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?
Why was it only the Daily Telegraph reported armed response to Zaid’s house (as far as I can see)? And presumably you have all seen the report that, following their interview with him, details of which were not made public, French Judges/Prosecutors abandoned their stated intention to go to Iraq as “too dangerous”!
“He recently ordered investigators to visit Iraq, which is where the Al-Hillis originally came from, but this has been delayed because of security worries.”By PETER ALLEN IN PARIS
PUBLISHED: 12:46, 30 March 2013
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/
Eric Maillaud, the Annecy prosecutor who is leading the investigation, has made no secret of his frustration at not being able to interview Zaid at length, but that situation changed when officers working directly to him arrived in the UK last week. He recently ordered a visit by investigators to Iraq, which is where the Al-Hillis originally came from, but this has been delayed because of security worries. The Telegraph.
“And today The Daily Telegraph reported that Zaid-Al Hilli, 53, was interviewed by detectives on Friday near his home in Chessington, Surrey.”The Independent” 30.3.13 So it appears the Telegraph is being used as a police channel. Apart from fairly cursory reports in the Mirror and Mail that source back to the Telegraph, there appears to be an absence of reportage. I am sure I read the Iraq trip had been cancelled, which now appears to be only “delayed”. I notice the Peter Allen (he of the “Serb Paramilitaries”) article was “updated” two hours later. Is that when it changed or am I just imagining?
Olifant
I agree with your view on the secular world view of the al hillis. That mekes them enemies of the Sadrists. It is exactly what i was about to confirm with my latest links of shia vs shia war and “follow the money”.
Read the two links below and the British involvement and the Patreaus support for the al Hilli/al Hakim secular Shia movement.
http://www.understandingwar.org/operation/operation-knights-charge-saulat-al-fursan
http://m.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/dec/10/iraq-withdrawal-basra-army-british
I guess that there lies part of the Chevaline motives.
Also interesting are the al Hilli links to Marocco. We have had those links with Mollier/Ginolin too. The al Hilli Marocco links are new to me.
ISCI (former SCIRI) was somehow involved into this (Spain/Marocco)
http://statecrime.org/online_article/the-trial-of-ali-aarrass-state-crime-and-the-war-on-terror/
http://www.euro-islam.info/2008/04/02/spain-arrests-two-islamic-terror-suspects-wanted-by-morocco/
Good point, Olifant. As we recall with the Scottish clans, some family groups were adopted in and took the clan’s name through a marriage. This is different from the custom today in some countries where only the bride takes the family name through marriage.
Well done Olifant
5 Apr, 2013 – 12:48 pm et al. We always knew that this was no ordinary killing or ordinary family outing. Now it is becoming clear – and no thanks to our wonderful “free press” that this Al Hilli family was as close to Shia/Iraqi “Royalty” it is possible to get. No mere “chicken farmers” these. There were and are central and critical to any Iraqi future and the interests of western nations so dependent on its oil.
The British and Americans always had close links with the family and the British particularly given its colonial history with the region. Both British and French must have been aware from the beginning the family context, yet have tried every trick in the book to camouflage and hide the truth. Did they both have their own reasons for doing so or different ones? On the face of it they are working together but it is clear this is just window dressing. The French dissemble and point the finger across the Channel. The British won’t even give them access to Zaid. Maillaud suggests Zaid is a suspect; Surrey police unambiguously exhonerate him and tell the world he is afforded armed protection. Yet incongruously they also prevent family access to the children. What can this mean?
The fact that Saad al Hilli was where he was when he was assassinated, MUST now be interpreted in the light of current political moves in Iraq – those he was most likely brokering – or in actions thought to strengthen Iranian/Iraqi ties, possibly playing to his technological strengths; and that the killers were agents of those most likely to gain from frustrating those plans. What we really need is up to date, local, reliable, high-level insight into SCIRI/Iranian (SCARY?) activity and CIA/MOSSAD (particularly) attitude to it.
“During the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Najaf was a key target of the invading United States forces. The city was encircled during heavy fighting on March 26, 2003 and was captured on April 3, 2003 by 1st, 2nd, 3rd Battalions, 327th Infantry Regiment, units of the 101st Airborne Division.
