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?
@Intp1
“That they would make an announcement about it…..”
Because it is a flush out.
Clearly so as “Eric” hasn’t donated his “sample”.
The reason being the crime seen was closed (they call it frozen), yet it wasnt “frozen” as it had to be reopened to collected the youngest daughter.
When is a closed crime scene, not a closed crime scene ?
When it’s “ajar” !
Eric gave his interview (and is seen talking to reporters) before the scene was closed. This is because the “local” forensics arrived just as she (the female reporter) filed her report for the 8pm “News”.
It was reopened just before midnight, when officers attended the scene (or whoever)…and “re closed” again.
The Paris forensics arrived around the same time (midnight) and did not reopen the reopened scene (!) until 7am/8am (CET) ?
And there is ONLY one “index” (item) of unexplained DNA (that is not from any of the deceased/survivors/WBM/PD/female with PD X 2).
ONE item ! That is amazing.
And given the French “way” of refusing to release ANY “information” whatsoever, this so called ONE DNA find is….at best a “ploy” !
At worse it is a… “we ave found zee DNA ov zee killer. We ave checked zee databases…and zut alors…we don’t know im”.
Laughable !
You have it Olifant
13 Apr, 2013 – 10:47 pm. There is the official line (“We have every confidence in the French investigation”) and the true line (“We don’t trust them with our man Zaid) This is why, sadly, we can trust nothing that comes out of either government actually, yet everyone plays the game that you can. How do we the outsiders get a glimpse of the truth? Perseverance, reason and a healthy scepticism.
Al-Hilli murder: French police contaminated evidence
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/9992847/Al-Hilli-murder-French-police-contaminated-evidence.html
Quote from telegraph link:
Earlier this month, the prosecutor was forced to “freeze” plans to travel to Iraq to probe the Al-Hilli’s background in the country, because of ‘security reasons’.
This is ridiculous. Of course Iraq isnt a save country. However, for questioning family members and genealogists there exists skype, email and even interpol police assistance. Why would he need to go into Iraq personally? And even if he had to go, security can be arranged …. with one exception:
Exception: there is perhaps a concrete threat that was forwarded to the French to stop investigation in Iraq. There could be orders (political or theocratical) that the French would not get any kind of support in this case.
Why? Simply because our previous investigation regarding the al Hillis being involved in a political crime in Iraq (e.g. as whistleblowers, leakers or even as money launderers) was correct.
Both Maliki, al Sistani or even the Sadrists could be involved and they could have an interest to keep the reason of the killings quiet. Even corrupt Chirac and his political party could have an interest to keep the reason quiet when they were perhaps involved in receiving kickbacks from ransom money paid for the two journalists to Iraqi negotiators.
However, the “security reason” for not investigating the family in Iraq is ridiculous and strange.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Didier_Julia#section_1
http://www.trend.infopartisan.net/trd0105/t420105.html
Given the facts and the messages given by eric to te media, this is a french/iraqi thing with the UMP party ((Chirac, Pierre Morange, Didier Julia) deeply involved.
Follow the money!
The 15 mio. Euros weren’t paid as ransom money to the Iraqi “terrorists”. The ransom money was seperately paid. The 15 mio. were paid to Iraqi and French “negotiators” only due to the German “infopartisan” link (see link here).
There were French (in the environment of the French UMP) who received money as “negotiators”. There were Syrians and Iraqis who received money.
Didier Julia made accusations about corruption. He was then brought to court because of espionage. Didier Julia said that he has documents to approve the corruption but those documents were stolen when his office was raided by French secret intelligence sources. However, Julia said that Iraqis had copies of those documents that will approve the corruption in regards to the Iraqi abduction and ransom kickbacks for the Malbrunot and Chenoit.
Where are those documents and the copies? Did the Iraqi negotiator (and/or money launderer) have these documents?
Who are the Iraqis who got copies of Didier Julia’s stolen documents that would approve corruption?
Theory: Was the Geneve money part of the corruption money (perhaps the last still unpaid installment? ) but Saad did not want to pay? Did he have those documents from his father? Were the documents stored in Geneve?
Did Saad perhaps blackmail the UMP with the release of the documents? Did he therefore contact UMP?
Was Morange UMP’s negotiator in the possible Saad blackmailing?
Was Mollier chosen by Morange as the “courier” to obtain the documents and hand them over to UMP?
If so, what went wrong? Did Saad know too much? Was he a threat for UMP? Were other parties involved (e.g. Julia) who did not want these documents in the hands of other people?
In the infopartisan link, the author says that the French have two different intelligence units with different interests in Middle Eastern and African politics. Like the 2 CIAs.
