Not Forgetting the al-Hillis 22281

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?

Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

22,281 thoughts on “Not Forgetting the al-Hillis

1 599 600 601 602 603 743
  • Tim V

    Welcome back Mochyn69
    21 Oct, 2013 – 5:47 pm. We’ve missed you. Ref. Guardian Snowden coverage here’s a little piece I added just for general reading.

    “It’s one thing to collect information on personal communiation, quite another how it is used. If we could be sure that the latter was benign – beneficial even – I suppose we could be fairly relaxed about it, as indeed the majority of the public appear to be. However, we cannot be sure to what use it will be put or who will have access to it. The so called “Five Eyes” work so closely together and potentially others such as France, Germany and Israel, and so many private entities, such indeed was Snowden, we cannot be sure who will have access to it or what they will do with it. So what if people realised that British and foreign governments were able to create detailed profiles of them, not only from semi-public formats but also from highly private sources such as bank details as well, that may have very practical implications. Being able to travel freely for example or conversely extradition with no domestic appeal. Some consequences may be far more sinister such as executive interference with normal life up to including assassination itself! This is no exaggeration. America, Israel and Russia all pursue policies of extra-judicial killing, either overtly or covertly. Indeed one of the reasons why the Al Hilli killings have received such widespread coverage, is the suspicion that this could have been a State inspired killing, perhaps predicated by internet communication. So were the British Government to admit that there are effectively no controls on where sensitive personal information may end up, who might see it, or how it might be used, would the British public be quite so complacent? It is clear both the activities of GCHQ and the NRA have been illegal. They use secrecy to protect themselves from the consequences of acting illegally, yet threaten the full weight of the law, up to and including permanent incarceration, against those who would blow the whistle. Nor is the public able to make any assessment of how collated information is used, nor if life circumstances have been affected by it. So the only thing that in fact protects us is trust in Government. Given all the national and international events that flowed from a corrupt and fraudulent WTC attack on 9/11, I for one think that that would be negligent to the point of recklessness.” Guardian 21.10.13

  • Tim V

    21 Oct, 2013 – 7:53 am I couldn’t agree more BB! Anniversaries usually get the the programme makers off their backsides but as you pointed out in a later one, seldom ask the important questions. This was a major point of mine in the article I knocked out at the very beginning. (Incidentally it’s still up there on Google hits which is pleasing)

    So now we have tonight’s Panorama programme. Panorama is mere shadow of its old self, as is the BBC having largely succumbed to the Government “sexing-up” attack, despite eventually being exonerated. One can’t help but see the shadowy spooky hand behind Leveson and Savile et al designed it would seem to undermine the reputation of the BBC. BBC holed below the water line, press shackled, particularly those outlets not prepared to sign up, the law used to curtail individual free opinion, control of public meetings and demonstrations by “kettling” and other methods, total secret surveillance, “robust” (as they are fond of saying) action against the likes of Snowden et al, greater political control of the police, setting up British “FBI” and so it goes on. So we can’t expect too much from the programme can we, however much they big it up beforehand?

    However despite this, they must demand some tid-bits to make the effort worth while. So every time we get just the odd new “fact” that presumably has been let go to justify the effort and persuade people of the efficacy of “investigative journalism” and a not wholly waste of millions of pounds of an army of detectives. I agree this is all highly orchestrated theatre and collusion between government and broadcaster. It will reignite for a time in the topic which can’t be bad, for I am convinced far more turns on this incident than meets the eye.

    We shall have to watch the whole programme to see what it comes up with but from the previews I have just one observation: if as now claimed THREE forestry workers observed both bike and car and their riders or drivers, why has it taken more than a year to even publish the vague descriptions now made? As primary suspects, virtually confirmed by the fact that neither subsequently came forward, is it not COMPLETELY INEXCUSABLE AND INEXPLICABLE that these were not issued at the very beginning? These are government employees for god’s sake. Photo fits and vehicle descriptions should have been the first step. The fact that they weren’t makes these statements, as with everything else, highly suspicious.

