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?
I wonder whether or not there were names told in the latest France “terrorist” or “line wolve nutter” shootings.
I could not find a single name of a victim nor could i read the names of the two “terrorists” anywhere in media. It looks as if we heard more regarding the al Hilli event than the French usually tell to the media. Perhaps due to the UK media being involved we did hear and read more than usual? What do you think?
Marlin
Forgot to mention regarding TWA 800 Iraq connections and “al Hilli” alerts.
When a Iraqi terrorist starts shouting at border control “I AM FROM SWEDEN” then i receive a “double alert” for reading on more carefully. It was not just the Boeing aircraft connections and Iraq but the word “Sweden” that caught my attention.
What kind of were the USA-Saddam and USA-Shia and the CIA-Iraq relations in 1996 after the first Iraq war? I am no historian and i dont have a clue
Blue
Operation Desert Strike, 31st August 1996.
Cruise missile attack on Iraq…because Saddam was going to attack the Kurds !
Of course “Iraq” bringing down a US airliner would be a better reason to have a pop.
But after the “event” maybe they though twice about it.
“We’ll go with a possible genocide instead”.
Just a few missiles needed for that.
The airliner….we’ll say “fuel fumes did it”.
Still, it’s a good plan. Maybe we’ll use it again one day.
Great to start a war or something !
Maybe a few more airliners ….and a couple of buildings.
“Then we can have a hum dinger of a war”.
Who knows !
Marlin – Bluebird’s ref.(20 Jun, 2013 – 12:59 am) could be the French hitting back. This looks a bit anti-Israel though and it’s difficult to mesh with the joint Franco/British stance on both Libya and Syria.
Roland Dumas is a prominent socialist and ex government foreign minister under Mitterrand. He was convicted of an embezzlement crime in 2007 and given a suspended sentence. He was a member of the French Resistance in WWII and later defended a prominent Communist. He was very critical of Sarkozi’s bombing of Libya so his approach to the war in Syria is not surprising.
Bluebird
20 Jun, 2013 – 9:06 am Possible patsie material? Almost a shoehorn for Chevaline the Swiss incident having come a cropper?
“Everything points to him having dumped it there after the shooting,” one said, adding that the suspect was known to police for hoarding military weapons and had a history of psychiatric problems.
“One of the victims, a man thought to be in his sixties, was shot dead at the wheel of his car, the other two were male pedestrians, both local men aged 35 and 45 respectively.”
Marlin
20 Jun, 2013 – 9:12 am thanks for your tip. I always had a sneaking suspicion you had Israeli/Jewish connections or insight. You certainly seem to be fluent in English. Wherever you are located I hope you stay here for the foreseeable future.
James there is much that I agree with you. If its not already become clear from my comments, I come to everything reported in this highly unusual, indeed unique, crime with a great deal of scepticism. I am not convinced, sadly, that anything can be taken as necessarily truthful or as it appears at face value. If it had happened in Iraq or Afghanistan I doubt we would have even heard about it! It is the fact that BRITISH tourists are cold bloodedly murdered in FRANCE and subsequent events with espionage overtones, that has resulted in us still discussing it. This may well be considered a major nuisance in some quarters. “How do we get rid of the story?” somebody must be asking someone else, somewhere.
Without necessarily swallowing the official output, my approach is to take it on board as if it were kosher, and then test it against other reports/testimony. In this way at least we can see if it is internally consistent which it isn’t. That way at least we know someone is lying, although we can’t be sure who and how much.
The tyre tracks shown on the original aerial photos of the scene are a classic case in point. News outlets, presumably with police blessing, immediately pounced on them to “prove” they were Al Hillis and that he did a circular manoeuvre. By and large this is still the media and police position but nothing could be further from the truth. The vehicle that left the marks is clearly coming out frontwards at that point.
The only way it could be Al Hillis would be if he drove off past his final position and reversed back in. The semi circle mark don’t indicate this but rather aim at the blood marks where Mollier was eventually discovered. That’s what leads me to suggest it might have struck Mollier in the process rather than Al Hilli as stated by the police.
Nor as you point out can the suggest manoeuvre be made to fit the injuries and locations not to mention the ten cartridges found under the car apparently. If the attack had started at the other end thats where the bullets cartridges would have been.