The Imām Alī Mosque, an important shrine in Najaf
The clerical authorities of the Shīa enclave of Sadr City in Baghdad, which claimed autonomy in April 2003 after the fall of Baghdad, claimed to be taking their orders from senior clerics in Najaf.
On April 10, 2003 Sayyid Abdul Majid al-Khoei the son of Sayyid Abul-Qassim Al-Khoei was stabbed to death outside the Imam Ali Mosque by an angry mob.
On August 29, 2003 a car bomb exploded during prayers outside the Imām Alī Mosque just as weekly prayers were ending. More than 80 people were killed, including the influential cleric Ayatollah Sayyid Muħammad Bāqir al-Ħakīm, the Shīia leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). Dozens of others were injured. Nobody claimed responsibility for the attack – Saddam himself, in hiding at the time, denied any involvement in a taped message.”http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Najaf
@Tim V 5 Apr, 2013 – 2:03 pm
Once again I am in complete agreement with your hypothesis. In fact many months ago, without anything like the the evidence we now have, I posited that it was most likely someone had ‘offed the crown jewels’ of British intelligence interests in Iraq/Iran.
Now who was that ‘someone’?
IV
Kazem al Hilli should have be placed in group IV with Ali al Hilli as above and two other ?uncles of SAH who fit in there:
Mr. Sadiq al Hilli Husseini Alnsabh, bin Abdul-Hussein al-Khatib al Hilli, active in union of gentlemen supervision, and documentation in genealogy support, from Captain supervision in Jerusalem in the field of genealogical documentation,
Mr. Abdul Muttalib al Hilli bin Abdul Hussein al-Khatib al Hilli, graduated early from the Soviet Union, with a master’s degree in engineering, and was an expert in aircraft engineering in the Air Force, and served as General Manager in the industry, and is still a member of the Advisory Board. (useful contact for aerospace work)
V
as well as Haitham al Husseini al Hilli add to the list in V:
Saad al Hilli bin Abdul Hussein al-Khatib al Hilli (if this is correct fuller name)
Zaid al Hilli ….etc,
VI
not sure how genealogical lines connect al Hilli’s in UK – Australia – Canada – Holland – Sweden – Iraq
Titles: What does Mr. signify? Gentleman? ranking as an alder but below Shaikh. Presume clothing (robes) denote this plus bearing arms. Shaikhs are front men for a tribe, don’t bear arms. Is Shaikh = Sir? and Mr = The Hon.? Sayyid = descended from the Prophet. Hafiz = learnt all the Koran. Faris = Knight (ie horse)in antique usage (Alferez = 2nd Lt in Spain, Chile, Argentina)
SAH was exiled when young but retained urge to return. People were amazed he wanted to live in Iraq. Family tree shows he was upper class but probably not in the elite. Iraq linked theories:
A. An Arab website: key may be transfer of satellite expertise; day after killing new Iraqi space contract was announced.
B. another Arab website said SAH had discs implicating Maliki in Samara Golden Dome bombing plot, a prelude to rounding up, killing of Sunni suspects.
C The Geneva account. Follow the Money. Saddam era? Iranian?
Back from far off places ! And yet interesting….
Funding and Assistance Vs Terrorist.
Which has the stronger reputation ? Well not the terrorist. They have nothing without “funding”.
But funding needs to go the “other way”. Then you have yoyr terrorist. Especially if you have a failing opporsite number (terrorist) who has no money.
Now you may see this as terrorism ? They who support “the terrorist” ?
Ozzie Al Hilli left Iraq Airways when they were grounded (nearly new 747’s and 707’s !). This was as “terror” was growing, but under a different regime.
That then stops…when the Neo Cons got in.
The terrible truth is, the “idea” was there (and had been funded), then switched !
The people that were “there” before (supporters of Saddam and supported by Reagan regime) couldnt change sides that quickly (from the Bush I and II Regime).
There was someone that got there before them !
This fella like Private Aircraft and signing deals….with the Kurds mainly.
All Iraqi people (in powerful positions during “Reagan”) have been doing this.
Could never understand why…at the time of the growth of Iraq Airways, Ali was involved. daddy and Uncle !
The only ones that changed sides (so I am informed), was “America” !
The “rest” didn’t !
Olifant
Your family tree of al hilli needs some time for investigation and some better translation than computers. Unfortunately there are translation errors (father-son mix up, e.g. The son becomes the father due to grammar mistakes of the translation machine. Also names getting translated into english (e.g. Al hilli = ornaments).