    So was the 4×4 seen by WBM leaving the scene at the time of the murders the forestry vehicle or the vehicle seen by the forestry vehicle? Did these two pass one another in the narrow combe because WBM said he was about half way up when one passed him. The BMW x 5 was said to be one third up the combe at 3.20, in which case they could not have avoided one another could they?

    Then we have the confirmed presence of an OAP cyclist who also arrived on scene yet has remained totally anonymous. Who he and who passed HIM?

  • katie

    “Interesting inheritance law:
    Both girls get everything. Zaid gets nothing.
    If both girls were dead, Zaid would get everything (given that he was the only brother or paternal half brother).”

    That is exactly why it surely couldn’t be Zaid. He knew there were two daughters & I don’t believe he’d want them dead.

  • Tim V

    Well I never! For the first time ever WBM now states it was the AL HILLIS (!) who overtook him on the way up!!!!

    Also he comes up behind SM NOT overtaken by him. This means he would have had to be going FASTER because he describes it as a racing bike and being surprised. Yet SM is ahead of him, and also passed by SAH it is claimed.

  • Tim V

    Next: the false interpretation of the reversing car and attack at the TOP of the lay by. Yet this is categorically contradicted by the fact that we were told ALL the cartridges were around in or under the final position of the car at the BOTTOM of the car park.

    No mention by WBM of the BMW x 5 now that must have passed him if the forestry workers evidence is correct. Well i never!

    British saying its French. French saying its British.

  • Tim V

    How could WBM change his testimony so completely without challenge?

    It has taken more than a year for the “green 4×4” that he categorically stated passed him has now miraculously morphed into Hilli’s red BMW estate.


  • katie

    Very odd how Brett hears a revving car which could have been coming straight for him,but he calmly ignores it to move the child.
    He then goes to the drivers side to turn off the engine & didn’t notice the passengers in the back……………until he walked around the car later.

    Oh Puleeeeese, this is getting farcical.

  • Mary

    Well that’s the surviving brother well and truly stitched up by Ms Corbin as the credits rolled. She presented the programme that lied about the Mavi Marmara slaughter, Death in the Med. The producer was Mike Rudin who also produced The Conspiracy Files: 9/11 – Ten Years On and other fiction.

    More questions were raised than already existed.

  • katie

    I’m on the Panorama Twitter feed.
    This just came in :

    ihsan_alhilli 14m
    الحمد لله الذي نجى #الفلوجة البطلة من براثن #القاعدة الاجرامية وابقارها الانتحارية على يد ابطال الجيش العراقي الباسل


    Bing Translates it to this:

    ihsan_alhilli 14m
    Thankfully the NGE # Fallujah heroine of the clutches of criminal rule # and her cows and suicidal by the heroes of the valiant Iraqi army


    Can’t work it out…..

  • bluebird

    More on al Sistani’s shia inheritance law:

    If the two girls AND Zaid were dead, the inheritance would go to Saad’s paternal uncles and aunts (if they were still alive). If there are no paternal uncles or aunts alive, the inheritance would go to Saad’s maternal uncles or aunts (if there still are any).
    I don’t know whether or not brothers or sisters of Kadhim are still alive.
    I don’t know whether or not brothers or sisters of Fasiha al Shaban are still alive.

    I just wonder about why both Zaid and the two girls are still receiving police protection.

    However, if it was Zaid who let the family kill because of his father’s inheritance, then he wasnt very wise in order to let the girls alive, simply because he would get nothing as long as they are alive. He must have known that. I am sure about that.

    Shia law as it is would not make any sense for zaid killing the family but letting the girls alive. He would get nothing then.

  • intp1

    @ Katie
    Going back to the discussion on the sophisticated active traction control system on the BMW, the wheels should not spin rapidly when stuck in the rut as BM stated tonight.