Now the chilling question arises, are the police so thick as not to know their story, which they still promote, is quite untenable. They must KNOW it is. So we have to assume they are a spinning a lie for some reason or another. The only reason I can think of is that they don’t want to admit another vehicle on scene.
This is supported by other output from them:
* They claim, very belatedly, to have traced the “green 4×4” to a forestry vehicle and cleared it completely despite it being there at the time of the murders if WBM is correct
* They claim there was only one shooter/lone wolf
* They claim the chief suspect is the man on the MC
* they claim SM was hit by SAH (not another vehicle)
* they claim to have traced and ruled out the Peugeot 2/306 and driver
* they claim they are looking for a mental hospital inpatient, who by definition would be unlikely to be a driver
* their efforts to trace a possible vehicle have been singularly unsuccessful despite all the high tech data base search facilities and automatic cameras, available to them.
So I conclude that the evidence weightily suggests an INTENTIONAL OBJECTIVE to expunge or undermine any suggestion of a 4×4 being actually involved in the killings. Why? Because it inevitably leads to the conclusion that more than one person was involved (particularly if there is a motorcyclist as well) an more than one indicates collusion and conspiracy, which they clearly do not want.
BB I’d really appreciate your view on the attendees at the Iraqi London 2000 conference @
Tim V
16 Jun, 2013 – 11:47 pm
if you get a chance. So close to it all kicking off were the Al Hilli links connected. Were the Sweden links connected. Were the dentistry links connected. Madrid. Lebanon. Geneva? Only you possess the the inestimable skills oh Wise One!
http://shoebat.com/2011/12/16/this-jerusalem-document-was-signed-by-husham-al-husayni-husseini-the-dearborn-imam-featured-on-all-american-muslims/
Tim….
I always forget the bullet casings under the car.
Which then would make “Le Ninja yoga attacker” even more flexible !
He/she/they somehow crossed diagonally through the reversed arc of the BMW, got “ahead” of this arc (which would present to him/her/them the rear of the rear of the BMW) fire shots…which miss (as the rear tailgate glass is not marked) then engage the target (Al Hilli the driver) again…and kill him (the car remaining in reverse), AND THEN returning to the eldest girl (who is inside the arc of the vehicle, one which he has already passed through…and previously shot and hit her…and also Mollier) inorder that he could “pistol whip” her.
It’s incredible really. And this guy/girl/group is/are amateurs !!!
Man he/she/they are TRUE Ninja !
Or…the story is all Bollocks !
The only way that “Le French” story COULD be true is if….
The shooter is stood where the BMW ended up AND was firing at the car, which would mean that he/she/they “got out of the way” of the reversing vehicle as it came towards “them”.
Al Hilli could then have been hit as he got into his car.
BUT would have then had to reverse TOWARDS (albeit in reverse) the shooter.
That may have happened ?
So what of the shot that marked the windscreen ?
The shooter fired (and not at close range) at the front of the BMW “in anger” ?
It’s a too “weird a shot” to make. What would “he” be angry at ?
If that is so (and he was “p*ss’d off at the family in the BMW) that would make Mollier (by logic) the Key Target.
I conclude that
1. Mollier was the main target….OR
2. This “shooting” didn’t happen at The Martinet.
Re: Michael Hastings. Boston Brakes? Or take your pick from the list here, chosen purely as an example of things that go wrong with cars/computers/software:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009%E2%80%9311_Toyota_vehicle_recalls
Do cars have FADEC, too?
One thing about the car crash that killed Michael Hastings: nothing. Can someone please tell us the make, model and year of the vehicle, etc. and circumstances of the crash? No. There will be no Pajeros, or Peugeots, or forestry vehicles or motorcycles. Only nothing. That’s one way to avoid internet forums debating conflicting details and ever-changing “facts”: don’t provide any.
Whistleblowers and car accidents is an interesting search. Silkwood was one of the famous ones.
Tim
I read the article and the names.
Walid (Waleed) al Hilli had always been a riddle to me. I first thought that he were a brother of Balsham and Ali (son of Hashim) but that does not seem to be the case. I rather believe that he is somehow related with London based Sheikh Mohammad al Hilli.
I dont understand about why Sheikh Mohammad al Hilli, leader of the al Khoei foundation, did not sign. Perhaps because al Khoei was still alive at this time?
Unfortunately this text was translated into English by a computer.