That UMP documents/corruption thing makes sense and links Morange as a member of UMP to this case, and it makes sense about why Mollier was there and why his father in law, Mr.Schutz/Morange did suggest him to take this route ….
Pink
14 Apr, 2013 – 10:51 am this most recent Telegraph article by our friend “Peter Allen in Paris” is the first as far as I am aware, a somewhat more critical tone of the French investigation. There is little doubt this reflects the officially approved “British view” that is now being allowed to seep out. Some of the points even begin to reflect those expressed in here over the months. “DNA contamination, photographs, witnesses, failure to find Zeena, defeatist approach” – all for the first time specifically targeted. Watch this space.
Bluebird
14 Apr, 2013 – 11:53 am as you say – ridiculous. Even at the height of the violence after 2003 it did not stop western powers sending their representatives, as we noted with our current head of MI6 Sir John Sawers. Nor did it stop SAH himself returning 03/04 and achieving whatever he set out to do (negotiate the release of French hostages?) including the return of property long since vacated, and returned only with a bloody nose. What could possibly stop a French delegation protected by legionnaires, other than government opposition on either or both sides?
This is an already well known link:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2248973/French-Alps-shooting-Cyclist-murdered-massacre-involved-bitter-dispute-million-pound-inheritance.html
Quote: The Schutz family, who now refuse to speak about the murders, have been receiving advice from Pierre Morange, the brother of Genevieve Morange.A political ally of Nicolas Sarkozy, the former French president, he is the MP and town mayor for Chambourcy, near Paris.Morange found himself drawn into another high-profile murder case five years ago when Christian Marichal, the chief of police in Chambourcy, was found stabbed to death at his home.The murder came shortly after both men had been accused of corruption, allegations they both denied.A year later, Morange, who said he feared for his life after Marichal’s murder, was granted a special permit to carry a handgun. Mr Morange declined to comment.
Pierre Morange (UMP) isn’t an “orphan” in terms of corruption allegations and some “killings” next to him. Is he UMP’s corruption expert? Every political party has got experts for various science.
http://archives-lepost.huffingtonpost.fr/article/2009/06/15/1578575_un-depute-ump-accuse-de-corruption-pourquoi-un-non-lieu.html
Question:
Did anybody ever investigate the Christian Marichal murder closer (and its background?). This happened post 2004 (after the abduction in Iraq and the 15 mio. paid to french and Iraqi “negotiators”).
Can we link Marichal to the Didier Julia group? Or to the known friends of Julia? (See infopartisan link). Perhaps Marichal was killed for the same reason? (Blackmailing of UMP or else he knew too much?).
That’s an interesting theory Bluebird
14 Apr, 2013 – 2:19 pm
“Was Morange UMP’s negotiator in the possible Saad blackmailing?
Was Mollier chosen by Morange as the “courier” to obtain the documents and hand them over to UMP?”
I have always puzzled over the role of SM in any scenario and the fact that he appeared to have been the principal target if anything from the number of shots (unless it was that he was the first to run) It would be interesting to know if he had a back pack. WBM ought to know as he said he passed him but we have not been told. Certainly he WAS searched for some reason which seems to indicate he was expected by WBM to have items on him of particular interest. The 800 000 however had been in Geneva since the early eighties subject to us having been told the truth which of course is always suspect.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/france/20070505.FIG000000738_crime_de_chambourcy_la_piste_politique_exploree.html
http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/l-assassinat-du-chef-de-la-police-municipale-reste-une-enigme-21-03-2010-856997.php
http://www.leparisien.fr/chambourcy-78240/a-chambourcy-l-affaire-marechal-toujours-au-point-mort-01-12-2012-2370669.php
Regarding the Christian Marechal assassination.
I found something, but French people should be able to find much more.
Still, this is interesting stuff in regards to Morange, Chirac’s UMP and corruption.
http://www.rfi.fr/actufr/articles/058/article_30839.asp
Above: Picture of Philippe Brett in 2004.
Didier Julia’s “man for the tough things in Iraq”.
Far right wing FN member; worked for Didier Julia and for Le Pen-Marechal. Didier Julia had a political friendship with Le-Pen Marechal. Samuel Marechal (Le Pen party) is her husband. He is son in law of Le Pen.
To gather a relevant relation between Christian Marechal (killed) and Didier Julia/Philippe Brett, we need to find out whether or not Christian Marechal was a relative of Samuel Marechal. Then the circle to Pierre Morange, Didier Julia and the assassination of Christian Marechal would close.
More on Philippe Brett (doesn’t he sometimes remind us on William Brett when we watch the pictures?)
http://wikipedia.qwika.com/fr2en/Philippe_Brett
More stuff on France/Iraq and Didier Julia’s team:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134192,00.html
I’m sure it’s just me being thick and you guys have already made the connection here long ago.