  • katie

    21 Oct, 2013 – 10:28 pm

    Yes but that’s not my point, would you think that on arrival ? The noise would make me think someone was going to leave at high speed. Therefore I’d have stood back for a second or two to see what was going on.
    Martin saw the girl & didn’t mention that it was odd or scary to hear the engine racing.

  • bluebird

    That is my software translation. It makes more sense. However, i am not sure whether or not this is correct.

    Praise Allah and Allah have mercy for the heroine, who survived and who was freed in Falluja from the clutches of al Qaida and their criminal suicide killers by valiant heroes of the Iraqi army.

  • Tim V

    this is my quick take on the Panorama programme:

    It can be viewed here:

    It concentrates on the alleged dispute over property between Saad al Hilli and his brother Zaid. In this, the latter denies any involvement in the murders and instead points the accusatory finger at the French, who he claims, know who carried out the crime and are involved in a cover up. For his part the Annecy Prosecutor rather confusingly states Zaid is the only suspect but that no court in France or Britain could find him guilty.

    New insight was limited, despite Zaid and a Forestry Employee being interviewed for the first time and Brett Martin for the first time since his original BBC/SKY one. Unfortunately these added further confusion rather than clearing up unanswered questions.

    Now WBM says he caught up with SM at Chevaline and thought it strange he was riding a racing bike on such an unsuitable route. This would mean he was going faster than Mollier yet later he is ahead of Martin without reportedly passing him.

    Now for the first time Martin claims the Al Hillis pass him and Mollier up the Combe. He just drops this casually into his account despite its significance. You will note this is a complete departure from his original story in which a green 4X4 passed him both up and down.

    Clearly the trained pilot could not have confused a red BMW estate car with a green 4×4, nor has he ever mentioned before the Al Hillis passed him. The programme in typical fashion, did not challenge this fundamental change in his story. Now only a motor bike passed him very carefully the 4×4 conveniently disappearing from the account.

    The Forestry employee who remained anonymous, stated he drove down at the critical time yet refers not at all to either the Al Hillis or the two cyclists coming up. He says that as he passed the lay-by he noticed a motor cyclist on his machine parked up on his left hand side. It was suggested this was the lone killer waiting for the victims to arrive.

    Then he adds that on the way down a grey British RHD BMW X5 passed him going up, driven by a dark skinned man.

    This raises further problems as this vehicle must have passed WBM although he does not mention it. Also, unless it continued over the mountain pass it would have to have returned but again now no mention of it doing so from WBM.

    The forestry man also adds that two of his colleagues had met the motor cyclist further up the dog leg that coincidentally had in early newspaper reports been inaccurately identified as the murder site! He said they stopped him and made him return down the way he came presumably following him in their truck. He says they saw his face and that he had a small beard. Presumably, and implausibly, they didn’t record the registration number.

    So the first obvious question that was not posed was why were these details not immediately circulated with appropriate photo-fits as part of a general appeal? There can be no rational explanation for this. This programme proves that descriptions of primary suspects were for some reason withheld.

    The second question would be, if as they are claiming, this was the single killer intercepted and sent back down the hill following the killing, not only would he have to have passed WBM now at the the murder scene, but the forestry employees would also have been the first to come upon it. Neither of these events have been claimed.

    Or are they claiming this meeting was on a different day?

    In addition, if there was only one motor bike killer, what was the role of the now claimed BMW X5? The programme does nothing to clear up any of these outstanding important inconsistencies.

    Then the programme slavishly repeats the French interpretation of the killing events completely without analysis or challenge, despite it conflicting with what has been reported.

    It claims the car was parked nose in at the top of the lay-by (next to the signage) and that the motor cyclist approached from beyond, firing at the two Al Hillis and the approaching Mollier. This simply does not fit. Even a school child could see it, yet a team of professional journalists working for the BBC can’t?