That being said, they did translate a lot of names, too. Like “al hilli” = “ornaments”.
I dod not see “ornaments” in that text. However there are other kinky names like “Sweet”.
It is a pity that olifant and felix arent here to list the real names from the original Arab text. The computer translation, however, sadly creates a lot of BS names here in that english text.
James said:
I conclude that
1. Mollier was the main target….OR
2. This “shooting” didn’t happen at The Martinet.
Quote end.
James
You forgot my theory that
3. SM was the killer.
Every move of the car and his own injuries plus the broken gun would be logic then.
Unfortunately the first killer had the same fate as most Gladio killers have. They die when something went wrong, mostly killed by the cleaner when they believe that everything is done and that they could go home ….
Tim
Search google for “walid hashim”
You will get the following return find of facebook:
Join Facebook to connect with Walid Hashimand others you may know. Facebook … Walid Hashim … Hashim Al-Hilli …
That is confusing because when you open facebook, there is no Hashim al Hilli.
Private and secure? I have no clue.
James
20 Jun, 2013 – 7:44 pm You also factor in the fact that Saad, Zainab and Sylvain were all standing together when the shooting started. We know this because Sylvains blood was on Saad and Zaid apparently.The blood stains on the ground must show where this happened (roughly) or at least where Sylvain was “downed” and bled. Saad was shot in the back as he fled back to his driver’s seat (in vain so it transpired). So now you see the impossibility of his car being parked at the top end. He could not have been shot in the head until he had returned to his car, got into it and then carried out a complicated manoeuvre whilst be shot at. Apart from anything else, given the short burst of gunfire, there would simply not be time for all this running, driving and parking eventually up against the bank from a starting position at the other end of the car park. I defy anyone (including the police) to make it work. The ONLY logical explanation is that the three were standing together on the near (LHS) of the car when the attack, in whatever form it took, took place and those car tracks were made by another vehicle completely.
That’s an interesting theory Bluebird
20 Jun, 2013 – 8:15 pm (SM kills the Al Hillis then someone else kills him?) but there are a few problems. First he knew WBM was coming up behind him as he overtook earlier. Second why would SAD have been shot in the back whilst escaping which suggest he was alerted first Third given that the fatal shots were in the car, how could his blood splashes got onto SAH. Fourth what happened to gun and magazine Five why no SM DNA on that gun fragment. six how could he be shot first and THEN shoott the Al Hillis? That’s enough problems for now although as WBM discovered him first, he also would have to be deeply implicated.
As to Bluebird
20 Jun, 2013 – 8:07 pm that Walid al Hilli has been around at the top for a long time. Is there any one out there who can put that document and group in context? Did anything come of it and how many survived the purges? There is no doubt it would have excited the interest of both Israel and western intelligence who undoubtedly would have infiltrated it. I can’y believe, given their profile, our Al Hillis would not have been involved. The Swedish connection fascinated me too.
Tim
In my theory, WBM and SM were one team. SM stay behind knew that cleaner stay behind WBM would arrive later (or else he was probably already there). We do not have a witness other than WBM himself who said that SM was passing by. Nobody else would have seen them ever. No independent source.
Blood can be shared when there was a fight. Blood does not necessarily only come from bullet wounds.
Gun is back where it came from. In a secret WW2 Gladio depot with WW2 weapons (the Luger was a German WW2 handgun used by German officers using dum dum ammunition), probably in the woods, in a cave or below a hut at Col d’Ire. The dead cow was a test shot with the gun having been removed from that secret depot before it was used.
In my theory, WBM was the cleaner. He did a good job.
They do not have that gun other than small broken pieces. There isnt necessarily any DNA on such tiny pieces. In my theory there was no car, no motor bike, no third party. Just SM and WBM.
On the other case:
While searching for Walid al Hilli (still no clue) i found a lot of US addresses for Iqbals father Abdulamir al Saffar from the 80tees and 90tees. Maybe you could find military significance or companies at these addresses that could enlighten us a bit?
