not a bribe. I was paid as a consultant. It was perfectly legal. But I did not work in reality.”
It was to say that no one would believe us if we said, you know? So we went to Saudi Arabia in the early 70s. We knew Saudi Arabia was the key to our energy independence, or the means to control the situation. So we mounted this agreement where the Saudi Royal House agreed to send most of their petro-dollars, and invest in the United States. The Treasury Department would use the interest from these investments to hire U.S. companies to build new cities in Saudi Arabia, new infrastructure, and that’s what we did. And the Royal House guarantee the price of oil within acceptable limits to us, something they have been doing all this time. In exchange, we can ensure their stay in power as long as they comply with the agreement that we have done, and this is one of the reasons we went to war in Iraq. In Iraq, we tried the same policy with Saddam, but Saddam did not work in combination. When the economic hit men fail, the next step is to send what we call the jackals from the CIA, ie people who try to foment a coup or revolution. If it does not work, they resort to murder, or they try. In the case of Iraq, they have failed to reach Saddam Hussein. His bodyguards were too effective. He had doubles. They have failed to reach it. So the third line of defense, if the economic hit men fail and the jackals fail, it is to send young men and young women to kill and be killed. This is obviously happening in Iraq.
Brief comic interlude:
If I was a reporter who finally collected enough courage to ask British “authorities” something about the Al Hilli “affair”:
Me (intrepid reporter wanna-be): Why have the two Al Hilli girls not been released to the close relatives who want to care for them?
Authority x (feel in blank for name/rank/affiliation): well, hmmm….we need to make sure they are safe.
Me (tepid reporter): safe from whom, the killers?
Authority y: well, yes,that – we are still investigating who actually killed their parents….can’t take chances, you know – they are only children!
Me (timidly): but didn’t the french Prosecutor Milliot say he is sure it was a lone psychotic killer? is there really any danger such killer would pop up in the UK?
Authority z: did he? and i am not sure who you are referring to as Milliot? we are not aware of what the Frenchies say. As my colleague said, we are trying to do what’s best for the children while the investigation is ongoing.
Me (densely tepid reporter): Are you suggesting you have different take than the french? do you believe it was a professional hit and there’s a reason to fear for the girls’ safety?
Authorities xyz (in unison): We work closely with our french counterparts. The investigation is ongoing….
Me (trembling now at the sight of such righteous conviction): But are you saying that the girls cannot be allowed out of custody until the investigation is complete? because French investigator Maliot said it’s take 10 years!
Authority A seizes microphone (new on the scene, crew cut, triathlete build): We are saying no such thing! and the girls are not in custody! they are well cared for by excellent carers! first class care!
Me (fending off some approaching goons): can you at least assure us they are being raised in their own muslim religion? do you have any muslims caregivers available in a witness protection program?
Authority A (glaring): who are you exactly? what did you say your paper was?
Me (on the ground, wrestling to keep microphone from goons): I represent a very important blog! and {some/may be lots] people read my comments! Some are even French!
Authorities (all at once, signaling to goons): next question!
Curtains drop as foolhardy reporter wanna-be is whisked away in unmarked car. microphone semi-smashed on the ground. Bored crowd walks away, slowly. fello {real] reporter shields eyes, as if from the sun (even though it’s cloudy), shaking head. Greek chorus in the distance – singing the last stanza from Aida. or is it Nabukov?
@ bluebird 10 Feb, 2013 – 11:39 pm
“NR I agree. I meant 9/11 as a bigger thing than just the 9/11 event. This event was just the starter for a bigger plan that is going on still today.”
Good points all. Let me extend this into a Grandly Unified Conspiracy Theory and include the alleged 1997 assassination of Diana & Dodi in the Pont de l’Alma tunnel. [Note Masonic bridge symbol and all surveillance cameras “happened” to be out. Also 31 Aug. date – a season for assassinations? Chevaline & Norfolk?]
Prince Charles inducted Diana into the ways of the royals and palace intrigue — 9/11 pre-planning [it would take that long], Jimmy Savile, etc. She blabs to Dodi who tells auntie Khassoghi, the Scientologist, in Clearwater, Florida. Word gets to CIA which warns MI6. Bond goes to palace, explains all, and HM ERII quickly adds Diana & Dodi to her personal little kill list. It wasn’t ’cause Diana committed a commoner’s gaucherie at tea, and insulted the queen, as we all thought.