    If the shooting took place at that end, the spent cartridges would be recovered there. But we have been told all the cartridges were found around, in or under the car at the BOTTOM end where it came to rest. So one or the other stories MUST be a lie perpetuated by the French. The lie is confirmed by the impossibility of the manoeuvre, given the fact that Al Hilli had already been shot before, it is claimed, carrying out a complicated impossible reverse turn.

    In addition there was a fundamental contradiction between the claim that SM was shot at the top of the lay-by, yet was found by WBM in front of the parked car where it ended up. Nor is WBM’s actual reconstruction of what he did fit with blood stains. There are no blood stains in front of the car, they are all to the side.

    So yet again a mainstream television programme fails to grasp the nettle. This is not investigative journalism, it is a conduit for agreed, approved story-telling, not to provide clarity and answers. Rather to leave the impression that the French best line of investigation is quite hopeless. Sure they have managed to uncover animosity and dispute between the two brothers but this falls far short of a murder plot. On the other hand for the first time a specific allegation of collusion and cover up is levelled at the French.

    If any element of the story was consistent or believable it would help. The Panorama programme merely adds more confusing layers to the conundrum.END

  • katie

    Tim, you keep chasing your tail. Why spend so much time & effort trying to work out how it was done,it did happen,it makes not a jot of difference now whether the car was red white or blue or if it happened 3 minutes earlier , or later than stated or where the bodies were.
    With unreliable stories, you will never get the true timings.

    What you need to be doing is looking for a motive……or who ‘could’ be the killer.

    Having watched BM again, I still think he was in on it,his action by moving Zainab before checking the car he acted as though he ‘knew’ the driver of the revving car was dead, how could he know that ?

    Knowledge on arms to Iraq still remains a strong motive.

  • bluebird

    I still have to verify that translation. Tomorrow i am meeting a native Arab. Then I’ll know

    The heroine could either be Iqbal or her mother. I bet on her mother.
    Was she captured by al Qaida in iraq (in Falluja – that is a Sunni town)?
    And was she freed by the iraqi army? How many al qaida leaders were killed in this action?
    How close before sept 2012 had she been freed? Was it her whom the killers searched for in surrey? Did they go to france in a hurry to hide her or to give her a new identity?

    We should not forget that her brother in law Ammar al Saffar was also abducted in Iraq (and probably killed) by al Qaida. That would make sense.

  • straw44berry

    I’m watching and re-watching last nights Panorama programme, the early part/reconstruction seems entirely without any semblance of truth. Couldnt even get the wheels of their BMW straightened as it was found, and as Tim says casings all in the wrong place.

    WBM seems as unbelievable as ever.

    At about 38.11 (when talking about the allegedly fraudulent will) into the program there are photos of the 2 brothers side by side, oddly enough this photo of Saad hasnt been seen before, it was taken at the same time with Saad in a blue striped shirt but has a lady’s hooped top behind Saad’s head and Saad looks much less happy in this head-on photo. It seems odd to me that 2 different photos would be taken in such a location. Perhaps Saad didnt know he was about to be snapped in Photo 1 and was not happy about it in Photo 2.

    Photo 1:-

    BBC credited Central News for this photo in an article.

    I wonder who took these 2 photos and why.

  • bluebird

    This happened with al Qaida in Falluja shortly after Chevaline:

    This happened before chevaline regarding falluja:

    Samira Alaani, chief doctor at Fallujah hospital, took part in a study in close collaboration with the World Health Organisation. Several tests conducted in London point to unusually large amounts of uranium and mercury in the hair root of those affected. That could be the evidence linking the use of prohibited weapons to the extent of congenital problems in Fallujah.

    A subsequent campaign in November saw some 2,000 civilians and 140 Americans killed in a battle considered one of the fiercest for US troops since the Vietnam war.

    The US response was swift and ruthless. In April, American forces launched an offensive to quell a burgeoning Sunni insurgency but it failed. Fallujah became a fiefdom of Al-Qaeda and its allies, who essentially controlled the city.