Abdulamir E Saffar[Abdulamir E Alsaffar] Phone Number:435-2292Address:PO Box 83051 # 8, Lincoln, NE, 68501-3051 (1989)[PO Box 83052, Lincoln, NE, 68501-3052 (1993)] [1315 F St 8, Lincoln, NE, 68508]
Abdulamir E Saffar[Abdulamir E Alsaffar] Address:17 Sheridan Dr, Shrewsbury, MA, 01545-3852 (1988)[9 23rd 71, Shrewsbury, MA, 01545 (1988)]
Abdulamir E SaffarAddress:PO Box 83052, Lincoln, NE, 68501-3052 (1995)
Abdulamir E Saffar[Abdulamir E Alsaffar] Phone Number:435-2292Address:PO Box 83051 # 8, Lincoln, NE, 68501-3051[PO Box 83052, Lincoln, NE, 68501-3052 (1993)] [1315 F St 8, Lincoln, NE, 68508] [1315 F St 8, Lincoln, NE, 68506 (1994)] [PO Box 83051 # 174, Lincoln, NE, 68501-3051 (1990)]
Abdulamir A SaffarAddress:3309 N 93rd St, Omaha, NE, 68134
Abdulamir AL SaffarAddress:2075 SW 122nd Ave Apt 209, Miami, FL, 33175-7336 (1993)
Over to you …
Tim
One more thing. The only guy Zainab saw was “one bad guy”. She was never talking about a good guy nor about any second guy. Just “one bad guy”. She must have seen SM, though.
Given that this bit given to us by Eric was no lie, then i have to conclude that SM was that “bad guy”. Otherwise she must have mentioned 2 guys. But she didnt. At least when we believe Eric and the media.
“One good guy and one bad guy” would include SM and an unknown killer.
However, “one bad guy” only, simply leaves SM as that “bad guy”.
Also, if i were Saad then i would not hit the good guy with my car since he might probably help and support me. I would try to hit the killer when my car were my only weapon.
Tim….
We don’t “know” anything, simply because we only have the “official story”, which is at worst “flakey”…and at best “in constant change” month after the incident was first “recorded” (I was going to say reported, but I think recorded is better.
Blue….
We know nothing of Mollier’s movements prior to the incident. Was he part of “the team” ? Maybe.
AND what better way to “dispatch” of him than during this incident.
If (and I am thinking “if”) it did all happen that day, then it is not unlikely that Mollier could have been part of it as Bluebird concluded.
If (again “IF”) the DNA of Mollier is on Martin (and vice versa) AND the DNA of Al Hilli is on both Mollier and Martin (and vice versa) then…..the car being in reverse (and in motion albeit “halted” or “stuck” as the French put it)…and so the need to smash a window of a locked car to gain entry and therefore remove the possibility of “further injury” provides and FANTASTIC excuse does it not.
Of course we have… “I had to smash the window because the door was locked” Vs “The girl was outside the car” situation !
If the car was not “a danger” and therefore “not moving” then there would be no need to smash a window (and transfer DNA).
If you consider that point…and that point alone (the need to break open the drivers side window) then other parts of this story can be “torn apart”.
If it did happen at The Martinet…then SM could very well likely be “part of a team” as Bluebird has stated.
How big a team, I have no idea. Lets start with “two”…and add to that.
P.S. That could make sense of “the broken roof rack”
I’m reminded of the murder of a bank manger some years ago and the question one police officer asked of the tied up/hostage husband.
It took several hours to find him at their home.
He had been tied up in the earlier hours (he said) when the police released him that afternoon.
One detective asked “Why didn’t he p*ss himself ?”
The husband is doing life now.
It is often the smallest, overlooked detail…. that makes the “probable” impossible.
Tim
Here you have an encyclopedia about Iraqi names. I am sure that you could find most of those names you want to explore, here:
http://my.wn.com/search/iraqi_east_iraq?p=400&t=details
While searching that encyclopedia, i found this. This thing has a Romanian/Iraqi/UK link as Romania was the producer. This is ridiculous. I quote some lines. There was a whistleblower revealing that fraud.
According to an associate of ATSC, the devices were manufactured at a cost of £150 ($250) each by suppliers in Britain and Romania. The associate told The New York Times: “Everyone at ATSC knew there was nothing inside the ADE 651.”[2] A whistleblower who worked with McCormick to sell the device around the world told the BBC that he once challenged McCormick over the device’s effectiveness. McCormick was said to have answered that the device did “exactly what it’s meant to … it makes money.