That makes it a bit confusing.
I will need about a week to sort this out.
One more thing: you can forget “al Khatib”. This is not a name in that regards. It simply means “the preacher”. It is used by many sheykhs of the past who did preach and teach in mosques. Husain al Hilli was such a “Khatib” scholar.
Interesting is the mentioning of Fahd (Fahad) al Hilli. Ot looks as if the al Hillis were traditionally the lawmakers of the Shia law and the highest jurisdiction of Shia law since the prophet Ali.
Search for al Hilli here:
http://www.al-islam.org/a-short-treatise-on-the-guardianship-of-the-jurist-mansour-leghaei/2.htm
http://tourismiq.com/ensite/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=121&Itemid=142&limitstart=22
Your genealogy confirms that Husain al Hilli was in fact the father of Kazim and that Sheikh Mohammed al Hilli (sheikh of the UK based al Khoei Mosque) seems in fact to be a brother of Kazim (Kadhim).
Olifant
Just to add for your better understanding:
The phrase: ” bin Abdul Hussein al-Khatib al Hilli”
…. Means nothing else than “he is the son of the (Preacher/Ayatollah/Sheykh) Husain al Hilli”
That is exactly the same name description that we had already seen being used for Kazim/Kadhim al Hilli earlier.
Another son of a high ranked Shia Sheykh who was an aide/supportive follower (friend) of Ayatollah al Sistani was shot dead by a “lone gunman” in Iraq.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_17-1-2005_pg7_43
Bluebird
5 Apr, 2013 – 2:09 pm
“What is perhaps most significant, however, is that the need to expand the Iraqi government’s security presence in Basra has offered a window of opportunity for tribal movements in Basra. Maliki began to reach out to Shiite tribes shortly after is arrival in the city. He held a series of meetings with leaders from the powerful Bani Tamim tribe, as well as the Halaf and Subihawi tribes, to discuss the incorporation of their members into the ISF.74” http://www.understandingwar.org/operation/operation-knights-charge-saulat-al-fursan
The Basra situation proved a massive loss of face for British involvement whilst being a high risk strategy for Maliki with American support that he pulled off. British forces criticised the approach of the Americans in the north (with some justification) whilst falling down for various reasons on their own operational objectives. We have seen the same competition/one upmanship in Afghanistan where Americans took over from British units in Sangin in September 2010. Britain still tries to punch above its weight in the world and to cling on to its pretensions of empire half a century after it effectively ceased.
The point is these geo/political changes are complicated especially where conflict and violence are involved. Wherever there is breakdown in civil order, chaos ensues and numerous groups jockey for power and control, with America and other big powers doing their bit to achieve preferred outcomes determined by perceived national interest. Meanwhile millions are displaced, injured and killed and the country goes to wrack and ruin. Just look at Syria. Who are the victors in such a situation?
As regards Chevaline, I believe we have an example of these forces at work. We have the projected image: the “Hollywood Set”. The suggestion of common-or-garden crime scene or even simple road accident or various other scenarios, but never a hint of planned assassination. We witness two levels of “reality”: that projected by the authorities and dutifully replicated by the media and the much more sinister underlying truth – a battle between the secret agencies of states themselves. For under the “bonhomie” and talk of co-operation there is competition and even deadly opposition and the military style executions at Chevaline are the human result.
But whoever was behind the killings may have miscalculated and over-reached themselves. Hundreds of thousands have died in Iraq without hardly a murmur. Apart from the deaths of British soldiers, the horror of the situation is hidden and produces minimal reaction. However when the same tactics were applied to a British family in France, it exploded as news item around the world and refuses to go away. In addition the unpublicised ramifications may have been considerable, the leaking of the embarrassing Zygier story being one, the lack of co-operation with the French another. We may well see more subtle indicators with the passage of time, whilst on the surface nothing will have changed.
The Al Hillis were, and probably still are, a valuable asset to the British. They provide a well established and respected bridge between Iraq and Iran. They are probably a moderating and modernising influence in Iraq as indicated in the above article. They have been part of Shia alternative government for at least thirty years. They are probably well informed about the nature of Iranian support for armed groups and states and where the non-Iranian backed outrages are coming from. Chevaline has blown the cover and linkages sky high – a rather appropriate description even.