I think I might agree with you Bluebird
10 Feb, 2013 – 11:39 pm. The Patriot Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001 – i.e. less than TWO MONTHS following 9/11. It gives the Executive extrordinary powers of arrest and unlimited imprisonment without trial or the accused even knowing what is being alleged. This is an ultimate weapon of control over people. The fact that it drove a cart and horses through the Constitution raised hardly a murmour. So an internal conspiracy achieved all it set out to do: it enabled two countries to be invaded on spurious grounds, thus gaining control of essential raw material assets, whilst at the same time extending state control over its population. If the propoganda were to fail there is always the plane crash, the drowning, the shooting or the Patriot Act. Don’t lets be too complacent. Someone wanted to do much the same in the UK.
“The bill, which removed most of the changes from the Senate version, passed Congress on March 2, 2006, and was signed into law by President George W. Bush on March 9 and 10, 2006.”
“On May 26, 2011, President Barack Obama used an Autopen to sign a four-year extension of three key provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act while he was in France:[2] roving wiretaps, searches of business records (the “library records provision”), and conducting surveillance of “lone wolves” — individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities not linked to terrorist groups” N.B. LONE WOLVES
James
10 Feb, 2013 – 11:45 pm I agree. From my earliest posts I have argued this was at least a two man job and probably three. Again the French line that it was only one is proof in my mind that there is cover up sanctioned at the highest level of the French state.
Tim V “Child actors a step too far tho even for MI6.”
That may well be. But let it not be said that I didn’t cover all the bases, just in case….
About sums it up Marlin
11 Feb, 2013 – 12:53 am as per poor old Walter Wolfgang?
01 10 – that’s a wrap folks!
@ Marlin 11 Feb, 2013 – 1:02 am
“Tim V “Child actors a step too far tho even for MI6.”
That may well be. But let it not be said that I didn’t cover all the bases, just in case….”
In isn’t too far, in a time when the CIA obliterates with drones anyone, even innocently, in the vicinity of a highly suspected militant/terrorist and 83% of those polled approve.
There was a kinder, gentler time when perhaps people played by gentlemens rules. Like when Mafioso ordered hits in old days, the victim’s family was off-limits. Now, in Montreal for example, they torch apartment buildings with no regard for collateral damage, kids included.
@NR 10 Feb, 2013 – 12:19 pm
I found and reproduced a red car mentioned in an article no longer available on the web, but archived, dating from the Monday. The Daily Mail note also published the identity of Didier before withdrawing it. I get the feeling the police or a branch of it formally identified him”.
@Bluebird
I had found Pride Investigations earlier but not commented – 4 Feb
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1061296926&postcount=88
previously in Phoenix.
Did you see the pics?
Historically the name Tow emanages from the East Midlands of the UK (www.freebmd)
Glad you find the official story complete balderdash. The timing is fascinating, just before operation Chevaline went off.
Everybody shut up: “no comment”….move along now please.
@Blue – should say I reproduced the article where it was mentioned, not a pic of the red car. Yes, why wasn’t it photographed by Hoskins or whomever – these things make nice images with white suited forensic officers crawling over them, or even being loaded onto a trailer and driven away [cf Al-Hilli caravan]. Guess Norfolk Police weren’t allowed near the forensics! Anders would have called it a psy-op. [did you notice the “death of Anders” reported in January on the massive Icke-Savile thread he started way back. He was using the JS icon way back before it all blew up. Anders was very well informed here too…
Speaking generally, I get the feeling that, along with the Guardian and Telegraph, the Sun is a prime place for “placed stories” to emerge from the Securty services.
@Blue
thanks for Pride Inv website – hadn’t searched for that…
see Icke.
felix, I asked earlier but it was buried in one or two of my too-long posts so perhaps unnoticed. But this one is for you:
This JD/AC “incident” transpired apparently in late August early September. Many news accounts coming out on Sep 2nd through the 6th (including some of the ones you linked). Sep 6 is when news of the Chevaline killings were all over the map, and in the DM accounts for example, the Norfolk case was prominently displyed under the “related items”.
So here is what puzzles me – people like you, Ferrett and Anders were all over the Chevaline case bringing numerous links to all kind of cases where people died mysteriously and/or a cover-up is suspected (Gareth Williams was just one of those). Yet I can’t recall anyone bringing up this John Didier case, which as you point out stinks to high heaven, literally reeking of cover-up. Am I wrong about this?i admit to being a rather occasional reader of the CM comments on his first blog so it’s quite possible I missed things. if someone did bring it up that your remember, please share – I’d like to be corrected on this.
But if no one brought it up at the time – and there were many commenting in those early days, I would find that odd simply because people seemed so knowledgeable and so good at bring up all kind of cases, some with the most tenuous connection.