Iraq was one country which between 2008-2010 bought 6,000 devices at a cost in excess of $40 million. The devices were used at numerous checkpoints within Iraq during this period. It is clear that both civilians and armed forces personnel were put at significant risk in relying upon this equipment. McCormick showed a complete disregard for the safety of those that used and relied upon the device for their own security and protection. He amassed many millions of pounds through his greed and criminal enterprise
The BBC’s revelations in January 2010 caused outrage in Iraq. A police officer toldThe New York Times: “Our government is to be blamed for all the thousands of innocent spirits who were lost since these devices have been used in Iraq.” MP Ammar Tuma of the Iraqi Parliament’s Security and Defense Committee said: “This company not only caused grave and massive losses of funds, but it has caused grave and massive losses of the lives of innocent Iraqi civilians, by the hundreds and thousands, from attacks that we thought we were immune to because we have this device
The ADE 651 is widely used by the Iraqi Police Service and the Iraqi Army. The IraqiInterior Ministry bought 800 of the devices in 2008 for £20m ($32m) and a further 700 in 2009 for £32m ($53m), in no-bid contracts with ATSC. The Iraqi government paid up to £37,000 ($60,000) for the devices despite the purchase price being put at around £11,500 ($18,500)
Forgot to post the link for that ADE 651 UK/Romanian/Iraqi multi million fraud.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651
Pity that this forum will get closed next week, now that there are coming back some life and news.
@Bluebird
“Pity that this forum will get closed next week,…”
Oh no it won’t, if we keep posting!
Haven’t you noticed the “comments will be closed on” date is always a rolling week on from the last comment.
Tim V @ 20 Jun, 2013 – 2:27 am
even Zainab’s injuries are far from clear…
Indeed. Which is why I wasn’t specific!
I also find it disturbing that the two girls are being kept from their family.
On the Sm idea at the start of the CH 4 doco Mr.Bossy says he saw the occupants in the car and then he saw SM’s legs behind the car ,the later animations show Sm all over the place but at first it seemed he was behind the car .
Before the car was moved to go on the loader it was close to the bank making the drivers side quite tight where do you think PB was stood to see only SMs legs ?
Photo’s of the two positions of the car are in this DM story.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2225436/The-man-whos-key-Alps-massacre-Mail-investigation-uncovers-vital-new-evidence-execution-British-family-thats-baffling-police.html
Pink
The BMW pictures in the DM link is one and the same position in both pictures. The second image was just taken from a different angle.
However, do we know whether or not their BMW was …
1. a 4W car or
2. a front wheel car or
3. a rear wheel car?
I don’t understand why that car was fixed/stuck in that position. There is no water and no swamp. Only a rear wheel car could perhaps have a little problem there. However, a 4W or a front wheel car would leave that place smoothly.
Blue
Those 5 series tourings are not four wheel drive (or “all wheel drive”).
They are rear wheel drive.
They also have a “DSC” system fitted.
Interesting thing the DSC system.
It “on” all the time. There is a button in the centre that turns it “off”. Why would you need that ?
Well, it is effectively an “ABS” system in reverse.
If your wheel starts to spin (say in a wet and cornering), it will cut power to that wheel and therefore the powered wheel which should be gripping, should have traction….
The odd thing (in theory) is that if BOTH wheels spin (say in snow when you’re about to move off) you CAN have “power” from the engine, but “no” OR “very little” movement from the rear wheels (which have started to spin ..and the DSC has “cut in” to modulate the power going through those rear wheels).
And that’s why you have the “off” button.
Switch the system off….and you can drive out of the snow, like a normal rear wheel drive car (gulp !)….then press the switch to turn the system back “on” again.
Use it in wet leaves, wet grass, snow…etc, etc, etc.
A previous 328 touring owner (had a dog then !).
And once got stuck on wet muddy grass. But remembered to turn the DSC “off” and creep away.
With Al Hilli’s car (in reverse) the DSC (if armed which it is UNLESS you turn it off) once the wheels started to spin, power would cut off to that spinning wheel.
http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=335178
Comments 3 and 4 explain it also. Maybe more below
Oh ! Nearly forgot.
The reason, in case you’re wondering, for the DSC system is that Rear Wheel Drive cars are “tail happy”.
Plant one in a bend, in the wet…with a few dead leaves on the road and you’ll be either coming out backwards or very dizzy as the car spins and spins around when you exit the bend (that’s if you exit the bend…or meet a tree coming the other way !).