Bluebird
6 Apr, 2013 – 1:59 am What is quite incredible is that despite tens of thousands of specific assassinations since 2003, virtually no killers have been identified or brought to justice. We (the British) were quick to invade, disregarding the huge human and financial cost, but cannot apparently devote even a fraction to helping identify the perpetrators of cold-blooded killings? What strange priorities we perpetuate.
This was the first al Hilli who defined Shia law and jurisdiction.
http://www.theshiapedia.com/index.php?title=Allamah_al-Hilli
This is from 2012 and explains the Shia clashes and sectarian violence very well. It was getting worse in 2012.
http://iwpr.net/report-news/clashes-spread-between-iraqi-shia-groups
@ Tim 2:02 a.m.: Thank you for the summary. It was a miscalculation of grand proportions and perhaps a miscalculation of human nature itself. Who would make such a mistake? How appropriate to mention Zygier in the same paragraph.
Sayyid Muhammad Riďa Ibn Abul-Qasim Ibn Fatallah Ibn Nejm ad-Din al-Husaini al-Kamali al-Asterbadi al-Hilli (d. 1346 A.H./1927 A.D.) (Henceforth referred to only as Sayyid Muhammad Riďa al-Asterbadi al-Hilli), Al-’Iqd al-Farid fi Ma’rifat al-Qira’a wal Tajwid (henceforth referred to only as Al-’Iqd al-Farid), Vol. 2, p. 313, where Yazid’s reign is discussed.
Thanks to Olifant’s research i could identify the great grandfather of London based Sheykh Mohammad al Hilli:
This is that guy. He must be great grandfather or grandfather of Hashim and Kadhim. He died 1927. Mohammad al Hilli refers to Muhammad Rida in his online biography as being his great grandfather.
More genealogy – Clarify or Confuse?
Looking for SAH family tree is an attempt to trace the links between names which pop up in various countries and with varying relevance. But the genealogist is only looking back and doesn’t include the present. It seems safe to conclude there are a number of subsets of the al Hilli clan. As a tree grows, new branches spring out of the main trunk. Probably the attempt is to define what most closely aligns with the main trunk. a) SAH is middle ranking in a well known extended clan b) a number of subsets of this will recognise and relate to each other c) probably not going to be possible to know which exiled al Hilli families are members of same subset as SAH. (what does ‘cousin’ or ‘uncle’ mean in this clan context)
The forum thread previously referenced is described as: Thread: a research study in the book “expressed” about the gentlemen al-Husseini ornaments, Zyoud Alzbhawih.
Excuse copy and paste of ‘ornaments’ – Google translation is transcribed unchanged, ie being baffling enough already.
First part General Notes A discussion of the descendants of Mr Azziz the big, of Hilla, who seems to be at the apex of this clan name, but maybe the particular al Hilli group is only a later subset of descendants eg from Mr Azziz the small or later, probably from Mohamed al Hilli. Difficult to read……
In para 3 and in the Second interjection para 11: the jurist Mr Muslim al Hilli is mentioned. Seems he is also descended from Mr al Azziz the small but perhaps not part of the family group here described…..
Compare the known lineage of (ayatollah) Muslim al Hilli / Musallam al Hill 1916-1981 (as per previous ref) His name and lineage: Mr. Musallam bin Hamoud (1) bin Nasser bin Hussein bin Ali bin Mohammed bin Hassan bin Hashim bin Azzam small bin Mohammed bin big Azzam al-Husseini of the breed ornaments Mr. Shahid Zaid bin Ali bin Hussein, peace be upon them
(1) who died in 1378 AH / 1958 AD – or in the year 1372
Mr. Musallam
bin Hamoud (1)
bin Nasser
bin Hussein
bin Ali
bin Mohammed
bin Hassan
bin Hashim
bin Azzam small
bin Mohammed
bin big Azzam al-Husseini of the breed ornaments
Mr. Shahid Zaid
bin Ali
bin Hussein, peace be upon them.
