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?
is the general consensus that “RAFman” Brett Martin was involved or not? His Linkedin profile is pubic and lists the companies he works for, his RAF days seem to be well over.
“You were nowhere to be see on either threads.”
I read every word. I couldn’t be arsed commenting since you spent all of your time making smart remarks about the contributions of others, while contributing virtually nothing yourself (other than copying and pasting the contributions of yet more others, from other forums). Stop behaving like you’re the only one who knows anything on the Al Hilli subject. Or “spooks” in general. It’s become tiresome and very, very boring.
Comprenski?
I’m not aware that there is any general consensus on “RAFman” Brett Martin. Other than the one Anders is pushing to create.
“Then we have bizzaro moderation” — Anders007
I saw no bizarro moderation. You were given a hell of a lot of freedom by the mods, and you ignored them when they (once in a blue moon) tried to rein you in. Now you’re trying to dictate moderation here. I’ve had more than enough of you.
lol…
http://972mag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/shira-glezerman.jpg
Iran have problems with sabotage of their nuclear program. Among the sabotage is zirconium of low quality, and spareparts with explosives that can be activated through satellite-emitted signals. This is from a newly published article:
“Iran displays ‘proof’ of western sabotage
Exhibition for local media presents faulty equipment, weapons Islamic Republic claims Israel, US and other western countries used in efforts to sabotage its nuclear progress
—–
Iranian news site Khabar Online reported that the exhibition included equipment from “several prominent factories in Germany, the United States, Romania, Ukraine, China, South Korea and Australia. The devices could stop functioning or explode at a specific time.”
According to the report, “some of the pieces had an intelligent processor stashed inside to disable them through satellite-emitted signals.”
Among the equipment on display was a zirconium powder and metal used in nuclear reactors as a protective layer for fuel rods. The Iranians claim they received a powder with 25% instead of 65% which could sabotage the uranium enrichment process.
An intelligence source at the exhibition said that since the end of 2009 “the sabotage against our nuclear and energy facilities has increased and in recent months has been carried out in against our petrol, gas, communications, nuclear and defense sectors.”
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4286162,00.html
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2012/09/201292916631790143.html
“Hundreds of Libyans turned over their weapons at collection points in Tripoli, the capital, and the eastern city of Benghazi, following rallies which called for disarmament and the disbanding of militias.
A steady trickle of men surrendered their weapons to national army troops stationed in Tripoli’s Martyrs Square and in Benghazi’s Freedom Square on Saturday. There were also weapon collections in Zintan and Yefrin.
“We are astonished by the positive turnout,” said Colonel Hussein Abdullah Khalifa in Tripoli, adding that the initiative was galvanised by anti-militia rallies pressing for a united army held in Libya’s two largest cities this month.
Tripoli campaign organiser Ziad Hadia told AFP news agency that “more than 100 people had turned in light, medium and heavy weapons as well as ammunition ranging from bullets to tank shells” in the first half of the day.
“We also received three heat-seeking missiles,” he added, while one person had come forward with a tank which is to be delivered to the army later at an undisclosed location.
Re William Brett Martin (ex RAF man)
One of the questions yet to be answered is how he was cleared so quickly of any involvement – as if he had been vouched for – before full forensic testing results would have been obtained, and let leave the country quite soon after the murders. It was said initially that he called the emergency services but then it turned out that another man (Philippe Didierjean) actually made the call. It would be interesting to know the method of Martin’s return to the UK.
Another question that has not been adequately answered is why the regional forensics team in Lyon (100kms/1hour away) were not sent for. Instead a team for Paris were called and due to some ‘mix up’ they were delayed in getting to the scene. This is one of the reasons why the four-year-old was not found in the rear of the car (if one is convinced that that is what actually happened).
כל הפעילים לחוט השני
“It would be interesting to know the method of Martin’s return to the UK”.
Plane….or car.
Walking would be rubbish.
@James 29 Sep, 2012 – 8:59 pm
Very droll.
What I mean is, did he book a ticket on a commercial flight? Was he brought to Paris, debriefed, and sent across on a helicopter? Did the embassy fly him home or did he have to make his own way?
I would have thought he’d have been asked to stick around for a few weeks and leave his passport with the Gendarmerie.
Flanders7835.3
I thought you said “goodbye” to this website ?
You had a big speech and everything.
I even baked a cake.
You left mainly because everyone worked out you were bonkers and had bipolar
But now you’re back !