I do understand the reason for the prominence of this case at this time is the inquest in late January. But why wasn’t it noticed back in September? even the most cursory read of those early articles raised red flags – it was almost tailor made for someone like Anders and his uniquely suspicious mind.
Thanks for digging into this case – a fascinating read for sure. Your reply is appreciated.
@ Bluebird @ Felix OT – JD/AC Norfolk
The link BB put on Icke re the “wrong” JD in San Francisco (prev. Paris) has this at the bottom – strange coincidence:
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ericdidier
“Scientific & technical IT solutions (Cray, Vax, Unix, PCs).
… mechanical and thermal simulation on Mica and MLRS (French and US missiles)… French Engineering School: Memoir on Mechanical and Thermal simulation on Nuclear Plants mechanical faults.”
Belongs to “Red Herring Global” some type of software industry association. He goes from supercomputers to bulk email marketing and working large databases (those again). More money than working on Cray supercomputers? Probably is, and less likely to end up in a red holdall in Pimlico like GW — something MI5 bitched about after MI6 “lost” one of their seconded experts. Makes recruiting more difficult.
@ Felix @ Bluebird + OT – JD/AC Norfolk
Suppose, for a motive, there’s an investigation into end-of-life care in the NHS. They bring in JD as an outside IT specialist, because he’s unknown and couldn’t be involved in whatever aroused suspicions. He works with AC and they uncover scandal.
The obvious one is diversion of salable painkillers, a known problem with EOL care in hospices, nursing homes and from pharmacies/chemists.
I wonder if there is enough money in hastening patients departure. Saves money for the NHS, but on a large scale would there be enough in it to defraud life insurance companies by upsetting their actuarial predictions and forcing them to pay out earlier than planned. Not hundreds of billions, as were made by pushing the Libor rate one way or the other by a fraction of a percent, but still enough to be highly profitable for a few insurance company investors that had inside info.
Off-topic:-
Drones employed for the fist time on US soil targeting Christopher Dorner.
http://now.msn.com/christopher-dorner-is-first-drone-target-on-us-soil
The floodgates have opened.
Anyone else believe he is a good guy being framed?
@ felix 11 Feb, 2013 – 3:00 am
“Speaking generally, I get the feeling that, along with the Guardian and Telegraph, the Sun is a prime place for “placed stories” to emerge from the Securty services.”
Lord Baron West, former Lord Admiral West, one time minister of security and anti-terrorism for the UK, is pops of The Sun’s Alex West. The Sun did not hesitate to send Alex West to Europe to confront dying a paeodophilic fiend in hospital demanding to know if he’d killed Maddie McCann.
None of the UK media is much bothered to confront anyone re the inconsistencies in murders we’ve discussed. One can appreciate their problem – no cute kid and anguished parents to drive story, but suspect they’d do more is they didn’t have some background info warning them off. Not necessarily a D Notice thing, just gentle persuasion.
The Maddie fiasco is still ongoing six years later:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article4782633.ece
Anorak’s view on the insanity of it all.
http://www.anorak.co.uk/347066/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-a-jailed-troll-and-police-swab-kids-in-new-zealand.html/
They’re now taking DNA from kids on the opposite side of earth, that “look like” the missing child to prove that they aren’t really missing Maddie and sold into adoption or slavery. Good excuse for paedos worldwide to take pics of little girls in the park – demand DNA swabs too.
@ Felix – OT – The murder/suicide in Cromer — the murder/suicide by shotgun in two gardens, not the one in Norfolk by excess ballast. Did you see this?
http://swns.com/news/tory-councillor-shoots-dead-cancer-sufferer-wife-blasting-muder-suicide-horror-28628/
The implication is it was a mercy killing and suicide, though further down it’s revealed she was cured. Maybe the cancer returned and that’s why he was depressed.
“He delivered me my paper most days… On saturday he turned up … wearing shorts and I said to him it’s too cold for shorts this time of year…”
Wearing shorts in cold weather, (or running about naked) esp. the elderly, is often a sign of drugs.
“Mrs Johnson worked as a sales assistant at Homebase in Cromer.
Mrs Johnson’s Porsche Boxster was still parked on the couple’s front lawn next to Mr Johnson’s Mercedes E220 on the driveway.”
The neighbours said they liked flash, hot tub parties, cruises, but were now delivering papers and working as a store clerk. Where did the money come from and go to.
“Detective Superintendent Peter Hornby from Norfolk Police said: “Whilst I understand this is a very shocking incident for the neighbours of the two people involved, I can reassure them that, at this stage, we are not looking for anyone else in connection with it.””
Is this a standard response they teach in all police academies?