(presume implies tracability back to the founders -Ali, Hussein and Zaid, who were first in descent from the Prophet)
His son, in Belgium, writes “Mr. Musallam al-Husseini ornaments God’s mercy was professors Hawza in Najaf, he was studying Islamic philosophy and research abroad, and my uncle Professor Taha Baqir was a world of brilliant in archeology, and so understand a good example to me he followed them” (http://alalemya.com/iih/0_2011_5_/11_/11_5_1/5_1/eye_mohamed_husseini.html)
Second interjection Para 7: “the Kawar branch of the denominator of the Issa,” science and jurisprudence, literature, politics, and witnessing them sons cousins superiority which ….. …… of the flags in the areas mentioned, in Najaf, then in the Adhamiya and Kadhimiya of Baghdad, all after Mr. Mohammed ornaments great grandson undisputed master of Kawar, who immigrated with his sons scientists, “Mr. Habib ornaments, writer Alnsabh, and mark Mujahid, Mr. Ali ornaments, and facet Mr. Hussein ornaments , “from the village of gentlemen to Najaf, the mid-nineteenth century,
ie ~1850 Mohamed al Hilli left Hillah with Habib al Hilli, Alnsabh, ‘mark’ Mujahid Ali al Hilli and facet (notable) Hussein al Hilli. But Naser and Hamoud, part of ayatollah Muslim’s line, don’t appear in the Interjections of Haitham al Hussein al Hilli, hence that must be a different subset from Saad’s line. So Belgian al Hilli (and perhaps Dutch al Hilli) are part of the wider clan but not the subset to which Saad belonged.
Third section / interjection subject: “Kawar branch Qasim Isa Al Azzam significant Alzbhawih” – from them have emerged – there follows a list of contemporary names/biographies as noted earlier
So what appears to have been the response of different nations (as reported by the press outlets)?
FRANCE – Obfuscation, incompetence and the opinion with almost indecent haste that the crime would not be solved. Protection of Sylvain Mollier. Point finger to Britain.
BRITAIN – Almost total silence and an appearance that they wish the story to be “buried”. Obstruct French in its attempts to question ZAH.
SWEDEN – Virtually total silence as to any investigation into the murder of their national.
SWITZERLAND – Absence of any information on the source of alleged weapon, the purpose of the Al Hilli’s visit to Geneva or the nature of the large bank deposit.
GERMANY – Initially (Oct ’12) stated money came from Saddam Hussein after which nothing.
IRAQ – Nothing as far as I am aware.
IRAN – No clear Government opinion as far as I can see.
ISRAEL – One initial Jerusalem Post article rather cynical in tone dismissing any Mossad involvement. No further comment. Al Hilli search reveals only “No Results”
USA – Total silence from Government sources on the event as far as I am aware though plenty at the time from news outlets replicating official French releases.
When will the revelations here eventually find their way to outlets in any of these countries if at all? Does anyone have better/more informed opinion on national approaches to the story and and differences in content or emphasis?
@ Tim V: The story is long forgotten outside of France and Britain. If they ignore it, it will go away?
Here’s what is getting media attention in the U.S., Tim V:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/04/05/187853/obama-kerry-dust-off-old-arab.html
Yup that’s the plan
Q
6 Apr, 2013 – 5:56 pm I guess. Could be why I keep flogging a dead horse?!!!
And as we saw in the “Northern Ireland Peace Process” a lot of crimes can be forgiven for the greater good. Who is interested in boring details about an assassination here or an assassination there when such grand designs are in prospect?
Am watching Arne Dahl to see how the Swedish police investigate murders. Perhaps I should take notes for future reference?
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?app=core&module=attach§ion=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=36425
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?/topic/234979167-the-sanad-of-ayatullah-sistani-qs-to-the-prophet/
Olifant
Maybe you can use that for the family tree.
There is no doubt that the al Hillis were the most prominent shia scholars descending their knowledge from the prophet.
Cosy relationship. http://travel.aol.co.uk/2013/04/06/air-france-racism-non-jewish-passenger-removed-flight-israel/?ncid=webmail10
“France–Israel relations refers to the bilateral foreign relations between France and Israel. France has an embassy in Tel Aviv and a consulate-general in Jerusalem. Israel has an embassy in Paris and a consulate-general in Marseille.
