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?
Noooo Felix, he was in on the meeting but NOT the ambush. I keep saying we have two separate issues.
@Dopey
Still doesn’t explain the inexplicable omission of any reference to the death being reported to a coroner in the month before someone was charged. The funeral was however on Feb 11 at Ampfield. Was an inquest opened? In such a high-profile case, I would have thought that the press would have reported it. But they didn’t.
Katie – children endangered…..what have they done???
This is nonsense. as is the whole story. Why are you defending the official narrative the whole time??? Did you write it? The authorities have dug themselves into a huge hole and are struggling to get out of it.
Felix, I am defending no one !
Those girls could be a target, surely you can see that ?
Why do you think they were under police protection at the hospital ?
Katie it ruins my have a go hero theory if he was shot in the back ok its legging it for cover instead .
I must get an early night and catch up tomorrow I have had to many late nights .
Thanks for all the interesting posts especially BB who has sent me on a very interesting excursion from last night I have seen things I didnt know existed .:)
This is hilarious.
It starts off criticising inaccurate reporting, and then goes on to do just that itself.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/inconvenient-facts-highlight-the-media-fiction-swirling-around-dark-mystery-of-the-annecy-murders-8223361.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
@Felix: Sir Peter Ricketts and his deputy must show up every time a British citizen is killed in France? Can we presume he shows up every time more than than one British citizen is killed in a single incident? No? Has he ever shown up at any killing in France before this incident? Please, can someone prove that Sir Peter Ricketts has ever shown up at a crime scene, or in the vicinity, and had his presence noted?
This alone speaks volumes.
Here’s a photo of Sir Peter Ricketts, in case anyone spots him snooping around crime scenes in France:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ukinfrance/8073813348/
Katie’s glib dismissal of the obviously different “WB Martin” signature as being by the accountant is sadly rather predictable.
:rolleyes:
the second signature looks like its by Alan Little,maybe BM wasn’t around that day – Katie @ 7.22pm
In fact, I predicted exactly this defence when I wrote:
(In before anyone says “oh, the accountants must have signed them”, if they had that would have been an act of gross malfeasance and no accountant would dream of doing such a thing. They would risk going to jail and being barred for life. And, the accountants would have nothing to gain by signing clients’ accounts as the responsibility for submitting them rests solely with the directors, not with the accountants.) – Ferret @ 6.38pm
(Alan Little clearly works for GC Secretarial Services Ltd which is a company set up by Gabriel Consultants to act as Company Secretary for a large number of their clients.)
Again, this theory ignores the fact that it’d be a criminal offence for the accountant to sign in place of the director (forgery among other things) and that there is absolutely no incentive for the accountant to do so.
And there’s no such thing as “maybe he wasn’t around that day”. Normally accountants will prepare the accounts months in advance of the due date (which is 12 months from the year end) and the director(s) will have ample time to sign them.
AND finally, if Alan Little *was* forging WBM’s signature as Katie is suggesting, why wouldn’t he even vaguely try and copy the signature from the previous two years, which he would have had on file at the office?
An absolute and utter FAIL of a theory.
😀
Ferret,
I have worked in an accountants and was aware of 1 client who also used to sign for her husband whilst no-one was looking.
According to “Independent” today, BM arrived to the scene after 4 pm.
Is the 3.48 call from somebody else than BM?
“Meanwhile, the “known knowns” of the Annecy mystery – those things which have been officially confirmed and those things which have been reliably reported and not officially denied – offer some insight into the last hours of the four victims.
Soon after 4pm on Wednesday 5 September, a British cyclist found a scene of unbelievable butchery on a remote lay-bay on a forest road above the village of Chevaline.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/inconvenient-facts-highlight-the-media-fiction-swirling-around-dark-mystery-of-the-annecy-murders-8223361.html
just found new pic (at least to me ‘new’)
http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/societe/20121022.OBS6590/chevaline-on-essaie-toujours-de-savoir-ce-qu-il-s-est-passe.html
Speaking of the airline industry, two-thirds of all titanium produced is used in aircraft engines and frames, according to this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanium
“Due to their high tensile strength to density ratio,[7] high corrosion resistance,[3] fatigue resistance, high crack resistance,[52] and ability to withstand moderately high temperatures without creeping, titanium alloys are used in aircraft, armor plating, naval ships, spacecraft, and missiles.[3][4] For these applications titanium alloyed with aluminium, vanadium, and other elements is used for a variety of components including critical structural parts, fire walls, landing gear, exhaust ducts (helicopters), and hydraulic systems. In fact, about two thirds of all titanium metal produced is used in aircraft engines and frames.[53] The SR-71 “Blackbird” was one of the first aircraft to make extensive use of titanium within its structure, paving the way for its use in modern military and commercial aircraft. An estimated 59 metric tons (130,000 pounds) are used in the Boeing 777, 45 in the Boeing 747, 18 in the Boeing 737, 32 in the Airbus A340, 18 in the Airbus A330, and 12 in the Airbus A320. The Airbus A380 may use 77 metric tons, including about 11 tons in the engines.[54] In engine applications, titanium is used for rotors, compressor blades, hydraulic system components, and nacelles. The titanium 6AL-4V alloy accounts for almost 50% of all alloys used in aircraft applications.”
That must mean the TIMET Savoie/CEZUS Ugine facility is very important to Airbus and Boeing.
http://www.timet.com/markets/commercial-aerospace
A bit over excited there Ferret !
Who said I said it was legal ?
I am saying ‘only’ that it is by the same hand…… . I was trying to confirm it purely from the graphology angle.
So excuse me if I don’t bother to help you in future.
@Ferret
23 Oct, 2012 – 3:57 pm
The trick with benefits from both UK and Sweden can work if you have two different identities, which was the case of Suhaila.