Was it the “website” you left…or just that “thread” ?
I get confused with you, you see !
I think Anders is excused as somenone said they were missing him quite quickly. In my head I thought it was you James, sorry if I’m mistaken.
“SO SHIT OR GET OFF THE POT NUID” — Anders007
Calm down. Quit shouting.
You say all I posted was “2899 3976 4988 5903”. That’s a lie.
I posted a summary of what I thought had probably happened, and said I thought ‘some people’ were making it unnecessarily complicated. (Ring a bell?)
“Then break down how many of my answers were cut and pastes”
Your “answers” were for the most part sneers and sarcasm at other posters and constant references to HARD DATA™ — although I saw none of it coming from you.
You’re a pain in the neck.
@Mossad
אתה צריך לקרוא את שני חוטים ארוכים שלמים כדי להתעדכן כאן, חבר
Straw….
I do like his “rants”. It makes me giggle.
I’m just waiting on emails now from friends that maybe able to help
…so just chilling.
Can’t wait for 7777985 decimal 4 to start a rant.
CMON Flanders….give it to em !
James,
Do you still have any further thoughts from your Eureka moment triggered by Mr Postman?
@Anders, I’ve removed a couple of posts from you in this thread, which are again dominating/derailing the conversation, even though you’re new here. Again, please refrain from abusive language, and focus on the topic.
Nuid, I don’t what’s gotten your fuse lit tonight, but IMO Anders is quite right, and Jon is completely clueless by allowing it to continue. Topic dilution and forum sliding are just as abusive as any other form of trolling and he’s allowed it to continue unabated, which seriously detracts from the quality of the thread.
Look, for a quick example: immediately after Ben Franklin replies to my post about ViviSat, the satellite which is operated by ATK (Gary Aked’s employer) which can take down other satellites, Peter immediately posts his ridiculous claim that “Gary Aked works as a senior engineer at WS Atkins plc, which has nothing whatsoever to do with satellites”, which Katie follows up with her clueless “why is everyone getting so excited about satellites when even the EU uses them to spy on farms?”
I won’t bother to comment on Katie’s post as nobody can really be that clueless, but Peter’s is more sly because it’s half-believable, especially as WS Atkins’ ticker symbol on the stock exchange is “ATK”. The problem is that Peter has made this fatuous claim previously on the other thread and has refused repeated requests to publish any proof (of which there is none). On the other hand, Gary Aked’s LinkedIn profile lists his employer as ATK, which is pretty clear, don’t you think? I can’t imagine anyone listing their employer by it’s ticker symbol. Would you? It’s just preposterous, it would confuse everybody so the very idea is ridiculous.
Peter, your credibility is completely blown and nothing you say on here should be believed, ever again.
And Katie, anyone who believes you are really that stupid is, well… even more stupid than you pretend to be!
So it would be nice if the mods just once would pick these “people” up and say “post your proof or shut up” – and then delete the offending comments.
It’s fine by me to post speculation – but disinformation should be weeded out and the repeat offenders banned for abuse. There are plenty of places on the internet people can post bullshit for free so please don’t even start complaining about the right to free speech etc, this isn’t about that, it’s about stopping people deliberately abusing this thread and stopping genuine researchers from finding stuff out.
Nuid, to be fair you did participate a lot at the beginning of the other thread but your participation of late has been restricted to the kinds of posts Anders is mentioning. No point fighting about it though. The point is that “people” like Peter and Katie have been driving us mad with their incessant nonsense (stupidity coupled with wrong information is a powerful combination)! And yesterday James had us all going off to Dubai for something so momentous he dare not post the info… but now can’t come up with any hard data to back it up… which was rather a distraction, IMO… Maybe that was just a mistake but just sayin…
Ferret,
Saad’s father left his business in Iraq in 1978 and did what then?
“it’s about stopping people deliberately abusing this thread”
I’m all for that. But as far as I’m concerned, the person who was doing most of the “abusing” on previous al Hilli threads was Anders007. There will be people coming on here who haven’t read all of the previous two threads, won’t even know of their existence perhaps, and they can’t be allowed to suffer ‘Anders’ abuse, just because they’re less informed.
I do not like people jumping on others who disagree with them, and labelling them trolls, or worse, paid trolls.
HOWEVER… all of this is distracting us from the business at hand — other than perhaps pointing out to any newcomers that not everyone here can be trusted, and that various tactics are employed to throw genuine researchers off the scent.