After the Israeli Declaration of Independence in 1948 and in the early 1950s, France and Israel maintained close political and military ties as common enemies of Pan-Arab nationalism. France was Israel’s main weapons supplier until its withdrawal from Algeria in 1962 removed most common interest from the relationship, and France became increasingly critical of Israel, especially after the Six-Day War in June 1967, when Charles de Gaulle’s government imposed an arms embargo on the region, mostly affecting Israel.[1]
Under François Mitterrand in the early 1980s, French–Israeli relations improved greatly. Mitterrand was the first French president to visit Israel while in office.[2] The relations declined after Jacques Chirac was elected to be president in 1995, especially after he stood steadfastly behind former Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat, during the first stages of the Second Intifada.[3] The election of French President Nicolas Sarkozy in May 2007 has led to a significant warming in ties between the countries, with France’s new leader stating that he would refuse to greet any world leader who does not recognize Israel’s right to exist.” WIKIPEDIA
“On February 13, 2008, Sarkozy spoke at the annual dinner of the French Jewish CRIF (Conseil Représentatif des Institutions juives de France). The address was seen as a sign of newfound warmth between France’s Élysée Palace and French Jewry, whose place in French society has been shaken in recent years following a surge in anti-Semitic attacks. “Israel can count on a new dynamic to its relationship with the European Union”, said Sarkozy. “France will never compromise on Israel’s security.”
Israel welcomed Sarkozy’s tough stance against the Iran-backed Hamas and Iran-backed Hezbollah. During the 2006 Lebanon War, France played a key role in Europe’s efforts to get a quick ceasefire.[8]” WIKIPEDIA
“FRANCE 24 LATEST UPDATE: 01/12/2012 Diplomatic relations between Israel and France remain “excellent”, despite France’s vote at the United Nations General Assembly to recognise Palestine as a non-member state, the Israeli ambassador to Paris told FRANCE 24 on Friday.
Yossi Gal said that the “not unexpected” move by France the day before had in no way damaged ties between the two countries, pointing out that the French leadership had repeated Israeli pleas for the Palestinians to resume peace talks.
“Despite the vote, France has stressed once again that the Palestinians need to get back to the negotiating table, which is what Israel wants,” he said.
“The French vote will not undermine our relations, which are strong, as demonstrated by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent visit to France to remember the victims of the Toulouse shootings.”
How about this for an earlier “dry run”:
“Report: Mossad involved in Betancourt rescue
Spanish newspaper says Israeli, US and French secret services took part in operation to free hostage from Colombian rebels earlier this month
AFP
Published: 07.20.08, 17:08 / Israel News
Mossad, the Israeli secret service, was involved in the operation to free hostage Ingrid Betancourt from Colombian rebels, a Spanish newspaper said Sunday, adding US and French secret services were also involved.
“Mossad and the US and French intelligence services worked for more than a year with the Colombian authorities to develop the plan,” Vanguardia said, citing an Israeli secret service source.
Previous Report
Betancourt rescue in Colombia: Israeli connection / Ynet
(Video) Colombian hostage Ingrid Betancourt mentions Israel in shower of praise following her rescue; most likely not by chance. Israeli advising team, headed by former Sayeret Matkal officer Maj.-Gen. (Res.) Israel Ziv, may have been involved in operation
Full story
Colombian armed forces freed Franco-Colombian politician Betancourt, three US nationals and 11 Colombian soldiers July 2 from the jungle, where they were being held by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).
According to Vanguardia, Israel, France and the US had different reasons for participating in the operation: France because of Betancourt’s half-French nationality, the US because of the three Americans in the group and Israel in order to maintain good bilateral relations with Colombia and the US.
Vanguardia’s correspondent in Tel Aviv said the Mossad operation consisted of two agents unknown to each other separately infiltrating FARC.
The pair managed to penetrate the Marxist guerrilla group so effectively that they ultimately controlled what FARC did or didn’t know, the Catalan newspaper said.
The Israeli and US secret services used unmanned spy drones to locate the camp where the hostage were held, Vanguardia said.”
“And Mossad’s record has also been blemished by a few embarrasing failures. In Lillehammer, Norway, on 07 January 1974, Mossad agents mistakenly killed Ahmad Boushiki, an Algerian waiter carrying a Moroccan passport, whom they mistook for PLO security head Ali Ahmad Salameh, believed to have masterminded the 1972 massacre of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics [Salameh was killed in a 1979 car-bomb explosion in Lebanon]. Following the attack, the Mossad agents were arrested and tried before a Norwegian court. Five Israeli agents were convicted and served short jail sentences, though Israel denied responsibility for the murder. In February 1996, the Israeli government agreed to compensate the family of Ahmad Boushiki.
