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?
“Experience.
Twenty years.”
Sure. Twenty years experience of what? Posting on davidicke and the like? Reading spy novels? Don’t make me laugh.
=====
The icke forum did not EXIST 20 years ago missus
Nuid
“…….stories that he told you from day 1. No proof whatsoever”.
There’s alot that come from that source. No proof, just “shouting”.
Then if a different point raises, it soons gets smacked down with insults, from that very same source.
If someone where to suggets “unpaid” members working at the behest of others. Then no doubt those sources would already (before Al Hilli) be in position on high profile sites where questions would be raised, don’t you think.
Sites like this one infact.
“In 1990, he published By Way of Deception to draw attention to the corruption and shortcomings he claims to have witnessed in the Mossad …………” – Anders007
Yes, we all know about Mossad. What do you think you’re adding by posting all that?
“In 1990, he published By Way of Deception to draw attention to the corruption and shortcomings he claims to have witnessed in the Mossad …………” – Anders007
Yes, we all know about Mossad. What do you think you’re adding by posting all that?
=====
Put your EGO away missus 😉
“There’s alot that come from that source. No proof, just “shouting”.”
Yes James. Has anyone raised the possibility yet that Anders is a (paid or not) disinfo agent?? He’s certainly loud enough.
Someone´s in MOST SAD´s “lap”
“The icke forum did not EXIST 20 years ago missus”
Oh look, he thinks he made a point. Except I said, “davidicke and the like? Reading spy novels?”
“Put your EGO away missus”
Projection.
“There’s alot that come from that source. No proof, just “shouting”.”
Yes James. Has anyone raised the possibility yet that Anders is a (paid or not) disinfo agent?? He’s certainly loud enough.
======
Is this good enough for you missus?
Sayanim – Wikipédia
[Jon/Mod: removed c+p from Wikipedia – please just cite URLs]
Nuid
…and has been here and elsewhere along time, he says.
Is there a “conspiracy” a day ? Or his he “on the staff” ?
[Mod/Jon: deleted abusive contribution]
@anders7777 – nuid has a point. Firstly, if you are making a claim, it is not up to other people to disprove it. Secondly, whilst you may be an expert in your field – and that is somewhat in doubt here – your assurance of your experience is insufficient.
@straw44berry – @nuid is a longstanding and valued poster here, who has a track record of interesting input. Her requiring evidence for everything seems to be quite reasonable, in my view. “Anders says so” is not evidence.
“Is this good enough for you missus?
Sayanim – Wikipédia”
I know all about hasbara and sayanim, Anders. No need for long cutting and pasting. You don’t impress me one bit.
“…and has been here and elsewhere along time, he says. Is there a “conspiracy” a day ? Or his he “on the staff” ?”
I don’t know James. I just thought it was an interesting possibility. Especially as he throws so much muck at others.
its a well known fact that the MonKees ‘im a believer’ sung by MicKy Dolenz is MK Ultra/zionist written my Neil Diamond(jewish) and in 1992, he performed for President George H.W. Bush’s final Christmas in Washington NBC special. Keepin it all in da family…..
I thought ZION was only true in fairy tales
Meant for someone else but not for me
Ah, ZION was out to get to me
That’s the way it seemed
Disappointment haunted all my dreams
{Refrain}
Then I saw ITS face
Now I’m a believer
Not a trace
Of doubt in my mind
I’m A ZIONIST
I’m a believer I couldn’t leave IT if I tried
I thought ZION was more or less a givin’ thing
Seemed the more I gave the less I got
What’s the use in tryin’
All you get is pain
When I needed sunshine I got rain
{Refrain}
Ah, ZION was out to get to me
Now, that’s the way it seemed
Disappointment haunted all my dreams
{Refrain}
Yes, I saw ITS face
Now I’m a believer
There’s not a tra-a-a-ace
Of doubt in my mind
Well, I’m a believer
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah ah-uh-uh
FADE
Well, I’m a believer
Fair enough Jon just please stop deleting my stuff or if you feel compelled to do so please post an acknowledgement that you have deleted An Horiffic Item.
Ta.
Still down the pub nudi.
Iphones and a laser mind can do wonderful things missus.
Carry on missus.
@Jon
They have a department for this sort of thing; nobody can proove they are oporating here on this site and noboday can proove that they aren´t.
But by sounding each other out, you certainly get a hunch or two as to where people are at; so maybe it´s time to let the thread roll and see where we end up?
and doesn´t James owe me an oppology for the other night; he appologised to you, so you would allow him to continue to post.
al-hilli was singing this to himself as his life flashed before his eyes…
re today 1 Oct, 2012 – 2:14 pm “re owners of the property being renovated” asks “Where is their French property?” answer: Le dernier chalet avant le lieu du crime, face à une ferme.
see JDD article previously referenced here on 9 Sep, 2012 – 7:37 pm
Le JDD 09.09.2012 The Journal du Dimanche
Derniers témoins
Eux, les enquêteurs ne les ont pas entendus. Pas encore. Et pourtant… Ils sont certainement les derniers à avoir vu la famille Al-Hilli vivante. Eux, ce sont deux ouvriers maçons. Le jour du drame, mercredi, ils travaillaient dans une maison proche de l’endroit où la BMW a été retrouvée. Le dernier chalet avant le lieu du crime, face à une ferme. Et ce chalet, incroyable hasard, appartiendrait à un Anglais, un ancien de la RAF. Comme le témoin clé, ce cycliste qui a découvert la BMW avec ses occupants morts.