    “The Americans did not bring humanitarianism or democracy, they did nothing good for us,” said 28-year-old engineer Omar Abid Ouda. “Even if they brought all of America to Fallujah to help us, what they did was far more cruel than anything we have seen in our lives.”Ouda not only lost his father and brother in the battles, his wife of two years recently gave birth to a boy with a heart defect.“I would rather let my son die than go to the Americans,” he said.

  • bluebird

    That might fit well. So was the second falluja offensive concerted only to free 3 abducted Allawi family members?
    We had already previously discussed the strong family and political connection between the Allawi family and al Hilli/al Saffar. There was at least one woman amongst the three abducted ones.

    70% of Fallujah secure; Allawi family members kidnapped

    FALLUJAH, Iraq — U.S. forces bottled up insurgents in a narrow strip of Fallujah on Wednesday after a stunningly swift advance that seized control of 70 percent of the militant stronghold. Kidnappers abducted two members of Prime Minister Ayad Allawi’s family in Baghdad.Iraqi troops, meanwhile, have found “hostage slaughter houses” in Fallujah, including CDs and records of people taken captive in the way of kidnappings and beheadings, an Iraqi military official said.Maj. Gen. Abdul Qader Mohammed Jassem Mohan, commander of Iraqi forces in the battle, said the houses were located in the northern part of Fallujah, where U.S. officials had expected to meet their toughest resistance.”We have found hostage slaughter houses in Fallujah that were used by these people (kidnappers) and the black clothing that they used to wear to identify themselves, hundreds of CDs and whole records with names of hostages,” the general told reporters at a military camp near Fallujah.

    He was unsure if the hostage records included the names of missing British aide worker Margaret Hassan or missing French journalists Christian Chesnot and Georges Malbrunot.

    The insurgents have been seeking to open a “second front” to divert U.S. and Iraqi forces from the Fallujah offensive. The kidnapping of Allawi’s cousin, Ghazi Allawi, and the cousin’s daughter-in-law may be part of the campaign.

    Ansar al-Jihad claimed in a Web posting to have carried out the kidnapping and threatened to behead the hostages within 48 hours unless the siege of Fallujah was lifted and prisoners were freed.Ansar al-Jihad said it abducted three people – a cousin of Allawi, the cousin’s wife and another relative. Initial police reports, later corrected by the government, had said three people were kidnapped

  • katie


    I asked him to say it English, this is his answer:

    @ihsan_alhilli 16m
    @K69atie I was thanking my god for saving Fallouja by the iraqi heros after it was attacked by the suicide bombers of alqaeda criminals

  • intp1

    @Tim V
    22 Oct, 2013 – 12:56 am

    Agreed nothing believable there but since the show is extremely likely to be disinformation, one could potentially derive in the negative, something from what they are underlining. If they shouting and pointing over here! What are they leading us away from?

    E.g. Martin now, after 13 months says he saw the BMW go up. That ties in with the photos in the village, which since they have never been produced (or even talked about last night) I conclude, don’t exist. Ergo SAH and Co had been up there longer than they want everybody to think.

    It is is strange, the crystallization of the motorcyclist from vague sightings to witnessed approaching the scene, waiting at the scene and on route to escape. This is according to anonymous, ‘pixelated’ “forestry” workers. The film takes it as given he is the killer and depicts him for us in the act.
    As you say, If the biker is so obviously the suspect from eye witnesses that would have been interrogated within 24 hours. Why wasn’t everybody concentrated on him in Sept 2012? Also the girl was reported to have said there was nobody at the lay-by when she arrived.

    A logical answer is Misdirection; like a card trick, watch this hand while I deceive with the other.

  • katie

    Did anyone note the resemblance of Zaid & his father ,wouldn’t the first born son be closer to the father than the second?
    Saad looks the odd one out between the three.

1 599 600 601 602 603 743

Comments are closed.