Philippe Didierjean
Brett Martin
As BB says, it seems there is something deeply involving the French security service going on here.
@ Tim V: Remember way back when I posted Sir Peter’s wiki bio on the thread? The significance of these things often becomes apparent in time.
BTW, I was hoping you meant “Scarlet”:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Scarlet_and_the_Mysterons
Oh well. As for the author of the wiki piece, I think he/she underestimated the intelligence of children, whereas Gerry Anderson did not. Reminds me of how the authors of this story may have underestimated the intelligence of the audience.
@ Olifant: Another aside…
This historical moment has outlived de Gaulle in the annals of history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vive_le_Qu%C3%A9bec_libre
Some accused him of inciting terrorism, and claimed his words inspired what came later with the assassination of Pierre Laporte and kidnapping of British diplomat James Cross. The wiki articles don’t reflect the intensity of the direct accusations against de Gaulle that played out in the news throughout the FLQ crisis. De Gaulle and France were seen as directly interfering in Canadian politics. The War Measures Act was invoked in 1970, the first time this had been done during a domestic crisis. This was a dark and frightening time in the history of Canada.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Cross
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Laporte
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.com/articles/war-measures-act
Cross had Irish roots, and became a Companion of the Order of St. Michael and St. George. Maybe that will ring some bells.
FWIW, Brittany provided many of the migrants to Quebec in the 1600s.
I wonder about the surname ” Brett”.
If it were French, it would be spelled “Bret” or “Breton”.
This name is the English version (with French roots).
I also wonder whether or not Iraqi families involved in Iraqi politics should have known Philippe Brett. I believe that they knew him and that he was the first connection for inofficial French-Iraqi talks in terms of shady business.
I have no doubts that the al Hillis and the al Saffars knew Philippe Brett or at least they knew other Iraqi people who knew him and who did recommend his connections.
Hi everyone. I have been following this case closely & reading here.
After reading yesterdays & todays news of the utter bungling by the French police , I can only say I’m not in the least bit surprised.
From the very start it was clear they either didn’t know where to start, didn’t want this case solved or ‘knew’ they had to cock it up…… it was never a ‘normal’ crime to them in my view.
The very fact they opened up the crime scene within hours, then for appearances [?] closed it again, stank to high heaven. From that first staged press conference where no questions were answered & the farcical interview with Brett.
They have made noise without result.
After all the words & theories written on these pages, my theory still stands, BB you have done sterling work, I do however think you are looking in the wrong areas. I have yet to see the name Obama mentioned in connection with this .
This is a huge crime, no one kills four people & involving children for some piddling bit of French corruption,or Iraqi corruption, face it they are used to it.
Nor is this about anything nuclear in my view, this, is about Obama…..ask yourselves again, where did he come from,who is he,look at his friends past & present especially in the UK………then ask what did Saad & wife know that could harm him ?
Think Chicago !
@ Olifant: I have posted the de Gaulle incident as an example of a French leader overtly sticking his nose in the affairs of a foreign country. De Gaulle never apologized. Perhaps the French learned a lesson from de Gaulle about discretion. It is up for debate whether they learned any lessons about interfering in the affairs of sovereign nations. Once a colony, always a colony in some peoples’ minds.
I believe that if we knew more about the backgrounds of the assassination of Christian Marechal, then we would know more about the assassination of the al Hillis.
Katie, there were more assassinations because of corruption and blackmailing than because of weapon or drug smuggling. It does not sound unreal.
Just imagine the scandal when it would come into the media that a political party ordered an abduction in Iraq to acquire e.g. 10 mio. Euros as kickbacks for their own financial belongings during French pre election times?
@ Katie Millington: Perhaps you missed the past discussions on the CIA, drones and even “Jefferson”? We’ve also had extensive discussion of the shirtless FBI agent Fred Humphries, and the Americans from the Seattle area who settled in Annecy while being hunted down for a huge fraud case back in their home country? And remember the femme fatale in that Florida scandal involving the resignation of the CIA Director/American four-star general (she had visited the French Alps not long before the scandal broke)?
Further notes on the Order of St. Michael and St. George:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_St_Michael_and_St_George
Sir Peter Ricketts is among the prominent names.
A 2008 appointee to the Order of St. Michael and St. George:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Manning
Manning’s role in the 2003 Iraq war plays prominently in his wiki bio. Also note connection to Lockheed Martin and Hakluyt & Company. He is a business partner with Sir Jeremy Greenstock, and is closely connected to the royal family.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Greenstock
Another of Greenstock’s business connections:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_La_Rue
Interesting.