Lorsqu’ils ont aperçu cette voiture immatriculée en Angleterre qui montait la côte, ces ouvriers, qui avaient pris du retard sur le chantier, ont pris peur : et si le propriétaire, leur client, débarquait? Ils ont vérifié, bien regardé la BMW. Ce n’était pas lui, alors ils ont repris leur travail. Peu de temps après, c’est la tuerie. Très vite, ils entendent parler d’un drame. Affolés, ils prennent peur, veulent éviter les questions. Ils préfèrent quitter le chantier. Et s’ils avaient, aussi, aperçu la voiture des tueurs? “No comment”, lâche l’un deux. R.B.
The, investigators have not heard. Yet. And yet … They are certainly the last person to have seen the Al-Hilli alive. Them, two bricklayers. The day of the tragedy, Wednesday, they worked in a house near where the BMW was found. The last cabin before the scene, in front of a farm. And chalet, amazing coincidence*, belonged to an Englishman, a former RAF. As the key witness, the cyclist who discovered the BMW with its dead occupants. (* or ?misreporting)
When they saw this car registered in England coming up the coast, these workers, who had fallen behind on the site, took fright: and if the owner, their clients, landed? They checked the BMW looked good. It was not him, then they resumed their work. Shortly after, it’s killing. Soon, they hear of a tragedy. Terrified, they get scared, want to avoid questions. They prefer to leave the site. And they, too, saw the car killers? “No comment,” one of them loose. RB
Also location for http://www.ashdownsi.co.uk/ see at http://www.swanboroughfarm.co.uk/
they got Madonna … ‘she’s a believer’
@ Ferret
“What *were* SAH’s links to nuclear weapons research?”
I definitely read that at one stage in his career he had worked on an energy particle accelerator according to a friend. There has been such silence and disinformation about what his current job really was, who can say? That silence speaks volumes to me.
@anders – will continue to delete material from you that is excessively dominating a thread or abusive. Aside: it would be much appreciated if you would improve your citations and quoting, so we can see what text is yours and what is someone else’s.
@Roland Teflon, yes indeed, no-one can prove it, which is why I think it is pointless to speculate endlessly. If someone is seeding disinfo in these threads, then people who suspect them of foul play may of course engage them in detailed conversation. The resulting careful application of debate and logic will separate known facts from speculation and nonsense.
‘stamp out the beatles’ create the MonKees … FBI watch john lennon ..j.d.salinger ex oss/cia … catcher in the rye …mark chapman..hinckley jr.
@Jon
“If someone is seeding disinfo in these threads, then people who suspect them of foul play may of course engage them in detailed conversation.”
OK then, I seem to recall pulling up Misspuddleduck, james and Peter on said suspicion; Misspuddleduck and Peter stopped posting without response and James started a personal attack on me which you felt the need to delete and then post a warning to James to decease.
indeed, no-one can prove it, which is why I think it is pointless to speculate endlessly. If someone is seeding disinfo in these threads, then people who suspect them of foul play may of course engage them in detailed conversation. The resulting careful application of debate and logic will separate known facts from speculation and nonsense.
=====
This is of course RUBBISH as it plays into their aim of forum sliding.
Jon.
You are waaaay out of your depth. As Roland sez, just key it roll and let the public bake up their own minds.
We are now in Thread III and it is deja vu all over again.
Found an article from 2006 on SSTL’s website about particle accelerator technology and satellites
http://blog.sstl.co.uk/archives/2006/10.html
(and Kathy- Rutherford Labs was were he was re the particle accelerator)
@Nuid
“You were implying that eyewitness testimony is unreliable.”
I was suggesting that 3 or 4 or 5 eyewitnesses won’t necessarily agree on all details.
No, you weren’t. You were saying (in the original context) that it didn’t matter that some witnesses reported hearing 30 seconds of automatic gunfire, while others (specifically BM) heard none. You were saying it didn’t matter, as witnesses are inherently unreliable, thereby throwing aspertions on the suspicious nature of these discrepancies. My point is that a salient fact, such as hearing gunshots, would be seared in the memory. Etched.
In fact, strangely, the minor details given by all witnesses AGREE STRIKINGLY with the events of the day… description of the car, passengers, etc, etc… nothing jars there. It’s only the shots/no shots discrepancy which is ODD. (That and other elements of BM’s story, of course…)
So… actually, thanks for arguing the toss about this one because it’s teased out the heart of the lie… in fact, the eye witnesses agreed on the minor points (contrary to what you are saying, Nuid) but disagreed on one of (if not THE) most major point!
Now THAT is MOST ODD indeed…
@ Roland
@ Anders
I found it very odd that I was subjected to personal abuse and the person only got a jokey slap on the wrist for it.
@ kathy
” NO WERE NOT GONNA DO FUCKIN STONEHENGE TOMORROW NIGHT!”
@ Dopey
“Rutherford Labs was were he was re the particle accelerator”
Ok, thanks for that. So he definitely was a bit of an expert in that field by the looks of it.