Who could do worse than read, for example, our trusty old friend “The Gentleman’s Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)” at http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5
PS. Watch Peter and Katie lay into me now to try to discredit me and try and make me out to be a liar, loony, whatever. That doesn’t matter though because it’s not about me, it’s about getting to the truth. And as always, trust no one and do your own research, check all the sources and draw your own conclusions. Don’t believe anyone, including me…
@Kempe
If he was in on the plot why did he leave the little girl alive?
Tosh/disinformation of the highest grade.
BM’s weird one-off performance on BBC shouts out fairy-tale to me.
In on the plot? Clearly yes. Doesn’t mean he pulls a trigger. Moreover I am not persuaded anybody has been shot. In fact, only Brett Martin puts himself at the scene. (I don’t believe Philippe D exists) BM’s strange online holiday business and why he happened to be there without his family just doesn’t stack up for me. If he was there at all.
It’s all about getting the official narrative out there double quick. I also don’t believe that Brett Martin was meant to be outed publicly. Now he is in the public domain, what’s to stop him appearing again? The stupid “ex-RAF man line” was a suicide note for the official narrative. Who wrote the script?? They want shooting.
Ferret; I duly note you didn’t respond to my question, but instead chose to be derailed onto a similar question, challenging your assertion, which assertion you repeated above. I certainly don’t get upset when responses are not forthcoming, as I’ve learned such things don’t matter in the long run. FWIW.
We all have opinions of others that have posted regularly and that builds up over time. Yes sometimes you need to wear earplugs when Anders is at his loudest or a fast-forward when Katie or Kenneth sometimes get going. But at other times they say relevant things and get on to a subject that they know a great deal about.
The blog needs all sorts and when the ingredients are right progress is made. When the wrong people are mixed together all we get is a smokescreen.
A blog on your own is no good to any of us. So we all need to be a little tolerant but also not let the blog degenerate into farce.
“Nuid, to be fair you did participate a lot at the beginning of the other thread” — Ferret
Yes, I did. And then I stopped. As I couldn’t take Anders egotistical bullying. Posting the numbers of comments was simply to indicate that I was still reading. And then I gave that up too.
@Straw
AFAIK he didn’t have to work, he was wealthy enough not to have to. Can’t remember where I read that now though.
@Nuid
I can see your point. In counterbalance, I would say two things, the first is that *generally* Anders only jumps on people who are being quite deliberately “distracting”, but there have been one or two occasions where I’ve thought he has jumped on someone who was just “new”, rather than being deliberately obtuse. But I think that’s par for the course and goes hand in hand with taking on the powers-that-be who must be at least *monitoring* thread quite intently (more on that in the next post) if not actively taking part.
As a newcomer to a forum such as this, part of the attraction was Anders’s battles with those he termed “the spooks” and trying to work out if this was real or delusional. I’m quite certain now which way I feel about this and it’s been quite an education finding out.
@Ben
Please be patient, I will answer your question. As you say, I got derailed – one of my weaknesses…
My phone died as I was replying to you late this afternoon, and now that I’m back online I just thought “first things first”!
Hey there Ferret !
Why is Dubai mad ? Anyway, I have posted “why it isn’t” on the proper thread.
But I will ask you the questions.
Where did Saad meet his wife ? On holiday ? How did he date her ? Skype ?
Why don’t the accounts from 2001 to 2006 add up for a hotshot contractor?
What date did he join (not start) AMS1087 ? (everyone thinks its his !)?
Why did the CIA (allegedly) veto the closure of the consulate in Dubai ?
There is more….
@Ben (again)
… and yes, thanks – I can see your point, sometimes it’s better just to ignore it. But it’s been going on for soooo loong… it’s getting ridiculous!
🙂
@Everyone
While I’m on the subject of the powers-that-be at least listening in here…
Remember the hideously stiltedness of Brett Martin’s TV interview, where he says he first saw a young girl (Zainab) stumbling around, “as if playing with a sibling”?
Remember how many of us here commented on how odd this sounded, and how it was clear he was lying, making it up, etc, etc?
Well, surprise surprise, this was edited out of the BBC’s radio programme. That’s right, airbrushed right out of the interview, which was otherwise verbatim! (Or, he re-recorded it for them without the incriminating statement.)
At least they are paying attention…
(If you’re new here and wondering why MI5 would be paying any attention to this blog at all, recent stats say it’s the third most influential political blog in the UK, so they’d be mad to ignore it.)