BB, these murders were not assassinations. They were very different & not political but personal, in my opinion.
Q.
You are not talking about Obama when you talk of CIA.
I believe it is all personal nothing to do with the US government just O, but emanates from his UK Iraqi connection…… and money.
we had a katie in here before didn’t we? rather an apologist for the jewish state and other non conformist ideas. are you by any chance related? i think we should be told.
as for your personal grudge obama theory i dont think it holds water. that he is capable these days of ordering death from the skies of combatants and non-combatants alike, indeed has taken personal charge of it, is well established, but this is much more sensitive. what you can do in the deserts of oman is one thing, what you do on the border of three european countries quite another. anyways would he risk a private vendetta? would CIA (generally anti democrat and him) be prepared to go along with it. for CIA involvement it needs motive and covering up the crimes associated with 9/11 or the huge financial frauds in the pentagon or iraq, or subversion and assassination but a personal revenge/chicago scenario – never!
KM, we discussed the “kill list” in the past, but I assume you are referring to something more personal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/29/world/obamas-leadership-in-war-on-al-qaeda.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
We have also discussed some well-connected individuals.
Sir David Manning who as Ambassador to the US was in the meeting between Blair and Bush in Jan 2003 that sealed the already advanced plans of invasion. On retirement note the companies with which he was associated. The usual story.
“He was appointed Knight Grand Cross of the Order of St Michael and St George (GCMG) in the 2008 New Year Honours. Sir David retired from HM Diplomatic Service in January 2008. Six months later, he joined BG Group (formerly British Gas plc) on a part-time basis at a reported annual salary of £80,000.[3] In 2008 he became a non-executive director of Lockheed Martin, the multinational arms manufacturer that made millions supplying military hardware for the war, and joined the advisory board of Hakluyt & Company, an intelligence company partly staffed by former SIS officers.[4]
At the beginning of 2009, Sir David was appointed by The Queen to a “part-time, advisory role”[5] in the newly-formed Household of HRH Prince William of Wales and HRH Prince Harry of Wales, since renamed after the marriage of Prince William to Catherine Middleton, the now Duchess of Cambridge now known as the Household of TRH The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and HRH Prince Harry of Wales.
Sir David has been elected to the Council of Lloyd’s as an external member.[6]
In 2010 Sir David formed Gatehouse Advisory Partners Limited (http://www.gatehouseadvisorypartners.com) in partnership with Sir Jeremy Greenstock. Gatehouse works with organisations to factor geopolitics into their decision making.” WIKI
good article Q
15 Apr, 2013 – 1:49 am but i either need more time or increase my reading speed. “Pragmatic approaches”. Yea that’s the expression. In other words just more of the same old killing, detaining and torturing effort whilst trying to distinguish yourself from despotic regimes.
Meanwhile there have been more disturbances at Guantanamo Bay prison, a continuing indictment of the injustice and inhumanity of American policy to un-convicted detainees. http://www.blacklistednews.com/Raid_and_Riot_at_Guantanamo_Bay/25310/0/38/38/Y/M.html
Here’s something (most) CraigMurrayites can love about Biebs. He managed to (inadvertently) insult the memory of sacred Anne Frank, at her own memorial museum no less.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2308938/Justin-Bieber-causes-outrage-writing-tasteless-Belieber-comment-guest-book-Anne-Frank-museum.html
@ Q: Off-topic — mostly pointless.
Your St. George ref. brought me back to the recently concluded court hearings in Montreal.
From QMI Agency, “[the defendant’s] lawyer… argued in court Friday that the Crown presented insufficient evidence that his client was [the] murderer. Moreover, [he] argued that there was not enough evidence to prove that [the] death was premeditated. [He] told the court that the Crown’s evidence relied on speculation, inference and was entirely circumstantial.”
Only three small-town Canadian media quoted the above. The major media that used QMI redacted that. Throughout the hearings, the allegedly unbiased journos were back and forth on Twitter with the defendant’s detractors, all on the same side.
One of the lead detractor groups, one that allegedly was doing fund-raisers for their alleged charity up in Canada last Nov/Dec is from the NYC area and is composed of (ex?) Gambino and Colombo associates.
Is their only interest in the affair money-making or were they involved in the original frame-up and the murder itself? Perhaps part of the mafia wars, which I believe were won by the Don returned from Colorado, who took vacation in the Dominican Republic to celebrate. Maybe he’ll take a pic of himself with the now famous python.
The various detractor groups, and there are many, are arguing over who deserves greater credit for capturing the fiend. They’re especially resentful of the alleged, tattooed, mafia dudes muscling in on their profitable enterprises, but can’t do much except instruct media friends not to mention them.