But there are other reasons to have double identity, like travelling offscreen.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19500161
The consular staff were in Grenoble, with the four-year-old. Now why would this be? Is it routine for consular staff to rush to the side of minor children whose parents have met with foul play?
@Straw
Sure, but that’s a totally different thing to an *accountant* forging their client’s signature, which would be both illegal and professional malpractice, and no accountant would do it.
And there’s no reason why an accountant would *want* to do it, either. That’s because if the accounts are submitted late, or not at all, it’s the director(s) who get fined and/or prosecuted, not the accountant.
In the case of a wife forging her husband’s signature, she has a direct benefit (saves them both time and trouble, and gets them both off the hook for late accounts etc) and she probably wouldn’t get into too much trouble if she got caught.
But if an accountant got caught they’d be disbarred, and possibly prosecuted. And as I’ve already said, they’ve no interest in doing so.
So it’s quite simply a ridiculous suggestion (third time of saying it now).
Much more likely IMO is that WBM is a totally fictitious character (a la William Martin) and 5 different people signed the 5 different signatures.
IMO, there is no *real* WBM. It’s simply a character created by the security purposes for convenience.
Background for Peter Ricketts, with reference to his Intelligence and NATO work in Brussels:
http://blogs.fco.gov.uk/peterricketts/about/
Shelock, yes that’s new to me too. It must have been taken from the helicopter which rescued Zainab ?
We haven’t heard of any other planes or choppers, unlike Claygate.
Thomas you are right.
It was a case highlighted with the Poles in the UK a couple of years ago, they were claiming child benefit in the UK & Poland.
I am saying ‘only’ that it is by the same hand…… . I was trying to confirm it purely from the graphology angle.
Oh yes, remind us, your qualification in graphology is what, exactly?
I would suggest that anyone with a few minutes on their hands could point out several significant and obvious differences between the “A Little” signature and *all* the “WBM” ones, so I’m not sure which school of graphology you think you studied at.
So excuse me if I don’t bother to help you in future.
You are excused, your kind of help I can do without.
😀
Could it have been a language thing Q ?
Also they would be the ones co-ordinating the family’s arrival to collect her…wouldn’t they ?
Ferret.
I don’t know what you are on tonight but really there is no need to be so rude.
@Ferret
I do think WBM is real. His marriage, family and house purchase check out in the timeline.
What he was, and what he was doing on September 5 is less clear.
@Katie
so, a four year old, or even a seven year old “orphan” is hunted down forever in her life because of what her dead parents did, which might even stretch to being UK intelligence assets. Utter utter nonsense. Do you have any precedents?
Thanks, Q
Ricketts was a key player in the David Kelly business, which, like the Al-Hilli conundrum, is in the top three cover-ups in the UK in recent times. 2/3 – not a bad record. Clearly a very safe pair of hands. Watch him become an ambassador to Washington or Israel soon.
@Katie
a language thing….
as usual utter utter nonsense
I need to translate an article from French -Oh, I think I’ll ring the UK ambassador to France for him to drop by to check the google or bing result. Oh, my mother-in-law is waiting at Paris Nord – I’ll just bell the British embassy to send someone over to meet her because I’ll be late. Not any old minion from the short-staffed embassy. I want the ambassador himself.
file as usual as ridiculous explanations for a ridiculous official narrative
@Thomas
looks like the Indy is looking in here – they realise that the 3.48 narrative is nonsense, so need to rejig it.
RAOFL
Felix, I don’t know why you are continuing this, maybe if you answer my question as to why Zainab was guarded in hospital & maybe then you will have the answer you are demanding.
They are at a secret address now, ask the same question about that.
It seems Felix & Ferret have morphed into one bad tempered ego tonight , so I shall not bother anymore.
Goodnight !
Straw
I said this earlier. BM was certainly no security guy. You dont want security by a 50 years old guy on a mountainbike. Security looks different.
However, taking the timetable regarding the purchase of his house and his participation in the same cycling club as SM, i see it very likely that BM was an intelligence guy covering SM. You can follow a cyclist just withanother bike. You would be too slow while running and the cyclist would know after only 1 mile that he were under investigation if they followed him with a car or helicopter.
I am sure that SM and SAH were suspicious already 2 years ago and that they were simply following their tracks for collecting information.
BM was in no way security but investigator and shadow of SM. He has no part in the killing scenario. He was not responsible for security and he was not prepared to witness that massacre.
Of course he must have known that there was a reason for a 2 years cover up operation. However, the killers came unexpected and from another organisation.
I am pretty sure that agents from all important players were present at the scene but only one of them knew about the killing in advance.
I don’t understand at all, how this guy, if his name is
William Brett MARTIN – is NOT signing just that way- along with his full name?
Even more important on offical documents
Or is his first name just William and Brett Martin are both last names??
Things are getting even more bizarre…. despiate the fact that the signitatures are not just from one and the same person
__________________-
@ all:
let’s guess, we/you are somehow on the right track here…. don’t you think SAH wouldn’t have made some kind of ‘last will/precautions’ before leaving to France or elsewhere? For all we know he was frightned in some way (locks, taser….)
At least I would have done so— and had made some copies of the most important things- to be found – if sth strange would happen to me and/or my family.
So, who knows, if THEY already know exactly what and why IT has happened…. but aren’t willig to provide us with the truth??
If so- THEY will have a very good reason not to tell us- and that gives me the chill
@Sherlock H
just found new pic (at least to me ‘new’)
http://tempsreel.nouvelobs.com/societe/20121022.OBS6590/chevaline-on-essaie-toujours-de-savoir-ce-qu-il-s-est-passe.html
Its been mentioned before, but isnt the green thing on the dashboard a cycle helmet? Its about half as long as the door?