On 15 November 1995, Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin was assassinated by Yigal Amir, an Israeli citizen. Following the controversy over the failure of intelligence to protect Rabin, and the embarrassment over the mistaken assassination of a Swedish national, the Director Geneneral of Mossad, known only as ‘S’, was forced into retirement. On 24 March 1996, Prime Minister Shimon Peres appointed Major General Danny Yatom as the new Director General of Mossad, the first Director of Mossad to ever be publically identified.
On 24 September 1997, Mossad operatives attempted to assassinate Khalid Meshaal, a top political leader of the Palestinian group Hamas. The assassins entered Jordan on fake Canadian, and injected Meshaal with a poison. Jordan was able to wring a number of concessions out of Israel in the aftermath of the fiasco, including the release of the founder of Hamas, Shaykh Ahmad Yasin, from an Israeli jail.
Ephraim Halevy, a nephew of the late Sir Isaiah Berlin [who helped to negotiate a peace deal with Jordan], became the new head of Mossad after two bungled operations led to the arrests of agents in Switzerland and Jordan. Mossad scaled down overseas assassinations after the bungled operations in the late 1990s. But by 2002 Prime Minister Ariel Sharon decided to remove Halevy, after the two clashed repeatedly about what strategy to adopt against Palestinian violence
In October 2002 General Meir Dagan, who served in the Israeli Army with Ariel Sharon, and assisted him during his election campaign, was confirmed as head of Mossad. Dagan led an undercover commando unit that tracked and killed Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip. Sharon wanted Mossad to go back to the undercover and special operations for which it was renowned.” http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/world/israel/mossad.htm
“ALTHOUGH they stolidly refuse to admit that their external security service had done it, Israeli officials say they are confident that in Europe and elsewhere outrage over the recent assassination in Dubai of a Hamas commander will quickly blow over. Israeli ambassadors were called in and carpeted in London, Canberra and Dublin over stolen passports and identities used by the team that killed Mahmoud al-Mabhouh and was later exposed by the Dubai police. eu foreign ministers have “strongly condemned” the action. But the Israelis, seeking to minimise the damage, note innocently that the complaints focused on the passports rather than the actual killing—and anyway stopped short of explicitly fingering Mossad.
Indeed, despite the meticulous closed-circuit television records of the comings and goings through Dubai’s airport and hotels, Mossad people still say, with an almost straight face, that the evidence is circumstantial. A former spymaster, Rafi Eitan, even suggested half in jest that a rival service may have framed the Israelis.
In any event, even though they do not admit their involvement, the Israelis are portraying Mr Mabhouh’s demise as part of a wider war waged by Israel together with the West and its own secret services. The Israelis stress that Hamas, the Palestinian Islamist group, is as much the West’s enemy as it is Israel’s. So, they add, is Hizbullah, the Lebanese group. Both, they note, are clients of Iran.
In this section
Does Mossad really make Israel safer?
Not such a success
Statuesque or grotesque?
Steady as she goes
Jihadists on the march
It seems popular, so far
A sudden return
Correction: Najib Balala
Reprints
Related items
Israeli spies in Lebanon: Not such a success
Feb 25th 2010
A reader debate on assassination: A view to a kill
Feb 19th 2010
Netanyahu, continued
Oct 9th 1997
Related topics
Politics
Middle East politics
Iranian politics
World politics
Government and politics
Israel says Mr Mabhouh was a kidnapper and murderer who, more recently, had procured arms, chiefly from Iran. The Israelis want to block the flow of weapons, especially rockets, into Gaza, which Hamas runs. To this end, they have raided ships off the Horn of Africa and bombed a convoy of lorries in eastern Sudan. “This is the broader background to what happened in Dubai,” says an Israeli familiar with Mossad. “Friendly governments know it full well”—and tacitly, he says, approve.
Still, the choice of Dubai, a commercial hub with friendly ties to the West, as a venue for the assassination has discomfited some Israelis in intelligence circles. They want Meir Dagan (pictured above), now into his eighth year as Mossad’s head, to make way for a younger man. Insiders say he has kept down potential successors, making it hard for Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, to sack him.” http://www.economist.com/node/15581314